Island Areas Ministerial Working Group
To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on the island areas ministerial working group. (S4O-05615)
The final meeting in the current series of the island areas ministerial working group took place in Lerwick on 22 February. Over the last two and a half years the Scottish Government has formed a positive and constructive partnership with our island councils.
The “Empowering Scotland’s Island Communities” prospectus that was published by the ministerial group is the most comprehensive package for empowering Scotland’s island communities that has been put forward by any Government, and it confirms our commitment to subsidiarity. Many key prospectus commitments have already been delivered, including the appointment of a dedicated islands minister, the establishment of an islands transport forum, the completion of roll-out of the road equivalent tariff—RET—to all remaining routes in the Clyde and Hebrides ferry services network, and maintenance of the existing air discount scheme, with the additional benefit, which was not anticipated at the time of the prospectus’s publication, of the discount increasing from 40 per cent to 50 per cent at the start of 2016. Work continues on a number of other important workstreams.
Does the minister agree that the plans for a forthcoming islands bill offer a significant opportunity and hope for all Scotland’s island communities to end the regional disadvantage that they have suffered for generations?
The establishment of the working group led by a minister with responsibility for the islands has demonstrated the Scottish Government’s strong commitment to tackling the challenges that Mike MacKenzie has highlighted. The work that the group has taken forward since 2013 has included a focus on listening to the islands councils and their communities and on working with them in partnership to identify opportunities to support economic growth, job creation and the improvement of services and connectivity.
The Government’s consultation, which was undertaken towards the end of last year, sought views on provisions for a future islands bill. That consultation received more than 190 responses. All the views that were expressed will help to inform the development of a draft islands bill. That bill will be a key way of joining together the various workstreams of the ministerial group, and of channelling our focus to ensure that we provide real change for our island communities, with lasting benefits for generations to come.
The cabinet secretary will be aware that all the islands councils want full management powers over the sea bed to be devolved to the areas that are most affected—preferably, without delay. Does the Government support that position?
A number of provisions are still the subject of discussion in relation to the Scotland Bill between the Scottish Government and not just the islands councils that were mentioned by Tavish Scott, but the United Kingdom Government. We have to await the conclusions before we can say that we will take on the further powers in order to devolve them, where possible, to island communities. The issue is still in question, to some extent. The process of transferring the Crown Estate’s assets to the Scottish Government has not been straightforward, and disagreement remains between the two Governments.
I am happy to keep Tavish Scott updated on progress or to ensure that Derek Mackay, the Minister for Transport and Islands, does so.
Beverage Containers (Deposit Return Scheme)
To ask the Scottish Government when it will make a final decision on a deposit return scheme for beverage containers. (S4O-05616)
I announced on 30 December the further work that would be undertaken following Zero Waste Scotland’s call for evidence, to consider the important issues that were raised in that call for evidence. Those issues include the implications for small stores, costs to retailers and changes in customer behaviour where a deposit return scheme has been in place.
Reports suggest that the proposed bottle tax could cost consumers £155 million a year. That is £65 per household, or, if I express it in terms of council tax bands A, B and C in East Renfrewshire, increases of 8.6 per cent, 7.4 per cent and 6.5 per cent—a bit of raining on the jamboree parade yesterday.
Given that the vast majority of organisations that responded to the Zero Waste consultation were opposed to a DRS in Scotland, will the cabinet secretary—who is a man with a reputation for having a penchant for embracing lovely ideas—ensure that practical concerns that were expressed by wholesalers and others are at the centre of any final decision that is made on the proposal?
Jackson Carlaw has just taken scaremongering to a whole new level in Parliament. The whole point of a deposit return scheme is that the customer pays the deposit and then gets it back on return to a store, or other location, of the bottle, or other item.
With regard to the way forward, we had a feasibility study carried out. Deposit return clearly works in other countries and is very effective in tackling litter and improving recycling rates. Of course, this is Scotland, and we have to ensure that any scheme in this country would be suitable for Scottish circumstances. That is why, before we take a final decision to determine how such a scheme could work in Scotland, we are taking further evidence and investigating issues that have arisen in concerns that the retail, packaging and other sectors have expressed. However, there is a lot of support for the proposal. It works in other countries: Jackson Carlaw should recognise that approaches that work in other countries can, in some cases, work in Scotland as well.
Tourism (Aberdeenshire)
To ask the Scottish Government what support it is providing to tourism in Aberdeenshire. (S4O-05617)
We work closely with a range of public bodies—including VisitScotland, Scottish Enterprise, Scottish Natural Heritage, Skills Development Scotland and Historic Environment Scotland—and with industry to increase tourism throughout the country, including in Aberdeenshire.
I thank the minister for the substantial support that is being given to tourism delivery in Aberdeenshire. I invite him to join me in welcoming the formation of the Aberdeen and Aberdeenshire tourism company, which is consolidating what has been a fragmented approach to tourism in Aberdeenshire. With more than £1 million of initial funding, it looks set to deliver much more for Aberdeenshire in that important economic sector.
In 2014, the total visitor spend in the Aberdeen city and Aberdeenshire region was £351 million, with 1.25 million trips, so there is plainly a great deal of success already. However, the establishment of the Aberdeen and Aberdeenshire tourism company represents an opportunity for even more success. I am delighted that there has been support from all parties, including Sir Ian Wood’s Opportunity North East—ONE—initiative, to build on the success of tourism in Mr Stevenson’s part of the world.
The minister will be fully aware of the potential impact of flooding during the winter on tourism in the Royal Deeside area in particular. Can he do anything to assist directly people whose businesses have been impacted? In particular, is any flexibility available to enable people who are unable to let holiday accommodation to make it available to people who have been displaced as a result of flooding without their being impacted by the changes in private rented tenure regulations?
Mr Johnstone is entirely correct that the area, particularly Ballater, has been extremely badly hit. I have been in contact with some of the businesses there that have been most affected by the flooding. I am advised that there has been support for flood-hit businesses to a certain extent, but we are, of course, willing to consider what else can be done to support all businesses that have been affected badly, especially the caravan park in Ballater, with which I have been in contact. I am happy to consider that matter further and to meet Mr Johnstone, if he so wishes.
Fracking
To ask the Scottish Government what its position is on fracking. (S4O-05618)
The Scottish Government is taking a precautionary and evidence-led approach to unconventional oil and gas, including hydraulic fracturing. In January 2015, we introduced a moratorium on unconventional oil and gas developments. In October last year, we announced details of an extensive programme of research into the potential impacts of that industry and the timetable for a full and comprehensive public consultation.
We know that a moratorium on fracking is in place and that the research will—conveniently and, I am sure, totally coincidentally—report after the election. As the minister is responsible for the policy, do the voters not deserve, in the spirit of new open and transparent politics, to know prior to the election what his position is on fracking? Come on, minister. Go on—just tell us. You know you want to.
Neil Findlay says that the spirit of openness and transparency is new, but as far as I am concerned, it is old; I have always been open and transparent, as members know. Consistent with the spirit of openness that I hope I have followed for the past 16 years as a member of the Parliament, I entirely support the Scottish Government policy of pursuing the matter on the basis of evidence. That is the approach that Scotland has bequeathed to the world through the great thinkers of the Scottish enlightenment. If it was good enough for them, it is good enough for me.
Now that even the Liberal Democrats have seen sense on fracking, is it not time that the minister was true to his own instincts and joined the growing consensus that we should get on with fracking—in a properly controlled and regulated fashion, of course?
I am absolutely determined that the people of Scotland should have the benefit of the most substantial corpus of evidence that has been produced in relation to how hydraulic fracturing may impact on Scotland. That is precisely why we have commissioned the most substantial series of pieces of research into all the relevant aspects.
I had thought that Mr Fraser was a reasonable chap.
Who told you that?
Well, I did think so, but perhaps it was a mistake. Is Murdo Fraser, as a lawyer, like myself, not willing to look at the evidence first and to come to his conclusions afterwards? That is what we are committed to doing, and that is what we will do.
In the light of the openness and transparency that the minister has outlined, could he give us some transparency about the community organisations that are being consulted as part of the consultation exercise? After several attempts, I am still waiting for an answer from the minister on that.
The process of consultation to which we have committed, that we have expounded and that we have explicitly stated in many public utterances, including parliamentary answers, is a full national consultation after the evidence. It will involve everybody. I would have thought that Mr Wilson would be deliriously happy about that.
Cannabis Possession
To ask the Scottish Government what its position is on Professor Neil McKeganey’s statement that Police Scotland’s decision to issue on-the-spot recorded warnings for the possession of cannabis rather than report people to prosecutors is a “massive white flag to Scotland’s drug problem.” (S4O-05619)
Recorded police warnings allow police to deal more quickly and efficiently with a range of offences that already commonly result in non-court disposals. The types of crime covered by the scheme are a matter for the Lord Advocate as part of his independent role as head of the system of prosecution. Those offences will still appear in official statistics on recorded crime.
The system provides a mechanism that is timely and proportionate, it avoids the need for the preparation and submission of a standard police report and it enables the procurator fiscal and the court to focus on more serious crimes while giving police the range of powers that they need to respond quickly and appropriately to less serious offences. Those offences are still recorded as crimes.
As the member will be aware, the classification of drugs is currently reserved to Westminster. However, even should we gain responsibility for the issue, we have no plans to legalise or decriminalise drugs.
The Scottish Government and our partners place a high priority on the education of Scotland’s young people on the dangers posed by drugs and continue to invest in treatment services and recovery services for those affected by drugs. We will always seek to disrupt and prosecute those who supply the drugs that destroy the lives of individuals.
The minister will be aware that, since March 2015, police in England and Wales have been using roadside drug testing kits to detect and deter those driving under the influence of drugs. Can he confirm that those kits will be made available for police to use in Scotland? If so, when? What has been the hold-up so far in introducing those kits?
The use of such techniques is obviously an operational matter for Police Scotland and for the prosecuting authorities. I will happily write to the member on the position in Scotland but, as we are trying to set out today, we remain robust in our response to the prevalence of drugs in Scotland.
Thankfully, the prevalence of drugs is not at its highest level—it has been reducing over recent years. We will continue to focus on tackling the supply of drugs, which are destroying the lives of individuals, their families and communities.
Is the minister able to confirm whether there are targets for such warnings?
I can confirm that there are no such targets. Police Scotland uses them to deal appropriately with matters as they arise. As I said in my original answer, the system allows the police to release resources to tackle the more serious offences that occur in our society.
Question 6 from Anne McTaggart has not been lodged. The member has provided me with an explanation.
Local Government Settlement 2016-17
To ask the Scottish Government what impact the 2016-17 local government settlement will have on communities. (S4O-05621)
The 2016-17 settlement funding package for local government, which was agreed by Parliament on 25 February, is firmly focused on the delivery of our joint priorities to deliver sustainable economic growth, protect front-line services and support the most vulnerable in our communities. Those shared priorities will improve outcomes for local people. We are protecting the council tax freeze for a ninth year, which will provide much-needed financial relief, particularly to vulnerable groups; we are investing £250 million in integrating health and social care services; and we are improving educational attainment by maintaining the pupil teacher ratio in Scotland’s schools.
Does the cabinet secretary agree that, even in spite of yesterday’s massive U-turn by the Scottish National Party on council tax, the effect of the coming year’s local government settlement will mean millions of pounds of cuts in school, teacher and pupil support budgets, which will drive a stake into the heart of Scotland’s communities and thwart efforts to promote investment in education?
It will come as no surprise that I do not agree with the member. The overall impact on local authority expenditure budgets is a cut of less than 1 per cent. Any local authority that has to cut into its education expenditure as a result of a reduction of less than 1 per cent in its overall budget is not managing its money very well at all. When I look at a council such as North Lanarkshire, and the amount of waste that is evident in some of the things that it does, I am absolutely sure that councils could save a lot of money and reinvest that in education as well.
Working Group on Consumer and Competition Policy for Scotland
To ask the Scottish Government how it will take forward the recommendations of the working group on consumer and competition policy for Scotland. (S4O-05622)
I established the independent working group for consumer and competition policy for Scotland to consider how new consumer and competition powers that are to be devolved to the Scottish Parliament under the new Scotland Bill could be put to best effect. The working group’s report, which was published at the end of October last year, included 46 recommendations. We are considering those carefully and will issue our response shortly.
On the back of the report have come pleas for the Scottish Government to use the powers in the Scotland Bill around consumer advocacy and advice to contribute to tackling the menace of nuisance calls. How does the cabinet secretary think that those powers might best be deployed on that important issue, and will he work with Westminster on it?
The specific point that Mr Dey makes about nuisance calls concerns an issue that is reserved to the United Kingdom Parliament. That will not change as a consequence of the Scotland Bill. Therefore, it is important that we use the responsibilities that are transferring to us around consumer advocacy to support individuals who are troubled by the persistence of nuisance calls. A lot of good research has been undertaken on this subject by Which?, and we have co-operated with Which? in many respects around the design of consumer and competition policy in Scotland. We look forward to continuing that dialogue and working with the UK Government on that question.
North Glasgow Suburban Railway Line (Electrification)
To ask the Scottish Government when it will make a decision regarding the possible electrification of the north Glasgow suburban railway line. (S4O-05623)
Electrification of the north Glasgow suburban railway line will be considered as part of the Scottish Government’s next high level output specification for control period 6, which is due in July 2017. The Scottish Government remains committed to a substantial rolling programme of electrification that will bring significant economic, social and environmental benefits, providing Scotland with a sustainable world-class transport system.
The cabinet secretary will be aware that passengers who travel on that line have recently suffered severe disruption from a number of causes, including the Edinburgh to Glasgow improvement project and the problems with the Forth road bridge. All that disruption is, perhaps, understandable, but they also now face 20 weeks of considerable disruption and substantially increased journey times during the period of works to the tunnels and other parts of the railway outside Queen Street station. Will the cabinet secretary consider making an early announcement about the electrification of the line, so that we can bring it into the same situation as the other suburban lines in Glasgow? It would be extremely helpful if he could do that.
The Edinburgh to Glasgow improvement project, which is one of the causes of the disruption, is bringing substantial benefits to Glasgow. I think that I am right in saying that more electrification is happening in and around Glasgow than in any other part of the country. As for an early announcement, I think that the matter is best considered when all the different options are taken together. Other parts of Scotland are very interested in the roll-out of electrification to their areas, and we have to consider that against the resources that we expect to be available at the time. For that reason, I do not think that it would be right to bring the announcement forward. However, it is worth saying that there is a substantial amount of electrification in addition to EGIP, Airdrie to Bathgate and the Paisley corridor. As we said previously, there is a commitment to 100km a year of electrification beyond EGIP. It is in that context that we will consider an announcement about Maryhill.
Thank you. Before we move to the next item of business, members will want to join me in welcoming to the gallery His Excellency Mr Simon Smits, the Ambassador of the Kingdom of the Netherlands. [Applause.]