Engagements
To ask the First Minister what engagements she has planned for the rest of the day. (S4F-03270)
I have planned engagements to take forward the Government’s programme for Scotland. That will include meeting pupils from Brunstane primary school later today to celebrate world book day.
For years, the Scottish National Party has promised to abolish the hated council tax—that promise was in its 2007 and 2011 manifestos. Thousands of leaflets were delivered, and billboard after billboard was plastered with the promise to scrap the unfair council tax. The only thing that the First Minister scrapped yesterday was the council tax freeze. She could have broken her promise on day 1, so why did it take her 10 years?
Since 2007, we have made sure that there have been eight years—soon to be nine years—of a council tax freeze that saves the average band D council tax payer £1,500. Labour has moaned about that every single step of the way.
Yesterday, we announced plans to make local tax fairer or, as Professor David Bell described it on the radio this morning, “certainly progressive”. We also set out how, with the new tax powers, we will make the funding of council services more closely related to income in the future, which is something that Labour has opposed for many years.
We are doing this in a fair way. The council tax freeze will remain in place for the next year and, after that, council tax will be capped so that we cannot go back to the bad old days when Labour increased council tax by 60 per cent. The band reforms will mean that people in the highest bands will pay a bit more; there will be exemptions for those on lower incomes, including pensioners; three out of four households will not pay a single penny more; and low-income households with children will pay less. Out of all that, we will raise an additional £100 million a year for education.
Those are fair, balanced and reasonable proposals. That is probably why Labour opposes them.
Presiding Officer,
“We’ll get rid, once and for all, of the unfair council tax.”
Those are the words of the First Minister. Of course, voters should have known that when the First Minister said that she would get rid of the council tax, she really meant that she would keep it. The whole process has been a sham.
Here is the SNP’s formula: condemn it; freeze it; order a big report; then go ahead and do it anyway. That is its approach not just to council tax. The SNP says that fracking is bad, and it has imposed a temporary freeze on that. A big report has been ordered, but all the signs are that the SNP will go ahead and do it anyway. Labour would not allow fracking in Scotland. Can the First Minister give the same guarantee?
Before we move on from local taxation, which I am still keen to talk about—[Interruption.]—unlike Labour, clearly.
Order. Let us hear the First Minister.
Let me give Labour a bit of what I hope will be helpful advice. Before Kezia Dugdale adopts her usual position of whingeing from the sidelines—in this case criticising the SNP’s policy on local taxation—it might be a good idea if Labour had its own policy on local taxation.
Labour members talk about reports, and Iain Gray is sitting next to Kezia Dugdale right now. In 2009, Iain Gray, then the Labour leader, set up a commission to decide what Labour’s policy on local taxation was going to be. The outcome of that commission has never been published, so we still do not know what Labour’s position on local taxation is. Before Labour criticises our position, it should please have the good grace to come up with one of its own.
On the issue of fracking—
Members: Hooray!
Order.
Kezia Dugdale has just heard the energy minister set out the Government’s clear position. [Interruption.] Labour members do not like the answer, but perhaps they might want to listen. We will not allow fracking in Scotland because we will not take risks with our environment while there are still unanswered questions. That is why we have a moratorium in place.
The First Minister’s back benchers do not like her answer on fracking, because all their leaflets say that they are going to oppose it. All across the country, SNP candidates are telling voters that there will be no fracking under the SNP; they are the same people who promised to scrap the council tax. People deserve the truth. We know where the Tories stand—they are for it. We know where the Lib Dems stand—they voted for it at their conference. We know where the Greens stand—they are against it. I have said where I stand—Scottish Labour will go into the election with a very clear manifesto commitment to oppose fracking.
If Jim Ratcliffe of Ineos can get a straight answer, why cannot the people of Scotland? Fracking: yes or no, First Minister?
Let me put it simply: there will be no fracking in Scotland because there is a moratorium on fracking. That is what a moratorium means—it ain’t allowed to happen. We will not take risks with our environment while there are so many unanswered questions. That is the responsible way to proceed.
Labour members stand up here, week after week, and say whatever they like about what they would do because, as we already know from Kezia Dugdale, they are going to come second in the election.
Jim Ratcliffe of Ineos says that he has had private assurances from the Government that the SNP is not against fracking. He says that the Government
“are being quite clear. What they’ve said to us is they’re not against fracking.”
What does he know that we do not?
Freedom of information requests show that her environment agency and the Department of Energy and Climate Change have agreed to stop minuting conversations on fracking. The Government has tendered for research into decommissioning on fracking. If the First Minister is not planning to frack, why is she preparing for the clean-up?
Can the First Minister tell us whether the SNP promise to stop fracking is a real promise or just an election pledge?
I know that Labour is desperate, and I know why, but that really takes the biscuit. For the avoidance of doubt, let me say again that there is a moratorium on fracking in Scotland. It is clear and simple: there is a moratorium on fracking. That means no fracking.
Secretary of State for Scotland (Meetings)
To ask the First Minister when she will next meet the Secretary of State for Scotland. (S4F-03267)
No immediate plans.
This morning, the Secretary of State for Defence announced extra funding that will help to support our naval base on the Clyde. I welcome that. The First Minister and I have an honest disagreement about the decision to renew our nuclear deterrent and about its remaining an integral part of the United Kingdom’s defence. However, it seems to me that all sides of the debate should be able to agree on one thing—that, if the subs go, the jobs go. Does the First Minister agree?
No, I support the continuation of Faslane as a naval base. However, I think that it should be a conventional naval base and I do not believe that we should be spending £167 billion—and rising—on nuclear weapons that we cannot afford and which are not the appropriate defence of our country. That money would be better spent on supporting jobs not just in our defence industries but across our public services.
It seems that the First Minister is flying in the face of all the evidence, because the GMB union has said that it is “pie in the sky” to pretend that “highly paid, well skilled” defence jobs could be replaced. [Interruption.]
Order—let us hear Ms Davidson.
The Secretary of State for Defence says that
“Thousands of highly-skilled jobs would disappear.”
Even the local MSP, Jackie Baillie—Labour’s lone ranger—admits this morning that
“No-one yet has come forward with a credible plan to replace those jobs”
and that
“the loss of that employment would devastate my local community.”
Perhaps the First Minister has in mind Jeremy Corbyn’s new position, which is that we should build the subs, keep the jobs but just stick the missiles in a shed somewhere. I know that the First Minister linked arms with the Labour leader in London last week, but please tell me that she does not agree with him on that as well.
Actually, I did not link arms with Jeremy Corbyn, because for some unknown reason he refused to turn up until after I had left. I will leave that to him to explain.
When it gets to the point that Ruth Davidson has to call in aid Jackie Baillie, that should tell her that her arguments have got rather threadbare.
On the serious issue of defence jobs, Ruth Davidson should look at the numbers of defence personnel in Scotland and what has happened to those numbers under this Conservative Government. We have seen a haemorrhaging of conventional defence jobs. We have seen the closure of bases. We have seen our forces take a hammering as a result of Tory austerity. The report that was done a year or so back on the question of whether Trident should be renewed set out clearly the price that conventional forces pay as a result of the obsession with Trident.
My position is clear: support our conventional forces and support Faslane as a naval base, but for goodness’ sake let us not spend obscene amounts of money on obscene nuclear weapons when there is so much more that we could do with it.
To ask the First Minister what steps the Scottish Government is taking to support the 107 workers in Greggs bakery in Loanhead in my constituency, whose jobs are under threat as a result of the company’s decision to close that facility?
I was very concerned, as I know that the member would have been, to learn of the situation at the Greggs bakery in Loanhead. I know that this will be a very anxious time for the bakery’s employees and their families.
I can advise the member that, as soon as the announcement was made, we immediately contacted the company to offer support for employees through our partnership action for continuing employment initiative. The Minister for Business, Energy and Tourism, Fergus Ewing, will be speaking to Greggs management later today, and to union representatives, to explore all possible options for supporting the Midlothian site and its workforce.
We will continue to engage and will monitor the situation closely. I will ask Fergus Ewing to update the member after his discussions later today.
Cabinet (Meetings)
To ask the First Minister what issues will be discussed at the next meeting of the Cabinet. (S4F-03266)
At its next meeting, the Cabinet will discuss matters of importance to the people of Scotland.
Last week, the First Minister cut hundreds of millions of pounds from education budgets. She told us that she had no choice and that her hands were tied, but that she would bring the cuts to an end as soon as she had the powers.
This week, she announced extra money for education. She did so without gaining one single additional power. The cruel twist for children is that they will not see a single penny until next year. The First Minister could have invested that money this year. Why did she not do that?
As Willie Rennie will presumably know, because he was here when John Swinney made the announcement on the budget last week, we are also doubling the education attainment fund, starting in the financial year about to begin.
As a result of the announcements made yesterday, from 2017 onwards we will invest an additional £100 million in education. That is welcome investment—I am sure that it will be welcomed by people across Scotland, even if not by Willie Rennie.
I know that the Liberals’ position is that, having spent the past five years helping the Tories to cut our budget, they now want to spend the next five years hiking up the taxes of everyone who earns more than £11,000 a year. That is not my position. I will continue to argue for a fair and balanced approach that gets money into education.
The First Minister is wrong. Last week, she told us that she was going to cut education budgets, even though she said that education was her top priority. Massive cuts for one year could set back a child’s chances for a lifetime.
Scotland used to have one of the best education systems in the world, but it has slipped down the international rankings. The situation is urgent. One penny on income tax would generate five times as much for education now than the First Minister’s timid and tardy proposals would generate next year.
Even though the First Minister had all the powers, she still cut education budgets last week. Surely she can no longer boast that education is her top priority.
Willie Rennie is now just making things up as he goes along. Gross revenue expenditure on education has increased in each of the past three years. Council plans show that in this financial year councils are spending a further £150 million. Last week, the finance secretary announced the doubling of the attainment fund. Yesterday, I announced plans that will result in an extra £100 million every year for education.
I remind Willie Rennie that a penny increase on the basic rate of income tax would hit every single person in our country who earns more than £11,000 a year. I do not think that that is the right approach.
On the world rankings, our desire to see Scottish education as the best in the world is why we embarked on work around the national improvement framework. Willie Rennie has opposed us on that, every step of the way. Instead of moaning from the sidelines—he is becoming almost as good as Kezia Dugdale is at doing that—he should maybe get behind some of our sensible policies to improve our education system.
Modern Apprenticeships
To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government has done to encourage people to access modern apprenticeships. (S4F-03268)
As Richard Lyle said, the most recent—apologies. We are taking action—[Interruption.]
Order.
We are taking action to ensure that we are supporting modern apprenticeships. We have a target, which we have met every year, of 25,000 modern apprenticeships, and the fair work secretary has announced that we are increasing the target to 26,000, on the way to ensuring that we reach 30,000 by 2020.
On Monday I met two modern apprentices, Paul Reid and Ross Menzies, during my visit to Ingen Technical Services, which is based in Tannochside, in Uddingston, in my region. Ingen has taken on eight modern apprentices at that site alone, and other apprentices are being taken on throughout Scotland.
Will the First Minister say how the modern apprenticeship programme has contributed to youth employment, which I note is at its highest level in a decade?
Modern apprenticeships are a key element of our approach to economic development and youth employment. They support young people into sustainable and rewarding careers, and they have had a big impact on our youth employment rates.
Youth employment in Scotland right now is at its highest October to December level and rate since 2006. Over the past year alone the youth employment rate increased by four percentage points, and there has been an increase of 19,000 in the number of young people in employment, taking the number to 368,000.
The youth employment strategy sets out our seven-year plan to increase youth employment, with a world-class vocational education system that builds on the modern apprenticeship programme that has been so successful.
Part of the seven-year plan that the First Minister mentioned includes the equalities action plan. Will she update the Parliament on progress in that regard, particularly in helping disabled young people into modern apprenticeships?
The “Equalities action plan for Modern Apprenticeships in Scotland” was published on 2 December and includes specific improvement targets for modern apprenticeship participation by black and minority ethnic people, care leavers and disabled people, and on gender balance. Improvement targets for each group have been included and must be achieved by 2021, and Skills Development Scotland will report on those annually.
Improving the balance of participants from underrepresented groups in the MA programme will not happen overnight, of course, but it is a change that we are determined to see happen.
Will the First Minister say what plans the Scottish Government has for its share of the United Kingdom Government’s apprenticeship levy, when that comes to Scotland?
Well, if Murdo Fraser could get on to his colleagues in the Westminster Government and get them to give us the detail of the apprenticeship levy, we might be able to answer the question about what we plan to do with it. We have been pressing the Treasury and other ministers and officials in the UK Government to get that information, and we will continue to do so. When we know what the situation is, we will try to ensure that we use the levy as positively as possible, to enhance and build on the work that we are doing in the area.
An article in Third Force News by the Scottish children’s services coalition indicates that only 0.41 per cent of modern apprenticeship starts in 2014-15 had a self-declared disability. That is in stark contrast with the 8.6 per cent of the working population aged 16 to 24 who have a disability. Could the First Minister outline the work that is being undertaken with employers as part of the action plan to ensure that the 2021 target of increasing the number of modern apprenticeships for those with disabilities is achieved?
Work with employers is part of the action plan, because it is employers who we need to persuade of the benefits of making sure that we have a more diverse population in the MA programme. That is at the heart of the action plan.
I have spoken about the targets that have been set, which are challenging, and I have also said that they will not be reached overnight. However, progress is already being made following the publication of the action plan. We have already seen some improvement in the proportion of starts by people reporting a disability—three percentage points up on the same point last year—and we have also seen a slight improvement in those who report as coming from a minority ethnic group.
There is a lot of work still to be done, but those figures are promising. The work that is set out in the equalities action plan gives me confidence that we will see further progress in the years to come.
If modern apprentices are so important to the First Minister, why is she is cutting the SDS budget in real terms, and why in particular is she planning a 50 per cent cut in support for hospitality and retail apprentices until 2020?
I know that Ken Macintosh will know that we are meeting our targets on modern apprentices. We have a record number of 25,000 modern apprentices. Roseanna Cunningham announced just this week that that will increase next year to 26,000, and we have set a target to get that to 30,000 by 2020.
Instead of the constant and continual whingeing from the sidelines, cannot Labour just get behind us when we are making progress on such an important issue?
Neurological Conditions (Young People)
To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government is doing to ensure that young people with neurological conditions receive appropriate care. (S4F-03274)
National clinical standards for neurological health services were implemented in 2010. We have asked Healthcare Improvement Scotland to review how the quality of care for people with neurological conditions can be enhanced in all care settings. That assessment will reflect our national clinical strategy and health and social care integration, as well as evidence of good practice.
Furthermore, in 2016-17, we are investing £250 million through health and social care partnerships to protect and grow social care services. We are also investing £11.6 million to implement self-directed support. That will increase the availability of social care so that more people can stay at home to share their lives with their family and friends and do the things that give their lives meaning and value.
The First Minister will be aware of this week’s Sue Ryder report, which highlighted that young people with neurological conditions are being placed in older people’s care homes because of a lack of specialist residential care. It also highlighted that health boards do not know how many people in their areas have neurological conditions or what those people’s needs are. It is difficult to see how health and social care spending will impact on that. More than that, although health boards are supposed to have mandatory delivery plans for neurological services, only five boards have them.
Could we have a question, please?
What will the Scottish Government do? Will it show leadership? Will it deliver and drive forward a national strategy for people with neurological conditions?
I am aware of the Sue Ryder report, which makes a lot of important and legitimate points. Many of those points, including the point that Rhoda Grant highlighted about care settings for people who are under 65, are driving the work that I spoke about in my earlier answer: the review that Healthcare Improvement Scotland is undertaking of how the quality of care for people with neurological conditions can be enhanced in all care settings.
As I said, clinical standards are in place for neurological services. They were implemented in 2010, and the HIS review will allow us to ensure that they remain up to date.
The extra investment in social care is pertinent because, if we invest properly in social care, we can develop the services that enable people, wherever possible, to stay and be cared for in their own homes. That is an important part of the agenda.
What measures are there in our penal system—perhaps in our prisons—to identify and assist those who may be suffering from neurological conditions?
That raises a good point, and I am happy to ask the Cabinet Secretary for Justice to write to Christine Grahame with details of what we do in our prison system to deal with people who have neurological conditions and to reflect on whether we can and should be doing more.
For a number of different reasons, a number of people in our prison system need a lot of care and support—perhaps because some of the reasons why they have ended up in prison have been misunderstood or not properly dealt with in the first place. The category that we are discussing might well be one of those reasons, and I am happy to ask the justice secretary to write to Christine Grahame with further details.
One of the Sue Ryder report’s recommendations referred to the need to develop and implement a method for collecting and presenting data on the prevalence of neurological conditions. Does the First Minister agree that a comprehensive database is important?
Yes. That was one of the many recommendations from Sue Ryder that were extremely important and sensible. I can tell the chamber that Dr John Paul Leach was recently appointed as the new chair of the national advisory committee for neurological conditions. We will work with that group specifically to improve methods of collecting and presenting data on neurological conditions, because that is part of how we ensure that services are improved in the way that they need to be.
Having suffered a bilateral subdural haematoma two and a half years ago, and being blessed with an excellent recovery after the fine work of Mr Kamel and his team at Aberdeen royal infirmary, I ask the First Minister to update us on the support that is provided for the ARI neurological department and for Raigmore hospital in Inverness, with which the ARI works closely in its treatment of such conditions, particularly in relation to young people.
I know that Aberdeen royal infirmary has identified local clinical leaders in the care of younger people, which is to be commended. I recognise the efforts of clinicians and support staff in neurosurgery and neurology across the country, who work together to ensure safe, effective and person-centred care in all hospitals and specialist centres.
It is through joint working, such as we see taking place between Aberdeen and Inverness, as well as through primary and community care, that people of all ages are supported by local clinical teams to address any rehabilitation or other support needs as they return home. Some of the work that has been done in Aberdeen is excellent, and I am sure that other areas around the country could usefully look to it.
Will the First Minister tell us whether the Neurological Alliance of Scotland, which is the group of organisations that represent patients, has in fact received money? The direct grant for those organisations was stopped, but their indirect grant through the Neurological Alliance was the subject of discussion. Will the First Minister confirm that they have been funded?
I am happy to look into the issue and write to the member with the detail.
“Scottish Six”
To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government’s position is on the BBC’s proposal to introduce a “Scottish Six” news programme. (S4F-03269)
I welcome the proposal—I think that it is a good idea. The United Kingdom has changed dramatically since devolution, but in some respects the BBC has still to catch up with those changes and deliver news programming that reflects the complexity, variety and richness of life in Scotland. We welcome proposals to introduce a dedicated news service for BBC Scotland, and I am sure that it will draw on the best of our journalistic talent to produce programmes of the highest standard.
I am interested in the point that the First Minister just made—that the most important consideration is BBC Scotland’s ability to harness the best broadcasting talent so that it delivers the highest possible standards in reporting UK, international and Scottish news. Does she agree that such a service should be entirely free from Governments and politicians, some of whom in recent years have sought to influence what is broadcast on the BBC?
Yes. I am happy to agree with Liz Smith that the Conservative United Kingdom Government should really stop interfering in the BBC, as it does quite often.
On a serious note, I agree with the point. There is a really interesting debate here, but it is an exciting opportunity. I understand that there might be people in Scotland who, perfectly legitimately, think that a “Scottish Six” is maybe not required. However, I struggle to understand those who argue that somehow people in Scotland, and in BBC Scotland in particular, are not up to producing a dedicated news programme. With the journalistic talent that we have in Scotland, of course they are. A “Scottish Six” would be a great addition, and I support what is proposed.
Does the First Minister agree that the establishment of a “Scottish Six” would provide great opportunities for individuals who are being trained in broadcasting and journalism, such as those at North East Scotland College in Aberdeen, and would offer them opportunities to retain their skills in Scotland rather than having to seek opportunities elsewhere, as is so often the case?
That is a really good point. We should all be in the business of creating more opportunities for those who want to pursue a career in journalism. We know how much difficulty some sections of the media are in, and that is a great regret to all of us. In particular, we know about the pressures on the newspaper industry and the announcements that there have been over the past years about redundancies and job losses in that industry. To be frank, with anything that is about reversing that trend and creating more opportunities for bright young journalists to get on and pursue their careers in Scotland, we should all put party politics aside and unite behind it as a thoroughly great idea.
Before I end First Minister’s questions, I thank all the party leaders for their brevity, the result of which was that an additional 10 back-bench members were able to ask the First Minister a question. I intend to circulate the video to the party leaders. I hope that they will watch it and that we will have a repeat next week.