Plenary, 03 Jun 2009

Meeting date: Wednesday, June 3, 2009

Official Report 410KB pdf

---

First Minister's Question Time

---

Engagements

To ask the First Minister what engagements he has planned for the rest of the day. (S3F-1745)

Today I was pleased to be in the Borders to open the new Ahlstrom facility at Chirnside. The development has involved investment of around £23 million and takes the total number of jobs at the facility to over 200. It is exactly the sort of investment in modern facilities that we welcome in these tough economic times for the Scottish Borders.

Later today I will have meetings to take forward the Government's programme for Scotland, then it will be on to campaigning in the European elections, to which I am sure all of us in the chamber are looking forward enormously.

Last week at First Minister's questions, the First Minister was asked seven times about absconds from the Scottish open prison estate. In seven long-winded and repetitive replies, not only did he fail to answer any of the questions, but he did not see fit to mention what he already knew—that yet another prisoner had gone on the run. Does the First Minister believe that he was being open and transparent with Parliament?

It is obvious that my answers were not repetitive enough, otherwise the difference between 16 absconds in 2008-09 and 79 absconds in 2006-07 would have got through to Iain Gray. I have heard Opposition leaders struggling to ask questions, but not to even realise that we are now in 2009-10 tends to undermine any substance in Iain Gray's complaints.

The matter has been referred to the panel of former Presiding Officers. I received a letter this morning from Iain Gray welcoming that, and I welcome his welcome. Unfortunately, nowhere in the letter does he say that he will abide by the adjudication of the Presiding Officers. Would he like to make that clear now?

Questions are to the First Minister.

I am glad that the First Minister has seen fit to refer himself on the matter to that independent panel of advisers, although I thought that he did so rather gracelessly. His accusation that my complaint was

"publicity-driven rather than procedural"

was not just wrong, but—as is so often the case with the First Minister—it missed the point. My complaint was one of principle: that the First Minister should treat this Parliament with respect.

I am not the only one who is concerned. At least one commentator concluded last week that the First Minister's Government

"bore the hallmarks of an administration that is not up to the job or cares not a jot for its responsibility to protect and inform the public. Or both."

Presiding Officer—[Interruption.] I hear Mr Crawford asking, "Only one?" No, I fear that there is not only one such commentator, but time does not permit me to read them all. Many commentators expressed concern about how straight the First Minister was being with Parliament last week. Will the First Minister give a commitment today to treat this Parliament and the public with respect in the future?

If I were Iain Gray, I would not rely too much on commentators. There are plenty of comments in the papers today, including in The Guardian. An Opposition leader who relies on commentators is in a very weak position indeed.

We have seen the statements last week—which should be taken very seriously indeed—from Scottish prison officers warning the Opposition party about undermining the confidence of our staff on the front line of the Scottish Prison Service. We have seen the comments from Tayside Police explaining exactly the procedures that they follow, although Iain Gray still seems to be oblivious to them.

Iain Gray might not know about the comments of Patrick J Shearer, who is the chief constable of Dumfries and Galloway Police and—of course—the president of the Association of Chief Police Officers in Scotland. He said:

"It would be entirely inappropriate for the First Minister or the Cabinet Secretary for Justice to make any public announcement regarding an abscondee when that operational decision had not yet been made by the Police to release information which was the case this week."

Now that Iain Gray knows and understands that information, will he cease undermining our prison officers and operational police forces and accept the word of the chief constable?

It is not the word of the chief constable that I have difficulty accepting sometimes.

Tayside Police released the news of last week's absconded prisoner a few hours after my exchanges with the First Minister—a day after Tayside Police and ministers knew that the prisoner had failed to return. The ministerial code states plainly that

"Ministers should be as open as possible with the Parliament and the public."

The First Minister must surely have known that he would be asked about open prisons last week. Did he ask Tayside Police whether it had any objections to his informing Parliament, at First Minister's question time at 12 noon, of the abscondment?

I am not certain that Iain Gray understands the concept of operational independence, which is to leave the police service to decide when to release information. I would be able to understand that he does not if trusting our police with operational independence were a new concept that had been introduced by Kenny MacAskill or Alex Salmond. If it is not a new concept that was introduced or dreamt up by the SNP, and if, in the term of office of the Labour Party, it was normal to release such information to the Parliament, why is it that although there were 79 absconds in the last year of the Labour Administration, not once did Cathy Jamieson make an announcement to Parliament on an abscondee? Operational independence means that we trust our police force to look after public safety. I do that. When will Iain Gray do it?

Is operational independence the reason why it took Mr MacAskill from the Monday, when Brian Martin absconded, until the Thursday to try to find out what had gone wrong? That is yet another question to which the First Minister has failed for two weeks now to give an answer.

Let us return to the real issue, which is trust. Last week, representing us at the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland, the First Minister said:

"Trust is an essential quality and once lost it is not easy to rebuild. … trust is the lifeblood of a decent society and a true currency in a democracy."

However, trust is not just a matter of claims for food, home cinemas, moats or duck islands. Does not the First Minister understand that every time he is less than straight with Parliament, he demeans his office, and that every time he defies the will of the chamber, he undermines Parliament? Above all, does he not understand that every time he breaks another promise in the chamber he shows that he just cannot be trusted?

Usually when people give us reprises or repeat performances, it is of their best performance, but this Opposition leader repeats his worst performances. I note that during this question time there is no call for the resignation of any United Kingdom Government minister. I wonder why. I say to Iain Gray that in order for there to be total disclosure to Parliament, I have made arrangements to be informed if there are any more resignations from Westminster over the next few minutes. The reality is this: the Cabinet Secretary for Justice is staying in office, but the Home Secretary has gone; the Cabinet Secretary for Education and Lifelong Learning is staying in office, but the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government has gone; the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Sustainable Growth is staying in office, but I would put no bets on the fate of the Chancellor of the Exchequer. This First Minister is staying in office. I do not know the fate of the Prime Minister.

---

Secretary of State for Scotland (Meetings)

To ask the First Minister when he will next meet the Secretary of State for Scotland. (S3F-1746)

I have no exact plans to meet the Secretary of State for Scotland—indeed, it may be foolish to decide who that may or may not be. I may well see him next Wednesday when the House of Commons gets the opportunity to vote for dissolution of that Parliament and a general election for the people. [Interruption.]

Order.

Trust in politics and politicians has never been lower. It is essential that the person who holds the office of First Minister is, like Caesar's wife, above suspicion. In the First Minister's foreword to the Scottish ministerial code, he confirms his strong commitment to

"serving the people of Scotland in an open, honest and transparent way."

Last week, I, too, specifically asked the First Minister about absconding prisoners from the open prison estate. In his reply, although he knew that a convicted murderer was on the run, he chose to conceal that fact from Parliament. Had he no sense of discomfiture about that? Had he no sense of personal unease? Did he really feel that he was discharging his role in a non-contentious, responsible and candid fashion? Will he confirm to Parliament whether he experienced any of those unpleasant or disquieting emotions?

I follow the precept of the operational independence of our police service.

The letter that I received from Annabel Goldie was a lot more reasonable that the letter that I received from Iain Gray—

Really?

It was—and a lot more literate, too.

Perhaps I can clear up one aspect of Annabel Goldie's letter for her. She said that I should, given the abscondee of last week, have given a higher figure for the number of abscondees than the figure of 16 that I cited. I think she accepts that, when one looks at the Official Reports of First Minister's question time last week and the statement of the week before, one can see that the figure of 16 refers clearly to the year 2008-09. The comparison was made with the 79 absconds in Labour's last year of office—and, indeed, with the 98 absconds in the last year of Conservative office.

I referred the matter to the past Presiding Officers because I believe that the operational independence of our police forces is sacrosanct. No minister—no justice minister or First Minister—should interfere with that. Annabel Goldie has now heard, probably for the first time, the quotation from the chief constable and president of the Association of Chief Police Officers in Scotland that I read to Iain Gray. Will she at least accept the strong argument for saying that politicians should not release information that has always—always—been left to the discretion of our police service?

Final question from Annabel Goldie.

Let me remind the First Minister of what he said last week, in reference to the previous escapee Martin. He said:

"The prisoner concerned has been recaptured, as other prisoners from the open estate have been recaptured."——[Official Report, 28 May 2009; c 17970.]

That was a patent misrepresentation. As the First Minister spoke, he knew that a convicted murderer was on the run. The First Minister has chosen to fall back on the defence of police operational sensitivity—

Oh! Is that all it is?

Order, Mr Swinney.

Will the First Minister confirm that that sensitivity, which resulted in a delay in publishing the details of the second absconding prisoner Brown, was nothing more than a delay in sourcing a photograph of the prisoner for the press release?

Tayside Police made a comprehensive statement on the careful procedures that it follows. That is a question not of sensitivity, but of the operational independence of our police service.

If I were Annabel Goldie, I would be extremely concerned that a Conservative leader in Scotland had got herself into the position of being directly criticised by the Prison Officers Association Scotland for joining in an attack by the Labour Party that looks as though it is designed to undermine the status of the open prison estate, which is totally remarkable, because the open prison estate was introduced by a Conservative Government in the 1950s.

Last year—2008-09—the number of abscondees was one eighth what it was in the last year of the Conservative Government. Indeed, in the last year of that Conservative Government, there were 25 abscondees not from the open estate, but from the closed estate—in other words, more people got out of prison from the closed estate than got out last year, under this Government, from the open estate. Given all those circumstances, and given that the matter has been referred to the former Presiding Officers, is Annabel Goldie prepared to acknowledge that we should accept their judgment on the points of concern that she raises and that there is no gainsaying the fact that the record of this Government and the Cabinet Secretary for Justice is incomparably better than that of any other political parties when they were in government?

My obligation as an elected politician is not to the Prison Officers Association or to chief constables. It is to ensure that the standards of honesty, transparency and integrity are upheld in Parliament by Parliament and the First Minister.

Every single member of the Scottish Parliament should have obligations to our prison officers and police service. Having obligations to and backing our security and police services is not just a question of numbers, although the numbers are very pleasing at present: rather, it is about respecting their operational independence, as has always been done, backing our prison officers in the incredibly difficult job that they do, and understanding that, even in the heat of an election campaign, going for a quick hit in the chamber is irrelevant, compared with the important job of backing the people who keep us safe from harm.

---

Cabinet (Meetings)

To ask the First Minister what issues will be discussed at the next meeting of the Cabinet. (S3F-1747)

The next meeting of Cabinet will discuss issues of importance to the people of Scotland.

Next Wednesday, the Parliament will vote on the Scottish Government's Sexual (Scotland) Offences Bill, which has been described by ministers as

"a once in a generation opportunity"

and "an historic opportunity", and by Rape Crisis Scotland as "a crucial opportunity". Will the First Minister be here to vote for the bill, or will he go down to Westminster to vote for an immediate general election?

My judgment, having been encouraged by the resounding and solid support of the Liberal Democrats at Westminster for our motion, is that my duty and obligation to the people is to vote for a general election, so that they can clear out Westminster.

The First Minister has been caught out by his own decision. His constituents in Banff and Buchan may expect him to be in the House of Commons at 4 o'clock next Wednesday to vote for an immediate general election, but his constituents in Gordon expect him to be here at the same time to vote on important legislation that will protect people from crime. That is two jobs, in two cities, two Parliaments and two constituencies, and too many people being let down. If there is not to be a general election after next Wednesday, will the First Minister ensure that there is a local one in Banff and Buchan, so that people there can have a full-time member of the UK Parliament and this Parliament can have a full-time First Minister?

I understood that not only were we getting backing at Westminster for our motion to dissolve Parliament but that we were getting backing for the Sexual Offences (Scotland) Bill from the Liberal Democrats in this Parliament. I would be interested to know from Tavish Scott how he has decided that there is a difference between my current situation and the situation of his former colleague, the former Deputy First Minister. [Interruption.] It is a transferable situation for the Liberal Democrats. I know that there is one difference—all my MSP salary goes to charitable causes in the north-east of Scotland. I do not know what Jim Wallace did with his.

The First Minister will be aware that two people are in intensive care at the Royal Alexandra hospital in Paisley, suffering from swine flu. Reports suggest that there is a significant difference from previous cases, in that the patients are critically ill, despite having no underlying health problems. The First Minister will be aware of concern in the Paisley area. Will he comment on the implications of the development? Will he review existing procedures to reflect the change? Will he ensure that the local press and public are kept fully informed, so that those who might have been in close contact with people who are connected to the patients can take appropriate action to prevent further spread in the Paisley area?

Yes—I can give those assurances. I know that the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Wellbeing has personally briefed Hugh Henry on the matter.

The situation is serious, and it is changing rapidly. There are now 88 confirmed cases of swine flu in Scotland. There are two reasons for the substantial increase. One is the emergence of a large cluster of cases in and around Dunoon, which now comprise more than half the confirmed cases. There is also faster testing in Scotland now, through the laboratory in Glasgow, which means that there is no delay in reporting confirmed cases.

The precautions that Hugh Henry described are being taken. All the appropriate information will be given—not just to constituency MSPs, but to the general public. The co-operation of the general public is absolutely vital in continuing to limit and interrupt the spread of the virus. As Hugh Henry and other members know, it is hoped that the summer months will start to bring some interruption to the transmission of what is a highly infectious virus, which will allow us time before the comprehensive vaccination programme in the autumn.

Although, in most cases, the symptoms of the virus have been mild for flu—flu is a serious illness—there are now four patients in intensive care in Scotland, as Hugh Henry said. That indicates that there can be no complacency on anyone's part. Although, in the vast majority of cases, the flu is having is a relatively mild effect, there are always people who, for a variety of reasons, are more susceptible to the virus.

Everyone in the health service and in NHS 24—everyone working throughout the services that we rely on—is co-operating fully. I know that Parliament is, and I know that we all appeal together for co-operation from the Scottish public so that we can do our absolute best to keep the country safe from harm.

---

Teenagers (Alcohol Addiction)

To ask the First Minister what measures have been taken to reduce the number of teenagers with alcohol addiction. (S3F-1754)

Action is being taken on a number of fronts. We are introducing legislation to restrict access to alcohol by cracking down on retailers who sell alcohol to underage drinkers. We are making it easier for local licensing boards to apply a minimum age of 21 to off-sales where they believe that to be appropriate. We are also working to introduce a minimum price for alcohol and to bring an end to irresponsible promotions.

Education is vital. With social partners, we are improving substance misuse education in schools and we are reviewing advice on alcohol to parents and carers. We have established a youth commission in recognition of the important role that young people have in finding effective responses to alcohol misuse.

I thank the First Minister for his response, particularly regarding education. Is the First Minister aware of an ITV programme that was screened last night entitled "The Truth About Binge Drinking", in which pop singer Michelle Heaton was asked to binge drink for a period of four weeks? She had to abandon the experiment after three weeks, when the alcohol intake to which she was exposed brought her body to the brink of collapse. It was a shocking exposé of the dangers of binge drinking. Will the First Minister consider approaching the programme makers with a view to having the programme screened in schools, given the powerful message that it sends?

The results of the Scottish schools adolescent lifestyle and substance use survey will be published later this year. We will evaluate the success of the alcohol framework through data from various sources, including those on alcohol-related hospital admissions.

Education in schools is the first line of prevention against substance misuse. Our alcohol framework outlines a number of ways in which we intend to work to support young people in making more informed choices about alcohol. Key aspects of the implementation of the curriculum for excellence will also make a significant contribution to improving education on substance misuse in our schools.

I will write to Christine Grahame about whether it is appropriate that we wend the suggestion into the variety of measures that are being taken.

---

Local Government Concordat (Education)

To ask the First Minister whether the Scottish Government is confident that its concordat with local government is benefiting school pupils. (S3F-1757)

The Scottish Government's ambition is to deliver the key elements of the curriculum for excellence nationally. We are now working as equal partners with local government to ensure that the curriculum for excellence is implemented in practice and benefits all in our school system. That approach provides a contrast with the top-down, centralist approach to which some members want us to return.

We should not forget that the concordat is underpinned by the record funding that we have provided to local government, and—in contrast with the previous Administration—by an increasing share of the budget that is available to the Scottish Government.

The First Minister's rosy view of the situation in Scotland's schools is not borne out by the people at the chalkface. Today, a survey by the General Teaching Council for Scotland showed that the percentage of newly qualified teachers who find employment is down year on year. Given that teacher numbers have already been cut by 1,000 under the Scottish National Party, who does the First Minister think will be to blame if the numbers fall further this year? Will it be Scotland's councils or his hapless Cabinet Secretary for Education and Lifelong Learning?

There has been a substantial increase in probationers finding employment since the most recent survey, which I had thought Rhona Brankin would welcome.

Opposition parties in Parliament sometimes find it difficult to acknowledge the Government's progress and successes, but people outside Parliament have no such inhibitions. I was interested to read a quotation from Councillor Steven Purcell in The Observer last Sunday. Rhona Brankin should reflect on it. Councillor Purcell said:

"New Labour as a brand is dead and the period of opposition we're having in Holyrood is giving us a chance to reflect on how we administer devolution. Look, there's no point in pretending that the SNP government has not done very well".

If the next leader of the Labour Party in Scotland can say that, cannot Rhona Brankin find it in her heart to acknowledge our successes?

Will the First Minister congratulate the SNP-led West Lothian Council—[Interruption.]

Order.

In West Lothian, teacher numbers are going up and class sizes are going down faster than almost anywhere else in Scotland. Will the First Minister therefore encourage other councils to follow West Lothian's good example, which demonstrates that under the concordat councils can bring real improvement to schools and the pupils for whom they are responsible, if they have the political will to do so? [Interruption.]

Order. First Minister, the answer "yes" will do.

Angela Constance had me fair flummoxed; there is so much on which we can congratulate West Lothian Council that I was not sure which areas she would pick. She picked on strong performances by the council. If, by any chance, there was to be a by-election in that neck of the woods, I think that the SNP would be well served.

---

Drug Addiction (Targets)

To ask the First Minister when tackling drug addiction will become a health efficiency access and treatment target. (S3F-1752)

The Government has been working with the national health service since October 2008 to define a health efficiency access and treatment target for reducing waiting times for drug treatment services. When the target has been agreed, it will take effect from April 2010. That will be the first time that such a target has been set.

First Minister. Mary Scanlon. [Laughter.]

Thank you, Presiding Officer.

According to recent newspaper reports, a 21-day referral-to-treatment target is to be introduced. Will the First Minister confirm that that is the timescale? Given the revolving-door experiences of people who are treated for addiction, will he also give an assurance that equal emphasis will be given to people's underlying mental health conditions and need for long-term recovery support, as is given to treatment for addiction?

Yes. Can I write to Mary Scanlon about the second part of that question? As I heard it, I think that I can give that assurance, but I will write to her specifically about the point that she made.

I understand that the Presiding Officer said "First Minister Mary Scanlon". I am sure that it is only a matter of time, but if she gives us a reasonable time in office before she makes a move, it would be much appreciated.

On a point of order, Presiding Officer.

Oh!

Order. The member has a right to make a point of order.

Further to the point that Tavish Scott raised, I wonder whether the Presiding Officer can advise Parliament what the position would be if there was a major incident or other matter next Wednesday about which the Parliament required the First Minister to make a statement to Parliament.

That is entirely a matter for the First Minister and is not a point of order for me.