First Minister’s Question Time
Engagements
1. To ask the First Minister what engagements he has planned for the rest of the day. (S3F-2443)
Presiding Officer, with your permission I will take a few moments to express my shock at the appalling events that unfolded in Cumbria yesterday and to inform the chamber of the assistance that Scotland has been able to provide.
I know that the entire Parliament—indeed, the whole of Scotland—will join me in offering deep sympathy to those affected. The emergency services acquitted themselves superbly in extremely difficult circumstances. Yesterday they included officers from Dumfries and Galloway police, who provided assistance to their colleagues in Cumbria by deploying an armed response unit and by taking over Cumbria police’s motorway policing duties. In addition, the Scottish Police Services Authority has provided scenes-of-crime officers to support the forensic work. The national health service in Dumfries and Galloway has been in contact with Cumbrian colleagues to offer assistance. To date, no patients from the incidents have been treated in Scottish hospitals, but the facilities are on standby if required.
I have written to the leader of Cumbria County Council, Councillor Eddie Martin, to convey the Scottish people’s condolences and to offer any further assistance that we can. Scotland has had its own experience of tragedy on this scale, and just as our thoughts remain with those affected by those appalling crimes, our sympathies today are with the families and friends of the victims of yesterday’s shootings in Cumbria.
Members on this side of the chamber would of course wish to be associated with the condolences and sympathies for those who suffered in yesterday’s terrible incident and with the support for those who are working in its aftermath.
This week, there are no surprises or leaked documents, just the Scottish Government’s own official figures on how many new teachers have found a job. The Educational Institute of Scotland called the numbers “shocking”. Others have called them “disturbing” and “a tragedy”. They are certainly a disgrace. Can the First Minister possibly disagree?
The ability of post-probationary teachers to get employment is a huge concern. The numbers cause us great concern. It should be said that we are now approaching 90 per cent of post-probationers in employment, which is a much better position than in the previous survey. It should also be said that teacher unemployment in Scotland is much lower than it is in England, Wales or Northern Ireland. Although the figure is too high, I suspect that that is an indication that councils are responding to a difficult situation, just as the Scottish Government is. Iain Gray will also have to have in mind the public expenditure pressure in which I think everyone else in the country would accept that his previous Government at Westminster had a substantial part to play.
The public spending pressure that the First Minister faces in this year—it is this year that we are talking about—is that he has more money than he has had in any previous year. The figure of 90 per cent of new teachers in employment is pure and simple spin. It includes, for example, teachers who are on a supply list, sitting at home and hoping that the telephone might ring so that they might get a day’s work. The truth is that three out of four new teachers cannot find a permanent, full-time job. We trained those teachers, parents want them in our schools, and pupils need them in front of them, teaching them, right now. Can the First Minister explain why three quarters of them cannot get a permanent job?
Let us look at the reality of the funding that has gone to local authorities. The percentage of the Scottish budget that is allocated to local authorities has risen in each of the past three years—from 33.63 per cent to 33.99 per cent and to 34.08 per cent this year. If the problem is not the overall size of the budget, given the increased percentage of funding, perhaps Iain Gray might like to reflect on the fact that the only way to change the situation and increase the percentage of funding to local authorities is by reducing funding for other services, such as the national health service. Of course, the Labour Party’s position is not that we should increase funding to local authorities and reduce funding elsewhere but that we should increase all funding everywhere. That position is extraordinary, untenable and ridiculous.
We have heard before the excuse that local government had the money but spent it on something else. We heard it from Fiona Hyslop just before she was sacked. The problem is not the envelope of spending; the problem is that the Government has cut 2,500 teaching posts from our schools.
Yesterday, Mike Russell said on television that teachers who are accused of incompetence should be suspended automatically. What about a Cabinet Secretary for Education and Lifelong Learning who cannot deliver his promise on teacher numbers, who cannot deliver on class sizes, who cannot find jobs for three quarters of new teachers, who will not build a single school in four years and who has had to write to 50,000 parents to apologise for the mess that he has made of the new curriculum? That is incompetence, so will the First Minister suspend Mike Russell?
The vast majority of councils throughout Scotland place a strong priority on driving down teacher pupil ratios in terms of class sizes and teacher numbers. The average primary class size has reached a new record of 23.1 pupils, which is down from 23.2 in 2008, 23.3 in 2007 and 23.6 in 2006.
In a difficult situation, the vast majority of Scotland’s councils place a high priority on employing as many post-probationary teachers as possible. Not every council has such a priority. Some councils do not believe that class sizes are a serious issue—they think that other priorities exist. For example, Glasgow City Council has halved the number of post-probationers whom it employs from 225 to 107 this year; Midlothian Council has cut its numbers by a half from 49 to 27; and North Lanarkshire Council has cut its numbers by more than a quarter. In fact—amazingly enough—the decline in the employment of post-probationers is concentrated hugely in Labour councils.
Before Iain Gray comes to the chamber to weep crocodile tears for unemployed teachers, it might be interesting if he had a word with his colleagues in local government and asked them to apply the same priority to employing teachers as do many other councils throughout Scotland.
Our Administration raised the number of teachers in our schools to 53,000 and the First Minister promised to keep that figure there. He should not accuse me of crocodile tears for teachers. He started by blaming the Westminster Government and ended by blaming councils. When will he take responsibility?
Every year, the First Minister has had more money, and every year, he has thrown more teachers on the scrap heap. What are those teachers doing? They are applying for jobs in England, looking for jobs in Canada and heading for jobs in the middle east.
The First Minister brought up the health service. He is right—what I described is not just happening in our schools. Nicola Sturgeon admitted today that the teachers will be joined by more than 1,500 nurses. It is a Salmond shambles all round. Is the First Minister’s message to young Scots, “If you want to be a teacher or a nurse, emigrate”?
Unfortunately, Iain Gray had prepared his fourth question before I pointed out in my first answer that unemployment among teachers in Scotland, although too high, is substantially lower than unemployment among teachers south of the border.
I turn to Labour’s attack on the health service. I remind Iain Gray that the quality of health care remains our top priority and that there shall be no compulsory redundancies in the national health service in Scotland. Contrary to Labour’s scaremongering, we now know for certain that far more people will be employed in the national health service in Scotland at the end of the SNP Government’s four-year term than at the start, under Labour control.
Iain Gray accused me of finishing with my previous answer, but I have not finished with him just yet. Let us consider the consequences of his line of argument. The Labour Party wrecked the public finances of the United Kingdom, imposed a £500 million cut on the Scottish budget this year, went into an election campaign saying that it was considering cuts that would be tougher and deeper than those of Margaret Thatcher, and then ran away from government. Under its Kerr-Baker analysis, it wants to impose another £332 million of cuts this year, and it is hoping beyond belief that everyone else in the country will accept its view that everyone else is responsible for the actions of the Labour Party and the Westminster Government. That is not a credible position. There is not a single person in Scotland outside the Labour ranks in the chamber who will absolve the Labour Party of its individual and collective responsibility for the financial circumstances that we now face.
Prime Minister (Meetings)
2. To ask the First Minister when he will next meet the Prime Minister. (S3F-2444)
I will meet the Prime Minister next week.
I hope that, when the First Minister meets the Prime Minister, he will pledge to work with the United Kingdom Government on issues such as tackling problem drinks through taxation and dealing with general practitioner contracts, because his minority Scottish National Party Government has, quite simply, stalled.
Nicola Sturgeon has said that the Scottish Government is committed to ensuring that everyone in Scotland can access high-quality health care
“when they need it, regardless of where they live.”
No one could disagree with that, so what on earth has gone wrong in Kinloch Rannoch, a community that is being denied acceptable out-of-hours GP cover? Why has the Scottish Government ended up in court over the issue? Why is the First Minister’s Cabinet Secretary for Health and Wellbeing refusing to talk to the community of Kinloch Rannoch and refusing to intervene? Why has the Scottish Government broken its promise to provide high-quality health care when and where people need it?
As I recall, the community of Kinloch Rannoch came to the committees of the Parliament. The Cabinet Secretary for Health and Wellbeing and the health minister will be delighted to speak to that community.
Annabel Goldie should not give the impression that the health service in Scotland is doing anything other than providing outstanding care. As she knows, with the support of some members, we saved accident and emergency units across Scotland. We have the best waiting times on record. The cancer treatment target for the health service in Scotland has been met for the first time. We are abolishing prescription charges, without the support of some parties that are represented in the chamber. Crucially, we have wiped out bed blocking. [Interruption.]
Order. There have been enough individual interventions from sedentary positions for the time being.
I watched this morning’s debate, during which a number of members—not least on the Conservative benches—-made the point that we should think about how patients see the national health service in Scotland. It is significant that the recent Scottish social attitudes survey, which was published on 11 May, showed that more people are satisfied with progress in the national health service than ever before. That is evidence of the public response to the efforts of our people in the national health service. I know that Annabel Goldie would not want to give the impression that we have seen anything other than an outstanding performance, an improved position and improved public satisfaction.
The question that I asked was about out-of-hours GP cover, and I used the illustration of a particular community that is suffering such a significant problem that the Scottish Government has ended up in court over the issue. I also remind the First Minister that we know from a question to him on a previous occasion in the chamber that, since the renegotiation of GP contracts, emergency call-outs of the ambulance service have soared.
The First Minister might be fond of basking in the roseate impression that he likes to create of some of our public services in Scotland, but I remind him that the issue that the community is concerned about actually covers a great deal of Scotland, unless one happens to live in the central belt or metropolitan or urban areas. I ask the First Minister again whether his health secretary will now intervene. In comment to the media, she has apparently explicitly declined to intervene. How many other rural communities in Scotland lack acceptable out-of-hours GP cover? Does he even know?
As the Westminster Government is committed to renegotiation of GP contracts, will the First Minister, in his imminent meeting with the Prime Minister, commit his Government to that process?
I will certainly ask the Prime Minister on Annabel Goldie’s behalf whether he is going to reopen negotiations on GP contracts, which I could point out were introduced not by this Government but by a previous Administration.
The point is that communities in Scotland have satisfactory out-of-hours cover. I am proud to represent a rural community and I know what the situation is with out-of-hours cover. Of course people in many communities throughout Scotland, not least in our rural communities, would like to have improved services. That is absolutely the case. They are getting improved services, as I indicated to Annabel Goldie in my answer to her first question. Our battle is to maintain those improvements in the health service.
I do not accept, for example, the criticism that is often made of NHS 24. Particularly in circumstances such as the recent threatened flu pandemic, NHS 24 has proved its worth. It was outstanding in its performance.
I know that Annabel Goldie wants to quote a particular instance, and she is quite entitled to do so. All that I am saying is that she should not give people the impression—because it is not true—that the national health service is not responding superbly throughout the country, not least in rural areas, in providing the health services to which people are entitled.
Secretary of State for Scotland (Meetings)
3. To ask the First Minister when he will next meet the Secretary of State for Scotland. (S3F-2445)
I will meet the Secretary of State for Scotland next week.
First, I associate my party with the sentiments of the Parliament on the terrible events in Cumbria yesterday.
The First Minister announced the start of the Scottish Investment Bank in April 2009, to the Scottish Trades Union Congress. He announced it again in April 2010, once again to the STUC. The Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Sustainable Growth was asked by the Parliament’s Economy, Energy and Tourism Committee in May about money in the Scottish Investment Bank for businesses, and he said, “It is available now.” Fourteen months after the first announcement, is it available now?
The money has now been allocated. It is an interesting question. The purpose of the Scottish Investment Bank is to bring additional funds to help enterprise in Scotland. One of the difficulties in bringing additional funds was the difficulty that we had with the Treasury in getting it to accept the argument that, if we bring in additional funds from, for example, the European Investment Bank, the Treasury should not deduct that from the block grant to Scotland, which would rather defeat the purpose. Thanks to the work of the finance secretary, we found a method of substantially allocating and making able the funds for the Scottish Investment Bank.
I think that it is going to be a splendid innovation to increase the availability of funds to fast-growing businesses in Scotland. It is broadly welcomed across Scottish society and by both the STUC and the Confederation of British Industry, in a unique alliance. Therefore, I think that it should also be supported by others, even—lo—unto the Liberal Democrats. I am sure that, when I meet the new Scottish secretary, I will be able to persuade him not only that he should support the Scottish Investment Bank but that he should combine with the Scottish Government in seeking a more co-operative attitude from Her Majesty’s Treasury so that we can further increase the funds, with European money, to the Scottish Investment Bank.
The problem is that all of that was true 14 months ago. On Tuesday this week, the First Minister said that it is urgent that small and medium-sized businesses are able to get loans, but on the same day, the finance secretary had to admit to the Economy, Energy and Tourism Committee that his bank is not available for businesses to access at this time. Announcement follows announcement, but not one Scottish Investment Bank penny is being invested in Scottish business and jobs. Fourteen months after the Government announced the bank, there are at least another six months to wait before any money goes out the door, although jobs are being lost every month. A hundred jobs have been lost this week in Peter Scott & Co in Hawick, hundreds more have been lost in the Royal Bank of Scotland, 50 have been lost in Dumfriesshire, and 90 have been lost in Midlothian. Small businesses and the wider economy need an investment bank lending. Is not the project just another Scottish National Party vanity project that is long on publicity, but very short on delivery?
I point out to Tavish Scott that the co-investment funds that are available are being invested daily. Those funds continue to be part of the Scottish Enterprise mix. The idea behind the Scottish Investment Bank was substantially to increase funds, and that is happening. Tavish Scott rightly pointed out that funds will be available from the Scottish Investment Bank in this financial year.
When?
Order, Mr Purvis.
That will be a substantial improvement for Scottish business.
Now that Tavish Scott has, by extension, a role and responsibility in government, I am sure that he will agree that, with financial powers available to the Scottish Parliament and the Scottish Government, we will not have to bypass Treasury regulations in order to effect substantial increases in investment funds in the future. Given that people throughout Scottish society think that that is a powerful new initiative that will help Scottish business and jobs, cannot the Liberal Democrats find it within themselves to say that the idea might be a good one that is worthy of their support?
A number of members have requested to ask questions on recent events in the middle east. I do not have time to call all of them, but I call Pauline McNeill.
Given that the First Minister is responsible for the general welfare of all Scots, will he join me in condemning the loss of civilian life due to the Israeli commando attack on the flotilla that was heading for Gaza with international aid in international waters? One of my constituents, Hassan Ghani, who was on board the ship when it was attacked, is now in Istanbul and is traumatised, but at least he is safe.
On the BBC’s “Question Time” recently, the First Minister called for a review of trading relationships with Israel. How can he take that forward in his Administration? Can he act on that in any way? If he can, he will have my support and that of all Scots who demand that the blockade on Gaza be lifted and that Israel abide by international law.
I am glad that the member’s constituent has now been released, albeit that he is not yet home in Scotland. Four Scots have been involved in the recent incident. One is home and the other three are in the same position that her constituent is in.
The Scottish Government strongly condemns the Israeli authorities’ actions. We have added our voice to that of the wider international community, and call for the immediate lifting of the Israeli blockade of Gaza. The Deputy First Minister has made statements on the matter, and I have written in the strongest possible terms to the Israeli ambassador.
The issue of the immediate lifting of the blockade has, of course, been debated in the Parliament. I think that motion carried the support of the overwhelming majority of members. It is particularly important at the present moment that the wider international community responds to the atrocity on the high seas. We believe that a ship that is bound for Gaza with a Scottish captain piloting it is at risk if the Israeli Government continues its blockade and actions in international waters. Therefore, the Parliament should speak with an overwhelming majority and say that the Israeli action is unacceptable, insupportable and should stop forthwith.
Police Officers (Recruitment)
4. To ask the First Minister what progress has been made to meet the Scottish Government’s target of recruiting 1,000 additional police officers. (S3F-2456)
The Cabinet Secretary for Justice announced on Tuesday that, as at 31 March 2010, there were a record number of 17,409 police officers in Scotland. That is 1,175 more than we inherited, at March 2007, and therefore we fully anticipate that we will meet our target of recruiting 1,000 additional police officers in the lifetime of this Parliament.
By using the extra funding provided by this Government, and thanks to the efforts of the Scottish Police College in training record numbers of recruits, chief constables throughout Scotland have ensured that as many officers as possible are deployed on the front line. They are to be congratulated on their efforts.
I am particularly pleased to note that, for the first time ever, there are more than 3,000 police officers in Lothian and Borders. Now that an additional 1,175 police officers are patrolling the streets of Scotland, does the First Minister agree that if we are to support those new officers in striving to make our communities safer, it is now more important than ever that we tackle Scotland’s battle with the booze?
I do. The response, in terms of front-line officers, was absolutely necessary given the situation that we inherited. It has had a large role to play in the decrease in recorded crime and the fact that crime statistics in Scotland are at their best level in a generation. However, it does not remove the obligation on all of us to consider the underlying causes of crime. There is no question but that Scotland’s relationship with alcohol is one of the feeders of crime and disorder in our communities. As well as backing our police and the increase in the number of officers, we should have the courage, as a Parliament, to tackle the underlying causes of Scotland’s problems.
Alcohol etc (Scotland) Bill (Minimum Unit Price)
5. To ask the First Minister whether the Scottish Government will accept the view of the Health and Sport Committee that the Government should seek to amend the Alcohol etc (Scotland) Bill at stage 2 to specify its proposed minimum unit price. (S3F-2454)
As I have made clear a number of times, it is our intention to bring forward a specific price before a final vote is taken by the Parliament. We are happy to reflect further on the specific recommendations made by the Health and Sport Committee. I am greatly encouraged that Dr Simpson continues to show great interest in minimum pricing, despite his party opposing the policy before any evidence was taken by the Health and Sport Committee. Minimum pricing is backed by many who have considered the evidence: those in the health professions, including all the public health directors in NHS Scotland; the four United Kingdom chief medical officers; and the British Medical Association.
We already knew that the Government had agreed to make an announcement before stage 3 of the bill. However, if we are to have a proper debate on the whole issue of pricing—as opposed to minimum unit pricing—why will the First Minister not name his price now rather than waiting until the stage 3 debate in the autumn?
We have made it clear that we will name the specific price before the final vote is taken in the Parliament.
If Dr Richard Simpson is just waiting for the price before he rallies behind the policy—in line with the rest of the medical profession and, just this week, the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence—I am certain that the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Wellbeing would want to engage in dialogue.
I had the impression that the Labour Party had adopted a principled position north of the border against minimum pricing, while simultaneously having a principled position south of the border in favour of minimum pricing. Dr Simpson is one of the more open-minded people on the Labour benches and will want to consider the merits of the issue. I hope that, at some point, he will rally behind the progressive policies of this Government.
Year of Homecoming (2014)
6. To ask the First Minister what the benefits to Scotland will be of designating 2014 as the next year of homecoming. (S3F-2446)
I thank the member for his question and the enthusiasm with which he welcomed the Scottish Government’s announcement. I have a copy of his press release, in which he calls for Bannockburn to be
“the focal-point for Homecoming in 2014.”
Scotland’s first homecoming year was a great success. It attracted 95,000 additional visitors and generated £53.7 million in additional tourism revenue for Scotland. It makes sense to build on that success in 2014 when our next year of homecoming will coincide with the staging of the Commonwealth games and the Ryder cup, and, of course, the 700th anniversary of the battle of Bannockburn, a pivotal moment in Scottish history.
I thank the First Minister for his reply and for the interest that he takes in my press releases. What lessons does he believe that the Scottish Government can learn from homecoming in 2009? I know that he said that it was a great success for Scotland. Why then have we seen the disgraceful sight of Scottish National Party ministers briefing the press against the current chief executive of VisitScotland, the very agency tasked with that important job?
I have to say that I did not think that that question was as good as the press release, which I much prefer. It is simply not true that SNP ministers have acted in the way that Murdo Fraser described, but no doubt he will be able to pursue that particular aspect of his question after the statement that will be made later today.
I do not think that I did justice to Murdo Fraser. I did not communicate to the chamber the full flavour of his press release, which has now been handed to me. He said in his press release:
“The Battle of Bannockburn was where Robert the Bruce led a significant Scottish victory against the English during the Wars of Scottish Independence. It is of national importance to Scotland and in four years’ time we will mark the 700th anniversary of this battle.”
I welcome Murdo Fraser to the cause.
Has the First Minister spoken to the chairman of VisitScotland in the past few days about the leadership provided by the chief executive of VisitScotland, and, if so, what did he say?
No, I have not done that.
12:32
Meeting suspended until 14:15.
14:15
On resuming—