Meeting of the Parliament

Meeting date: Thursday, October 3, 2013

Official Report 854KB pdf

---

General Question Time

---

Rail Services (West and South-west of Glasgow to Edinburgh)

1. To ask the Scottish Government what plans it has to improve rail services to Edinburgh from areas to the west and south-west of Glasgow. (S4O-02462)

The Scottish Government has already made improvements in rail services to Edinburgh from areas to the west and south-west of Glasgow, with passengers now able to travel to Edinburgh via Shotts and Carstairs services from Glasgow central station.

The Paisley corridor rail improvements have also increased capacity and improved journey quality on one of the busiest sections of the Scottish network. Additionally, through the provision of a longer franchise, we are seeking the next franchisee to develop opportunities and strategies for delivering innovative enhancements to train services.

The minister will be aware of the large population that lives west and south of Glasgow. People in my constituency are hampered in taking up the economic opportunities to travel to work in Scotland’s capital because they have to change trains and stations and must walk between Glasgow central and Queen Street stations. That means that it can take around two hours to travel a distance of only 60 miles. Can the minister give me any hope that a through service might become available for customers from the south-west of Scotland at any point in the future?

As I said in my original response, it is no longer necessary to change between Glasgow central and Queen Street stations for most of those services because people can change at Carstairs. On Willie Coffey’s point about a direct service from, say, Kilmarnock to Edinburgh, work is currently going on to allow people to take a train from Kilmarnock to Glasgow central station and, although it is a Glasgow service, to stay on the same train through to Edinburgh. Work on that is going on in relation to the new franchise. It might be a good idea for Willie Coffey to engage with the potential bidders for that franchise to ensure that they are well aware of his and his constituents’ aspirations.

Does the minister recognise the benefits that the Glasgow crossrail scheme could bring to communities in the south-west of Glasgow? Is the Government minded to support that scheme in the future?

The Government does not support that scheme because we believe that it would disadvantage many existing passengers by diverting existing services from the city centre stations to run via crossrail. It would also substantially increase the subsidy requirements through the addition of new services, and it would require increased infrastructural investment at critical points elsewhere on the network. In 2008, when the scheme was looked at through the strategic transport projects review, we estimated that its cost would be between £150 million and £250 million at that time. If that is the Labour Party’s proposal, we would expect it to propose that in relation to the new franchise, or perhaps in its budget proposals, but the Scottish Government does not intend to take that project forward.

The minister is aware of the current Glasgow crossrail project, which is about the electrification of a section of the line and is costed at approximately £20 million. Does he agree that the increased connectivity that this project would offer to Ayrshire and, in particular, Prestwick airport, as alluded to by my colleagues, would be worthy of consideration at a much different price from that which he has just quoted?

I have given the reasons why the Government does not support the crossrail project. As I said in response to Willie Coffey’s supplementary question, there are different ways to effect the improvements that the member is looking for, and we are seeking to do that through the new franchise. It will be a longer franchise that will therefore allow substantial capital investment, which has not been as easy in the past, and the Government is committed to around £5 billion of investment over the first five years. There is the potential to improve those services vastly, but we would not do that through crossrail.

Question 2, in the name of Patricia Ferguson, has not been lodged because the member is abroad on parliamentary business.

---

Community Policing

3. To ask the Scottish Government what priority it attaches to community policing. (S4O-02464)

The Scottish Government has consistently made it clear that local policing lies at the heart of reform. That is evidenced through our aims for reform—to protect local services and strengthen their connection with communities—and the statutory purpose and strategic priorities that we have set for Police Scotland. Through reform, we have protected front-line services, including the 1,000 extra police officers who have helped to cut crime to a 39-year low.

Is the cabinet secretary aware of concerns in Edinburgh and the Lothians about the lack of weight given to community policing, which has resulted in the city council’s proposal to withdraw funding from local police officers? Are those concerns not compounded by this week’s announcement on proposed police station closures and cutbacks across the region?

I do not recognise the scenario that Ms Boyack has mentioned. From speaking to the deputy leader of the City of Edinburgh Council, I understand that Steve House is coming through to meet him and the council leader to allay any fears that there may be about local policing. I am happy to leave that to Councillor Burns and Councillor Cardownie.

The proposals from Police Scotland are, let us remember, an operational matter; equally, they are the subject of an on-going consultation, so they can be referred to. As Ms Boyack will be aware, the opening hours at some stations—Dalkeith, for example—are being extended, although I do not think that she deliberately sought to exclude that. In the main, the proposals relate to stations of limited use. The priority has to be police on the beat.

I simply remind Ms Boyack that there is a difference between what our Administration has done and what her Administration failed to be re-elected on. In 2006-07, the Government that she supported had 16,234 police officers and there were 120 homicide victims. In 2012-13, this Government has provided more than 17,000 police officers and the number of homicide victims is down to 62. There has been a marked difference across a whole range of crimes, including a 60 per cent drop in the handling of offensive weapons since we came into government.

While operational policing is of course a matter for Police Scotland and ultimately for the chief constable, has the cabinet secretary been made aware—I have been made aware of the issue across my constituency—that, if divisions are ranked on issues such as stop and search and targets become the be-all and end-all, the unintended consequence could be an erosion of the operational discretion of officers, which in turn could undermine the good will that community officers work so hard to achieve on the beat?

The member makes a fair point about the importance of such matters, which are operational. I respect that, although I have discussed such matters with the chief constable. The issue has also been raised with me by the Association of Scottish Police Superintendents and the Scottish Police Federation. It seems to me that we should listen to what has been said by the chief constable, who I understand from those who attended the Scottish Police Authority meeting yesterday has indicated that discretion remains the bedrock of matters and is available to officers.

I suggest that Ms Grahame should seek to raise the matter not simply through the Justice Committee but through the Justice Sub-Committee on Policing, which plays an important part—I again give credit to Graeme Pearson for this—in ensuring that there is parliamentary scrutiny of such matters in discussions with the senior police team.

Does the cabinet secretary agree that police station counter services are an important aspect of community policing? In view of that, does he agree that the public should be consulted about the proposal to close, or to reduce the hours of, one third of Scotland’s police counters?

The public are being consulted—Assistant Chief Constable Mawson has been out making that clear—and I have no doubt that Ms Mitchell and many others will seek to respond to the consultation. However, it is important that we ensure that police officers are utilised out on the beat, which is where the communities want them, rather than manning stations that perhaps serve a very limited purpose and waiting for people to come in.

Had we followed the line that has been taken south of the border, where there has been an 8.72 per cent drop in the number of police officers, the number of police officers in Scotland would have fallen below 15,000. This Government, unlike the coalition Government south of the border, believes that front-line policing is important. That is why we remain committed to the additional police presence in our communities, even if at times there will not be a service available in the station.

---

Welfare Reform (Jobseekers Allowance)

4. To ask the Scottish Government what impact the additional seven-day wait for new claimants of jobseekers allowance will have on its welfare reform mitigation measures. (S4O-02465)

The increase in waiting days for jobseekers allowance will cause more hardship and worry for newly unemployed people and their families. It will also mean added pressure on the local services that provide help and support for those unfortunate enough to find themselves in that position. That is why the Scottish Government is increasing its spend on mitigation measures to £68 million in 2013-2014, and why our draft budget maintains spending at that level for at least the next two years.

We will do all that we can to help people make the transition to the new welfare system and to protect people in Scotland from the impacts of the United Kingdom Government’s cuts, but mitigating the full impact of all the cuts will not be possible.

I thank the minister for that answer.

Michael Gove, the UK Secretary of State for Education, has suggested that people use food banks because of

“decisions that have been taken by those families which mean that they are not best able to manage their finances”.

Does the minister share my view that that increased food bank use is caused by ill-thought-out welfare reforms, such as this reform of jobseekers allowance?

Yes. I believe that the increase in the use of food banks that we have witnessed in Scotland is a result of the UK Government’s increasingly punitive welfare reforms. The decision to increase JSA waiting days was taken not by the families using food banks but by a chancellor ready to impose cuts on those least able to bear them. When the policy was announced, the chancellor was warned by Alison Garnham, the chief executive of the Child Poverty Action Group, who said:

“We’re talking about parents doing the right thing but who have very little in the way of savings to tide them over if they lose their job. There should be no doubt this will leave more families and children cold and hungry and push more families towards doorstep lenders and foodbanks.”

As I have said before, only when the Scottish Parliament has full control over welfare can we put in place policies that benefit the people of Scotland.

---

Energy Sector (OPITO)

5. To ask the Scottish Government when it last met the managing director of OPITO to discuss the energy sector. (S4O-02466)

I last formally met the previous managing director, Larraine Boorman, on 9 October 2012. The Scottish Government continues to be in close engagement with OPITO, and looks forward to engaging with the new managing director.

I thank the minister for his answer. After declaring my obvious interest, is the minister aware that France is the second largest foreign investor in Scotland—after the United States—creating thousands of jobs, mainly in the field of energy, making the role of OPITO crucial in keeping the north-east of Scotland the powerhouse of the UK? With all that investment in the north-east coming from France, I must ask the minister: why are the French so positive about our future?

The member puts his question with panache and a certain je ne sais quoi. [Laughter.] We absolutely welcome the tremendous investment and support of French companies in Scotland, not least Total, with which I had a very useful meeting in May of this year. We are delighted that France is furthering and deepening its connections with the oil and gas industry. Just about every country in the world is investing in Scotland with confidence, effect and success. La France est magnifique. [Applause.]

---

Energy Market Regulation (Independence)

6. To ask the Scottish Government what its plans are for the regulation of energy markets should Scotland become independent. (S4O-02467)

In February, we set out our proposals for economic regulation of key markets, including energy. Individual regulators, including Ofcom, Ofgem, the Office of Rail Regulation and the Water Industry Commission for Scotland, could be replaced by a single economic regulator to oversee regulation of the water, rail, telecommunications and energy industries.

Further, we have established an independent energy commission, with industry, academic and consumer experts, to provide evidence on how we could improve Scotland’s stewardship of electricity and gas regulation in an independent Scotland.

By continuing as part of the United Kingdom, Scottish consumers stand to benefit from Labour’s commitment to freeze energy prices for two years while a new regulator with the power to control energy prices is created. Will the minister simply match that commitment for his preferred separate Scotland and new regulator?

When one considers the regulation of banking, railways or payday loans, the record of regulators in the UK is not one to boast about.

On Mr Gray’s specific question, I refer him to what the consumer experts have said:

“before this freeze comes in the companies will whack the prices sky high”.

They have also said that it

“may put off decisions by energy companies or others to invest in new, cleaner generation capacity.”

The industry—SSE and Scottish Power—has said:

“Smaller companies would … face insolvency and bigger companies would have to consider reductions in investment and jobs.”

Of course, an arbitrary price freeze has been tried before. It was tried in California in 2000. What happened? Blackouts and an 800 per cent increase in the wholesale price. [Interruption.]

Order.

As far as I can recall, never has a measure introduced by the leader of a major political party in the UK received such widespread, utter and total condemnation as being completely unworkable.

Worst of all for Scotland—[Interruption.] I can see that the Labour members are listening now. They do not like it, but they are listening.

Worst of all for Scotland, such an arbitrary measure threatens to impair the essential investment in renewable energy schemes that are so important for the country.

---

Natural Assets (Community Ownership)

7. To ask the Scottish Government what plans it has to expand community ownership of Scotland’s natural assets. (S4O-02468)

The Scottish Government is committed to maximising the opportunities for community benefits and believes that Scottish public assets should be managed in Scotland for the benefit of Scotland’s people. The First Minister recently announced a target to increase community ownership of land to 1 million acres by 2020. The independent land reform review group is also examining what more could be done to increase community ownership.

In addition, the Scottish Government has proposed a two-phase approach to devolution of the Crown Estate’s functions in Scotland, involving devolution to the Scottish ministers first and then, as a second phase, consideration of where the individual functions and powers might rest.

The first meeting of the recently convened island areas ministerial working group considered that process and the further devolution to island communities of responsibility for the Crown Estate’s functions.

I thank the minister for that detailed response.

Scotland’s rivers are an important part of our natural assets. What plans and funding does the Scottish Government have to ensure community ownership of our rivers, with a key role for angling associations?

Mr Finnie raises an important issue. During the passage of the Aquaculture and Fisheries (Scotland) Act 2013, we announced that we would undertake a review of wild fisheries management in this session of Parliament. I hope that we will come before the Parliament in reasonable time to give further detail on that.

The land reform review group has also been considering issues to do with riparian rights. We will have to wait to see what recommendations the review group makes in its final report in April.

I give Mr Finnie an undertaking that we will examine the issues closely and give them due consideration. I am aware of the link between ownership and access to riparian rights, and we will consider sympathetically any recommendations that are made.

---

Draff (Use in Agriculture)

8. To ask the Scottish Government what steps it has taken to ensure that draff remains available to the agriculture industry as a source of protein. (S4O-02469)

Last year, the Scottish Government commissioned research that found that availability of co-products suitable for inclusion in animal feed rations, including draff, was at a historically high level. Following on from that, it has been agreed that the NFU Scotland will co-ordinate a diverse group of organisations to discuss and agree a set of actions that can be taken to ensure the continued supply of draff in the future.

Although I am grateful to the cabinet secretary for that response, a year ago, in answer to a similar question from my colleague Mary Scanlon, he said that he was considering how to respond to those concerns. It rather sounds as if he is still doing so, but he will be aware that the concerns have not diminished. Draff remains a key source of home-produced protein, but more and more of it is being used as biofuel.

When will the cabinet secretary be able to give us a fully formulated response to the concerns? Might he consider, perhaps through the Scotland rural development programme, building shared draff storage capacity to assist farmers to stockpile when supplies are plentiful?

As I just explained to the member, following concerns that were expressed last year, the Scottish Government undertook considerable work. That has now reported and the industry is taking forward some of the recommendations.

It is worth bearing in mind that draff supplies have grown substantially in recent years in the wake of higher levels of Scotch whisky production, which is a sector that is absolutely booming. Significant quantities of draff are exported to England because of oversupply in Scotland. I recognise that some farmers in some localised areas of Scotland still have concerns about access to draff, which is a cheaper alternative to other animal feeds. We will keep a close eye on that situation.

Before we move to First Minister’s question time, members will wish to join me in welcoming to the gallery the governor of Punjab, His Excellency Mr Mohammad Sarwar. [Applause.]