General Questions
City of Edinburgh Council (Privatisation of Services)
To ask the Scottish Government what its position is on the proposed privatisation of services by the City of Edinburgh Council. (S4O-00298)
I am aware of the proposals that the council is considering as part of its alternative business model programme. It is for the council, as a body of elected representatives, to determine how it delivers services for the people of Edinburgh, within the framework of its duty to secure best value, with the principles behind best value in statutory guidance, including responsiveness to the needs of communities, citizens, customers, and employees.
I understand that the council has deferred a decision about environmental services until next month to allow members to get more information and to enable them to scrutinise the proposals fully, as is their responsibility.
I hope that the minister is opposed to the council’s privatisation proposals. On a specific point, is she aware of the protocol between the Scottish Government and the Scottish Trades Union Congress that requires that transferred employees and new appointees to a public-private partnership workforce have access to the same or broadly comparable pension arrangements as are currently available to council employees and that, where possible, that should be achieved through the use of admitted body status? Will she confirm that the protocol remains in force and that it is directly applicable to the Edinburgh alternative business model programme? Will she write to the City of Edinburgh Council to that effect?
I thank Malcolm Chisholm for his question. I reiterate that it is a matter for the City of Edinburgh Council.
On the pension scheme, I understand that the council is fully aware of its duty to comply with the guidance that is issued under section 52 of the Local Government in Scotland Act 2003 in relation to employment issues and contracting. Again, that is for Edinburgh councillors to consider. During the month for which they have opted to defer the decision, I expect them to ensure that they cover all bases in respect of the issues that Malcolm Chisholm has raised.
Are there, for councils such as the City of Edinburgh Council that might be considering large-scale private involvement in delivery of services, lessons to learn from the record of Labour’s wholesale embracing of the private finance initiative in local authorities and other services throughout the public sector?
Marco Biagi’s point is well made. We all know that public sector resource budgets are under pressure as a result of their being slashed because of choices that have been made by the Tories—and previously by Labour—at Westminster. We have made it clear that we will not continue the overly expensive PFI because it is apparent that it is not delivering best value for the taxpayer: no new PFI projects have been initiated since 2007. The PFI legacy is a drain on public finances and shows us that instead of accepting credit-card levels of repayment under PFI, we need to get the best value from our capital to enable us to do far more for our economy and our society.
Orthodontic Dentistry (Access for Children)
To ask the Scottish Executive how it ensures access to orthodontic dentistry for all children who would benefit from it. (S4O-00299)
All children who are assessed as having a definite need for orthodontic treatment, and who would benefit from orthodontic treatment, will be able to access such treatment.
Strict new guidelines that are being imposed on dentists by the Scottish Government will see parents pay thousands of pounds for orthodontic treatment if a dentist cannot prove that their child’s health will improve as a result of it. Does the minister understand concerns that the strictness of the new guidelines will create a tiered system in Scotland, with poorer families who do not meet the criteria and who cannot meet the costs of treatment being forced to go without? Will he take action to protect those young people?
Mark Griffin should be aware that, under the new criteria that were introduced under the index of orthodontic treatment need, where there is a clinical need, children will still be able to access orthodontic treatment. We, as a Government, have put considerable investment into oral healthcare in recent years and we are now starting to reap the rewards of that as Scotland’s overall oral health record is improving significantly.
I point out that the provision has been introduced because it was one of the key recommendations in the dental action plan for Scotland, which was published in 2005 by the Labour and Liberal Democrat Administration. We are now implementing various parts of the plan. It might also be helpful if I point out to Mark Griffin that, in Scotland, we are introducing it in the same way as it has been introduced in other parts of the United Kingdom. For example, the same index was introduced in England in 2006 by the Labour Government and it was introduced in Wales in April 2006, also by a Labour Government. It has also been introduced in Northern Ireland.
The system makes the process around orthodontic treatment fairer, clearer and quicker. That is why children in Scotland who have a clinical need for orthodontic treatment will continue to receive it.
The minister referred to clinical need. Does he accept that there are many children and young people who might not have a clinical need for orthodontic treatment but who do not want to grow up with disfiguring crooked teeth? Does he accept that the legacy of what he is proposing might well be that we have children with crooked teeth from less well-off backgrounds while the parents of those from better-off backgrounds can afford to pay for the much-needed treatment?
I should point out to the member that, under the index, children who require orthodontic treatment will receive it. That can involve a range of issues, including realignment of crooked teeth. That will still be available, where a clinical assessment has been undertaken.
It is worth pointing out that, at the moment, the vast majority of orthodontic treatment that is provided under the general dental service provision is given to children from more affluent backgrounds, rather than those from lower-income backgrounds. Ensuring that we target resources at those who have the greatest need for dental treatment is a key part of the dental action plan that was published in 2005 and which we are committed to taking forward.
Flood Defences (Perth and Kinross Council)
To ask the Scottish Executive what assessment it has made of flood defences in the Perth and Kinross Council area. (S4O-00300)
In 2007, all the existing flood defences in Scotland were assessed as part of the establishment of the Scottish Government’s flood defence asset database. There were only a few flood defences where minor problems were identified, one of which was at Bridge of Earn. Perth and Kinross Council was given the report and I understand that appropriate action to resolve the maintenance issues that were identified has been taken.
If the forecasters are correct, it seems to be likely that we are in for another difficult winter, which continues to cause concern to communities that are most vulnerable to floods, some of which the minister has just acknowledged. What discussions has the Scottish Government had with local authorities to ensure that the maximum possible assistance is being given to those communities when it comes to preventing flood damage this coming winter?
Difficult winters are, of course, something with which I am familiar.
We have a regular programme of engagement with local authorities. Later this month, I shall meet the Association of British Insurers on issues relating to flooding. We have a series of programmes to ensure that we are working in tandem with local authorities in their discharging of their responsibilities.
How do the minister and his department interact with local authorities to ensure that flood schemes are prioritised and that money is made available the many years ahead that are necessary if local authorities are to be able to plan for their schemes?
Nigel Don will be aware that, in 2008-09, the finance for addressing flooding was wrapped up in the money that was provided to local authorities. We are in discussions with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities about the money that is available for flood schemes. I am sure that that will be of interest to the member.
NHS Fife (Meetings)
To ask the Scottish Executive when the Cabinet Secretary for Health, Wellbeing and Cities Strategy will next meet NHS Fife. (S4O-00301)
The cabinet secretary expects to meet the chair of NHS Fife on 21 November during her routine meeting with national health service board chairs. She will also be chairing the NHS Fife annual review on 28 November.
No doubt the minister is aware of NHS Fife’s proposal to cut nine hospice beds at Queen Margaret hospital in Dunfermline. In just over a month, more than 12,000 people have signed a petition to oppose the cut, yet NHS Fife has repeatedly delayed an announcement on the future of the hospice ward. Will the minister ensure that the Cabinet Secretary for Health, Wellbeing and Cities Strategy raises the issue of cuts to hospice beds and seeks clarity at NHS Fife’s annual review?
I am aware that NHS Fife is reviewing the provision of palliative beds in its area. However, I am not aware of any specific proposal that it has brought forward so far. I understand that it has in place a review group that is due to meet later this month to consider various options. If there are to be any changes, there is clear guidance that NHS boards have to conduct a public consultation exercise around the matter. Given that the annual review will take place on 28 November and given the member’s interest in the matter, I encourage her to go along to the public meeting within the annual review and to take the opportunity to raise the issue with NHS Fife on that occasion.
Scotland-Norway Ferry Service
To ask the Scottish Government what progress has been made on encouraging port and ferry operators to introduce a direct passenger service between Scotland and Norway. (S4O-00302)
I acknowledge the member’s long-standing interest in the issue, which began long before he was elected to the Parliament. I assure him that the Scottish Government wants an expansion of direct ferry connections from Scotland to mainland Europe and we are therefore keen to engage with any operator that proposes a new ferry service between Scotland and Norway. However, any such service would have to operate on a commercially viable basis, and that is a matter for any prospective ferry operator to consider.
I am encouraged by the minister’s response. He will be aware that there has been no direct passenger ferry link between the UK and Norway since 2008, when DFDS withdrew the Newcastle to Stavanger and Bergen service, and that the Norwegian ferry company Fjord Line has expressed a keen interest in establishing a Scotland-Norway link. Will he do all that he can to support any ferry operator that seeks to establish a direct ferry link between Scotland and Norway? Such a link would not only allow Scandinavians to visit Scotland, but would open up another route for the distribution of Scottish exports.
I assure the member that we are aware of the reported interest in establishing a Scotland-Norway passenger ferry service and we are keen to work with any ferry operator that wants to introduce a new route. However, we have not to date received an approach on that. We are interested in increasing direct ferry connections from Scotland to mainland Europe, but any decision would be a matter for the commercial ferry industry, based on commercial viability. Fuel costs and vessel configuration would be key factors to be considered.
The strict European Union state-aid rules limit any possible funding by the Scottish Government to freight mode-shift grants, which are subject to budget availability. Grants are dependent on the transfer of freight from road to water, which is unlikely to be significant on a Scotland-Norway route. However, VisitScotland would certainly be prepared to work with any ferry operator to ensure that a new service was marketed to potential customers who were looking to come to Scotland.
Does the minister recognise that more than 100,000 people already travel each way between Scotland and Norway each year, principally via Aberdeen airport, but also via the new route between Glasgow and Stavanger that began in September? Will he now accept that it was a mistake for his Government not to replace the route development fund in 2007? If so, will he take steps to put that right so that we can have even more direct connections between Scotland and our Scandinavian neighbours in the years to come?
Lewis Macdonald’s question is disingenuous. He knows full well why that fund could not continue and what the issues are in terms of European regulation. I note what he says about the viability and increasing popularity of travel between Norway and Scotland, which is testament to the resilience of the Norwegian economy and shows what an independent country can do for its people.
Farming Tenancies (Compensation for Investment)
To ask the Scottish Executive whether tenant farmers relinquishing their tenancies have a right to compensation for investment made in their farms and, if so, whether the Agricultural Holdings (Amendment) Scotland Bill will alter this. (S4O-00303)
Tenant farmers who quit their holdings can already make statutory claims against their landlords, including for certain investments. Depending on the tenancy, that can include improvements that qualify under the terms of the lease or net assets that the landlord gains from, for example, future tree cropping. The Agricultural Holdings (Amendment) (Scotland) Bill, which the Government introduced on 31 October, will not amend the statutory provisions on waygoing and other compensation claims.
May I ask the cabinet secretary for some advice on behalf of a tenant farmer in my constituency who wishes to leave his tenancy because of ill health? He has a 1944 lease, I believe, and he has invested some £200,000 in his farm over that time. The factor for the landowner has basically said that they cannot afford—
Can we have a question, please, Ms Murray?
I am asking the cabinet secretary for his advice. Does somebody in that situation have any right to compensation, or can the landowner just say that they cannot afford it and tell them to go away?
I am sure that Elaine Murray will be aware that I am not familiar with the detail of 1944 leases. However, if she wishes to write to me in more detail about the 1944 lease I will do my utmost to investigate the circumstances. A tenant with proper records of what he or she has invested over the years should have little difficulty in justifying compensation.
Fireworks (Safety)
To ask the Scottish Government what steps it is taking to ensure firework safety around bonfire night. (S4O-00304)
Fire and rescue services are working with local partners to highlight the dangers of fireworks and bonfires. They have a statutory duty to promote fire safety in their areas. Their work is supported by the Scottish Government, which also delivers a national fire safety campaign.
I thank the minister for her answer and trust that the measures she has outlined will see a reduction in numbers from the 38 incidents that happened in my constituency on the last bonfire night. Will the minister explain what the Scottish Government does to promote fire safety in Scotland with the aim of reducing the number of people who are killed or injured by fire?
As I said, there is a national fire safety publicity campaign that is informed by the findings of the “Scotland Together” report, which was published in 2008. The campaign focuses on making the public aware of the real risk of fire and the promotion of home fire safety visits by means of the media, fire safety road shows, fire safety leaflets and the www.dontgivefireahome.com website. Statistics show a significant decrease in the number of fire deaths and injuries in Scotland and very good work is being done on the issues that are related to bonfires, which are slightly different to those that are related to fireworks but are wrapped into the same period. We are seeing considerable success, but as the member highlights, one incident is an incident too many.
Housing Benefit Cap (Representations)
To ask the Scottish Government what representations it has made to the UK Government on the possible effect in Scotland of the proposed cap on housing benefit for families that require more than four bedrooms. (S4O-00305)
The Scottish Government wrote to the UK Government in December 2010 expressing deep concern about the cumulative impact on Scotland of the cuts in housing benefit, providing a comprehensive impact assessment.
Although only 100 or so households in Scotland will be affected by the four-bedroom cap, overall the first tranche of reforms could lead to 55,000 people in Scotland losing on average £40 a month. Subsequent cuts in housing benefit for the social housing sector could adversely affect another 95,000 people. The Scottish Government has repeatedly expressed its concern to the UK Government about these matters, and will continue to do so.
I thank the minister for that answer and for the work that he has been doing on this matter. Will he raise the conflict between the cap on bedroom numbers and the requirements of section 137 of the Housing (Scotland) Act 1987 on overcrowding?
As Fiona McLeod suggests, landlords will still be expected to comply with overcrowding legislation, regardless of the levels of housing benefit that are paid. The UK Government reforms, however, will make it more difficult for families to manage on reduced benefits in appropriately sized accommodation. We estimate that the four-bedroom restriction and cap will have a severe impact on about 100 or so households in Scotland with average losses in excess of £200 a month. Councils will find it very difficult to provide alternative accommodation of the right size, so we will continue to work jointly with councils and other stakeholders through our advisory group to identify households and groups that are at risk.
I call Fiona McLeod. I am sorry; I call Gavin Brown to ask question 6—I mean 9.
Thank you, Presiding Officer, and I will make sure I read out question 9.
Business Gateway Contracts
To ask the Scottish Executive what progress there has been regarding the new business gateway contracts in the last month. (S4O-00306)
Local authorities are responsible for the retendering of the new business gateway contracts. I know the business gateway Scotland board is giving careful consideration to the Economy, Energy and Tourism Committee’s recent report on renewal of the business gateway contracts, which it published on 10 October. This is helping to inform progress on developing the new contracts. The board will submit a detailed response to the committee shortly and is continuing to engage with key interests. It is organising an event on 18 November to get views on the service specification.
Can we have a very brief supplementary question and a very brief answer, please?
The major criticism of the current contracts was that they lack flexibility. Will the new ones have the flexibility to help all businesses across Scotland?
Yes, they will.
Before we come to First Minister’s question time, members will wish to join me in welcoming to the gallery the ambassador from Croatia, His Excellency Dr Ivica Tomic. [Applause.]
Previous
Veterans