Plenary, 05 Feb 2009

Meeting date: Thursday, February 5, 2009

Official Report 704KB pdf

---

First Minister's Question Time

---

First Minister (Engagements)

To ask the First Minister what engagements he has planned for the rest of the day. (S3F-1425)

Later today I have engagements to take forward the Government's programme for Scotland, which includes the implementation of the budget that was so resoundingly passed by virtually the entire Parliament yesterday.

That is exactly what I would like to explore with the First Minister. Yesterday, the Parliament put aside political differences to pass the Budget (Scotland) (No 3) Bill. The money is in place, but what will the First Minister do to turn it into schools, hospitals, houses and jobs for construction workers?

Thankfully, because the Parliament passed the budget bill, we now have the opportunity to combat recession in Scotland. That will include, for example, the accelerated capital investment that will generate 5,000 jobs in Scotland; the accelerated capital for town centres around Scotland that will generate jobs in four figures; and—yes—the additional opportunities in training that will give young people in Scotland an opportunity. The Parliament and the Government will do everything within their power to combat recession in Scotland.

I agree that the money is in place, but it is a matter of what is done with it. Despite the sound and the fury of the past week, we should not forget the Finance Committee's advice in its budget report that

"the Scottish Government should consider all available funding models"

for capital investment. We have waited two years for the Scottish Futures Trust, and it has built nothing. Will the First Minister now give up on it and get Scotland building?

There are record capital allocations in the budget, but with regard to the Labour Party's continuing love affair with private finance initiatives and public-private partnerships, I suggest that Mr Gray casts an eye at the headlines south of the border.

On 26 January, the Press Association said, "Recession halts billions worth of public projects" because of problems in PFI. The Guardian said, "Government may have to take on risk of PFI deals" and "deals may have to be underwritten", and the Daily Express said, "Crunch hits PFI".

If Iain Gray and the Labour Party genuinely want to give us the power to ensure that we can increase capital investment across the range of projects in Scotland, they should vote for the motion on borrowing powers at 5 o'clock.

Professor John Kay said that the not-for-profit distribution method that the Scottish National Party dreamt up was "PFI with window dressing". There is no difference there at all—we should look back to before the recession.

I do not think that the First Minister understands his responsibility in this matter. Government figures for projects that are in the investment pipeline show that in 2007, under Labour, construction projects were worth £1.3 billion. Last year, under the SNP, that plummeted to £300 million. In one year, £1 billion worth of construction was lost to the Scottish economy, along with 20,000 jobs, while Mr Salmond fiddled with his futures trust.

In Scotland, the credit crunch comes on top of the Salmond slump. How many more jobs have to go before the Government wises up and starts building something?

Iain Gray is not particularly in command of his subject. Professor John Kay is one of the most long-standing and trenchant critics of PFI in the United Kingdom. The Government's capital budget is not £300 million; it is £3 billion injected into the Scottish economy year after year.

In the new atmosphere of consensus breaking out across the chamber, I tell Iain Gray that everyone has to contribute to it. I am afraid to say that in answer to Iain Gray on 8 January, I rather misled the chamber about the number of school projects that had been completed under this Administration. I said that it was 71, but I now understand that that was the figure for 2008. The real figure is actually 150 schools built or refurbished under this Administration.

The First Minister does not seem to be in command of his Council of Economic Advisers—John Kay was criticising the Scottish Futures Trust. It is true that he was criticising PFI, but he was saying that the SFT is exactly the same as PFI. That £1 billion is the measure of the projects stopped by the SNP Government—supposed to be replaced by the Scottish Futures Trust, but not replaced by the Scottish Futures Trust.

The First Minister can bluster as much as he likes, but in the real world, Harry Frew of the construction workers union says that there is a crisis in the construction industry and that it is losing confidence in the SNP Government. In the real world, Michael Levack of the Scottish Building Federation agrees. He says that Scottish Government funds are

"taking far too long to get to the coalface. This year is going to be horrendous … If we don't have the jobs coming forward we will lose more and more as the weeks go on."

Michael Levack is blaming this Government. That is the Salmond slump. When will the First Minister stop costing jobs and start creating them?

At some stage, the Labour Party had better understand its inescapable responsibility for the Downing Street downturn or the Brown recession—or maybe depression, as we have to call it after yesterday's Prime Minister's questions.

Serious points are coming out of the budget negotiations. One of the reasons why I applaud the decision of the vast majority of members of this Parliament to back the budget—the unity of the Parliament might at some point be reflected in the unity of the Labour Party—is that it focused attention on some of the key aspects that we must face as a Parliament, one of which is borrowing powers. If we are to combat a recession and reflate the economy, we need the power to borrow, as every other Government in the western world is doing.

The other aspect that came out of the budget negotiations and which I welcome is the realisation across most parties in the chamber that the basic threat to public expenditure in Scotland will be not in this coming year, the budget for which we have agreed, but in the year after that when £500 million in public cuts is coming at us through the tunnel.

Here is the advice to the Parliament's Finance Committee from Professor David Bell. He said that there is

"a possibility that real public spending in Scotland will fall during 2010-11 for the first time since the early 1990s."

I challenge Iain Gray and the Labour Party to unite with the rest of the Parliament in saying to the Chancellor of the Exchequer that deflating the Scottish economy and public spending in the teeth of a recession would be an act of madness. If we unite on that, as we united yesterday, we can do some real good for the Scottish economy.

---

Prime Minister (Meetings)

To ask the First Minister when he will next meet the Prime Minister. (S3F-1426)

I have no plans to meet the Prime Minister in the near future.

The First Minister will be aware of yesterday's extraordinary admission by the Secretary of State for Scotland that he did not know whether his boss, the Prime Minister, had met the First Minister to discuss the recession in Scotland. Unbelievably, the secretary of state seemed to neither know nor care whether such meetings had occurred. I wonder whether the First Minister knows how many times he has met the Prime Minister in recent months to discuss the recession in Scotland.

Gordon Brown claims to be saving the world, but is ignoring Scotland. Alex Salmond claims to be saving Scotland, but is more obsessed with breaking up the union. During this period of economic turmoil, how many times has the First Minister met the Prime Minister face to face to find common ways of tackling Labour's recession? How many times have they met face to face to discuss helping our small businesses? How many times have they met face to face to help our high streets in Scotland?

The last time I met the Prime Minister to discuss an economic issue it was on the dispute at Grangemouth last year, because of the importance that I felt it had and the threat that the entire Scottish economy faced. Let me make it absolutely clear that I am more than willing to meet the Prime Minister or the chancellor to talk about such issues. In a range of correspondence, particularly on the banking crisis, I have indicated that I thought that that would be a very useful thing to do. I am completely willing to meet the Prime Minister to talk about these issues, because of their seriousness.

Late last night, when I was watching yesterday's Scottish questions, I saw that the Speaker of the House of Commons had to upbraid the Secretary of State for Scotland by saying:

"prolonged criticism of the Scottish Parliament will give the impression that that is all we have to talk about."—[Official Report, House of Commons, 4 February 2009; Vol 487, c 827 .]

Those were wise words from the Speaker. The Secretary of State for Scotland should concentrate on doing his own job—whatever that is.

It is extraordinary that in these difficult times there has been no face-to-face engagement between the First Minister and the Prime Minister. Of course, the suspicion is that the relationship between those two people is more akin to permafrost than partnership. Would it not be better if, instead of picking fights with each other, Gordon Brown and the First Minister worked together in the best interests of Scotland?

David Cameron has made it clear that if he becomes British Prime Minister, he will work constructively with Scotland's First Minister, whoever that may be. [Interruption.]

Order.

I say to Mr Rumbles that we all know who the next British Prime Minister will not be.

I urge the First Minister to schedule regular talks with the Prime Minister, especially during this Labour recession. In the meantime, I ask the First Minister to endorse the Scottish Conservatives' help our high street campaign. Town centres the length and breadth of Scotland need our help as Gordon Brown's economic downturn hits our streets hard. Will the First Minister today endorse the Scottish Conservative campaign by logging on to helpourhighstreet.com?

I seem to have a choice between logging on to a Tory website and meeting the Prime Minister—I am perfectly willing to meet the Prime Minister. Last week in a press release, Iain Gray seemed to concede the next election to the Scottish National Party in Scotland, and Annabel Goldie just stopped herself from conceding the United Kingdom election. I must say that it will add lustre to the UK general election that the people competing to be the Prime Minister of the UK will also be competing for the ability to meet me on a regular basis. I confirm that I am absolutely willing to meet the current Prime Minister and, indeed, any Prime Minister, to discuss subjects of importance to Scotland.

I endorse the town centre initiative in the budget. I recognise the Conservative party's championing of that cause. This is exactly the right time to invest the capital acceleration in capital projects around the town centres of Scotland. I am sure that Annabel Goldie will agree that also crucial is the small business bonus scheme and the advantage that it gives small businesses throughout Scotland. I welcome the co-operation over the past two budgets that has brought that into place.

David McLetchie's lesson yesterday on chronology, and on who did what when, made me look back into the parliamentary record. When the SNP first announced the small business bonus scheme, Murdo Fraser said on 28 September 2006—in an exchange with Alex Neil—that the proposal "lacks credibility". I am glad that wiser counsel has prevailed upon the Tory deputy leader.

---

Cabinet (Meeting)

To ask the First Minister what issues will be discussed at the next meeting of the Cabinet. (S3F-1427)

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

Does the First Minister envisage that he would ever use the phrase, "Scottish jobs for Scottish workers"?

Not in the manner in which the Prime Minister used a phrase that he probably regrets using, given how it was picked up and promoted.

It is far better to take the initiative in the way that has happened on a range of public projects in Scotland and in negotiations with our key private sector companies. For example, Scottish and Southern Energy recently declared that it anticipates that 50 per cent of the contracts in the new Clyde project, one of our great renewable energy projects, will go to Scottish firms, not because it is compelled in that regard but because it thinks that that is the right thing to do, particularly in a renewable energy project.

Many councils in Scotland have negotiated section agreements whereby consideration will be given to the ability of local labour within a 40-mile radius to take advantage of major capital projects. That is the wish of Scottish Power at Longannet and it is the wish of many other major companies.

The Scottish Government's interest in getting our small companies sector on to the contracts portal, to enable small companies to take advantage of major contracts, is important, as is business club Scotland, which was launched this week and through which all our business organisations are combining to get the maximum benefit out of major capital contracts that will come to Scotland during the next few years.

Such productive action from the private sector and the public sector is the way to answer the question, as opposed to creating slogans such as the one that has come back to haunt the Prime Minister.

I am sure that the Parliament will welcome the First Minister's careful choice of words. People are angry about the recession and angry with a Labour Prime Minister who invented a slogan about British jobs to deflect attention from the miserable job that he is doing. Yesterday, Labour gave us a lecture on economics without mentioning the Prime Minister's useless slogan or his old one about conquering boom and bust, saving the world and the beloved prudence. Nor did Labour mention the £1.4 trillion of consumer debt, which might have had something to do with the position that we are in.

This morning, the Parliament debated how to protect Scottish jobs in financial services, which look after not just Scotland's pensions but the world's pensions. Our reputation has been shattered by the turmoil and failure of the banks. Does the First Minister agree that putting up national barriers will not protect a single Scottish job? How will he promote a global role? Does he have more to offer than a slogan?

Given that in his first question Tavish Scott reflected on what was perhaps an injudicious choice of words by the Prime Minister, I think that he should not have said that our reputation has been shattered by recent events in the financial sector. It is clear that there have been major setbacks and major blows. However, let us remember that the Scottish financial sector has a huge position in long-term investment, insurance and pension management and that there are many huge and strong companies.

That is why I welcomed and could agree to the Liberal Democrat proposal on the financial sector jobs task force. The proposal will be taken to the Financial Services Advisory Board meeting on Tuesday and I believe that the task force will be established. That will happen in a positive way, in the context of our knowing that there are substantial strengths in the Scottish financial sector, so that the task force not only faces up to the inevitable problems that we must face in the next while but considers the substantial opportunities for the future that exist. Such positive proposals are the way forward, as opposed to phraseology that turns out to be empty or even counterproductive.

I have received a large number of requests for constituency questions, which all reflect the same type of issue. I cannot take them all.

Does the First Minister share my concern at the recent announcement by FMC BioPolymer UK that around 145 jobs will be lost from the company's Girvan plant by the end of 2009 as a result of company restructuring and the moving of production to Norway? Will he urge the Minister for Enterprise, Energy and Tourism to meet the company urgently, to ascertain what can be done to ensure that jobs are retained on the site? Will the Minister for Enterprise, Energy and Tourism meet me and other people who want manufacturing to continue in the Carrick area and who want to know what more can be done to ensure that existing jobs are retained and new jobs created?

The Minister for Enterprise, Energy and Tourism will certainly meet the constituency member, and other members who cover the area, to progress the matter.

I know that Cathy Jamieson and the Parliament welcome the increased investment in the partnership action for continuing employment service and the early intervention of Government services in doing the maximum to try to prevent further job losses and ensure that the workers involved get the best benefits possible in terms of training opportunities.

---

Green Industries (Employment Support)

To ask the First Minister what action the Scottish Government is taking to support employment in green industries. (S3F-1438)

This week, the Scottish Government announced plans to create 16,000 green energy jobs by 2020 as part of Scotland's economic recovery programme. Looking to the long term, that is a substantial contribution to the new economy. We are taking action to create those jobs for the future—jobs in our rapidly expanding renewables industry, the development and application of clean fossil fuel technology, energy efficiency, microgeneration, and new sustainable travel methods.

What effect does the United Kingdom Government's obsession with nuclear power have on the renewable industry and Scotland's green jobs?

I believe in a general sense that any investment in nuclear power is investment—and it will be billions—that is taken away from investment in clean and renewable technology. My approach to such things, as a Government that I believe has now approved 18 major renewables consents in the past 18 months—the previous average was four a year—is one of highlighting the great prospects in our renewables sector, which is a huge priority.

By and large, my general attitude to nuclear power is this: I do not believe that the case for nuclear power is made. Indeed,

"nuclear power is not the answer to tackling climate change or security of supply".

I quote, of course, from Sarah Boyack's parliamentary motion S2M-4061.

Having launched the green jobs strategy in 2005, Jim Wallace doubtless takes as the sincerest form of flattery the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Sustainable Growth's announcement on Monday. How will the green jobs be defined and the targets measured?

A whole range of initiatives is being taken. Our task is one not of counting jobs—it will be easy enough to do that—but of generating jobs, for which we have first to approve consents. In launching the document in 2005, Jim Wallace was far-seeing in looking forward to the renewables surge in Scotland. Unfortunately, the Government then did not consent to renewables investments beyond four a year. The 18 consents that we have made in the past 18 months are impressive in that regard.

Making consents is not the only thing that requires to be done. We also have to encourage our universities to build up the research base. That is being done. Three out of four of the first awards from the Energy Technologies Institute are being led by Scottish universities. That is a fantastic achievement. The Scottish European green energy centre in the great city of Aberdeen is another substantial step forward, as is our engagement in the European grid initiatives. Above all, as the constituency member for Orkney should understand, if we are to realise Scotland's true potential as the green energy powerhouse of Europe, we have to crack the availability of transmission systems.

As with green jobs, the First Minister will recall that it is now nearly two years since the consultation closed on proposals for a Scottish energy efficiency strategy, the intention of which was to improve energy efficiency and create green jobs. When does he intend to publish his Government's energy efficiency action plan?

We are taking action. Ultimately, the Green party was not satisfied with what we were able to offer in the budget. Nonetheless, the largest insulation programme and drive against poor insulation in Scottish history has been brought forward. As that programme is brought forward, and in terms of the action that is being taken, including the publication in due course of the strategy, our view of the action that was not taken in the past will be validated by the investment and job opportunities that it creates.

---

Clostridium Difficile

To ask the First Minister what action the Scottish Government is taking in light of the emergence of the new and potentially more dangerous 078 strain of Clostridium difficile in hospitals across Scotland. (S3F-1436)

Irrespective of strain, the control of C diff is best achieved through prudent prescribing, zero tolerance of hand hygiene non-compliance and robust infection control measures.

The Government has introduced key measures to fight health care associated infection. From April 2009, there will be a new national target to reduce C diff across NHS Scotland by at least 30 per cent by 2011. We have introduced a new reporting template that requires national health service boards to report hospital-by-hospital performance on key indicators. We have provided £3 million of HAI funding this year to support the development of local surveillance systems, to help us gear up for the phased national roll-out of MRSA screening from 2009-10. In April this year, a new care environment inspectorate will be introduced to monitor actions that are being taken to reduce HAI at NHS board level. Other measures include a zero tolerance approach to hand hygiene non-compliance; tougher hospital cleaning standards, following the recent independent audit; ensuring 100 per cent provision of single rooms in new-build hospitals; and no more privatisation of cleaning contracts in the NHS.

I simply note that at the Vale of Leven hospital cleaning was not privatised.

Existing guidance to health boards requires samples of the 027 strain to be submitted to the national laboratory for typing but is silent on the 078 strain. Will the First Minister ensure that the 078 strain is specified in guidance? Given that the Deputy First Minister has said that the 078 strain is not a new strain, why was it apparently not reported by the Government until just a few weeks ago?

It is not a new strain of C diff, but it is potentially a very potent strain. That makes it all the more important that we proceed with the action plan that I have just outlined in great detail to Jackie Baillie. The Government is also willing to consider any positive suggestion for intensifying our battle against the infection. I hope that the battle can satisfactorily be won by the whole Parliament and the whole community of Scotland.

Does the First Minister share my concern about carpeted areas, unlimited visiting hours, unlimited numbers of visitors, visitors sitting on beds and so on as possible sources of infection? Does he agree that other commonsense improvements, as well as simple, commonsense attention to hand cleanliness—[Interruption.]

Members near to Christine Grahame's microphone should check whether their communication equipment is switched off; someone's BlackBerry is on. Carry on, Ms Grahame.

I am not the offender, Presiding Officer.

Does the First Minister agree that, as well as simple, commonsense attention to hand cleanliness, other commonsense improvementsthat could be made in our hospitals might limit the spread of infections?

Many of the measures that are being taken could be described as commonsense measures, and many are informed by the studies that have been made. All require a substantial increase in budget. That is why I am particularly pleased to note that the budget that the Parliament passed yesterday includes a 75 per cent increase in the budget for the battle against these vicious infections

---

Breaches of Bail (Action)

To ask the First Minister what action the Scottish Government will take in light of reports that a breach of bail is committed every 47 minutes. (S3F-1445)

In December 2007, the Scottish Government introduced tougher bail rules so that those accused of serious violent or sexual offences or drug dealing with previous similar convictions would be granted bail only in exceptional circumstances. The Government has also ensured that those who commit an offence while on bail face longer jail terms.

The First Minister will be aware that, despite the best efforts of all concerned, Scotland's bail laws are simply not working. Despite the introduction of the new steps, there are still instances—there have been three this year—of people who appear on a petition alleging violent conduct being released and subsequently committing violent acts. Accordingly, will the First Minister carry out a further review of the operation of Scotland's bail laws—recognising the fact that last year there were 11,000 breaches—and report back to Parliament in early course with its results?

The reason Bill Aitken has those figures is that this is the first time they have been compiled. Compiling the figures seems to show a determination, for the first time, to get to grips with the seriousness of the situation. The figures show the number of breaches, not the number of individuals who have committed breach.

I am surprised and disappointed by Bill Aitken. I know that he is a hard man and all the rest of it, but I have been looking back at the parliamentary records again—this time for Westminster—and, in August last year, the Tories at Westminster proposed a tightening of bail laws in England and Wales. Their document, "Public safety first: Reducing the risk of offending by suspects on bail", said:

"These changes will effectively bring the bail laws in England and Wales broadly into line with Scotland where breach of bail is already a free-standing criminal offence and where new bail laws came into force in December 2007 providing for many similar measures to the ones we propose."

The Conservative party said—as was reflected in the house journal, The Daily Telegraph:

"the proposals would bring laws in England and Wales into line with the tougher regime in Scotland."

I know that Bill Aitken is the Jeremiah of justice in Scotland, but when we have a record number of police and the lowest recorded crime for 25 years, does even Bill Aitken recognise, as his colleagues south of the border do, that something at last is being done in Scotland?

Meeting suspended until 14:15.

On resuming—