Plenary, 05 Dec 2002

Meeting date: Thursday, December 5, 2002

Official Report 682KB pdf

---

Question Time

---

SCOTTISH EXECUTIVE

---

Ritalin

To ask the Scottish Executive how many children under the age of six have been prescribed the drug Ritalin. (S1O-6033)

Prescription data collected centrally are not patient-specific. Ritalin is not licensed for children under six years of age. A medicine can be used outside its licence, but that would be a clinical decision for the doctor concerned.

Is the minister concerned about the increasing number of children, including very young children, who are being prescribed Ritalin? Does he have concerns about the long-term effects on those children as they reach adulthood?

I have had concerns about the matter over a period of time. Constituents, including one who contacted me this morning, have expressed concerns about the prescription of Ritalin, particularly its prescription for children under the age of six.

That said, in my current position I have to listen to clinical advice. A Scottish intercollegiate guidelines network guideline that came out last year makes it clear that drugs such as Ritalin have a role to play. However, the guideline also states that they should be part of a multidisciplinary approach and that non-pharmacological treatments—including behaviour management—are equally, if not more, important.

Why has the Executive not allocated resources to ensure the implementation of the SIGN guideline 52? As the minister says, it advocates the use of psychosocial therapies to reduce dependence on drugs such as Ritalin.

In general terms, resources have been allocated, although they are not allocated specifically on the basis of each SIGN guideline that is produced. It should certainly be possible to implement the guideline—which is obviously the guideline to which clinicians should look for advice—within the overall increases in health and local authority budgets.

---

European Funding (Highlands and Islands)

To ask the Scottish Executive whether it will make representations to the European Commission regarding the loss of objective 1 status for the Highlands and Islands as a result of any miscalculation of figures by the Office for National Statistics. (S1O-6037)

As always, we will fight to secure the best possible deal for the Highlands and Islands. The deal struck by Tony Blair in Berlin in 1999 means that the Highlands and Islands receives regional aid that is comparable with the funds received by an objective 1 area. We will use the most up-to-date statistics that are available to us in any negotiations on future aid.

I am grateful to the minister for his reply and for the assurance that the Executive will argue for the best deal for the Highlands and Islands. He will have my full support in doing so.

The minister will be aware of the significant benefits that European funding has brought to my constituency over the years. Can he tell the Parliament what efforts have been made to prepare the ground for the debate in the future? Will he meet representatives of Highlands and Islands Enterprise and the Highland Council to hear their views on the need for continuing regional aid for the Highlands and the best methods of achieving that assistance?

As Jamie Stone rightly says, European aid has brought enormous benefits to the Highlands and Islands, not least to his constituency where, for example, the Scrabster harbour project is improving the infrastructure of the area.

We have had a lot of discussions with our UK colleagues about the future. I attended the cohesion forum in Brussels to discuss the second cohesion report and to set out the Scottish position. I also attended the recent Euromontana conference in Inverness on the matter. On three occasions, I have met Commissioner Barnier, who spent some time in the Highlands and Islands earlier in the year talking about these issues. We also recently held a meeting of the structural funds forum in Scotland, which brings together all the key players to consider the future of structural funds. The forum includes the chairman of HIE and the leader of Highland Council. We will continue those discussions and preparations.

In recent days, the minister has made great play of a letter that he has received from the European Commission that rules out any appeal against the loss of European cash for the Highlands and Islands. Will he publish that letter? Does it explicitly and incontrovertibly rule out the possibility of reclassification of the current funding package to objective 1? Does he recognise that securing such an outcome would ensure that vital regional aid continues beyond 2006 in the Highlands and Islands?

The question demonstrates a lack of understanding of the issues by the Scottish National Party.

By you.

Not by me—by SNP members. The Commission has confirmed that past negotiations cannot be reopened. However, that is not relevant because the future negotiations are what is important. I have always made it clear that we will use the most up-to-date statistics in future negotiations, at which we will argue hard for the Highlands and Islands and for Scotland.

If a mistake has been made and an enormous amount of money has been lost for the Highlands and Islands, does the minister intend to get the money back and, if so, how?

Mr McGrigor's question is based on another misunderstanding and implies that the Highlands and Islands has somehow lost out, which is not the case. In Berlin in 1999, Tony Blair negotiated a special deal for the Highlands and Islands, which will bring more than €300 million to the area over a six-year period. That deal is comparable to what would have happened if the area had retained objective 1 status and is the reason why progress has been made on many infrastructure programmes throughout the Highlands and Islands. As I have said, the Executive will continue to argue hard on that issue.

---

Community Care Services

To ask the Scottish Executive what progress has been made on developing a joint-future approach to the delivery of community care services. (S1O-6050)

We are already making good progress on shifting the balance of care for older people using the new funding, which will rise to £48 million next year, to develop more intensive and flexible home care services. By April 2003, we will implement key areas such as joint resourcing and joint management for older people and single shared assessment for all care groups.

Is the minister aware of the recent newspaper article that misrepresented a joint community-care project to provide non-hospital care for older people in Smithfield Court in Aberdeen? Will the minister reassure the families and the older people involved that the community care that is provided is of a high standard? Will he join me in condemning the ill-informed comments made by some Opposition MSPs?

I thank Elaine Thomson for her question. The project she mentions is a joint project agreed between Aberdeen City Council and the local health board. It is part of the strategic response to delayed discharge, which aims to find more effective local ways of helping people who are taken out of hospital. I am not surprised by the sensationalist press coverage, but to describe the project—as the Opposition spokesperson on health has done—as a makeshift hospital that is not the answer and which will not provide the care the patients need, is to ignore the key role of the Scottish Commission for the Regulation of Care in assessing the quality of care. The project will complement existing provision of sheltered housing for older people and is part of a package that aims to provide the most appropriate care in the localities where people want it.

Does the minister agree that the joint-future approach between local authorities and health boards is completely missing from the Mental Health (Scotland) Bill, which is being considered by the Health and Community Care Committee? Will the Executive address that omission?

We are absolutely committed to working in partnership on community care. In fact, the Health and Community Care Committee has examined many of those issues. The Executive is confident that we will develop a partnership approach that recognises the issue of mental health.

The original question was about the appropriateness of care provision. I assure members—although Opposition members do not want to hear this—that the project that Elaine Thomson mentioned is a model that will deliver for older people in the Aberdeen area and that will provide the support they require in their community. It is not only in relation to that project that we need to be sensitive about the language we use; language on care issues throughout Scotland should be sensitive as we try to deliver the best quality care for the older people of Scotland.

---

NHS 24

To ask the Scottish Executive what progress is being made on the roll-out of NHS 24. (S1O-6026)

NHS 24 was launched in Grampian in May 2002 and in greater Glasgow in November. It now provides a 24-hour service to some 1.6 million people. The phased roll-out programme aims to provide Scotland-wide coverage by December 2004.

I welcome the move to roll out the service and I inform the minister of the support for the service that I have encountered in my constituency. When does he expect the service to be rolled out in Lanarkshire? Will he comment on the fact that the staff who provide the service are invaluable members of the national health service family?

I pay tribute to the staff who work for NHS 24, whom I was pleased to meet in both Aberdeen and Glasgow. I am sure that all members were as appalled as I was by the senior doctor who described them as monkeys. I am sure that we all condemn that unreservedly.

On the first point that Margaret Jamieson made—

It was Karen Whitefield.

I apologise. I am utterly confident that NHS 24 provides a good service because I have spoken to people in Aberdeen and Glasgow who have used it and who have benefited from an integrated service. In the past 24 hours, I have spoken to someone who phoned NHS 24 in Glasgow. The information from that call went straight through to the accident and emergency department that she then attended. Patients will benefit increasingly from integrated and seamless services.

Does the minister realise that the advent of NHS 24 is eagerly awaited by rural communities in the Highlands, where primary care services are under great pressure? Can he assure me that NHS 24 will be able to deliver an improvement to the health service in rural areas? When can we expect it to be rolled out to the Highlands and Islands?

As I said in my first answer, NHS 24 will be rolled out across Scotland by the end of 2004. It will be rolled out early in the Highland region, given that it started in the north of Scotland. Over and above the general benefits that will apply throughout Scotland, NHS 24 will have particular advantages for rural areas. For example, general practitioners in rural areas will benefit, in terms of their being on call.

Question 5 has been withdrawn.

---

European Funding (Highlands and Islands)

To ask the Scottish Executive what its estimate is of how much the Highlands and Islands will receive in regional aid from the European Union from 2006 to 2010. (S1O-6018)

It is premature to place any limitation on our ambitions for regional aid post-2006 within the context of a significantly enlarged EU.

I would have thanked the minister if he had answered the question. First, will he admit that the Highlands and Islands should now have objective 1 status? Secondly, will he admit that we do not have objective 1 status because the UK Office for National Statistics bungled the job and the figures? Thirdly, does he agree that, if we had objective 1 status, we would automatically qualify for transitional relief after 2006? Fourthly, does he accept that the cost of that failure by the UK Government and its agencies could be up to £200 million for the Highlands? Finally, will he publish or keep secret the letter from the Commission, to which he referred earlier?

Fergus Ewing is not right about many things, and he is wrong again on this occasion, on all fronts. There is no automatic qualification—[Interruption.]

Will the minister publish the letter?

Order. Let us have no commentary during the answer, please.

There is no automatic entitlement to transitional aid. The Executive continues to fight hard for the Highlands and Islands, as it always has. I have already referred to the fact that the Highlands and Islands have not lost out in any respect, as they have received special transitional aid from Europe equivalent to what would have been received under objective 1 status.

Fergus Ewing displays a misunderstanding of the situation that reveals the difference between the coalition parties and the SNP. We are certain about what we are seeking to do and we are using the facts, whereas SNP members like to use incomplete statistics. We have a proven track record, in contrast to the risk and uncertainty that is offered by the SNP as it seeks to take us out of the UK, threatening our future in Europe and our share of the rebate. That is why the Scots people do not trust the SNP.

Could we please clear up a mis-statement of fact that keeps being made by members of the Labour Government? They say that a special deal was made when we lost objective 1 status; that lie is not only told, but is repeated and repeated. Areas that had objective 1 status would have qualified automatically for transitional money.

I remind the minister that when the Highlands and Islands were alone in Europe in having bordering on 70 per cent of the average gross domestic product per head—we had no competitors at that—Scottish Office officials wanted to fight to get objective 1 status for the Highlands, because we were so near the threshold. However, we did not fight then. Is there going to be no fight again by the Labour Government?

Those are extraordinary assertions when it is known full well—I repeat—that there is no automatic entitlement to anything else at the end of an aid period. The transitional aid was achieved by negotiations that were partly conducted by Scottish interests through the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities and others, such as the former Scottish Office. As I indicated, the Highlands and Islands benefit enormously from European aid. We will continue to fight our corner in the future, using the most up-to-date statistics to do so.

---

Transport Infrastructure (Ayrshire)

To ask the Scottish Executive what progress is being made on improving transport infrastructure in Ayrshire. (S1O-6016)

Scottish Executive investments are improving roads, railways and buses in Ayrshire.

I thank the minister for his answer. Does he agree that best use can be made of the proposed three towns bypass by ensuring that it is adequately linked to an upgraded A737, so that we can properly connect North Ayrshire to Glasgow and the east?

I am happy to agree that the three towns bypass will be an important element of the improvement of the transport infrastructure in Ayrshire. Invitations to tender for that project went out last month. Irene Oldfather will know that improvements are also taking place on the A737 at the Roadhead roundabout and the Head Street junction. I am aware of proposals and suggestions that further improvements could take place at Dalry, for example. However, such decisions will be made as part of future major investment programmes.

Is the minister aware that last week his deputy ruled out any chance of a toll bypass around Maybole? Can he say what plans the Executive inherited for a Maybole bypass? Can he say whether a route has been defined for that bypass and, if so, whether that route has been protected? Does he agree that the A77 southern link between Ayr and Stranraer is an important artery for Ayrshire's infrastructure? What does he intend to do about the problems in Maybole?

I am happy to agree that the link to Stranraer is important for Scotland and for Galloway in particular. We continue to work closely with the partnership there. Lewis Macdonald has been involved in recent weeks with that partnership, looking at the A75 and A77 links to Stranraer. On the detail of the legal position on a potential route for a Maybole bypass, I am loth to make anything of legal positions when I reply to a question in the chamber, but I am willing to find out the detailed answer to Mr Gallie's question and reply to him in writing.

I thank the minister for acknowledging the importance of the A77 south of Ayr, not just to Ayrshire, but to Dumfries and Galloway. That was also acknowledged by the fact that the recent meeting of the north channel partnership—the organisation that represents ferry interests—was hosted by South Ayrshire Council in Ayr. Can we expect further announcements—indeed, any announcements—about improvements to the A77 in the near future?

The most significant improvement to the A77 is, of course, the M74 extension. We made announcements on that issue only in the past few days, when the preferred bidder was announced. I appreciate that the question was about further south on the A77 but, as a regular user of the road, I must say that both parts of it are important in relation to how long it takes to reach Stranraer.

As the member knows, the north channel partnership discussions are looking at several proposed schemes for the A77 and A75, which are geared particularly towards making the transit from ferries easier. I would expect to be able to make announcements in the relatively near future about the outcome of those negotiations.

---

Haddock Fishing

To ask the Scottish Executive what measures are being taken to protect the haddock fishing and Arbroath smokie industries. (S1O-6041)

As the member will be aware, in a general sense the Scottish Executive is committed to avoiding the closure of our mixed fishery, which particularly affects our valuable haddock fishery as well as our whiting and cod fisheries. We are negotiating for a solution that respects the science but affords a sustainable future for the catching and processing sectors. We support in particular the Arbroath smokie industry with financial assistance from the European Union structural fund allocation.

Nice answer, but I will check against delivery.

Is the minister listening to today's massive demonstration by fishing communities from throughout Scotland and representatives of all political parties, which demands a secure future for Scotland's fishing industry? Is not the plain truth that, while Scotland's fishermen take the pain of cuts, closures and fishing bans, any benefit that might be gained is being undermined by European factory fishing, which uses tiny-meshed nets, a sample of which I have with me, to fish for sand eels, thereby also undermining the sand banks? Given the simple equation that no food plus no fish equals no fishing industry, what is the minister doing to stop such industrial fishing? What is he delivering for Scotland's fishermen? We do not want words from the minister; we want action.

The negotiations that will finally determine the matter will take place later in December. It will be important for us to have words of substance to negotiate with at that table before we come to a result.

On industrial fishing, we have in recent weeks made our position absolutely clear to the European Commission: if we are to have an equitable solution to the difficulties that are affecting all of the species, there must be equity in terms of mesh sizes—

The mesh size of the nets that are used is tiny.

I understand the member's point, but that is the position. The member asked what my position was. My position, and that of the Scottish Executive, is clear: we do not accept the continued use of nets with such a small mesh size, whether by the Dutch or the Danish, for industrial fishing. We will continue to put that case. It is not equitable for those fisheries to catch the amount of cod that they do as a bycatch when we are required to use much larger mesh sizes in the North sea. We will continue to articulate that case in the negotiations.

Is there any attempt to reassess the economic impact of fishing on the regions in Scotland? I notice, from the papers that were being handed out at today's demonstration, that the figures that are being given exclude Arbroath entirely, on first investigation.

Has the minister taken any steps to ensure that his political masters are present in the fishing communities? Will he take the First Minister and others to places such as Arbroath, which David McLetchie and Iain Duncan Smith will visit tomorrow?

I have no doubt that those communities will find that visit uplifting. However, given that—unless I have my geography wrong—both my Scottish leader and my federal leader represent fishing constituencies, I am not entirely sure that they need me to take them on visits. Perhaps Alex Johnstone's leaders need to be taken on visits so they can have explained to them what the fishing industry is and where Scotland is, but mine do not.

On the impact on communities of the current proposals, I assure the member and the communities that we are working hard on economic modelling—in close collaboration with my colleague Iain Gray—to assess that impact to ensure that we have a clear view of the possibilities. We are acutely aware of the fact that the potential impact must be taken seriously.

Does the minister appreciate that industrial fishing and its impact on white fish stocks is one of the biggest concerns of Scotland's fishing communities? Can he explain why, in a written answer this week, he said that he has made no attempt to consider the impact of industrial fishing on white fish stocks, despite the fact that he has more than 250 scientists in his employ? Does he agree that that is shameful? Should not he be trying to find evidence to take to Europe to help him fight Scotland's corner?

We have access to the scientific information that is produced throughout the European Community. The issue is not only about our opposition to the member states that practise industrial fishing. In my response to Andrew Welsh, I made it absolutely clear that we do not need much more scientific advice to make it obvious that nets of the mesh size that he held up have a deleterious impact on the fishery.

However, Richard Lochhead should also be aware that, when we talk about industrial fishing, we must be clear and explicit about what we are trying to achieve, because we also need some of the nations that have industrial fisheries to support us in what we are trying to do in relation to the cod fishery. It is not a simple argument.

What about the nets?

We know about the nets. The matter is not just about the industrial fishery. Having examined the issue closely, Andrew Welsh will also be aware that the flat fishery is also causing us real problems in relation to its cod bycatch. All that information is out in the open. I make it abundantly clear to the Parliament that that is part of the argument that we are articulating as hard as we possibly can to ensure that we protect Scottish interests in terms of the cod, haddock and whiting fisheries.

---

Public-private Partnerships (Hospitals)

To ask the Scottish Executive whether it has held any discussions with, or issued any guidelines to, national health service trusts regarding the inclusion in public-private partnership agreements of hospital ancillary facilities such as parking, television and telephones. (S1O-6013)

No guidance has been issued to or discussions held with NHS trusts regarding car parking, television or telephone charges for PPP facilities. There is general guidance in relation to car parking charges, which is currently being revised.

I genuinely thank the minister for that reply because, when I raised the matter with him in September, there were no plans to revise the guidance. Does he think that the Lothian University Hospitals NHS Trust has breached the general guidelines that have been issued in regard to what it charges patients for car parking? It charges £10 per day, compared to the daily rate of £1 at Perth royal infirmary. I assure the minister that I am not being selective in my comparisons; I have investigated all the health boards in Scotland. The minister will find, once he gets into the subject, that the television payment rate of £3.50 per day at Dumfries royal infirmary compares to £1.50 per hour at the Royal infirmary of Edinburgh. Will he comment?

Car parking charges at the Royal infirmary of Edinburgh have, in my experience as a constituency MSP in Edinburgh, been the most—indeed, so far, the only—controversial element of the new hospital that has been drawn to my attention. We need to look carefully at the new guidance on car parking charges. The existing guidance says that the charges should not be excessive, but I accept that there is an element of subjectivity in that. I think that charges were relatively expensive even at the old Royal infirmary of Edinburgh, so the increase is not all that great in Edinburgh terms. However, that does not altogether remove concerns about the charges.

Television is nothing to do with the PPP contract—it is not part of the contract. I think that Ms Macdonald will find that the rate that she quoted for Dumfries is more or less the same as the rate for Edinburgh, because, after the first two hours, there is no charge at all.

In view of the current World Trade Organisation negotiations on the general agreement on trade in services, does the Executive have a view on how GATS will affect future policy on involvement of the private sector in our public services? Will the Executive reassure the Parliament that all efforts are being made to represent Scotland's interests to United Kingdom and European Union negotiators?

I cannot talk across all the ministers' portfolios, but GATS will have no significant implications for health.

---

Livestock Auction Markets

To ask the Scottish Executive what plans it has for the future operation of livestock auction markets in the light of last year's outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease. (S1O-6021)

Everyone is pleased that livestock markets are back in business following the foot-and-mouth outbreak. In the aftermath of that outbreak, I expect livestock markets to comply with all existing legislation, including the current biosecurity provisions.

I endorse the minister's remarks. Does he agree that the livestock auction markets have a vital future role to play in ensuring that livestock changes hands in the safe, biosecure environment that they can provide? Does he also agree that, by setting a base price for most other forms of stock purchase, they form an irreplaceable part of Scotland's food price chain? Will he give his robust backing to the continuing operations of livestock marketing companies? They are still struggling to recover from last year's disease outbreak, which they were highly influential in helping to stamp out.

I have no difficulty in assuring the member that the Executive has absolutely no plans to interfere with the provision of livestock auction marts. We must understand that there are direct purchasers who would offer particular deals, and I do not think that there is anything that I can do about that. We have to be concerned that, under such deals, transactions are carried out in a way that does not breach biosecurity arrangements. I agree fully with the member on the general principle of the continuing need for livestock markets.

---

Sex Offenders

To ask the Scottish Executive how many convicted sex offenders are receiving treatment and how many such offenders who have been released have had treatment. (S1O-6066)

That information is not available in the form that the member requested. In June 2002, 466 known sex offenders were serving terms of imprisonment. There are 42 places currently available on accredited programmes for the treatment of sex offenders and in May 2002, 179 prisoners were liberated after participating in prison-based treatment for sexual offenders.

I understand from the minister's reply that only 42 of the 466 sex offenders are currently receiving any treatment to stop them reoffending against children and women. It has been revealed that less than one third of prisoners at HMP Peterhead are given treatment before release. Does not that make a mockery of child protection?

Today's Scottish Daily Express contains claims that prisoners at Peterhead are planning to open a toy shop after their release, that one particularly dangerous paedophile, Francis Currens, made a video of pregnant women and of children while he was in Peterhead, and that those men are in contact with other perverts in the outside world. Will the minister please look into what on earth is happening in our prisons?

I will put Dorothy-Grace Elder's point into some kind of perspective. She will appreciate that if one is serving a very long-term sentence, the programmes that one can receive are not continuous. The STOP 2000 programme, for example, runs for a specific period and is not repeated. Therefore, we would not expect all prisoners to be undergoing treatment continually.

The Spencer report, which was published in September this year, highlighted the insufficient number of sexual offender treatment places; indeed, it called for a fourfold increase in places. The Scottish Prison Service is gearing itself up to deliver a greater number of programme places, but that takes time and involves proper training for what is very sensitive work.

The Scottish Prison Service is also developing a rolling programme for prisoners who are serving shorter sentences. Much of the effort has, so far, been concentrated on prisoners who are serving longer sentences but, as members will agree, shorter-term prisoners also need programmes. Work on providing such programmes is being done.

Can the Minister for Justice provide an assessment of how many of those who received treatment prior to being released have reoffended? What actions is the Executive taking to address that reoffending?

Lord James will recall that, during some of the Justice 1 Committee's discussions on the prison estate review, various figures on the level of reoffending were posited. From memory, I do not think that there was agreement as to how reliable those figures are. It is important, however, that we obtain that information.

Lord James will also be aware of the work that the Justice 2 Committee is doing in its stage 2 consideration of the Criminal Justice (Scotland) Bill, part 1 of which relates to the new orders for lifelong restriction, which will be directed in particular towards serious violent and sexual offenders. I think that we are taking a significant step forward on how we, as a community, deal with prisoners in those categories.

---

Dental Services (Borders)

To ask the Scottish Executive what concerns it has in respect of the delivery of general dental services in the Scottish Borders. (S1O-6029)

We are aware that there is evidence that access to national health service dental services in the Borders is becoming more difficult. That is why the Borders is one of the designated areas for the £1 million package that we introduced in August as part of a phased programme to improve recruitment and retention of dentists in Scotland. Although elements of the package cover all areas of Scotland, there are enhanced incentives for designated areas.

I refer the minister to a report of 24 September to the Borders NHS Board executive team. The report, which postdates the allocation of the money to which the minister referred, makes it clear that it is becoming more difficult to access general dental services in the Borders. I refer the minister to the case of a woman in Kelso, who after scouring the Borders for NHS treatment was forced to go to England as a private patient, because no care was available in the Borders. If the minister agrees that that is a disgrace, what does she intend to do about it?

We are aware that there are a number of pressure points in dental services throughout Scotland. That is why we have instituted the designated areas scheme. The £1 million package will include payments of £3,000 to each new dental graduate, £5,000 to all new dentists and up to £10,000 to dentists who take on trainees. One cannot say that the Executive is not doing anything about the problem.

I am aware of the report to which Christine Grahame referred. Borders NHS Board is considering that report and how to address the issues that it raises. We will support Borders NHS Board and continue to examine ways to bring dentists to areas where they are needed. I have answered a number of questions on the issue in the chamber and have said continually that we will examine new ways of bringing dentists to areas of need. However, members from the SNP have failed to come up with one suggestion for addressing the problem.

---

Recycling

To ask the Scottish Executive how it plans to meet its stated recycling targets. (S1O-6062)

The target to recycle and compost 25 per cent of municipal waste by 2006 will be met by local authorities implementing the national waste strategy.

The Executive has allocated £230 million over the next three years to the strategic waste fund to assist local authorities in the implementation of the area waste plans. Yesterday I announced that £6 million of this year's allocation to the strategic waste fund is to be distributed between local authorities now, to help them to expand recycling and composting.

I am sure that the minister agrees that sustained, concerted effort across agencies will be needed to persuade people to be more waste aware and to change their behaviour. Does he agree that the report on the Waste Aware Scotland survey, "Public attitudes to Reduce, Reuse, Recycle in Scotland" is encouraging and offers good pointers to what is likely to be effective? Based on that survey, will the minister do what he can to facilitate and encourage the introduction of kerbside collections where population density makes them a sensible option?

Yes. The survey indicated that 83 per cent of people would be more willing to participate in recycling if kerbside collection were available. In the area waste plans and their contributions to the national waste strategy, local authorities are required to indicate how they intend to increase public willingness to participate in, and public awareness of, recycling. Included in the strategy are measures such as kerbside collection. Local authorities will be able to apply to the Scottish Executive for money from the strategic waste fund to finance kerbside collection.

If my memory serves me correctly, two years ago £50 million was allocated to waste management, to be bid for by councils. Has all that money been bid for? What percentage of it went to fund recycling, rather than to deal with general waste management problems?

I do not have the details that Robin Harper seeks. I will be happy to provide him with a breakdown of the figures in writing.

Will the minister help me to solve a little mystery? Will the minister confirm—[Interruption.] I know that the minister cannot hear me, so I will wait until the rabble clam up. Will the minister confirm that on 20 February he said:

"The National Waste Plan based on the area waste plans will be in place by Autumn this year. We then want to set mandatory recycling and waste reduction targets and the forthcoming Local Government Bill will give Ministers the power to set such targets."

What happened to that ministerial promise?

The ministerial promise remains. The difficulty has been in finalising—[Interruption.] There are different ways of approaching the matter. We have tried to proceed through co-operation and collaboration with local authorities. That is the way in which Labour and Liberal Democrat members prefer to proceed. We have built that plan from the bottom up and that is why it has taken a little longer to get the area waste plans.

The second part of the question was on setting targets. We have taken the view that, as the interim area waste plans have indicated, it is possible to reach the target of 25 per cent waste recycling. Although we have not finalised the national waste strategy, it begins to look as if we could achieve a figure of something of the order of 40 per cent waste recycling. If that is the case and if the plan confirms that, that is the target that we will include in the local government bill when we introduce it. That is the answer to the member's question. If he disagrees with a bottom-up approach, I ask him to give us his alternative.

Have steps been taken to encourage businesses, particularly those that operate premises in which considerable recyclable waste is generated, such as business centres and serviced office accommodation, to employ the recycling services that many waste management providers are making available?

Yes. We have a group of people who are trying to deal much more generally with the various elements of the national waste strategy. In particular, we are giving local authorities every encouragement to do exactly what the member suggested.