Plenary, 06 Jun 2001

Meeting date: Wednesday, June 6, 2001

Official Report 275KB pdf

---

First Minister's Question Time

---

SCOTTISH EXECUTIVE

---

Prime Minister (Meetings)

To ask the First Minister when he next plans to meet the Prime Minister and what issues he intends to raise. (S1F-01122)

I last met the Prime Minister on 25 May. We have no immediate plans to meet. However, I believe that the Prime Minister is in Dumfries today—something to do with the election.

It has been reported today that there is a danger that some elderly and frail people will be evicted from nursing homes because of a rather unseemly squabble about the funding of those homes involving the Executive, councils and care homes. When the First Minister associated himself with the Labour manifesto at the previous general election four years ago, is that what he meant when he said that things could only get better?

We expected rather more from the so-called leader of the Opposition in the way of an eve-of-poll attack.

We have a firm commitment to the future of older people in Scotland. That is why over the next three years we will spend record amounts on our national health service. That is why, on receipt of the development group's report in August, we will embark on free personal care for our older people. We want to implement that from April 2002.

We hope that the current dispute between the local authorities and the nursing home owners will be resolved in the weeks ahead. It is in no one's interests for older people in nursing homes or their relatives to be unsettled by the discussion on fees that is taking place. We have facilitated discussions between the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities, nursing homes and local authorities. A settlement of the current dispute is in the interests of older people. It is certainly in the interests of long-term care.

If that was an eve-of-poll clarification, it has not taken us any further forward.

The First Minister may be aware of comments made by the board of social responsibility of the Church of Scotland, which has said:

"There is not a council in the country with sufficient money allocated to care for the elderly."

That money comes from the Executive. Apparently, that issue is to be resolved in the next few days. However, the spokesman for the board of social responsibility states:

"It is not surprising that this whole matter has come to a head,"

because it has been around for 10 years. He goes on to say:

"Residential homes have been consistently under-funded by successive governments"

and accuses ministers of

"burying their heads in the sand".

Is that not absolutely typical of new Labour? It bleats on about everyone else being at fault and fails to provide a solution to the problems.

We are not prepared to take lectures from John Swinney and the nationalists about the future of long-term care. I have read the comments to which he refers. I advise all concerned to get back to discussing the issues. COSLA and the nursing homes can resolve the problem.

The nationalists would commit a derisory amount of money to older people in the NHS. Furthermore, despite Mr Swinney's protestations to the contrary—he said that he would not spend unless the spend could be costed—the SNP has a national health service wish list that it will not own up to. Let us also be specific about this: the fiscal separation that the SNP talks about will destroy economic stability and inflict massive cuts on public services in Scotland. We have a nationalist party with empty promises and uncosted thinking. The older people of Scotland will be safe in our hands, not in the hands of the nationalists.

During the election campaign, the First Minister may have spoken to members of the public who are fed up with the fact that he does not give the Parliament any answers to the questions that we ask him. He talks about empty promises, but what about broken promises? The Labour manifesto from four years ago told us:

"Everyone is entitled to dignity in retirement."

Where is the dignity in the farce that is continuing over care for the elderly? Is it not time that the First Minister started standing for Scotland and delivering for the people of Scotland, instead of betraying them?

John Swinney moves effortlessly from being a gentleman to being Mr Angry again. We are not impressed by the rant that we get from the leader of the SNP.

Let us get down to the facts about billions of pounds of public expenditure. In 1997, the SNP earmarked a miserable £35 million extra for the NHS, whereas the Labour party budgeted for an extra £1.25 billion over the same period. The Labour party in Scotland is happy to agree with the Labour party at Westminster on spending a massive sum on the welfare of our older people—and there is more to come. We have an absolute commitment to personal care for the elderly, whereas the SNP plays politics. We want COSLA and the home owners to get together to resolve the issue of nursing homes. John Swinney is falling into the oldest political trap and is playing politics with the future of older people. It is a disgrace.

---

Secretary of State for Scotland (Meetings)

To ask the First Minister when he will next meet the Secretary of State for Scotland and what issues he plans to raise with her or him, or whoever it might be. (S1F-01123)

I last met the Secretary of State for Scotland earlier today and we have no immediate plans to meet.

I hope that when a meeting is arranged—the secretary of state will have plenty of time on her hands after tomorrow—the First Minister will get around to discussing the Scottish Executive's appalling record on health and what he intends to do about it between now and the next Scottish Parliament elections.

As we know, there are more patients waiting for treatment than there were in 1997 and 1999. Can the First Minister tell us why he is putting political dogma before the interests of patients and ruling out a partnership with the independent sector that has the potential to abolish NHS waiting lists within a year?

I am sure that the new Bavarian connection that is going to be developed between the Tories in Scotland and the Germans will be of some help to them in addressing the problems in the national health service.

The Conservatives are again raising the issue of spending on the NHS. We have just endured 18 years of the worst Tory Government in relation to public services. The Conservatives, along with the nationalists, are offering economic instability and massive cuts in public services amounting to £20 billion. I do not think that the Tory party is in any position to lecture us on the future of public services. We have a formidable record on the health service, which is why tomorrow the people of the United Kingdom will give us five more years to make more progress.

The First Minister must stop mangling his facts. We have not just endured 18 years of a Tory Government; we have just endured four years of a Labour Government, and things are a heck of a sight worse, not better, as a consequence.

The First Minister must stop trying to blind us with statistics and wake up to the reality. The reality is that general practitioners are in revolt and threatening to quit the NHS. In the past three weeks, I have met people from all over Scotland who are campaigning to save their local hospitals and stop the centralisation of many of the services that they have enjoyed for years.

As Mr Swinney rightly points out, many of our nursing homes are, unfortunately, unable to care for elderly and vulnerable people because of the current rates of payment that they receive from local authorities. Is it not a fact that, far from being saved four years ago, the NHS today is in turmoil wherever one cares to look?

We are becoming quite used to general abuse of the health service from David McLetchie and John Swinney week in and week out. Once again, we see the right-wing alliance between the two Opposition parties. [Interruption.] I am pleased that the SNP's deputy leader is not here, because she got quite excited the last time I mentioned that.

The Conservatives would deliver economic instability and massive cuts in public services. We have delivered the biggest hospital-building programme that Scotland has seen—eight new hospitals—an investment of £500 million and 1,500 more nurses and midwives over the next five years. We want to put that record to the country.

Where is Phil Gallie today? [Members: "Winning in Ayr!"] Phil Gallie had better enjoy his last day on the hustings, because the sad fact is that he will be spending the next two years in this chamber before he is ousted in 2003.

Tomorrow, the people will vote against the Tories' plan to make cuts of £20 billion. They will vote for the party that created the national health service, remains proud of its achievements and has a massive sum of money to invest over the next five years.

Members are being unusually noisy this afternoon, which, I suppose, has something to do with what will happen tomorrow. I call Frank McAveety for a quiet supplementary.

Does the First Minister agree that the Executive should take no lessons from the Tories, who, over the 18 years for which they were in power, closed six hospitals in Glasgow and did not replace them? The health service is safer in our hands than it ever was in theirs.

I agree. It shows how desperate the Tories are that they wheel out Mrs Thatcher during the campaign. Members may also have noticed the appearance of Michael Forsyth—if that is not political desperation, I do not know what is.

---

Schools

To ask the First Minister what progress is being made towards achieving the Scottish Executive's policy objectives for Scotland's schools. (S1F-01133)

We have made major progress in delivering our policy objectives for Scotland's schools as set out in our most recent programme for government. We have also achieved a stable agreement to improve teachers' pay and modernise their conditions and have established an improvement framework with national priorities to continue the drive to raise standards in schools.

Does the First Minister agree that opening up educational opportunities for children in Scotland is key to developing a successful and vibrant Scotland? He has outlined some of the steps that are being taken, but I ask him to give the vision of the Labour party for Scotland and indicate to the people of Scotland that the choice tomorrow is between a Labour party that is committed to, and will invest in, Scottish children and education and other parties that have no vision and no money to put their policies into practice.

I agree with Karen Gillon. People have a choice tomorrow between the nationalists' fiscal separatism as a smokescreen for separation and divorce and the cuts of £20 billion that would loom large if a Conservative Government were ever elected.

We have achieved much. We are committed to spending more on education in real terms over the next three years, we are setting national priorities to improve standards in schools, we are reducing class sizes in primary schools, we have put in place 62 new community school projects and we have agreed a deal with our teachers that they deserve. That deal will provide stability and will link excellence in standards in the classroom to a fair deal for teachers, whom we value and who will be at the core of the drive towards improvement in the years that lie ahead.

I want to address just one of the Executive's policy objectives. For several years, Labour has had a commitment to cut class sizes to 30 or fewer in primaries 1, 2 and 3. The Labour party has claimed that it will do so before 31 August 2001. No teacher believes that that will happen as it would require the Executive to take more than 1,000 children off the register every week for the next 12 weeks. Will the First Minister come clean and say that the commitment will not be delivered by 31 August? Anything else is a fib.

We do not expect the nationalists to support anything that is in the interests of schoolchildren in Scotland. We are on track to achieve the commitment to which Mike Russell refers, and that will be very significant for Scottish schools, for parents and for children. Once again, instead of praising what is being achieved in the long-term interests of our country and our children, SNP members want to denigrate at every opportunity—they are talking Scotland down again.

---

Motorola

To ask the First Minister what the up-to-date position is on the progress of the Motorola task force. (S1F-01132)

The Executive is working closely with the Motorola task force to secure the best possible outcome for the workers who are affected by the plant's closure. The main aim of the task force is to minimise the economic impact of the closure. It is seeking to assist all employees to gain alternative employment within the shortest time frame possible.

The task force has been on site since 21 May on a 24-hours-a-day, five-days-a-week basis and has been providing both general information sessions for all staff and an on-site job shop. Agency services provided include those from the Employment Service, the Benefits Agency, the Inland Revenue and a whole host of others. The next meeting of the task force is on 11 June.

The Executive has invited the task force to bring forward proposals as a matter of urgency to facilitate access to training and further education opportunities for those experienced workers who wish to consider a career change to sectors that contain identifiable skills shortages.

Is the First Minister aware of the frustration, anger and disappointment that is being expressed by Motorola workers, with particular regard to their being unable to obtain assistance for training until they first secure a job? Does he accept that they are in a chicken-and-egg situation, in that money is not being made available for training until they get a job, but they cannot get a job until they get money for training? Will he and the Minister for Enterprise and Lifelong Learning intervene as a matter of urgency?

How much of the £10 million that was allocated to the task force has already been spent or allocated, and what has it been spent on? The Executive said that it would do its bit; this is an opportunity for it to do so by sorting out this mess.

I agree with Alex Neil's thoughtful contribution in relation to the difficult experiences of Motorola workers. Intervention has already taken place and the matter will be resolved. The situation that Alex Neil described does not make sense for the work force and the Minister for Enterprise and Lifelong Learning is dealing with the specific point that he raised. On the £10 million, if Alex Neil is satisfied, I would like to write to him explaining what has been spent, what remains to be spent and what we have spent the money on.

Can the First Minister assure me that when proposals are put to the Executive by the task force, he will consider sympathetically support for those employees of Motorola who are currently taking further education courses—and who will wish to continue them—especially in cases where finances are particularly tight because more than one individual in a household is affected?

I am pleased to confirm that we will do that. It is important that the widest possible range of opportunities is available to the work force. The suggestion that Mary Mulligan has made will, in discussion with the Minister for Enterprise and Lifelong Learning, be implemented, so that we can provide the work force with the fullest possible opportunities.

---

Universities (Applications)

To ask the First Minister how the Scottish Executive intends to maintain the growth in applications to Scottish universities. (S1F-01135)

We welcome the continuing rise in applicants to Scottish universities as evidence that the Executive's policies to increase participation and widen access are already working. We will continue to support and encourage all Scots in realising their potential by raising aspirations and removing real and perceived barriers to entering higher education.

Does the First Minister agree that the figures published last week, which showed a 13 per cent increase in applications to Scottish universities by Scottish students, demonstrate that Scottish students are voting with their feet in favour of the funding package provided by the Liberal Democrat-Labour partnership Executive, which has meant an end to tuition fees, the reintroduction of grants of up to £2,000 and the fact that 99 per cent of all students will leave university with less debt than they would have under the present system?

That is the essential difference at the heart of education politics in Scotland. The coalition is delivering for students and universities in Scotland, and therefore it is delivering for the Scottish economy. There is no doubt that the abolition of tuition fees and the introduction of maintenance grants will help significantly.

We are also attracting students from the rest of the United Kingdom and from overseas. It is our aspiration to have the best university system in the world. Of course, as part of that aspiration, we must ensure that student support is made available.

Education remains a key issue and I have no doubt that it will be one of the key issues to dominate the election over the next 24 hours.

Does the First Minister accept that young people are concerned? Whatever he may choose to call the graduate endowment, it is seen by many potential undergraduates as a tax. What would he say to young people who say that they are deterred from the prospect of going into higher education because they still see a charge at the end? I have encountered instances of their concern in recent weeks.

If there is a disincentive to young people entering university education, it has not been measured in our figures. There is a significant increase in the number of students, which has been helped by the fact that tuition fees have been abolished and that 50 per cent of students will not pay the graduate endowment. It would help students if they got the right information from the nationalists and the Conservatives. The graduate endowment is not about deferred tuition fees—it is about the abolition of tuition fees.

I want to make an important point. Although the SNP may not like it, we are also introducing maintenance grants for students from low-income backgrounds. The combination of all that means that we have the best student package in the United Kingdom. The figures are up, and we warmly welcome them.