Plenary, 06 Jul 2000

Meeting date: Thursday, July 6, 2000

Official Report 762KB pdf

---

First Minister's Question Time

---

SCOTTISH EXECUTIVE

---

Secretary of State for Scotland (Meetings)

To ask the acting First Minister when he next intends to meet the Secretary of State for Scotland and what issues are likely to be discussed. (S1F-482)

I have no immediate plans to meet the Secretary of State for Scotland. I did, however, meet him—and indeed, his mother—on Tuesday.

I welcome the acting First Minister to his last question time in his current position. He might not be the only minister of whom that is true, if current events are to be believed.

On the subject of famous last words, does the acting First Minister recall telling the chamber last week that

"As we approach the anniversary of the Parliament, it is . . . the partnership parties of the coalition that are united."?—[Official Report, 29 June 2000; Vol 7, c 994.]

Given the acting First Minister's responsibility for Cabinet unity, will he answer a specific question? Before the First Minister issued his extraordinary public rebuke to the other ministers, did he consult the acting First Minister?

Yes, I recall making that statement last week and I stand by it. As I have said, Mr Salmond knows the mark of the first year; he has only to look behind him to see the divisions in his party, as does Mr McLetchie. I would be involved in any discussions about a reshuffle, but as there are no proposals for a reshuffle, I was not involved in any such discussions.

The acting First Minister should look around himself, not behind me for evidence of divisions. If he was consulted, can he tell us at which ministers the public rebuke was aimed? Was it at the Minister for Health and Community Care? Was it at the Minister for Finance? Was it at the big Macs who I see are sitting together? Given the Government's interest in clarity and in naming and shaming schools and health boards, will the acting First Minister name the ministers who are shaming the Administration?

That is quite an amusing question. [Members: "Answer. Answer."] Far from feeling that any of the colleagues around me are shaming the Administration, I want to put on record my appreciation for the support and encouragement that they have given me during the past nine weeks. Not only ministers, but Liberal Democrat and Labour members have worked together to deliver better services for Scotland and we are proud of doing that while Opposition members squabble.

Is the acting First Minister aware that the Minister for Parliament has told the parliamentary Labour party that the First Minister is incandescent with anger, that he has never been angrier and that he is threatening to sack ministers? The acting First Minister is also Minister for Justice—he has a responsibility to protect the innocent. Which ministers are involved? Is it one, several or all of them? Is the acting First Minister briefing against Ross Finnie? Parliament has a right to know which ministers are briefing against their colleagues and which are shaming the Parliament. Name and shame!

Not even Mr Salmond could keep a straight face as his question became increasingly ludicrous. It might come as a surprise to him—he has probably not read it on Ceefax at night—but I do not attend meetings of the Labour party. It is quite clear from the reaction of those who were at that meeting that Mr Salmond has the story wrong.

To return to Mr Salmond's first remark, this is indeed the last occasion in the parliamentary year on which I will take First Minister's questions. The First Minister told me that I would enjoy sparring with Mr Salmond—I never knew that I would enjoy it quite so much.

Next, please.

---

Joint Ministerial Committees (Meetings)

Here is a bigger Mac.

To ask the First Minister whether there are any plans for future meetings of joint ministerial committees. (S1F-483)

Further meetings of joint ministerial committees will take place in the coming months. The joint ministerial committee structure allows us to make devolution work for Scotland and for the rest of the United Kingdom by linking policy co-ordination of Scottish ministers, our Whitehall counterparts and the other devolved Administrations. We know that we achieve more by working together in the United Kingdom.

I thank Mr Wallace for that answer. Judging by the headlines in the newspapers north and south of the border this week, there is a need for a joint ministerial committee on collective responsibility and Cabinet discipline.

Mr Wallace may well be a helpless bystander, but is not the rather unseemly Cabinet dispute that we have witnessed a fitting epitaph for a year that has been characterised by Executive divisions, resignations, arrogance, incompetence and irrelevance? Will he tell us whether it will ever get better or will it be business as usual next term?

All I can say is that there were no resignations at my party's conference.

Mr McLetchie refers to the year that is awa. I remind him that during that year we passed legislation on standards in Scotland's schools, the abolition of the feudal system and adults with incapacity. We have established national parks, a social justice action plan, a framework for economic development and support for our rural areas. We have reintroduced student bursaries and abolished tuition fees. That is a record of which we can be proud.

We have heard all that before. To be frank, it is Wallace in wonderland—the year that the acting First Minister has described is not the one that people recognise. Will the man who dismissed his party's manifesto pledges as mere election rhetoric acknowledge that a yawning credibility gap affects the Executive, which has led people in Scotland to conclude that Parliament has made little or no difference to their lives?

I know that Mr McLetchie was on holiday at some point, but I do not know where he was while all that legislation was being passed. As he himself once said, "Facts are chiels," but he did not add "that winna ding." The Executive's achievements during the past year are facts. He ought to wake up to the fact that the Executive is delivering for Scotland and its people. We are making devolution work.

---

Health Services (Tayside)

To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Executive's plans are for the governance of health services in Tayside in the light of the resignations of the chairpersons of Tayside University Hospitals NHS Trust and Tayside Health Board. (S1F-478)

The vice chairs have automatically taken up the position of acting chairs of both organisations in accordance with NHS rules. We are holding discussions with them to ensure that effective interim arrangements are put in place until new permanent chairs are appointed. The process of seeking suitable candidates for the permanent posts of chair of Tayside University Hospitals NHS Trust and Tayside Health Board has already begun. Advertisements will appear in the national and local press this week and next week.

I thank the acting First Minister for his answer and I put on record the appreciation of many of us for the work of the chairmen who have resigned from the posts. In the light of the current deficit in Tayside University Hospitals NHS Trust and of the task force report that was commissioned by the Minister for Health and Community Care—which is sharply critical of the management executive in performing its supervisory role in Tayside—what action will the Scottish Executive take to improve the performance of the management executive so that people throughout Scotland are not exposed to uncertainty about health services such as that which my constituents currently suffer?

I recognise the seriousness of the matter and I acknowledge the seriousness with which Mr Swinney addresses it. It is in everyone's interests that that uncertainty is brought to an end as soon as possible and that morale and confidence are restored. As she indicated when the task force's interim report was published last week, Susan Deacon is considering carefully the way in which the Executive monitors trusts' performance. There are lessons to be learnt, including the need to examine the performance of the management system.

Does the Deputy First Minister agree that it is unlikely that the resignation of the two non-executive chairpersons of Tayside University Hospitals NHS Trust and Tayside Health Board—I record my appreciation for their services to health provision in Tayside—will be sufficient to resolve the deep-rooted problems that exist in Tayside? Will he agree to consider whether we need a review of senior management in the NHS trust in Tayside, and possibly of the management executive?

As I have said, we must learn all the lessons from the findings of the interim report. I also record my appreciation of the services of the people who have chaired those two organisations. However, as Kate MacLean knows, the report was an interim report. Improvements are being put in place, including a rewritten health improvement programme—that contains a sharper definition of acute services—and the establishment of a joint management recovery forum. Those are important factors in trying to secure the increased confidence that I am sure Kate MacLean and other members who represent Tayside want to see.

Does the acting First Minister have some sympathy with the people of Tayside, who are now facing "six years of austerity," as Paul White, the chief executive of Tayside University Hospitals NHS Trust put it? Can he advise the people of Tayside how to overcome the £19 million deficit? Is he concerned about GP referrals to consultants at Ninewells hospital being reduced by 19 per cent?

I can assure Mary Scanlon that, in the current year, £17.2 million has been allocated for hospitals and community health services in Tayside. Last week, coincidentally with the publication of the interim report, Susan Deacon announced that a further £4.7 million would be allocated to services in Tayside as consequentials of the budget. In spite of the difficulties, the quality of the health services that are delivered in Tayside has been very good and I want to put on record the dedication of the health service staff—doctors, nurses and consultants—who have worked to deliver health services for the people of Tayside.

The money must match up to the massive, endemic problems in the health service in Tayside, which can be dealt with only by a massive increase in cash allocations or by a massive programme of cuts and closures. Which will it be?

The interim report indicated that there were problems of financial management. Tayside University Hospitals NHS Trust has, with the task force, established the reasons for the deficit and identified the resources that are required to achieve financial stability. Everybody continues to work on specific proposals for financial recovery. As I said in my answer to Mary Scanlon, some £20 million of additional money has been allocated to Tayside this year for hospital and community health services.

---

Mortgage Repossessions

To ask the First Minister what plans the Scottish Executive has to offer further protection to those threatened with mortgage repossession. (S1F-494)

The Executive fully supports the Mortgage Rights (Scotland) Bill, which Cathie Craigie introduced to Parliament on Monday 3 July. We have worked closely with her on the detail. The bill proposes to allow the courts to consider the individual circumstances of a debtor who faces repossession action. It would allow them to decide whether the debtor can get back on track and repay their mortgage or whether they should be given more time to arrange alternative accommodation, if that is a better solution for the debtor.

I thank the acting First Minister for that reply. I welcome the Executive's support for Cathie Craigie's bill, which should allow approximately 2,000 families in Scotland a year the right to legal protection when they most need it. Does he also agree that the bill would allow the courts to consider all aspects of a family's financial situation while they remain in their home, so that rather than being put out on to the street, many of them will be able to remain permanently in their homes?

It is important that debtors' financial circumstances will be examined. Much of that will be left to the discretion of the court. The bill's purpose is to avoid the drastic step of putting people out on the streets by allowing them an opportunity for debt management or the possibility of arranging alternative accommodation, when that is a feasible option.

I thank the Deputy First Minister for offering the Executive's support for my bill. Does he agree that it will be a practical way of ensuring that we reduce the number of people who apply every year to local authorities under homelessness legislation and that it will thereby reduce the burden that is placed on local authority waiting lists?

I agree with Cathie Craigie and I wish her well as she pilots the bill through Parliament. It is a good example of a practical way in which Parliament can work for the benefit of ordinary people in Scotland.

I speak as someone who, in private practice, was required to act for building societies in repossession work. That is an area of work that is never pleasant, but is unfortunately necessary at times. Does the acting First Minister accept that many of our major lending institutions in Scotland have effective and worthy schemes for consultation with borrowers when difficulties are first detected? When any legislation is considered it is extremely important that the understandable commercial risk that a lending institution may contemplate will not be prejudiced because of apparent difficulties in the enforcement of repossession cases. In other words, we do not want borrowers ultimately to be badly served by undue restriction in the protection of the security subjects.

Annabel Goldie makes the important point that some lenders try to engage positively with borrowers. I understand that Cathie Craigie, in preparing her bill, has also been taking into account the need to strike the right balance so that lenders will not be more reluctant to lend. That would not serve a useful purpose.

Will the acting First Minister accept that it is important to make available effective and proactive advice to those who suffer financial difficulties in the context of mortgage or rent eviction? Does he agree that the courts should be routinely directed towards making use of such a facility?

It is important to direct people, whether through the courts or otherwise. That could, perhaps, be done through citizens advice bureaux. People must get better advice when they are approaching serious debt or are in debt. We should accept and acknowledge that as an important part of the provision of legal services and as a way in which people who are in real difficulties can be helped.

The minister might be aware that three members from three different parties have tried to address mortgage repossession. Does he think it is appropriate that a member's bill will be used to plug a gap in Executive provisions, especially bearing it in mind that there will not be a housing bill before Parliament until November? Will not he provide Executive time and resources to examine the issue, especially experiences relating to section 40 of the Bankruptcy (Scotland) Act 1985?

Why is the Executive backing Cathie Craigie's bill rather than Robert Brown's bill, which was the first to be published?

Fiona Hyslop almost answered her own question. She pointed out that the housing bill, which will incorporate many of the provisions that Robert Brown has pursued in his bill, will not be introduced until later. Cathie Craigie has prepared a bill. She has been working co-operatively with the Executive, which has given her its support in the preparation of the bill. The bill has been presented to the Parliament and is therefore more likely to get on track.

As far as I am aware, most of those who are interested in housing in Scotland are delighted that a housing bill that will be much larger than Cathie Craigie's bill will be introduced. It was important to take the matter out of the housing bill and to address it through a member's bill, because it is an immediate problem. I hope that Parliament will not regard members' bills as second rate. Cathie Craigie's bill is important and the Executive is happy to support it.

---

Ferry Services

To ask the First Minister what representations the Scottish Executive has made to encourage a speedy resolution to the dispute between P & O Scottish Ferries and the shipping officers' union, the National Union of Marine, Aviation and Shipping Transport Officers, in order to prevent industrial action disrupting the lifeline ferry services to Orkney and Shetland. (S1F-479)

The dispute is a matter for P & O Scottish Ferries and NUMAST. I understand that union members are being balloted on a revised offer. The Executive hopes that an amicable solution can be reached by negotiation and without disruption of ferry services to the islands.

I welcome the progress that is being made on the matter and I hope that there will be no disruption. Does the Deputy First Minister accept the importance of lifeline services and the Executive's commitment to supporting them financially? Given the importance of the services to the tourism industry and the fact that it is now the start of the school holidays, will he ensure that no action is taken that will disrupt those services?

I can give Mr Scott the assurance that he seeks that the Executive recognises the importance of lifeline ferry services to the islands. I am rather well placed to appreciate that and to give that assurance. The ferries are vital economic and social links. Under the current subsidy arrangements for P & O Scottish Ferries, there is a subsidy of £11 million a year. As Mr Scott will know, tenders are being evaluated for a follow-on franchise service. The Executive attaches importance to securing lifeline services to the northern isles, the western isles and Scotland's many other island communities.