First Minister’s Question Time
Engagements
1. To ask the First Minister what engagements he has planned for the rest of the day. (S4F-00822)
Later today, I will visit Forth Valley College in Stirling to open its new state-of-the-art £20 million campus building. That cutting-edge facility is one of the most advanced college premises in Scotland and demonstrates this Government’s unwavering commitment to the college sector.
It is astonishing that the Government’s definition of “unwavering commitment” is the cutting of colleges’ budgets by 20 per cent.
So, Nicola Sturgeon is the new minister for shovel-ready projects and Alex Neil gets a hospital pass. As I look round the chamber, I can see that not everyone is smiling—not Jamie Hepburn, who was passed over for the crime of sticking to party policy on NATO, and not Kenny Gibson, who is never the bridesmaid and is not even invited to the evening reception. The First Minister is not so much rearranging the deckchairs on the Titanic as swapping the mop heads on the Vital Spark.
It is not just the First Minister’s back benchers who are unhappy. Anyone in the country who is looking for a full-time job and any business that is looking for opportunities is unhappy. Why has the First Minister reduced the ministerial responsibility for economic recovery to a part-time post? Why is running the national health service less important than running his referendum?
I cannot believe that Johann Lamont is accusing someone else of not smiling.
Let me deal with the college sector first. I have been looking at the massive capital investment programme in the Scottish college sector—in Dundee, Forth Valley, Kilmarnock, Inverness and, of course, Glasgow, where £200 million of capital investment is coming to City of Glasgow College. I have been looking at what that will do to the college budget—current and capital—over the next couple of years. It means that the college budget moves from £574 million to an expected £655 million in 2014-15, which means, for example, a capital programme in that year of £184 million. That is the extent of this Government’s commitment to the college sector in Scotland. Ten years ago, the Labour Party’s capital programme in our college sector was £21 million. I repeat: £21 million.
On the Government changes, Johann Lamont is in a position in which she has to select her shadow cabinet from outwith the ranks of members of the Scottish Parliament, such is the dearth of talent. I am in the fortunate position in which every single member of this Government is focused on economic recovery and public services in Scotland, and every single member of this Government is looking to secure for this nation the economic and political powers that we need to ensure a prosperous and just future.
I will never, ever apologise for drawing on the expertise of ordinary people across this country, including students, who know what the First Minister is doing to them. The reality is that the gap between what the First Minister says is happening and what is actually happening on the ground is growing wider by the day. Ask any college principal, and that is what they will tell you.
Let me get this right. In the morning, Nicola Sturgeon will deal with Scotland’s biggest decision for 300 years. In the afternoon, she will deal with the greatest economic crisis since the depression in the 1930s. What on earth will she do over lunch? Will she split the atom?
On Tuesday, the First Minister said:
“There has never been an economic recovery without a recovery in the construction sector”—[Official Report, 4 September 2012; c 10899.]
This is the man who cut £86 million from the housing budget. Now he has downgraded the post of minister for construction to a part-time job. How does he explain to someone who is looking for work that the issue is on Nicola Sturgeon’s to-do list—that it is for some point when she gets past what she really cares about, which is the constitution?
Let me deal with the consequences of London rule over Scotland, which is supported by Johann Lamont and her friends in the Conservative Party. The capital budget for Scotland that was outlined by Alistair Darling—the capital budget in which cuts were to be “deeper and tougher” than the cuts that were imposed by Margaret Thatcher, as Alistair Darling himself predicted—would reduce by 37 per cent in real terms between 2010-11 and 2013-14. Through the munificence of the Conservative-Liberal Administration and additions through consequentials, that cut has been reduced from the 37 per cent that was planned by Alistair Darling to 33.4 per cent next year.
Can Johann Lamont make a possible connection between a 33 per cent cut in the capital budget and the consequences that that has for people in Scotland? Does she not understand that almost 90 per cent of Scotland’s budget is controlled by Westminster? Can she explain to the Scottish people why she wants to continue with a situation in which Scotland suffers from the cuts that have been ordered by successive Tory and Labour Chancellors of the Exchequer?
The First Minister makes my case for me. If the Tories are attacking Scotland in the way that he says they are, why, in the face of that, does he not have a minister actively focus on protecting the people of Scotland, rather than focusing on the referendum?
If the First Minister wants to talk about working with the Tories, perhaps he had better speak to his Westminster colleagues, who I hear are saying that they will back the Tories on cutting the number of Scots MPs we send to Westminster. That will be a case about representation.[Interruption.]
Order.
The fact of the matter is that the First Minister’s problem is that his priorities are not those of the people of Scotland. We know that he is fond of quoting opinion polls. Let me quote from one that was published this morning. When asked what subject they would raise with the First Minister, 68 per cent of young Scots said that they would raise jobs and the economy. Only 5 per cent said that they would raise the constitution, which came behind jobs, crime and the health service, yet the First Minister has downgraded jobs and the economy and has placed less importance on hospital care—all because of his obsession with breaking up the United Kingdom. Does he not see that he is out of touch and that he does not care about jobs, other than his own?
First, I will deal with the health service. Nicola Sturgeon was in post as health secretary for five and a half years. That is more than twice as long as anybody in the history of devolution, and is almost as long as Nye Bevan—who founded the national health service—was in post. That is not a bad comparison since Nicola Sturgeon, as health secretary, restored the principle of health care being free at the point of need to the Scottish people.
Under John Swinney’s leadership on the economy, we have jobs in Scotland: a better employment rate, a lower unemployment rate and lower inactivity than the rest of the United Kingdom. That is notable performance when set against the restrictions of the Tory Government at Westminster.
If Johann Lamont does not like Tory rule from Westminster—except of course when she shares platforms with the Tories throughout Scotland—why on earth does she support the continuing Exchequer rule over Scotland, which is forcing the cuts not only in the areas that we control and in which we can try to give protection, but in areas such as welfare, through which the Westminster Government is putting hundreds of thousands of Scottish people into poverty? Why does Johann Lamont support that kind of policy from Westminster?
The best opinion poll that I saw over the summer was from that Labour Party affiliated organisation, the Fabian Society. Through YouGov, it asked people in Scotland what words they associate with the Labour Party. The top three—remember this is a Fabian Society poll—were “out of touch”, at 35 per cent; “incompetent”, at 29 per cent; and “boring”, at 26 per cent. If that is what the Fabian Society thinks that people think of the Labour Party, what do the rest of the population think?
The First Minister might want to reflect on the fact that the people of this country do not think that his obsession—the referendum—is their priority. That is the biggest gap that he has to deal with.
If I was concerned about the health service, I do not think that I would be putting in charge of it a man who, in his previous job in relation to the economy, presided over a slash in the housing budget and exported £700 million to boost the economies of China, Spain and Poland.
Last May, Nicola Sturgeon was in charge of another campaign—a campaign to take over Scotland’s biggest city. She made her campaign not about the priorities of the people of Glasgow, but about Glasgow being a stepping-stone to independence, and she got roundly thumped. It is clear that the First Minister has learned nothing from that. The people’s priorities are jobs, paying their bills and putting food on the table when, in Salmond’s Scotland, thousands of families now need food parcels. The First Minister cannot keep Scotland on pause for the next two years. When will he realise that it is not independence that Scots families care about? It’s the economy, stupid.
Given that I am now on my fourth Labour Party leader since 2007, I do not think that Labour should talk about people getting “thumped” in elections in Scotland; Labour has had plenty of that.
As far as Alex Neil is concerned, I think that he epitomises the values of the national health service better than any member of the Labour Party in this Parliament—with the possible exception of Malcolm Chisholm, who was, of course, unfortunately removed as health minister by the Labour Party. The health service is safe in the hands of Alex Neil, rather than in the hands of a Labour Party that has been lying down on privatisation of the health service south of the border.
As regards Johann Lamont’s explanation of why people are happy with her alliance with the Tory party, I do not believe that it is universal in the Labour Party ranks. Another former leader of Glasgow City Council and former MSP, Charlie Gordon, said on Twitter:
“Only halfway through recession. Jobless youngsters’ benefits threatened. Devolution can’t protect them. Better together with the Tories?”
I think that there are questions in the minds of Labour MSPs as well as in the mind of every Labour supporter in Scotland about the alliance that Johann Lamont has made with the Conservative party front bench.
I go back to the Fabian Society’s opinion poll. It was not all bad news for the Labour Party. Some people felt that the Labour Party in Scotland has “plenty of ideas”. That number was 8 per cent. I think that that 8 per cent is a massive figure, given the desultory and negative performance of the Labour Party in this Parliament since 2007.
Secretary of State for Scotland (Meetings)
2. To ask the First Minister when he will next meet the Secretary of State for Scotland. (S4F-00818)
I have no immediate plans to do so, but this very morning David Mundell accepted the Deputy First Minister’s request to meet the secretary of state. I understand that that meeting will take place next week.
That is good to hear. It is also good to see that the cheery bonhomie between the First Minister and the leader of the Labour Party that we left off from in June has resumed.
We now know that the Scottish Government is happy to sacrifice a latter-day Nye Bevan on health in the pursuit of the break-up of Britain. Over the summer, we watched higher education descend into chaos. [Interruption.]
Order.
To be frank, justice has been little more than an afterthought for the Scottish National Party. Yesterday, Mike Russell said that the SNP wants to be judged on its record, so I ask the First Minister how many convicted killers and rapists, for example, have been released early under the SNP.
As Ruth Davidson should know, we have the lowest crime rates in Scotland for more than 30 years. The reason why we have the lowest crime rates in Scotland for more than 30 years is that we have 1,000 more police on the streets and in the communities of Scotland, solving crime and making communities safer.
I am not aware of “the cheery bonhomie” to which Ruth Davidson alluded. The cheery bonhomie that I have been complaining about is the cheery bonhomie between Ruth Davidson and the Labour front bench. The people of Scotland watch that cheery bonhomie and wonder whether the Tories are turning themselves into the Labour party or—more likely—the Labour party is turning itself into the Conservatives.
As for the crisis in the university system in Scotland, this year the best-funded universities in the continent of Europe have a record number of Scottish students. In England, under the policies of Ruth Davidson’s party, the numbers have collapsed by 25,000. Perhaps Ruth Davidson might inform the chamber how she can possibly interpret a record number of university students from Scotland going to Scottish universities as anything other than an outstanding success for this Administration and a total vindication of the restoration of free education to the Scottish people.
That was a truly stunning lap in the bluster Scolympics, but I asked about rapists and murderers. The First Minister should have those figures—they should be in his book—because they are Government figures: 161 rapists and 277 killers are among the nearly 5,000 of the most violent people in our society who have been released early, back on to Scotland’s streets, since he came to power.
We know that the judges do not like early release because Lord Ross has called it “a charade”. The First Minister is today keen on opinion polls, but we know that the public do not like early release because 95 per cent of them oppose it. There is a simple remedy; the First Minister has even announced a victims bill for this parliamentary session, but in it is not a single word about automatic early release.
Will the First Minister now act on the manifesto promises that he made in 2007 and in 2011, or is he personally content with these people roaming Scotland’s streets?
As the political party that introduced automatic early release in Scotland—yes, the Conservative Party introduced early release in Scotland under, I think, the tutelage of Michael Forsyth and Ian Lang—why on earth does the Conservative Party not realise that it should show some modesty when it comes to its complaints about the criminal justice system in Scotland?
The best thing about criminal justice in Scotland now is that criminals actually get caught. We have the best statistics on solving crime in a generation. We have the lowest levels of recorded crime in a generation. Fear of crime is falling in Scotland, leading to the situation in which the Home Secretary in England gets booed off the stage by the Police Federation while the Cabinet Secretary for Justice in Scotland gets a standing ovation.
Cabinet (Meetings)
3. To ask the First Minister what issues will be discussed at the next meeting of the Cabinet. (S4F-00823)
It will discuss issues of importance to the people of Scotland.
We have just heard from Johann Lamont that the health service and the economy are being deprioritised by the First Minister as he moves his most senior minister from health to independence.
There is also a concern about the cost of focusing the civil service on making the Scottish National Party’s case for independence. How many civil servants are working for the new minister for independence and how much is it costing?
Somewhat less than are working in Downing Street trying to argue the case against the Scottish people.
I would say one thing to Willie Rennie. Moving somebody of Alex Neil’s formidable talents into the health service indicates and vindicates the strength of feeling of this party in favour of a national health service that is free at the point of need. Would that the Liberals in England would resist the Tory attempts to dismantle the national health service in England.
Every member of this Government is focused on economic recovery, but every member of this Government understands the inevitable conclusion that unless this country of Scotland gets control of our own resources and unless we are able to run the finances of Scotland, the best that we can do is to mitigate the impact of Tory-Liberal cuts from Westminster. There was a time in Scotland when members of the Liberal party actually believed in genuine home rule and controlling the finances of Scotland. Under the leadership of Willie Rennie and his immediate predecessor, that enthusiasm for genuine self-government has disappeared. That is probably why the party is reduced to a rump in this Parliament.
The First Minister loves to bluster rather than answer the question. It is surprising that he does not even know how many civil servants are working on that, and how much it is costing.
This summer, we learned that every civil servant had received training—not on boosting the economy or improving public services, but on how to keep information on independence secret and how to criticise the United Kingdom. [Laughter.] SNP members laugh and joke, but that is what is happening. The First Minister’s deputy is paid by the taxpayer to run the SNP’s independence campaign. With all the problems that are facing our country, can it really be justified for taxpayers to pay her and for so many civil servants to be devoted to the SNP’s cause? Come on—tell us.
“I consider”
Willie Rennie’s
“allegations preposterous”
and his
“interpretation of the incidents fanciful”.
Those are not my words, but the words of Alison Elliot, the former Moderator of the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland, who had to respond to a similar ridiculous and nonsensical attack from Willie Rennie.
BBC Scotland (Job Losses and Gaelic News Service Reduction)
4. To ask the First Minister what representations the Scottish Government has made to BBC Scotland following the announcement that there will be job losses at BBC Highlands and Islands and a reduction to its Gaelic news service. (S4F-00816)
The job cuts in BBC Scotland are extremely disappointing. This week, the Cabinet Secretary for Culture and External Affairs wrote to the director-general designate of the BBC, George Entwistle, to make representations about the job losses, particularly those in news and current affairs and in Gaelic broadcasting.
I will be speaking personally with Mr Entwistle next week, when I will make clear my concern about the impact on public sector broadcasting in Scotland.
The First Minister will be aware that BBC Alba has been very successful in pulling in viewing figures of more than 0.5 million despite the number of Gaelic speakers being fewer than 100,000. Does he agree that that is clear evidence that the people of Scotland are seeking out programming that is made in Scotland and want more productions to be made and shown here, and that independent public service broadcasting would help to deliver that?
Yes, I agree with that. Members in the chamber should be aware of the contrast between the funding cuts that are affecting the BBC in Scotland—a 16 per cent cut in funding from £102 million to £86 million—and this Government’s decision to protect the funding for BBC Alba.
It would be of enormous concern, not just to me but—I hope—to every member in the chamber, if the reports in The Herald newspaper were true and the BBC was intending to use the staff of the publicly funded BBC Alba to cover for the cuts in Gaelic broadcasting that are being made in Inverness. That would, in my estimation, be a very serious position indeed, and I will put that point directly to the director-general designate when I speak to him next week.
Does the First Minister share my concerns that, with the removal of the news editor’s job from the proposed Inverness establishment, there would be no direction for those services except from Glasgow? That would mean that the BBC Highland news agenda would be driven from Pacific Quay.
Does the First Minister agree that the BBC’s mission must be for the whole of Scotland, including rural and island communities, not just the central belt?
Yes, I agree with that, and I hope that David Stewart shares my concerns about the report in The Herald on the idea of taking journalistic expertise from BBC Alba to cover for cutbacks in the BBC’s own broadcasting.
The BBC is our national broadcaster in Scotland. I think that all members would believe that it is time that the BBC started to act like a national broadcaster for the whole of the country.
CalMac Ferries (Services)
5. To ask the First Minister what discussions the Scottish Government has had with CalMac regarding the future of ferry services. (S4F-00831)
Transport Scotland meets regularly with CalMac and other key stakeholders, including trade unions and community representatives, to discuss how we can best deliver ferry services.
Does the First Minister agree that, in the process that takes place next year to replace the current contract—which CalMac operates—for the Clyde and Hebrides ferry services, the routes should not be debundled but should be tendered as a single contract as they were in the previous tendering process?
We have no plans to unbundle the Clyde and Hebrides ferry services. In our estimation, the case for unbundling has not been made.
I am sure that Richard Baker will be the first to acknowledge and understand that we have no choice but to tender for the services. I know he understands that, because in 2005, as a Government supporter at the time, he supported a Government motion that acknowledged that
“the tendering of the Clyde and Hebrides lifeline ferry services is required to protect these vital services.”
Given that there can be no disagreement that the tendering process is inevitable and that I have just given Richard Baker an indication of the Government’s view on unbundling, which should give him and the workers much security, I hope that he can see that the chamber should be united in protecting our lifeline ferry services.
I am sure that the First Minister is aware that the CalMac ferries are predominantly crewed by west coast seafarers. What safeguards will be in place in the next round of tendering to ensure that those excellent staff retain their jobs and conditions of service in the long term should CalMac lose the contract?
Dave Thompson describes the CalMac staff as “excellent”. I reiterate that. The staff employed by CalMac are excellent, and we should recognise the vital importance of those jobs to rural communities.
Even if there were to be a new provider following a tender process, the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations would, of course, apply. I urge all concerns to look at the protection of pensions, terms and conditions that we have managed to ensure has taken place with regard to the NorthLink contract.
Rolls-Royce Group (East Kilbride Plant Proposed Closure)
6. To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government’s response is to the proposed closure of the Rolls-Royce plant in East Kilbride. (S4F-00824)
We appreciate the concern that has been expressed about the effect of the closure of the East Kilbride Rolls-Royce plant on the local economy and the upheaval that will be felt by the workers relocating to Inchinnan. However, we are pleased that Rolls-Royce intends to retain all its staff from the East Kilbride plant. That clearly underlines the significant contribution that those staff make to the company. We also welcome its continued commitment to manufacturing in the west of Scotland.
The company has committed to working closely with its employees to ensure that the proposed transition is managed considerately, and Scottish Enterprise is now working closely with it to ensure that the relocation is managed effectively for all concerned. Scottish Enterprise and Scottish Development International are working with the company and local partners, and that work includes consideration of future options for the East Kilbride site in 2015 and beyond. That work is under way. The most recent meeting took place in Inchinnan on 4 September, and a further meeting is scheduled to take place in East Kilbride on 20 September.
The First Minister will be aware that, back in 2004, the Labour-Lib Dem Administration agreed funding to upgrade the Rolls-Royce plant in Renfrewshire, to where it is now proposed that the East Kilbride jobs will move. Were any conditions imposed on that funding at that time to protect East Kilbride jobs and workers? I ask the First Minister to ensure that the Scottish Government supports efforts to retain Rolls-Royce in East Kilbride and makes every effort, as he has outlined, to secure the suitable reuse of the important industrial site. East Kilbride has been home to some of Scotland’s most advanced manufacturing, and there is absolute determination in the town to see that continue.
I will look into the first part of Linda Fabiani’s question and reply to her on it in writing.
On an assurance about Skills Development Scotland and Government agencies, we will work with local partners to ensure that all young people can access the services that they need to help them into work. As Linda Fabiani knows, the Minister for Youth Employment is undertaking a series of employment action forums, including in East Kilbride, to engage young people and public, private and third sector employers to drive action at the local level. She can be absolutely certain that the Government and its agencies are fully committed to the East Kilbride economy.