Engagements
To ask the First Minister what engagements he has planned for the rest of the day. (S4F-02365)
Later today, I will visit the Scottish Institute of Sport to meet the athletes and coaches who played a vital role in this summer’s Commonwealth games. The games in Glasgow were an outstanding success in terms of their organisation and the way in which hundreds of thousands of people were engaged in the biggest event that Scotland has ever hosted.
I am delighted to announce to the chamber that, in addition to being the greatest Commonwealth games in history, the event has come in almost £25 million under budget, making it one of the few major sporting events in history that have managed to achieve that accolade. It is certainly the only one that has both been the greatest games and come in under budget.
I associate myself with much of what the First Minister has said, particularly the view that our athletes did us proud. I have a suggestion for how he can spend the savings.
Can the First Minister tell us whether the number of teachers in Scotland has gone up or down since 2007?
As Jackie Baillie should know, we have managed to hold to the pupil teacher ratio that was outlined in the agreements that we made with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities. That is a considerable achievement in the face of Westminster austerity cuts. I know that Labour councils were the most enthusiastic in responding to the Scottish Government’s urgings about maintaining the number of teachers.
That sounded like three excuses in one. I suppose that that falls into the same category as the First Minister’s most accurate answer that
“anybody has given in any Parliament”,—[Official Report, 15 November 2012; c 13513.]
and, of course, we know what nonsense that was.
The First Minister knows that I am a kind and helpful person, so he will let me help him out here. Between 2007 and 2013, the number of teachers in Scotland dropped by 4,000. That is 4,000 fewer teachers in our classrooms, teaching our children. It is the poorest kids and those who need the most support who will suffer. The experts are worried. They do not agree that the drop in numbers is because of falling school rolls. On Tuesday, the Educational Institute of Scotland told Parliament that, every week, pupils are sent home because of a lack of teachers, and the national parent forum of Scotland said that the poorest pupils will be worse off and will get less support because of the cuts.
The First Minister will not tell us the truth about the drop in teacher numbers. Perhaps he can be more forthcoming about another issue. Can he tell us whether the total number of people going to college in Scotland has gone up or down since 2007?
The number of teachers employed by local authorities in Scotland in 2011 was 51,212. In 2012, the number was 51,100. In 2013, it was 50,932. That means that COSLA and Labour and Scottish National Party councils across Scotland have kept to the agreement of maintaining the teacher pupil ratio at the 2011 level of 13.5. That is a considerable success against a background of the austerity cuts that Scotland has suffered from Westminster. Given that that is part of an agreement that encompassed the leaders of councils across Scotland and the Scottish Government, I would have thought that Jackie Baillie would acknowledge that her party has played a part in the success of maintaining teacher numbers and the teacher pupil ratio in those circumstances.
I hope that Jackie Baillie is prepared to celebrate the huge and substantial successes of Scottish education, such as the record exam results and the hugely promising and effective introduction of curriculum for excellence. The concentration of our colleges on courses that give people full-time qualifications is one of the reasons why we are seeing such hopeful signs as the huge and substantial decline in youth unemployment—because, of course, full-time college courses have been maintained, in terms of full-time equivalents, as we promised in our manifesto. Those are substantial achievements not just of the Government but of the teachers, the lecturers, the pupils and the students across Scotland.
The First Minister should not hide behind the professionals involved, because they are the ones making the complaints about his education system. If I was a teacher, the First Minister’s report card would be marked “Lacks attention. Could try harder. Can’t even grasp the basics.”
Let me tell the First Minister about the college experience. The reality is that the number of college students in Scotland has been cut by 140,000 since 2007. That is 140,000 fewer people going to college and making a better life for themselves and their families. He knows that there is a cut, I know that there is a cut and the people watching at home know that there is a cut.
The First Minister dodged my first two questions. How about we go for third time lucky? Can he tell us whether the number of Scottish students going to university from the poorest areas of the country has gone up or down in recent years?
There have been substantial improvements in exactly that ratio thanks to a number of initiatives that the Government has taken, particularly our maintenance of the educational maintenance payments. Those payments have been abolished in England but have been maintained here in Scotland and are helping the poorest students in the country.
The Labour Party’s chequered track record of failing to support such initiatives that help students from deprived families is a matter of record in this Parliament. The Government is rightfully proud of the achievements of Scottish education against the significant pressure of funding cuts from Westminster. In allocating the credit to the teachers of Scotland for the successful introduction of curriculum for excellence against that background, I am allocating the credit where it is undoubtedly due. The Government can, however, take some credit for the successful introduction, maintenance and expansion of the schools for the future school building programme. [Interruption.]
Order.
It is not so long ago that Jackie Baillie was the health spokesperson and her colleagues were questioning us about education, saying that we were not building any schools in Scotland. We now have the figures for the first seven years of SNP government. Against the background of austerity, 463 school building projects have been completed since 2007, which is 135 more than the 328 that were completed in eight years of Labour-Liberal administration. [Interruption.]
Order.
I know that Jackie Baillie does not want to celebrate those new schools across Scotland and the conditions in which our pupils are now being taught, but will she at least acknowledge that, if we wind the clock back to when some members on the Labour back benches were on the front benches—that is really winding the clock back when I look at some of the Labour members—the Labour Party claimed that we were not building a single school yet, in fact, we have built substantially more in seven years than the Labour Party built in its entire time in office?
Even by the First Minister’s usual standards, that was truly woeful. That goes for all his responses. I say to him that he is not in the playground any more and cannot say that a big boy did it and ran away. Education is fully devolved and it is his responsibility. The First Minister’s Government celebrates percentages, but we talk about real people. [Interruption.]
Order. Let us hear Ms Baillie.
Here are the facts. The First Minister knows that the number of Scottish students going to university is down by 12,000. The figure for those from the poorest background is down by over 3,000. Bursaries have been cut by 35 per cent and student debt is up by 69 per cent. Despite the First Minister’s assertions, the reality is that he is failing Scotland’s future. The truth is that there are fewer teachers giving our children the education that they need, there are fewer college places for people who are trying to get on in life and the poorest people are less likely to go on to university under the SNP Government. He should be ashamed. When the First Minister leaves Bute house for the last time, should he not perhaps consider taking the education secretary with him?
Over this term of office, there has been a record number of students going into full-time courses in colleges and universities in Scotland. That is a huge achievement, in contrast to what is happening south of the border. Thanks to the initiative that this Government has taken, we have seen a closing in the gap in terms of access to our universities and colleges by students from underprivileged backgrounds. That has been the point of maintaining the education maintenance allowance. That has proved possible because education is free in Scotland, since we abolished the back-end tuition fees introduced by the Labour Party and restored education on the basis of merit and achievement, not the size of your cheque book. I know that, whichever candidate is successful for the leadership of the Labour Party, one of the first things on their agenda will be the reintroduction of student tuition fees. I say to Jackie Baillie that that will not be tolerated or accepted by the people of Scotland.
However, I thought that the point of peak absurdity in the line of Jackie Baillie’s questioning was when she said that the Labour Party celebrates percentages—[Interruption.]
Order.
Is it celebrating the 23 per cent of people currently voting for the Labour Party?
I heard on the radio this morning that there are scientists at the University of Glasgow who are researching the expanding nature of the universe. There are political scientists all over Scotland researching the contracting nature of the Scottish Labour Party—from big bang to black hole, from expansion of the universe to the disappearance of the Labour Party in Scotland.
Secretary of State for Scotland (Meetings)
To ask the First Minister when he will next meet the Secretary of State for Scotland. (S4F-02353)
No plans in the near future.
I have questioned the First Minister on school performance many times. In response, he reels off a string of stats and I say that I know that Scotland’s schools are good but that we must strive for better—more choice, more autonomy and new ways of working.
This week, the education expert Keir Bloomer wrote in our new book that calling school performance a success
“demonstrates the tendency to self-congratulation, which is such a damaging aspect of the culture in which Scottish Education operates.”
There is a whole debate happening out there on school reform that the Government is not responding to. In the same book, a former headteacher pleads:
“Energise and empower headteachers—set them free and give them true accountability.”
At Tuesday’s meeting of the Education and Culture Committee, two parent groups urged the scrapping of local authority education boards altogether. Now that the First Minister has one foot out of the door, I ask him why he is so wedded to councils being the only provider of free education in this country. Why does he believe that there is no better way of doing this?
One of the great joys of not being First Minister of Scotland will be that I will not, as a matter of duty, have to read Tory education pamphlets, as I did last night. I studied in great detail the pamphlet that Ruth Davidson cited. Keir Bloomer’s article, “Two cheers for Curriculum for Excellence”, was very good and substantive—unlike, I am afraid, many of the other articles. Incidentally, I did not feel that doing both the preface and the introduction, as Ruth Davidson did, was the best use of resources in developing the pamphlet.
When people argue in that pamphlet that we should adopt as the means of going forward in Scottish education the rampant disorganisation and privatisation that, according to the National Union of Teachers, is being deployed south of the border, they mistake absolutely the temper of the people. If Ruth Davidson cares to study Keir Bloomer’s article, which she cited, she will see that he notes—although he says that the difference is not massive—that it is a matter of fact that in terms of international comparisons and the programme for international student assessment study, we have arrested the decline that took place until 2006. He also notes that, on two out of the three measurements, Scottish performance is ahead of that south of the border.
Given those facts, why on earth would anyone in Scotland be interested in the advocation by the Conservative Party of adopting the disastrous disorganisation of the English education system? It is far better to pursue the education system that we have in Scotland.
The First Minister clearly did not read Professor Lindsay Paterson’s entry, in which he compared the two approaches and said:
“Mr Gove’s public preference … is the more compelling”.
It is interesting that the First Minister refers to the Keir Bloomer essay and talks about the PISA study, because Keir Bloomer goes into that in great detail and shows that, in the year that the Parliament started, Scotland’s schools were performing at well above the international average and, since then, they have dropped 20 points in reading, 35 points in maths and nine points in science.
Our young people are less able to compete now than they were at the start of devolution. We must do better, so why does the Government dismiss the lessons that can be learned from the charter schools movement in Canada and America, the free school reforms of Sweden or the technical colleges of Japan? Around the globe, school autonomy drives up standards. The First Minister sticks rigidly to the one-size-fits-all approach on education. Rather than congratulate itself, should the Government not put its ego aside and learn the lessons from around the world?
As Ruth Davidson quotes Keir Bloomer, she will accept that, as I stated in my first answer, he notes that the decline in performance that was noted between 1999 and 2006 has been arrested, according to the PISA comparisons since then. He notes that in his article and she must accept that, because it is there in black and white.
I was interested in the Conservatives’ offering of New Zealand and America as the international examples that we should follow, because we have substantially closed the gap with New Zealand in the past few surveys on the selfsame standards—the PISA comparison—and we are ahead of America in the measurements. Why would it be a fantastic example to cite in a Conservative Party press release two countries, one of which we have closed the gap with and the other of which—America—we are substantially ahead of?
Cannot Ruth Davidson understand that, in the vast expansion of nursery education, Scotland is doing well; in the exciting development of the curriculum for excellence, Scotland is doing well; in the Ian Wood commission on vocational education and how it relates to the colleges, Scotland has an exciting opportunity to develop vocational education through the school and college curriculum; and our advocacy of free education has been vindicated by the success of our universities over the past few years?
On all those aspects, Scottish education is performing well. As we go into the future to enhance and improve that performance, let us do it on the basis of the Scottish principles of education—that means that each child should get an equal chance and not have to pay by cheque book for education—and not go down the road of privatisation and disintegration as the Tories south of the border have.
I have a number of constituency questions. As with last week, I want to get through as many as possible, so I ask for brief questions and brief answers.
I am sure that the First Minister and the chamber will join me in sending condolences to the families of the crew of the Fraserburgh-registered fishing vessel the Ocean Way, which was tragically lost on Sunday, resulting in fatalities.
That tragedy is not only a strong reminder that fishing is one of the most dangerous occupations; it also highlights the fact that many different nationalities work in our fishing industry, as four of the crew were Filipino. Has the Scottish Government been involved in helping to contact their families in the Philippines?
I agree with the sentiments expressed by Christian Allard. I am a former member of Parliament for Fraserburgh and many members in the chamber have close connections with fishing constituents. We record the Government’s thanks to all those who acted quickly to try to preserve human life—sadly, of course, in vain for some of the people involved.
The Scottish Government has been in contact with the Maritime and Coastguard Agency and the marine accident investigation branch since the weekend. That has included providing them with information about the fishing vessel, which was Fraserburgh registered but was fishing from Northumbria.
Responsibility for contacting the relatives of the deceased is a matter for the relevant police force, which is Northumbria Police. However, I should say that we have already made it clear to the police that, if they require further assistance in relation to the nationality of those whose lives were lost, the Scottish Government is anxious and willing to help in any way that it can.
NHS Grampian has lost its entire local leadership—executive and non-executive—in recent weeks. Does the First Minister recognise the damage that that has done to staff morale and public confidence in what has historically been an exemplary local health service? In that context, will he undertake to ensure that the next chair of Grampian NHS Board lives and works in Grampian?
I have seen some public suggestions about who that should be, but the next chair of Grampian NHS Board will go through the proper public appointments process.
I met the incoming chief executive of the board yesterday. Malcolm Wright assured me that, when he takes office, one of his first acts will be to arrange a meeting with local MSPs to discuss the way forward for the board.
We must recognise, as Richard Carey did in his note to NHS staff, that there had been a breakdown of relationships between some senior clinicians and senior management in Grampian. Therefore, he concluded—as others did—that the way forward was to have new leadership in NHS Grampian. We should go forward from there and rally behind the new chief executive as he addresses the questions, which he fully intends to do. Malcolm Wright comes into post with a substantial track record on addressing such concerns.
I do not for a second say that the finances are the key or the only issue here, but Lewis Macdonald will know that, historically, Grampian NHS Board was underfunded in comparison with the Scottish average. When we took office, it received 9.1 per cent of health board funding. I am delighted to say that, over the next two years, that figure will increase to 9.6 per cent, which is much closer to a fair allocation.
Lewis Macdonald should reflect on the fact that it seems extraordinary that, despite eight years of a Labour-Liberal Administration, that underfunding should have continued for so long. He should welcome, as I do, the fact that, in fairness to all health boards across Scotland, the new formula will bring a fair allocation to each and every health board, including Grampian NHS Board.
The First Minister will be aware that approximately 25 jobs are under threat at Prestwick airport because Greer Aviation and Landmark Aviation have been served notice to leave the airport by the management of Prestwick. Does he share my concerns about that potential loss of jobs and businesses? Will he ask senior Transport Scotland officials to meet Greer Aviation and me to discuss the matter and avert the closure of the businesses in question, which have served Prestwick and Ayrshire well and provided a constant income stream to the airport for almost 15 years?
I do not think that the local member’s depiction of the situation is entirely the full story. As I know of his interest in the airport, perhaps the best way forward would be for me to arrange the meeting that he asks for.
We should recognise that this is an operational matter for the airport. The senior management team is tasked with all aspects of taking the airport forward, including the development of significant commercial opportunities. On the issues that the member raises, I will be glad to facilitate the meeting that he requested.
Highlands and Islands Enterprise is seeking to build a number of units in Lyness in my constituency as part of welcome efforts to support renewables development but, despite previous commitments from the Government and the enterprise agency, the tender has been framed in such a way as to prevent any Orkney-based firm from competing for the work. The First Minister has the power to do something about that, so will he agree to suspend the tender process so that steps can be taken to allow small businesses in my constituency a fair crack of the whip?
No, but I undertake to examine the issue and to write in detail to the local member to see whether I can help him with his legitimate inquiry.
Cabinet (Meetings)
To ask the First Minister what issues will be discussed at the next meeting of the Cabinet. (S4F-02354)
Issues of importance to carry forward the Government’s programme for Scotland.
This week, the chief executive of the Care Inspectorate, Annette Bruton, warned that it
“would be a serious mistake to assume Scotland is immune from the type of child exploitation”
that has been seen elsewhere in the United Kingdom. She reported that Scottish agencies have made progress but are still not effective enough. What discussions has the First Minister had with the Care Inspectorate on the support that can be given to ensure the safety of children in Scotland? What priorities for action has he identified?
There were full discussions of those matters in the previous two Cabinet meetings, and I understand that there will be a ministerial statement this coming Tuesday, so Alison McInnes will have a full opportunity to press her questions.
I look forward to the publication of action on that.
People would expect the First Minister to take a close interest in what is a national issue. People in South Yorkshire assumed that agencies, committees and working groups were protecting their children, but we have learned that we have to check and double-check. Therefore, it is right to press the First Minister on the matter. It is insidious and creeping abuse.
Scotland’s public agencies still have “important and major weaknesses” in dealing with the first reports of abuse. What deadline will the national plan set to give Scotland’s young people the comprehensive assurance that they will be protected?
I chaired a long Cabinet session on exactly that subject on Tuesday. A range of initiatives were discussed, excepting, of course, the announcements that have already been made; for example, the new unit in the new Scottish police service for investigating crime and criminality, which will have substantial advantages over the variations in approach that were part of the difficulty for previous police services. The single police service gives us the advantage of having the specialism and detailed knowledge that that investigative unit will have. I know that Alison McInnes will welcome that.
Mr Russell’s statement on Tuesday will go into a range of matters in a comprehensive response. There is no complacency whatsoever in the Scottish Government’s approach. We recognise that everyone in the Parliament understands both the importance and the necessity of making absolutely sure that our agencies and legislation are entirely fit for purpose, and of ensuring that some of the abuses that have been historically documented can be addressed for the future, that weaknesses in our system will be addressed and, of course, that the survivors and victims of previous abuse will get the justice and the hearing that they rightly advocate and cry for.
Welfare Reforms
To ask the First Minister what assessment the Scottish Government has made of the impact of United Kingdom Government welfare reforms on families in which at least one family member is in employment. (S4F-02370)
We should start calling them “welfare changes”, not “welfare reforms”.
It is estimated that funds of £6 billion will be removed from the Scottish economy. That money is from families in Scotland in the six years from 2011-12 to 2015-16. Independent projections suggest that up to an additional 100,000 children and 150,000 working-age adults will be living in poverty by 2020 because of welfare reform.
As Jamie Hepburn highlights, households in Scotland are increasingly experiencing in-work poverty. Employment is no longer in itself a protection against poverty; six in 10 children and more than half of working-age adults in relative poverty in 2012-13 were living in households in which somebody was working. Unfortunately, that is an increasing trend that will be aggravated by the further changes that the Chancellor of the Exchequer is planning.
With those welfare changes hitting the poor and many working families hard, the First Minister will be aware that a range of front-line organisations, such as the Scottish Federation of Housing Associations, Children 1st, the Poverty Alliance and Engender, have called for the devolution to Scotland of powers over welfare. Does the First Minister agree that the whole Parliament should unite behind those calls so that we can make better decisions in the Parliament to improve on those matters and to build the fairer Scotland that we all want?
Yes, I do. I also think increasingly that the number of people in the Parliament who would say that Scotland should not—not “could not”—control welfare will diminish as people recognise, across the range of issues, that decisions that are made closer to people in Scotland will take account of the matters that Jamie Hepburn rightly raises. Of those issues, we should dwell on in-work poverty. We should recognise the logical—in fact, the inevitable—consequence of the Chancellor of the Exchequer’s recent announcements that thousands more people in each and every constituency in Scotland will suffer a reduction in their standard of living as a result of the changes that he intends to make. Those are working people who will get poorer as a result of the chancellor’s changes, which I understand the Opposition in Westminster seems to be prepared to accept and go along with. That is an intolerable situation, and I am certain that no Administration in the Scottish Parliament would ever countenance such a move.
Living Wage
To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government’s response is to the KPMG study that indicates that more than 400,000 workers in Scotland are being paid less than the living wage. (S4F-02363)
Tackling low pay is a key priority of the Government, and we fully support the living wage campaign. We have, of course, led by example. For the fifth consecutive year, we have required employers that are subject to our pay policy to pay their staff the Scottish living wage. We should note that, as a result—as the KPMG report shows—the living wage is paid to 81 per cent of Scottish employees, which is a greater proportion than in any other part of the United Kingdom outwith the south-east of England.
I am sure that the First Minister will agree that it is unacceptable that more than a quarter of a million women in Scotland are not paid the living wage. Some of those women are working on cleaning contracts in Scottish Government locations. Will the First Minister therefore agree to set out a national living wage strategy and to review urgently all Scottish Government cleaning contracts to ensure that people in those locations are paid the living wage?
What a pity that James Kelly did not attend the Scottish Trades Union Congress conference when I gave a speech that laid out exactly such a strategy and how the Government intends to roll out the living wage. Of course, it is this Government that introduced the living wage in Scotland, and we will pursue it for the fifth successive year, starting next April. It would be wonderful if, at some point in his rightful comments on these matters, Mr Kelly had acknowledged that it was the Scottish National Party Government that introduced the living wage across the public sector and, indeed, that secured the living wage as part of the recent contract negotiations for catering in the Scottish Government and for the railways.
I heard Mr Kelly on the radio wax lyrical about the £8 that the Labour Party has offered as the minimum wage, but he forgot to tell people that that is for the year 2020. In other words, there would be a 2 per cent increase in the minimum wage year by year, so it is likely—in fact, almost certain—that even an inflation increase would take the minimum wage past that amount. It is no wonder that the Labour conference and the leader’s speech at that conference have been given such a resounding raspberry by working people in Scotland.
Crude Oil Prices
To ask the First Minister what assessment the Scottish Government has made of the potential impact on the economy of the recent fall in crude oil prices. (S4F-02352)
The impact will depend on a number of factors. The final impact on the economy will depend on how the fall passes through to investors and consumers. Of course, it would be unwise to assume that the recent fall will last. Much of the recent decline has been driven not by market fundamentals but by a reaction to a temporary oversupply in the market, as the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries—OPEC—tries to force out the production of US shale oil. Indeed, the most recent forecasts by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Cambridge Econometrics, Standard Chartered Bank and even the Confederation of British Industry are for a bounce back in prices next year.
Perhaps Alex Johnstone would like to think how secure our economy would be if, like Norway, we had had the opportunity to invest in an oil fund. I saw in a Financial Times report this week that every day for the past 13 and a half years the Norwegian fund has grown by an average of $165 million. When oil prices were high and when they were low, the oil fund grew by $165 million a day. Would that Scotland had discovered oil at the same time as Norway. [Laughter.]
With Brent crude trading today at under $83 a barrel, we have reached a four-year low, with a 20 per cent drop since the day the First Minister lost the referendum campaign, having put oil at the centre of his campaign for an independent Scotland. Given that the case was decisively rejected by the North East Scotland, where the industry is based, will he now accept that, bury the hatchet with the United Kingdom Government and work to ensure that the oil service industry has the best of support north and south of the border to weather the storm and return to a successful future?
That was spoken with the confidence and authority that comes from being at 8 per cent in the most recent Scottish opinion poll. At some stage, the Conservative Party will consider whether a revival to 8 per cent indicates a glowing future. Why is the Conservative Party at such an all-time low? It is because it seems to suggest that having oil and gas in massive quantities is a curse and an irredeemable burden for the Scottish people.
What other people look at is the announcement of new discoveries in the North Sea, such as the Xcite Energy discovery of the Bentley field, with 300 million barrels. British Petroleum has announced another discovery in the central North Sea—something that obviously only became apparent after 18 September—not to mention today’s report in The Press and Journal, which indicates that the latest drilling in Clair ridge is showing extraordinary oil-well flows.
People will conclude from that that the size of the resource in the North Sea and in the waters around Scotland will outlast the Scottish Conservative Party by many decades, and will power Scotland in times to come.
Previous
General Question TimeNext
RBS Branch Closures