Prime Minister (Meetings)
To ask the First Minister when he last met the Prime Minister and what issues he raised. (S1F-1716)
Before answering Mr Swinney's question, I am sure that the First Minister would wish me to convey his apologies to the Parliament for not being here to answer First Minister's questions. He was taken ill this morning. I think that a bug caught up with him. He has had tests and I understand that he is on the mend. I am sure that the Parliament wishes to send him best wishes for a good recovery—I certainly do.
I know that I said au revoir to the Deputy First Minister on 22 November, but I did not think that he would be back so quickly to answer questions. I echo his good wishes to the First Minister.
If my recollection serves me correctly, the Ethical Standards in Public Life etc (Scotland) Act 2000 was in the first tranche of legislation that the Executive brought to the Parliament. The act has an important role to play in public life in Scotland. It builds on the Nolan principles of securing appointments to public bodies, which are that those appointments are made openly and on the basis of merit. The act appoints a standards commissioner for Scotland and a chief investigating officer to investigate breaches of codes of conduct and it requires registers of interests to be available to the public. It is worthwhile legislation. It has been on the statute book for less than two years and I am sure that it has and will continue to have an important role to play in upholding standards in public life in Scotland.
I hope that the Deputy First Minister's optimism is securely founded. The act says that it establishes
I am aware of the newspaper reports, but I am not prepared to comment on a leaked report. Part of the structure of ensuring good standards in public life is that there is in Fife Council, for example, a standards and audit committee. I understand that a report will be made to that committee tomorrow and that appropriate action will be decided on. I do not think that we do justice to standards in public life by condemning them on the basis of leaked reports in the newspapers and by using the Parliament to come to judgments when people's rights are at stake.
That sounded like a lot of ducking and diving from the Deputy First Minister. Is not the difference between Mr Wallace and me that he wants to keep the cronies in and I want to get the cronies out? Is not that how we should be cleaning up Scottish politics? Is not that one of the good reasons why Scotland should be talking independence?
Mr Swinney had to get the "i" word in somewhere, but that was mighty contrived. I make it clear that the Scottish Executive expects every council to apply proper procedures and to apply them rigorously. That applies to Fife Council as much as to any other council. The Scottish Executive expects officials and elected representatives in the public sector to follow high standards. However, I do not believe that the Parliament puts itself in good standing if it comes to rushed judgments when it does not have all the evidence. The matter is for Fife Council to determine and I do not believe that we should be making judgments on the basis of a leaked report. None of my councillors has sent me a copy of the report, but perhaps Mr Swinney has had the advantage of being able to read the report.
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. (S1F-1710)
The First Minister will next meet the Secretary of State for Scotland on 11 March. As chance would have it, I met the Secretary of State for Scotland in London this morning.
I hope that when the First Minister is restored to health—I wish him a speedy recovery—he will discuss with the Secretary of State for Scotland the findings of the inquiry into the goings-on in Fife Council, to which Mr Swinney alluded.
I support anything that will lead to a considered judgment, which is not what we heard from Mr Swinney. If the Local Government Committee thinks that that approach is appropriate, I am sure that it will take the appropriate course of action. It is worth reminding the Parliament that in promoting high standards in public life we have had not just the Ethical Standards in Public Life etc (Scotland) Act 2000, to which John Swinney referred, but the Public Finance and Accountability (Scotland) Act 2000. We also have the proposed public appointments and public bodies (Scotland) bill. We have made it clear that, if we think further action is required, we will take it, but it is important to put on the record just how much the Parliament has done in a relatively short time to promote public standards throughout Scottish public life.
I wish to suggest further action for the Deputy First Minister and the Executive to consider. Does the Deputy First Minister think that it is appropriate for councillors who are responsible for allocating the bulk of funding to voluntary organisations of the type that I have just described to be employees of those organisations? Instead of increasing the number of council employees who can become councillors, as the McIntosh commission proposed, should not we be tightening up the rules to avoid conflicts of interest and to prevent people from becoming councillors if they work for organisations that are wholly or largely funded by their local council?
We want to wait and see what the report says. I am aware that the report that has sparked off these exchanges has been sent to Audit Scotland, a body that the Parliament established. I am sure that Audit Scotland will wish to give a considered response. We will examine any wider implications of the report and Audit Scotland's examination for public bodies in Scotland.
Is the Deputy First Minister aware that it was the diligence of Fife Liberal Democrat councillors that uncovered the payments to the Third Age Group in Fife and that it was Liberal Democrat councillors who called for the inquiry? Does he agree that elected members at all levels should abide by codes of conduct and ethical standards, particularly in relation to the disclosure of information that may prejudice disciplinary or criminal proceedings?
I was aware of the origin of the inquiry. Iain Smith is right that, under codes of conduct, councillors who come into possession of confidential reports are bound to ensure that they observe that confidentiality, so that proper council procedures can take place and so that people are not judged through trial by newspaper.
Drugs
To ask the First Minister what message he plans to promote to children and young people on illegal drug use. (S1F-1727)
The Executive continues to have a strong commitment to tackling those who deal in drugs. However, sending that message on its own does not help young people to make positive life choices. We must promote the benefits of healthy lifestyles and equip young people with the skills and knowledge to make those choices.
I thank the Deputy First Minister for his comments. I also thank his deputy, Richard Simpson, for the comments that he made in the papers at the weekend. Does the Deputy First Minister agree that any drugs policy must work in the absence of teachers, police and parents to enforce it? If we are to make a difference in tackling the crime, chaotic lifestyles and misery that drug misuse and abuse bring, we must give our young people the education, information and self-confidence to choose for themselves not to use drugs.
I agree strongly with Kenneth Macintosh. It is obvious that teachers, police and parents are not always around to enforce, but we all accept that the police and particularly parents and teachers have a responsibility to try to ensure that children are well aware of life choices and the consequences of drug misuse.
What advice or recommendations have been forwarded from this chamber to the Home Secretary, who has announced his intention to reclassify cannabis? Is there unanimity in the Executive, given that the two parties that form the Executive have, I think, diametrically opposed opinions on the reclassification and possible eventual liberalisation and legalisation of cannabis?
As Margo MacDonald is well aware, reclassification of cannabis is a matter reserved to the Westminster Government. Even if the Home Secretary decides to reclassify cannabis, the criminal offence will remain. That decision will be made on recommendations from the statutory Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs, the report of the Select Committee on Home Affairs and the evaluation of the Lambeth experiment.
End-year Flexibility Funds
To ask the First Minister what steps will be taken in order to ensure that the end-year flexibility of £200 million for 2001-02, identified in the letter from the Minister for Finance and Public Services to the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities' finance spokesman on 25 February 2002, is disbursed timeously. (S1F-1717)
Carrying forward money from one financial year to the next ensures spending in favour of top priorities, rather than spending on low priorities in the last three or four weeks of the year simply to get money out of the door. I note that on 27 September 2001 the member's colleague Andrew Wilson said:
The point is that the letter says that the true end-year flexibility figure is £200 million, although £600 million has been mentioned. I take that to be £200 million spare cash in the coalition coffers. I have a question for the Deputy First Minister that probably would have suited the First Minister.
I would be delighted to hear a question.
If the Borders population equals 2 per cent of the Scottish population, and 2 per cent of £200 million equals £4 million, and Scottish Borders Council is short of £4 million, has the Deputy First Minister any advice for his Liberal Democrat colleague, the new leader of that council?
It is worth pausing and remembering that, last year, end-year flexibility was allocated to fund the McCrone settlement, the coronary heart disease plan and additional support for students. More money was provided to tackle foot-and-mouth and its consequences and more money was supplied for fishing vessel decommissioning, of which I am sure people in the Borders received a fair share, because of the problems of the fishing industry in Eyemouth and foot-and-mouth in the Borders. People would have benefited from the fact that the Executive had end-year flexibility to meet some of those issues as they arose. We will pursue a similar route this year and we will distribute underspend widely across the whole of Scotland. I am sure that the Borders will benefit directly from that expenditure, like other parts of Scotland.
Is the Deputy First Minister aware that the fundamental difficulty that Scottish Borders Council faces is getting its expenditure within the grant-aided expenditure limit that has been laid down? Will he advise the Parliament whether the rules on end-year flexibility give the Executive the authority to advance some revenue support grant to the council, to allow it the time that it needs to find alternative mechanisms to manage its swimming pools? That would enable the council to keep the swimming pools open rather than, as seems likely, to close them within the next two or three months.
I am certainly aware of many of the issues to which Murray Tosh refers. I have been in the Borders about three times in the past 12 months and I met a group from the Borders last week. It is fair to point out that Scottish Borders Council has balances of some 1.4 per cent of its total expenditure. I think that that percentage is somewhat greater than the Executive's underspend. My colleagues Euan Robson and Ian Jenkins have been encouraging Scottish Borders Council to make use of those balances. Some say that balances are for a rainy day; some in the Borders may think that it is raining.
I know that the Deputy First Minister recognises the deep concerns in the Borders about the threats to public services. Does he agree that the changes in the leadership in Scottish Borders Council offer a window of opportunity for a fresh start? Will he and his ministerial colleagues vigorously support efforts to find a positive way forward by using those balances or by using some other method?
There is a new convener in place and I understand that there will be a new administration, although it will not be chosen until 19 March. That offers a window of opportunity. The Audit Scotland report found administrative failures, particularly in the education department, and called for a recovery strategy. I hope that the new administration will develop such a recovery strategy. I am sure that it will want to and I am sure that, having developed it, it will want to discuss the matter with ministers.
Does the Deputy First Minister agree that the SNP's answer to everything is to propose spending more money—usually the same money again and again? By 4 pm on Monday this week, Alasdair Morgan was calling for more expenditure from EYF; at the same time, Christine Grahame was calling for the Scottish Borders Council to be bailed out.
That question is not in order. The minister is not responsible for SNP policy.
Foot-and-mouth Disease
To ask the First Minister whether foot-and-mouth disease has been eradicated in Scotland. (S1F-1715)
The last case of foot-and-mouth disease in Scotland was on 30 May 2001. On 11 September 2001, the country was declared disease free. Obviously, however, continued vigilance is required.
The Deputy First Minister will of course be aware of a number of scares in the north of England of potential recurrences of foot-and-mouth. The on-going inquiries have yet to report. I agree with Mr Wallace's colleagues at Westminster that the inquiries should be public, which those in Scotland will not be. Is Mr Wallace satisfied that arrangements are in hand to deal immediately with any similar scare in Scotland?
The short answer is yes. I can assure Mr Mundell and the Parliament that officials in Ross Finnie's department keep in close touch with the situation in England. At the time of the scare of the suspected outbreak in North Yorkshire, our officials were ready to launch full disease-control procedures had that case turned out to be positive. Ross Finnie will shortly issue the Executive's response to the lessons-learned inquiry. One of the issues dealt with in that response will be the revision of contingency plans in the light of experience.
Given that the likely cause of the previous outbreak of foot-and-mouth was infected imported meat, and given the considerable concerns that existed even before the outbreak about the inspection of the quality of imported meat, will the Deputy First Minister tell us whether he is satisfied with the levels of inspection that are now in place?
I assure Alasdair Morgan that the Executive takes the matter very seriously. Indeed, it was raised at the most recent meeting of UK agriculture ministers. Checks on imports have been increased, a major information campaign has been aimed at international travellers, regulations have been changed to allow local authorities to seize suspect meat where there is no documentation to prove its origin, and the feeding of swill has been banned. As I indicated in my answer to David Mundell, the Executive will respond to the lessons-learned inquiry, another key element of which will be import controls. Furthermore, work is under way to revisit the regulations. I again assure Alasdair Morgan and the Parliament that we take the issue seriously.
Is the Deputy First Minister aware that a recent Lloyds TSB Scotland survey found that more that 60 per cent of farmers in the Borders and Dumfries and Galloway area were very satisfied by the Scottish Executive's handling of the foot-and-mouth crisis and that only 12 per cent indicated any dissatisfaction? Given that there is grave concern that foot-and-mouth disease could return to this country through illegal meat imports, what steps are being taken to strengthen Customs and Excise's functions throughout the UK to ensure that those imports do not enter the country and put at risk our hard-fought control of the disease?
Although I acknowledge the figures and findings that George Lyon has quoted, I am the first to say that they do not give us any cause for complacency. Last August, I met many of the foot soldiers from Dumfries and Galloway Council, who represented a whole range of support mechanisms that one would not have thought were required in such a situation. I pay tribute to everyone in Dumfries and Galloway and the Borders who worked excessively hard to bring the outbreak under control. Indeed, I should also mention the Army's contribution to that effort.
That concludes question time.
On a point of order, Presiding Officer. Is it in order for the Deputy First Minister to mislead the Parliament with his claim that he could not comment on a leaked report when the report's authors, the chief executive of Fife Council and the leader of the Labour group, have today given detailed interviews about its contents and have therefore put it into the public domain?
I am sorry, but that is a point of argument, not a point of order.
Previous
Question Time