Infrastructure, Investment and Cities
Perth (Promotion)
To ask the Scottish Government what it and its agencies are doing to promote Perth as one of Scotland’s cities. (S4O-03176)
Perth is a modern, dynamic, international city and is able to contribute nationally and locally to driving Scotland’s economy. As members are aware, Perth regained city status in 2012 and, as a result of that, now plays a full part in the Scottish cities alliance.
What assessment has the Scottish Government made of Transform Scotland’s calls to create a new intercity rail hub at Perth station, as a catalyst for transport connectivity, urban regeneration and economic regeneration for Perth?
Liz Smith will be aware that we are always happy to engage with proposals of any nature, and I am sure that the Minister for Transport and Veterans, who is sitting next to me, would always be willing to engage and will engage directly on the specific point that she raises.
The proposal that Liz Smith just outlined would cost—as I am sure that she is aware—in the region of £1 billion and it would require cutting across the M9 motorway, so there are significant challenges to it, but we are always willing to engage and we will continue to do that. I and, I am sure, the transport minister would be happy to discuss those challenges in more detail with her.
CalMac (Meetings)
To ask the Scottish Government when it last met representatives of CalMac and what issues were discussed. (S4O-03177)
Transport Scotland officials meet regularly with CalMac representatives to discuss a range of matters relating to ferry services in Scotland. I last met CalMac representatives a fortnight ago to discuss a number of matters of mutual interest.
Is the Government aware of the widespread concerns of the public and the business sector in the Western Isles that, due to reduced timetable options and the removal of a dedicated freight ferry, the current major public investment in the Stornoway to Ullapool service will actually lead to a reduced service, particularly during peak periods?
Given the significant contribution that our island communities make to our nation’s social, cultural and economic wellbeing, does the Government not recognise and accept the need for the investment to be augmented by the retention of a dedicated freight vessel to provide the much-needed increase in capacity and timetable choices for the service’s users?
I would choose to characterise the £43 million investment that we are making in a new vessel differently from Mary Scanlon. I reassure her that the new vessel, MV Loch Seaforth, will have more than adequate freight capacity when it enters service.
We have said that we will keep another vessel on standby in the intervening period. We are confident that the £43 million investment in the new vessel and the new contribution to Stornoway’s and Ullapool’s harbour infrastructure will provide an improvement. Many people have staunchly supported that huge £43 million-worth of investment in the new vessel, to replace the two older vessels. There have been questions about the freight vessel’s reliability. We are confident that the capacity will be there.
Arran islanders are delighted that the Scottish Government is investing £2 million a year to roll out road equivalent tariff to Arran from October, and they have warmly welcomed the minister’s announcement.
Does the minister share my disappointment that CalMac seeks to dilute that commitment by avoiding implementing RET on weekend summer sailings?
The short answer is no; I do not share that disappointment, because I am aware that there is not an attempt to dilute the commitment to RET. Instead, as has been made clear right the way through the process, there are issues of demand management, which will be necessary. I know that Kenneth Gibson is aware of that.
The operator, in line with what we said in the ferries plan, is in discussions with the community about the need for the introduction of some form of demand management in the summer 2015 timetable, which is partly due to the success of introducing RET in the first place.
We are very clear that demand management will be introduced only where the projected demand on a particular route, as a result of the introduction of RET, indicates that that is necessary. Crucially, from Kenneth Gibson’s point of view, demand management techniques will be introduced only if they are agreed by the community.
Aberdeen City Region (Support for Public Sector Recruitment)
To ask the Scottish Government how its cities strategy will support public bodies in the Aberdeen city region that find it hard to recruit and retain staff because of the high cost of living relative to the rest of the country. (S4O-03178)
The Scottish cities alliance brings together all our seven cities in collaborative partnership with the Scottish Government to focus on creating jobs, developing infrastructure and boosting economic activity across our cities and their regions.
That approach is supported by other key Scottish Government policies such as our commitments on affordable housing and housing supply, our social wage commitments and a public sector pay policy that focuses resources on the lower paid.
I welcome those priorities. The cabinet secretary will recognise that a generation ago, the unique needs of the oil-producing region around Aberdeen attracted unique solutions—particularly with regard to affordable housing for incoming workers. Given the challenge that is there again today, will she take a lead in Government in seeking to join up the initiatives that have been taken by different public sector employers in the city region, whether that be by recruitment and retention pay supplements, by additional support for housing or by other means?
Lewis Macdonald makes a fair suggestion. I am more than happy—either through the cities alliance or in whatever other way might be appropriate—to consider how we can ensure that the work that he acknowledges is being done across the public sector is properly co-ordinated so that we provide solutions that are fit for purpose, given the circumstances that he outlines in Aberdeen.
As Lewis Macdonald will be aware, how we allocate resources for affordable housing takes account of need in different areas. The member referred to the flexibilities within our pay policy and to the recruitment and retention premiums that can be paid by national health service employers when a case can be made. He is right to acknowledge the work that is being done, but in the interests of trying to build consensus I am more than happy to give him an undertaking that I will consider what can be done to ensure that there is a fully joined-up approach to the issue. I am happy to liaise with him further once I have had the opportunity to give the issue that consideration.
As others have alluded to, the high cost of living is often due to a lack of affordable housing. How important does the cabinet secretary think it is for Aberdeen City Council, public bodies and the private sector to release land and work together to increase the amount of affordable housing in the north-east?
Maureen Watt is absolutely correct to raise that important issue. She has raised the issue of the cost of living in Aberdeen previously with ministers and has had discussions about it with John Swinney.
Land availability is obviously an important element of strategic local programme deliverability and we would expect to see an adequate supply of land. In Aberdeen, that combines land that is owned by registered social landlords and significant other sites that are zoned for housing in the current development plan, which have a planning obligation for affordable housing.
Maureen Watt’s point is an important one and I am happy to factor it into the consideration that I have just undertaken to give to the issue in response to Lewis Macdonald.
Flooding (Impacts on Infrastructure)
To ask the Scottish Government what discussions the Cabinet Secretary for Infrastructure, Investment and Cities has had with the Minister for Environment and Climate Change regarding the long-term impact of flooding on the infrastructure. (S4O-03179)
I am in regular dialogue with my ministerial colleagues on a wide range of issues of mutual interest.
I thank the cabinet secretary for that response to a convoluted question that rather makes the point that flooding is no respecter of persons or portfolios. My rural constituents of course see flooding as affecting their homes, the farmlands, the roads and the drains. Can the cabinet secretary assure me that the Scottish Government will have a good look at how these things are funded across the country—in particular, of course, in my constituency—to make sure that the funds are available to deal with all those problems?
As Nigel Don will appreciate, those issues are matters of enormous priority to the Government generally and to Paul Wheelhouse in particular.
The national flood risk assessment takes into account the impact of flooding on property infrastructure and agricultural land. It forms the basis of our current work to produce our first-ever flood risk strategies, which are intended to help inform decisions around the prioritisation of flood risk actions as well as supporting decisions that are made by local authorities and community groups.
That work has fed into the cross-Government work to deliver our first statutory climate change adaptation programme, which responds to a wide range of potential climate change impacts, including flooding. Through that work, individual parts of the Scottish Government are working to ensure that their own policy areas are recognising and adapting to those pressures. I hope that that gives Nigel Don assurance that this is something that very much feeds into every part of the Scottish Government’s work.
I agree with the sentiment of Nigel Don’s question. Can the cabinet secretary clarify the balance of funding that will be available between large-scale investments of the kind that Nigel Don has described and smaller-scale needs in his constituency and my own in relation to both flooding and coastal protection?
If it is acceptable to Tavish Scott, I would be happy to write to him with more detail on that, because the general question will be impacted by the specific demands for funding that he has in mind. I will consult colleagues—in particular, Paul Wheelhouse—and come back to Tavish Scott as quickly as possible with the detail that he is looking for.
What discussions has the cabinet secretary had with colleagues to ensure that the appropriate cleaning of gullies, burns and culverts is taking place to prevent flooding on roads such as the A85 near Lochawe village, which constantly floods in heavy rains?
I assure Jamie McGrigor that those discussions take place on an on-going basis. The transport minister has had some specific discussions about the issues affecting roads that Mr McGrigor has raised. All the specific risk factors for flooding are central to the overall work that we do on flooding, and I would be more than happy—either personally or through the appropriate minister—to provide further details to any members with particular local issues.
Prestwick Airport
To ask the Scottish Government what its plans are for Prestwick airport. (S4O-03180)
Our overall aim, as I have advised Parliament previously, is to return the airport to profitability as soon as possible. We will shortly receive a report from our senior advisor, who was appointed—as members will recall—for a period of three months, to inform us about the longer-term options for future business development and management of Prestwick airport. Once that report has been received, I hope to be in a position to provide a full update to the Infrastructure and Capital Investment Committee next month.
The three-month period technically expired yesterday, so what is the new timescale for monitoring progress and reporting to Parliament? In her evidence to the committee on 19 March, the Deputy First Minister mentioned the potential for increased passenger and freight use of Prestwick. What steps has the Scottish Government been taking to investigate whether that is a realisable objective?
I believe that there is a consensus in Parliament that the Government is right to be taking the action that it is taking to secure the future of Prestwick airport, and I am sure that Annabel Goldie will appreciate that the current management team has continued to engage appropriately with any interested party, to seek to bring new business to Prestwick and to explore opportunities for new business. However, we specifically asked the consultant to prepare an in-depth report for us.
As I said, he had three months in which to prepare that report; Annabel Goldie is right to say that that period has now expired, so I expect to take delivery of the report and to have time to consider it properly very soon. I will give the Infrastructure and Capital Investment Committee—and, as appropriate, the whole Parliament—a full update on where we intend to go with plans for Prestwick, both as regards the governance and management of the airport and as regards expanding its business opportunities as quickly as is reasonably practicable.
I know that all members will appreciate that it is vital that we take time to consider the best short-term, medium-term and long-term options for the airport so that we can reach the best possible position from which to deliver our objective of returning the airport to profitability as soon as possible. I will share those plans as fully as possible with Parliament as soon as I am in a position to do so.
Can the cabinet secretary confirm that Prestwick airport will, in its initial recovery phase, focus in the short term first on its capabilities as a maintenance, repair and overhaul airport, supported by the great engineering skills that are based on the airport perimeter and on the aero engineering training at Ayrshire colleges, and secondly on its ability to handle and promote wide-bodied air-freight transport for cargo exports?
Chic Brodie is right to point to Prestwick airport’s strengths; the MRO facility is one of the assets that are available to the airport.
To follow my answer to Annabel Goldie, I say that returning the airport to profitability will require improvements right across the business of the airport. That will include developing new passenger and freight services, as well as increasing the revenue from retail outlets and seeking to maximise the property portfolio of the airport.
Where we seek to strike the balance between those different objectives will depend on the views and recommendations that are made to us in the consultant’s report. Once I have that report and have had the opportunity to consider it properly, I will be in a position to share more fully with Parliament what we see as being the particular interventions that we need to make with Prestwick in the short, medium and long terms to get it back to profitability as quickly as possible.
Is the level of monthly losses at Prestwick increasing? How does the Government intend to recover those losses and previous investment by the public purse?
I provide regular updates on the airport’s financial position—in particular, on the investment in it that the Government is making. I last did that when I last appeared before the Infrastructure and Capital Investment Committee.
James Kelly will recall that the principle upon which we acquired the airport is the principle of ensuring a return on taxpayer investment. That is required in order to make our acquisition of and intervention in the airport compliant with European Union state-aid regulations. That is the overriding objective. I have been, and will continue to be, up front about the fact that the airport will require investment if we are to achieve our longer-term objectives. Whatever we invest is designed to ensure a long-term return for the taxpayer. We will continue to report to Parliament as appropriate on the progress that we are making.
Scottish Water (Renewable Energy Generation)
To ask the Scottish Government what plans Scottish Water has to promote the use of its assets for the generation of renewable energy. (S4O-03181)
Scottish Water already produces about 7 per cent of the energy that it consumes through hydro, wind and solar generation schemes on its assets. Scottish Water will continue to seek opportunities to invest directly or to work in partnership with others to increase renewable energy generation, when it is cost effective to do so.
Scottish Water is a successful publicly-owned business that has huge potential for renewable energy generation. Under its new 2015 to 2021 business plan that it has just published, it will invest £11.2 million in hydro, wind and solar schemes to increase its renewables output to 75 gigawatt hours per year. The Scottish Government consultation on a hydro nation stated that Scottish Water had the potential to generate in excess of 1,000 gigawatt hours per year. Is that a lack of ambition? What more could Scottish Water do with its new powers under the Water Resources (Scotland) Act 2013? What is holding it back?
I do not think it is a lack of ambition. What Alison Johnstone has just outlined has to be seen in the context of what Scottish Water exists to do and what its investment priorities will be during the next six years. In that period, Scottish Water will be required to invest £3.6 billion in our water and sewerage assets in order to deliver improved services. That investment implies growth in its need for energy because energy is needed to operate the installations that it will build.
Within its wholesale business, Scottish Water proposes to offset that higher energy demand with energy efficiency measures and the renewable energy that it generates from its assets. For example, as Alison Johnstone has indicated, it can use hydro power.
As I said in my original answer, Scottish Water has an annual energy requirement of 450 gigawatts and it generates approximately 7 per cent of the energy it consumes. However, through innovative use of its assets including treatment works, pipes, catchments, and pipelines, it is capable of significantly increasing that proportion and is working to do so. A further 350 gigawatts is generated at Whitelee wind farm through landlord arrangements and, by 2018, Scottish Water expects to generate more than 1,000 gigawatts through its own investments in renewable energy and landlord arrangements.
All that represents significant ambition. It recognises the obligations that are on Scottish Water to be energy efficient and to reduce its carbon footprint as much as possible.
Public-private Partnerships/Private Finance Initiative Projects
To ask the Scottish Government what estimate it has made of how much would have been saved if the PPP/PFI projects that were carried out during the previous Administration had been funded through the non-profit distributing model. (S4O-03182)
The rates that are applicable to any project reflect the market conditions when the actual contract is signed, so it is not possible to assess exactly what savings might have been made.
The NPD model ensures that private sector returns are capped and that there is no dividend-bearing equity, which avoids the excessive returns and poor taxpayer value for money that were associated with past private finance initiative projects. NPD also enhances stakeholder involvement and ensures that any surpluses can be directed in favour of the public sector.
In North Ayrshire, annual PFI payments will increase from £11.1 million in 2007 to £16.1 million in 2037, meaning that ultimately, £400 million will be paid over 30 years for schools with a capital cost of only £81 million. Does the cabinet secretary agree that the profligacy of Labour and the Lib Dems means that local authorities are stuck paying increased PFI charges year on year and that rising payments are limiting North Ayrshire’s ability to invest in jobs and services?
Yes, I agree. The fact of the matter is that the PFI approach that was used in the past has not delivered best value for the taxpayer. I assure Kenny Gibson that the mistakes that were made with earlier PFI contracts will not be repeated. It is vital that the NPD programme deliver value for taxpayers’ money, and this Government intends to ensure that it does.
Culture and External Affairs
British Embassies (Support for Events)
To ask the Scottish Government what assistance it receives from British embassies to help promote major events such as homecoming Scotland 2014. (S4O-03186)
The Scottish Government is aware that embassies and consulates have provided assistance by promoting information about homecoming Scotland 2014 through their network of media and promotional contacts. More specifically, with the assistance of the consulates in Milan and Hamburg, VisitScotland organised and delivered media and trade events in those key cities to launch homecoming Scotland.
The Foreign and Commonwealth Office network announced the launch of Scotland’s 2013-14 winter festival campaign. St Andrew’s day toolkits were sent to 11 of its 270 offices—in Toronto, Chicago, Boston, Virginia, Maryland, Massachusetts, New York city, Washington DC, New York state, Brussels and Queensland—to support their celebrations.
Does the cabinet secretary agree that having Scottish embassies around the world will allow Scotland to be promoted 365 days a year, which will result in far greater awareness of what our country has to offer, which in turn will lead to greater opportunities for Scottish businesses throughout the world?
Yes, I do. I have put on record my appreciation of the support that the embassies provide under their current responsibilities. However, a Scottish embassy will have five core functions: commercial, to maximise commercial benefits for Scottish businesses; governmental, to ensure effective engagement with Governments and other public institutions; cultural, to promote Scottish culture internationally; development, to ensure Scotland’s international development priorities and commitments are met; and of course consular support. As Gil Paterson has set out, with an independent Scotland, Scottish embassies will be promoting Scottish interests every day of every year.
Malawi (Support for Health-related Programmes)
To ask the Scottish Government what health-related programmes it is supporting in Malawi. (S4O-03187)
The Scottish Government’s international development fund for Malawi supports 16 health-related projects worth a total of more than £5 million: six health projects in funding round 2012-2015 and a further 10 projects in funding round 2013-2016. Those include a mobile clinic, medical training and projects addressing health awareness, mental health, meningitis awareness, cancer treatment and community needs in maternal health. Further details of all our projects are on the Scottish Government website.
I am particularly interested in two aspects. One of those is midwifery, but I want to ask about the mental health side. I should declare my fellowship of the Royal College of Psychiatrists. The college has a charity that supports training of psychiatrists in Malawi, where there is a serious—indeed, dire—shortage. Has the Government considered the possibility of incentivising donations from charity? That leverage system seems to produce more funding.
I put on record my acknowledgement of the work that Richard Simpson has done on this issue. He has addressed the issue of midwifery in the past and has raised awareness of issues around malaria.
We incentivise donations through some of our grant funding rounds, and we welcome match funding, for example in relation to the small grants scheme that we launched last September. We will continue to do that.
If there is a specific project that is looking into the matter, I will provide more details for Richard Simpson. However, as I said, such donations are incentivised, and match funding is welcome. Having done fundraising for non-governmental organisations in the past, I agree with him that it is certainly an easier way to get money out of donors.
Independence (Naval Vessels)
To ask the Scottish Government how many naval vessels it considers would be required to enforce a ban on European Union fishing fleets in Scottish waters if proposals for an independent Scotland’s membership of the European Union were not accepted. (S4O-03188)
An independent Scotland would continue EU membership and, as such, we would expect mutual access to fishing opportunities to continue.
I thank the cabinet secretary for her answer. I do not know what question she was answering, but it was not the one that I asked.
If the First Minister is going to go to Bruges and threaten to use gunboat diplomacy if his negotiation skills fail, is it not a good idea to know the size of the fleet that would be required to enforce a ban? Is that really the way that we want to look forward to the discussions we would have with the EU if Scotland ever became independent?
The First Minister did no such thing, and the member’s supplementary question shows that he does not understand the difference between access to fishing opportunities in waters and access to navigation through waters.
It is just as well that the member is not the fisheries spokesperson for his party, because it is clear that he does not understand the current situation. Marine Scotland is currently responsible for fishery and marine protection in Scottish waters. It routinely monitors the activities of all non-Scottish vessels that are in our waters, using three offshore patrol vessels, two long-range aircrafts and satellite information that reports the position of vessels every two hours.
Of course, Mr McMahon’s question highlights the current conventional capability gaps that have been created as a result of Westminster Government cuts. For example, there are no major surface vessels based in Scotland and no maritime patrol aircraft. That is an extraordinary and unacceptable gap, which has resulted in ships being dispatched from the south of England to the Moray Firth in response to Russian naval activity. That current gap also means that the United Kingdom has to rely on NATO allies to help to cover routine maritime patrol duties, a responsibility that an independent Scotland will take more seriously.
Perhaps Mr McMahon might want to do his research before coming to the chamber.
The reply from the cabinet secretary indicates an interesting scenario. Can she confirm where, in the situation that is outlined in the question, those vessels would come from, given that there would no longer be Royal Navy support from the rest of the United Kingdom? Would we rent the vessels? Would we buy the vessels? What plan has she in mind?
I am sorry to have to repeat my point, but the Royal Navy currently does not provide support in terms of maritime fishery protection.
The main point is that we must consider the situation that we would find ourselves in. We agree with Sir David Edward that it would be absolutely absurd to have a situation in which Scotland would somehow not be a member of the EU in the 18-month period after a yes vote. We also accept that position of Professor James Crawford, who was paid by the UK Government to provide legal advice, that the 18-month estimate for negotiating membership is a realistic one.
I think that people should be aware of the maritime fisheries protection that currently takes place through Marine Scotland, which is part of the Scottish Government, and they should also recognise the commonsense position that has been set out consistently by this Government.
Independence (European Union Membership)
To ask the Scottish Government what its position is on the recent remarks by the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs regarding an independent Scotland’s entry into the European Union. (S4O-03189)
The Scottish Government rejects in its entirety the position set out by Mr Hague in his letter to the First Minister of 27 April. The First Minister has responded, and he has made clear in his reply that those comments show a complete lack of engagement by the UK Government on all of the issues—most specifically its continued refusal to present the Commission with a precise legal scenario on membership of an independent Scotland.
The biggest risk to Scotland’s membership of the EU lies not in Scottish independence but in the possibility of a UK in/out referendum on EU membership.
Does the cabinet secretary agree that Mr Hague’s claims that the UK has a proven track record on delivering for Scottish interests in the EU are at odds with Owen Paterson’s recent reported breach on an agreement to make clear to European ministers Scotland’s opposition to genetically modified crops? Does she further agree with me and the Electoral Reform Society’s recent report “Close the Gap: Tackling Europe’s democratic deficit” that the EU should improve the involvement of devolved Parliaments and regional representatives, especially when the member state representatives cannot be relied upon to represent their interests adequately?
I understand that the issue recently came to light in a committee appearance by Mr Paterson. He had agreed to raise at the March environment council the need for any EU agreement allowing member states to make their own decisions about growing GM crops to permit Scotland to make its own decisions and not be bound by the UK Government views. However, I understand that he failed to do so.
Currently, there is no facility for committees of the Scottish Parliament to hold UK ministers to account for the position that the UK adopts at the Council of Ministers. The Scottish ministers do not have the right to participate in Council meetings to represent the Scottish interest. Only as an independent member state can Scotland’s voice be heard at Council.
International Development Expenditure
To ask the Scottish Government whether, in deciding its international development expenditure, it takes into account how developing countries balance meeting the needs and interests of business with those of people living in poverty. (S4O-03190)
Yes. All our international development expenditure is focused on helping people who live in poverty in developing countries, in line with the millennium development goals and the development plans of our priority countries. As part of that, we seek to work alongside both the private sector and civil society to help foster a global partnership for development, which is MDG 8.
A recent Scottish Catholic International Aid Fund event that I co-hosted provided an opportunity to meet SCIAF and its partners from Columbia and hear at first hand about the impact of big business on that country’s Afro-Colombian and indigenous communities. We heard that rich landowners, armed groups and multinational companies—including companies that are registered in the United Kingdom and Scotland—are now forcing people off their land so that it can be used for mining, banana plantations, cattle ranching and drug trafficking.
Does the minister agree with SCIAF, which believes that Scotland can and should play its part in promoting ethical and responsible business practices? How will the Scottish Government take a proactive role in promoting human rights and responsible behaviour from Scottish businesses?
Yes, I agree with SCIAF and with what Siobhan McMahon said. I did not get to meet the Colombian delegation this time, but I met them last year when they came round.
There are two ways that we can do what Siobhan McMahon suggests. One is domestically, by promoting that approach through the Procurement Reform (Scotland) Bill. As she knows, we have included in the bill a section about ethically and fairly traded goods. That shows what we can do in domestic legislation. We are also working alongside the Scottish Human Rights Commission, which has developed its action plan on human rights, part of which includes determining how we can incorporate what are known as the Ruggie principles, which are the United Nations guiding principles on business and human rights.
We can do what is suggested domestically, through legislation, and we can do it through the national action plan. I am happy to provide Siobhan McMahon with more details if she requires them.
European Union Membership
To ask the Scottish Government whether it has received advice from the European Commission that, if Scotland separates from the United Kingdom, it would need to apply to the EU as a new member state. (S4O-03191)
We have received no advice from the Commission to that effect. Indeed, the Commission has made it clear that it will not issue an opinion until it is presented with a “precise scenario” from the UK Government. I would welcome that, but the UK Government has repeatedly refused to make a joint approach to the Commission with the precise legal scenario on Scottish independence.
The Scottish Government proposes that an independent Scotland negotiate from within the EU, via an amendment under article 48 of the Treaty on European Union, on the terms to be agreed with other member states, as outlined on page 221 of “Scotland’s Future: Your Guide to an Independent Scotland”.
The Scottish Government recognises that it will be for the EU member states, meeting under the auspices of the Council of Ministers, to take forward the most appropriate procedure under which an independent Scotland will become a signatory to the EU treaties at the point at which it becomes independent, taking into account Scotland’s status as an EU jurisdiction of 40 years’ standing.
The cabinet secretary may wish to read the letter written by Viviane Reding, the vice president of the Commission, to the European and External Relations Committee. It states:
“Under Article 49 of the Treaty … any European state which respects the principles … of the … European Union may apply to become a member of the EU.”
However, it also says:
“a new independent region would, by the fact of its independence, become a third country with respect to the Union and the Treaties would, from the day of its independence, not apply anymore on its territory.”
Does the cabinet secretary agree with Viviane Reding?
I discussed Viviane Reding’s letter with the European and External Relations Committee. Her opinion does not concern the particular circumstances of Scotland, as she was talking about the conventional route for enlargement under article 49. As I have just set out, the Scottish Government’s proposal is via article 48. Moreover, Mr Henry might be interested in correspondence that I placed in the Scottish Parliament information centre in April, after a recent request for information to the Council of the European Union and the European Commission. On 1 April 2014, we received responses from Dr Marianne Klingbeil, who is the deputy secretary general of the Commission, and Jakob Thomsen, who is from the general secretariat of the Council, both stating that neither institution holds an analysis on Scotland’s membership of the EU under articles 48 or 49. I refer the member to those letters, which were placed in SPICe on 22 April.
International Development Programme (Support for Youth Volunteering)
To ask the Scottish Government how its international development programme supports young people wanting to carry out voluntary work overseas. (S4O-03192)
The Scottish Government has committed £9 million per year to its international development fund. Although the fund does not offer direct financial support to young people who want to carry out voluntary work overseas, we provide funding to the Network of International Development Organisations in Scotland and the Scotland Malawi Partnership. The member will be aware of those organisations, which provide information to young people about volunteering opportunities. On 31 March 2014, the Scotland Malawi Partnership hosted a youth congress, which I attended along with 200 young people from across Scotland. The event included information stalls and exhibitions on volunteering in Malawi.
The minister will be aware that the Department for International Development in East Kilbride funds a successful programme for young people to volunteer abroad—the international citizens service—and that approximately 600 people work in the East Kilbride DFID office. Will the minister confirm that such programmes will remain open to Scottish young people if Scotland separates from the rest of the UK and that the 600 people who are employed in the administration of schemes to improve some of the world’s most deprived areas can be assured that their jobs will be safe in an independent Scotland?
Yes. When I was at the European and External Relations Committee, I made the point—I have made it various times since then—that the Government has promised continuity of employment for those who are employed in DFID and in other reserved functions here in Scotland.
I find it poor when UK Government ministers use that issue, particularly when they come up to lecture Scotland about not going independent. I know that Margaret Mitchell is not doing that, but I was quite upset by some of the comments of her colleagues Alan Duncan and Justine Greening, in using the poorest people in the world as a political football in the debate. We should be very much above that.
Scotland will have a great contribution to make. Historically, we have made a great contribution to tackling global poverty, so let us continue to do that. As an independent country, we will of course work with DFID, the United States Agency for International Development and anybody from across the world who wants to fight global poverty.
Poland (Visit)
To ask the Scottish Government when it next plans to visit Poland. (S4O-03193)
I have no immediate plans to visit Poland, but I have just returned from a two-day visit to Krakow and Warsaw, which provided great opportunities to deepen diplomatic relations, promote cultural co-operation and develop business links.
Does the cabinet secretary agree that the 160,000 people from other EU states—including myself and those from Poland—who have chosen to live and work in Scotland are making a massive contribution to Scotland’s economy and culture, and that only a yes vote in September will ensure that we keep our status as EU residents, with the extra democratic benefit of the right to vote in every election in an independent Scotland?
Last week, I visited the Polish club in Edinburgh. I recognise the critical contribution that the more than 60,000 Poles living in Scotland make to our economy. As the member says, there are 160,000 people here from other EU states. It is important that we state that those workers, who work hard and contribute to our society, are most welcome here and that we expect that welcome to continue as Scotland remains in the EU.