Plenary, 07 Sep 2005

Meeting date: Wednesday, September 7, 2005

Official Report 683KB pdf

---

Question Time

---

SCOTTISH EXECUTIVE

---

General Questions

Question 1 was not lodged.

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I note from today's Business Bulletin that a number of members have failed to lodge questions for question time. I believe that such action is discourteous to the Parliament and denies other MSPs the opportunity to scrutinise the work of the Scottish Executive and to hold it to account. Will you consider whether it might be appropriate to introduce sanctions against those MSPs who continually fail to lodge questions?

One of the MSPs involved was Mike Watson; I am progressing matters by writing to the other two members concerned.

---

Rural Schools (Presumption Against Closure)

To ask the Scottish Executive whether it will support a presumption against closing rural schools. (S2O-7412)

Any case for a school closure needs to be considered on its individual merits. The local authority concerned must make a clear case, set out openly for parents and the wider community its arguments for closure and be seen to weigh up the advantages and disadvantages of any proposal.

I am not sure that that is an encouraging response. Does the minister accept that a presumption against closure, such as that which exists in England, would protect communities such as those in Angus, where the Scottish National Party-run council is threatening to close a number of small, rural primaries, despite vigorous opposition from parents' groups?

With respect, I think that Mr Fraser misleads people about the position in England. The circular in England makes it clear that the presumption against closure does not mean that rural schools should not close. It would be highly misleading to suggest to people that difficult circumstances do not arise in Scotland in which it is sometimes necessary for small schools to close, just as schools in urban communities with larger populations sometimes have to close.

In our guidance, we have tried to set out what is important and have made clear our position to local authorities. I am prepared to reinforce that message and, in fact, tomorrow—I think—I will meet the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities to discuss such matters, among other things. We will make it clear that we expect any council to set out its case clearly, to justify it to the local community, to engage in proper consultation and to be seen to weigh up the arguments properly, openly and transparently. That is the right way to proceed. We cannot impose a blanket policy to cover all schools, as all schools are different.

It is disingenuous for the Tories to raise the matter. When David Mundell was still a member of the Parliament a few months ago, he promised that the Tories would not support school closures in the south of Scotland, but what are the Tories doing in the south of Scotland? They are producing proposals for school closures. Rather than listen to what the Tories say, we should watch what they do.

The minister might care to enlighten Murdo Fraser about the Tory councillor on Moray Council who voted against the presumption against closure at the council's recent meeting, at which Labour and Liberal Democrat members supported the SNP's position.

I want to pick up the minister's point about a blanket policy. The problem for rural communities is that the Executive has imposed blanket school estate management requirements. Although the guidelines have been revised, they still do not connect with education and rural development policy. I invite him to reflect on the hurt, anguish and concern that are being experienced by the many communities that face a rolling programme of threats to schools. Perhaps the school estate management programme that is being pursued nationally should be married with the important desire of communities to protect the quality of education that small schools provide, as well as the rural development benefits that they bring.

I take such matters seriously. We must all acknowledge that the population of young people in Scotland is declining dramatically. In some communities, the rate of decline is staggering. At the same time, we are having to invest large sums of money to make up for the Tories' huge neglect of our school estate. The combination of those two factors means that, locally and nationally, we all have an obligation to think about the implications of the long-term planning of our school estate. That important process must be gone through. In that context, no one should go down the road of school closures in a frivolous or light-hearted manner. The issue is serious, which is why our guidance sets out how serious it is and how people need to deal with it.

I say to Fiona Hyslop what I said to the Tories. Like Tory councils, SNP councils are involved in making proposals for school closures. That is a necessary part of the work of all our local authorities, regardless of their political complexion. It is not right to imply that we can stop all school closures, given the extent of the change that is taking place in our society. What is important is that we consider each case on its merits and that any case for closure should be extremely strong and justifiable.

I invite the minister to remind Murdo Fraser that my excellent local primary school has just been closed by the Tory council in the Borders. The issue is far too serious for political point scoring. What will the Executive do to take a grip of those local education officials who are hell-bent on herding primary school pupils into distant, centralised schools, regardless of educational or community considerations? I put it to the minister that there is now a powerful case for introducing a presumption against the closure of rural primary schools.

John Home Robertson is right to draw attention to the contradiction in the Tories' position. At the same time as they appear to argue for a presumption against closure, they are closing schools. I have already agreed to meet John Home Robertson who, along with Richard Baker, has expressed concerns about the way in which some local authorities are conducting their affairs. There was a recent case in the north-east in which a council upset—unnecessarily, in my view—a range of communities throughout its area. As it used an informal consultation process, it was not required to take account of our guidance. I want to examine that issue, because we can tighten up how local authorities conduct themselves.

I return to the point that each case must be considered on its merits and must be clearly justified before people take difficult decisions that have a major impact on local communities.

---

School Public-Private Partnership Projects (Renewable Energy)

To ask the Scottish Executive whether school PPP projects can apply for funding for renewable energy schemes under the Scottish community and householder renewables initiative. (S2O-7476)

PPP projects are ineligible for funding under the Scottish community and householder renewables initiative. However, the current review of the scheme, which is due for completion very shortly, will recommend how the installation of renewables technologies in PPP schools might best be supported.

I am getting a sinking feeling. I feel that we have not moved on since the last time that I asked the question or since the times before that. Projects such as that at Breadalbane Academy desperately want to be sustainable, but time has almost run out for them. Will the minister commit to speak to Perth and Kinross Council urgently to find out whether there is any way in which the Executive can help to fund the capital costs of the biomass infrastructure connected with the Breadalbane project and help Perthshire to take the first small step towards creating a new and sustainable renewable energy industry?

There are a number of points to make. First, the facilities in PPP projects and in capital projects generally are a matter for local authorities—they have operative responsibility for such matters. Secondly, the installation of sustainable heating systems should not turn solely on questions of grant. I understand that the report that was commissioned by the council to which the member refers points to long-term running-cost savings from the use of wood fuel, for example. I also understand that the consortia that are bidding for the Perth and Kinross project have no difficulty in principle with the biomass proposal.

The Executive's role is to support and encourage such developments and to consider various ways in which we can make progress with the agenda. For example, we are doing that through the school estate strategy and through publications such as "Sustainability: Building our Future: Scotland's School Estate", which took account of issues that were discussed at a workshop in Glencoe in July last year. The issue has featured in school estate conferences that we have organised. We also fund a sustainable design initiative, which is based at the Lighthouse in Glasgow and which includes the preparation of client education guides for a variety of building types, including schools. The picture is broader than Mark Ruskell suggests. However, I return to the fact that councils have overall liability for the matters that he raises.

Although the measures that the minister has just mentioned are welcome and interesting, they will not close the financial gap that must be closed to ensure that Perth and Kinross Council completes the Breadalbane Academy project. The financial gap exists simply because the proposed heating system is more expensive than other systems. The Government will have missed an opportunity if it continues to preach to us about sustainability and environmental concerns but does not make it possible for practical solutions to be delivered on the ground. As time is running out, I ask him to examine the situation urgently and to ensure that that innovative project goes ahead.

We should not overplay the significance of the impact of what would be a modest amount of grant, given the high value of school PPP projects, which already attract considerable funds from the Executive. I understand that grant funding may not be necessary for the installation of renewable technologies in PPP schools in Perth and Kinross. I return to the point that the matter is for the council to deal with using the facilities that are available. We will consider the matter further when we receive the report of the review to which I referred in my opening answer.

---

Sustainable Development (Planning)

To ask the Scottish Executive how its proposals on the reform of the planning system will contribute to sustainable development. (S2O-7475)

Sustainable development is at the heart of our proposals to modernise the planning system, as our white paper makes clear. A key way of doing that will be to ensure that sustainability considerations are taken into account in the preparation of all plans and programmes, from the national planning framework through to local development plans.

If the term "sustainable development" is to be more than mere jargon, the Executive must understand that achieving sustainable development requires nothing less than a transition in society from business as usual to true sustainability, which means living within our ecological means. Does the minister agree that, at least in the devolved context, the planning system is perhaps the most important tool that we have to facilitate that transition? If so, would it not make sense for the proposed planning bill to set out explicitly that sustainable development is the purpose of the planning system?

The white paper emphasises the central importance of planning for sustainable development and we are considering how that can be translated specifically into words in legislation. However, the substance of the matter is the critical issue. If people read the white paper with any care, they will see that it puts strong emphasis on sustainable development in relation to all development plans, including the national planning framework. A strategic environmental assessment will be carried out for all plans and there will be statutory consultees, including the Scottish Environment Protection Agency and Scottish Natural Heritage. Also, it is proposed that if an environmental impact assessment is required for individual planning applications, pre-application consultation will have to take place with local communities and enhanced scrutiny, including hearings, will be required. That comprehensive package of measures will ensure that sustainable development is at the heart of the planning system.

---

Tourism (Highlands and Islands)

To ask the Scottish Executive what assessment it has made of the impact on tourism in the Highlands and Islands of public service obligations. (S2O-7449)

The Executive has made no specific assessment of the impact of public service obligations on tourism in the Highlands and Islands. However, PSOs are imposed to support regional development, and tourism is a key sector in the economic base of the Highlands and Islands. The Highlands and Islands strategic transport partnership has carried out detailed work to appraise the impact of improved services.

I trust that the minister enjoyed her visit to the most westerly inhabited island in my constituency 10 days ago.

The minister will be aware of the excellent work that is being undertaken on public service obligations on air routes in the Highlands and Islands. Such PSOs would help to make travel affordable for more islanders and the islands more accessible for visitors and tourists. As she knows, I am campaigning for a new air route between Stornoway and Aberdeen. Will she reaffirm the Executive's commitment to the PSO principle in the Highlands and Islands and will she join me in helping to secure a new air link between Aberdeen and Stornoway?

I am happy to confirm the Scottish Executive's commitment to the PSO principle in the Highlands and Islands. I am sure that my colleague Tavish Scott, the Minister for Transport and Telecommunications, and I will be happy to work with Alasdair Morrison to secure the new air link between Aberdeen and Stornoway.

Question 6 was not lodged.

---

National Health Service (Availability Status Codes)

To ask the Scottish Executive what progress the national health service has made on its policy of phasing out availability status codes. (S2O-7443)

Interim guidance on implementing new ways of defining and measuring waiting, which includes the abolition of availability status codes, was issued by the Scottish Executive in March and NHS boards have assured me that they are following the guidance. Boards have also produced outline plans for delivering the target of abolishing ASCs by the end of 2007 and they will shortly agree individual profiles for phasing out ASCs. I will monitor progress on that.

I welcome the commitment that the minister and the health boards have given to phase out status codes. Does he agree that the misrepresentation of what those codes stand for does a great disservice to the people of Scotland, given that we are tackling the longest waiting times and targeting NHS resources at those who need it most?

I agree with Mr McAveety that we are tackling the longest waits effectively and are successfully bringing them down. Of course, those who want to create discord, disharmony, misunderstanding and mistruth about the health service focus on something that they call the hidden waiting list. However, I talked about that hidden waiting list on 15 December, it is available on our website and I talk about it in my regular meetings with journalists to discuss waiting times. There is no such thing as a hidden waiting list in the health service. Nonetheless, in the interests of the patient, we seek to abolish availability status codes, even though 90 per cent of them are driven by the patient and not by the NHS.

Will the minister acknowledge that there are 30,000 people on that waiting list who are yet to have treatment? If the list is so irrelevant, why has he accepted that it should be abolished by the end of 2007? Rather than wait until the end of 2007, why does he not do the right thing and abolish it now?

I am not sure where the member was on 15 December, but I said then that patients who show the service and staff a discourtesy by not turning up for an appointment and who waste the equipment, resources and time that are devoted to their appointment will be zeroed and sent back into the queue. That is an appropriate way of treating such people.

Let us go through the codes. One relates to patients with medical constraints that prevent admission for treatment—in other words, people who have another long-term chronic condition that means that they cannot safely undergo their operation. Does Shona Robison want me to bring forward those operations and endanger the lives of the patients? I think not. Another code relates to patients who have asked to defer admission to hospital, perhaps because that does not suit them socially or personally. That is a legitimate choice to make. I cannot make people have their operations; they have every right to defer an appointment if they think that that is in their interest.

We also have patients who are judged to be of low medical priority. Ms Robison has mentioned the hidden waiting list for children. However, 99 per cent of the children on that list—she calls it hidden, which is untrue in the first place—are waiting for religious circumcisions. I must be honest with the people of Scotland: children who have much greater clinical needs should receive priority and should go first; religious circumcisions, after discussions with parents, can be dealt with appropriately.

I could go on, Presiding Officer, but that would be inappropriate. I am happy to discuss the ASCs—they are not hidden, information on them is widely available and I am happy to talk about why we are getting rid of them.

---

Dental Services (Fife)

To ask the Scottish Executive when it last met NHS Fife to discuss dental services in Fife. (S2O-7465)

Andy Kerr discussed dental services with NHS Fife at its annual review in Glenrothes on 17 August 2005; I discussed dentistry with the national health service board chairs at their regular meeting with ministers on 29 August 2005; and there are regular meetings at official level to discuss the implementation of the action plan for improving oral health and modernising NHS dental services in Scotland.

Will the minister join me in commending NHS Fife for its efforts to establish an access clinic in St Andrews to fill—almost literally—the gap that has been caused by the retirement of a dentist in the town? Will he examine how health boards can expand the services that they provide through salaried dentists and access clinics to include some level of continuing care, not just emergency cover? Will he condemn the decision of many dentists to stop NHS treatment and virtually blackmail vulnerable patients to sign on for private treatment or take out expensive insurance schemes that they cannot afford?

I am aware of the position in St Andrews and I hope that NHS Fife is successful in putting in place those access arrangements. The key thing is that there should be access to continuing care under the NHS wherever possible. For that reason, I share Mr Smith's concern at the actions of those dentists who have withdrawn or reduced the level of services that they provide under the NHS. That is why we have brought forward a range of plans to ensure both that NHS dentists are properly rewarded for their contribution to the NHS and that the funding that we provide is used to reward NHS dentists.

As we started two minutes late, I will allow a final question from Helen Eadie.

Like Iain Smith, I applaud the Executive's efforts to improve dental services. However, will the minister investigate why, of the five constituencies in Fife, the one that has received the most negligible investment in resources is Dunfermline East, which is also the constituency with the highest incidence of heart disease, with which gum disease is very much associated? I would very much welcome any commitment that he could give on that issue.

Our discussions with NHS Fife on those matters will continue. We will certainly take into account both the levels of existing access to NHS services and the wider health and deprivation position of communities that are affected by dentists who withdraw their services from the NHS.