Prime Minister (Meetings)
To ask the First Minister when he next plans to meet the Prime Minister and what issues he intends to raise. (S2F-487)
I wish the leader of the Opposition, the Presiding Officer and all other members a very happy new year. I have no formal meetings with the Prime Minister planned for this month.
I reciprocate the First Minister's good wishes at new year. I welcome his new year message, in which he said:
So far I have received considerable assistance. Just yesterday, officials from my office were in London discussing with the Home Office some of the details of the proposals that we will bring before the Parliament before the Easter recess.
I will add an issue for the First Minister's officials to reflect on and to take to the Home Office when they next meet its officials. I refer to the case of a Russian woman who wanted to come to Scotland to study English for 10 weeks. Her case was refused by the Home Office and this was one of the reasons:
If Mr Swinney passes me the correspondence, I will be happy to raise the matter with the Home Secretary.
I am grateful that the First Minister is prepared to consider the correspondence, which is a refusal form from the Home Office under the Immigration Act 1971 and the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999. However, on the point of principle, will the First Minister today say that such an attitude of institutional discrimination in the Home Office is unhelpful to his objective of bringing more people to live and work in Scotland in the 21st century? Will he condemn such an attitude today?
If Mr Swinney is ever in a position of responsibility, he will know that it would be unwise to comment on any correspondence on the basis of such information as he has given.
The First Minister knows that we absolutely support his objective of bringing people to Scotland, but the problem is that the Home Office acts as a brake on his objective—I hope that similar unity will be shown in the chamber about that. Does he recognise that the Home Office puts obstacles in the way and that he must do something about that?
The Home Office has greatly encouraged the strategy that we have outlined. David Blunkett in particular has been extremely helpful and committed in respect of our desire to move forward on that issue in Scotland, with specific proposals that will help our campaign for fresh talent.
Cabinet (Meetings)
To ask the First Minister what issues will be discussed—in their totality—at the next meeting of the Scottish Executive's Cabinet. (S2F-493)
The next meeting of the Cabinet will discuss our progress towards implementing the partnership agreement to build a better Scotland—in its totality.
I hope that, having discussed such matters in their totality, the First Minister will take the opportunity to explain to the Cabinet why he chose to launch a personal attack on Douglas Keil, who is the highly respected general secretary of the Scottish Police Federation. To say, as the First Minister did, that
I want to be clear. In advance of the Parliament's second session and the election last May and in all the local discussions that I have had in different corners of Scotland in the past few months on antisocial behaviour and crime, I have not met a police constable anywhere in Scotland who does not support further powers to help to disperse groups of youngsters who are causing trouble in communities. The coalition partnership has recognised the importance of taking on board the views of those who submit their comments in consultation and it amended the proposals that were in the original consultation paper before the Antisocial Behaviour etc (Scotland) Bill was introduced to the Parliament in October.
The trouble with the First Minister and the Scottish Executive is that they believe that window-dressing and passing more laws are more important than enforcing the laws that we have at present and giving the police the resources to do so. We have still to hear a word of apology from the First Minister for his disgraceful insult. He and his colleagues keep talking about having genuine debates. They pride themselves on the number of consultations that they conduct yet anyone who raises a voice in opposition is subjected to vitriolic personal abuse. That is no way for an Executive to behave.
Never was a Tory party leader so out of touch with his own voters. There will be people who voted Tory last May thinking that they were voting for a party that was tough on crime who will now know an awful lot better.
The First Minister has just demonstrated his appalling ignorance of the law of Scotland. Has he never heard of breach of the peace, disorderly conduct or causing an affray? If there are 150 young people standing outside someone's door in Mrs Lamont's constituency, as he suggested, Strathclyde police already have more than enough powers to disperse the crowd, arrest the troublemakers and see that they are suitably prosecuted for their offences. That is the view of the Scottish Police Federation and the chief constables of Scotland. Who knows best: the people who are dealing with the problem on the front line or the First Minister, who is grandstanding?
I refer Mr McLetchie to a high-profile visit that I undertook in Livingston in September to launch our review of off-licensing provisions. In front of television cameras, I met the local community police constables and the first thing that they raised with me was the need to have more powers to disperse groups of young people—that is on camera and on the record. Individual police officers across Scotland cannot turn up at parliamentary committees and make representations, nor can they speak out in the media, but I know what they say to us privately and I believe that Mr McLetchie knows that as well. He might want to score a political point here today, but I do not believe that the voters whom he represents or the position that he has—until now—advocated in the chamber support his opposition to this fundamental proposal, which was, quite rightly, amended by us following representations that were made over the summer months.
There is one open question, from Fiona Hyslop.
Will the Cabinet reflect on the recent earthquake in Iran? I am sure that the chamber would wish to send its condolences on the devastation and loss of life there. Is the First Minister aware that the Iranian Government has asked the United Nations to set up a flash appeal? I understand that it will be launched in Tehran today. What support has the Executive already offered, or what support does it intend to offer, to the people of Iran at this time?
On the day of the Iranian earthquake, I was immensely proud that the first people from the United Kingdom who were on the move to go and help were, I think, from Grangemouth, and certainly from Scotland. They were proud to be encouraging others to do the same thing. Scots have a tremendous record, right throughout history, of helping in such circumstances, and Scots moved quickly again in this situation. If we can provide any assistance that we are required to, to encourage other public bodies to provide assistance at this time, then clearly everyone would want us to do that.
Fertility (Environmental Factors)
I return the compliments of the season to the First Minister.
A number of plausible lifestyle and environmental factors have been suggested, but so far the studies do not identify the cause or causes of this apparent trend. The Scottish Executive, the Medical Research Council and other bodies are currently looking into the wider issues of infertility and will consider any findings with interest.
I thank the First Minister for that partial answer. Does he agree that the opinion that next year's review of European Union legislation and proposals to strengthen that legislation will decimate the United Kingdom chemicals industry has been exposed as self-interested scaremongering? Does he agree that Scotland, which has a lead in biological, chemical and medical research, should be leading the research in this area? Will he commit the Executive to making a serious contribution to the UK consultation on forthcoming EU legislation on toxic chemicals, to ensure that such chemicals are phased out as soon as possible?
We have been contributing already to the UK input to the preparation of the new European provisions. With the UK Government, we plan to have a very full and wide UK consultation—which clearly will involve us here in Scotland—when the European proposals are published later this year. We are very conscious of the importance of this issue; of the continuing importance of research to ensure that we are dealing with facts rather than speculation from any side; and of the critical importance of ensuring that, where hazardous, dangerous, toxic or, indeed, simply damaging chemicals or other substances may be causing difficulties in our society, we will find new ways to tackle them—both at European level and at Scottish level. We continue to have a very strong interest in the subject.
I welcome the First Minister's commitment to full and proper consultation on this matter. The First Minister may be aware that I and others took part in blood testing for toxic chemicals last year. In the light of public health concerns, would he support a much wider programme of public information and research to test for toxins in our blood, so that we can get more accurate information on the long-term and cumulative impact of chemicals in our blood? In his discussions with the UK Government, will he commit to pushing the precautionary principle so that, when the new European legislation on chemicals comes in, we will have proper and effective regulations that will protect public health and our environment?
As I said, we are making an input into the discussions on the draft regulations. We take a strong view of the fact that we should look after the public interest in these matters. That said, I agree with Sarah Boyack and Robin Harper that further research is required. I encourage the many Scots scientists who can be at the forefront of the research to pursue their research. I am sure that, as a Government, we will want to look at the research that they produce with great care and take it on board in our policy decisions.
Hogmanay Celebrations
To ask the First Minister what assistance the Scottish Executive will provide to ensure that Scotland is the best place in the world to celebrate hogmanay. (S2F-497)
I believe, and I hope that there is no opposition in the chamber to this belief, that Scotland is already the best place in the world to celebrate hogmanay.
Hear, hear.
We provide financial support to city councils through the cities growth fund and some of those resources have indeed been allocated to hogmanay celebrations in Edinburgh and Aberdeen.
I thank the First Minister for his answer and wish him a good new year. Does he agree that Edinburgh's hogmanay celebrations make an enormous contribution to the promotion of Scotland across the globe? I hope that he also agrees that the economic and tourism benefits to Scotland are significant. Will he ensure that the Executive continues to work actively with the City of Edinburgh Council to build on the success of Edinburgh's hogmanay?
I congratulate the City of Edinburgh Council and its partners on their identification over a number of years of Edinburgh as one of the main locations in the world for a successful hogmanay celebration. The effect of that long-term success was noticeable in the reaction of visitors from other countries who were interviewed on television after the events of last Wednesday night. If I remember accurately, each of them said that, regardless of what happened this year, they would be back again next year. We look forward to enjoying Edinburgh's hogmanay in future years. We should build on that success.
It was disappointing for all of us in Edinburgh to see the cancellation of the hogmanay celebrations last week. I was only glad that the weather cleared up in time for me to do a loony dook at South Queensferry on new year's day. What is the Executive doing to support all the different organisations that are involved in developing hogmanay celebrations on an on-going basis? Those events generate an awful lot of money for commercial operations such as hotels. However, although we are seeing money being generated in Edinburgh, we are not seeing the investment that is needed in the Ross bandstand and other infrastructure projects. What can the Executive do to assist Edinburgh and other cities that get involved in hogmanay celebrations? How can some of the money that is generated by those events be recycled into our infrastructure?
Clearly, the cities growth fund is a major factor in the development of that sort of infrastructure. In some cities, the funding is allocated to transport—to roads projects and other schemes. In many other cities, an allocation has gone toward events such as hogmanay celebrations. The infrastructure that backs up those celebrations can also be used at other times of the year for other festivities. We want to continue with that and ensure that each of our cities can compete internationally and attract visitors from around the globe.
Civil Service (Private Sector Expertise)
To ask the First Minister what benefits will result from his plans regarding the use of private sector expertise in the civil service in Scotland. (S2F-501)
People in Scotland need and deserve the very best public services that are designed and delivered to meet the needs of the people who use them. That is why we place such a high priority on modernising the civil service and securing the benefit of external expertise. We have announced today the appointment of Nick Parker, a former senior partner with PricewaterhouseCoopers, who is to head our performance and innovation unit. He will play a key role in improving the delivery of services throughout the public sector.
That announcement is very welcome. I am sure that the First Minister agrees that by working together, the public and private sectors can feed into and learn a great deal from each other, but both sectors are reticent about getting together. Will he assure me that he will use every means at his disposal to ensure a meeting of minds and to roll out this welcome programme further?
In my experience, the programme of change that is well under way in the civil service and in wider public services has the enthusiastic support of civil servants and of public servants more generally. We need to work closely in partnership with the people who work in those services to ensure that the improvements in efficiency, organisation, delivery and performance are followed through. That is done best by working in partnership with the voluntary sector, other parts of the public sector and the private sector to share expertise and good practice and to progress the ultimate focus of all of us, which is the delivery of the best services to patients, parents and pupils, victims of crime, transport passengers and the many others who need our public services.
I welcome the First Minister's intention to modernise the civil service. I hope that one side benefit of that will be real answers to parliamentary questions rather than the Sir Humphrey answers that have become the Executive's habit. Does he agree with his Deputy Minister for Finance and Public Services, Tavish Scott, who wrote in Holyrood magazine in October that the time had come to make the civil service a devolved matter for Scotland and that Scotland should have its own civil service whose loyalty was to the Scottish Parliament and the Executive, rather than ministers in Whitehall?
Mr Scott will confirm that he said that in February, not October. He fully supports the partnership Government's position that we work effectively with the existing civil service arrangements. I will make clear those arrangements to the chamber. It is right that all members of the civil service in Scotland are members of the home civil service for the whole United Kingdom, because that allows interchange and exchange that are helpful for us in the devolved Government. However, all members of the civil service in Scotland who deal with devolved responsibilities report directly to the permanent secretary, who reports to me, not to anybody in London, and I am accountable to the Parliament. The civil service in Scotland is accountable through me to the Parliament and not to anybody in London. That is the right arrangement.
Fishing Communities
To ask the First Minister what steps will be taken to ensure the prosperity of fishing communities following the outcome of the agriculture and fisheries council in Brussels in December 2003. (S2F-490)
The agreement that was reached is a balanced package that is aimed at supporting fishing communities' long-term sustainability. It provides significant increases in haddock and prawn quotas alongside stricter control and enforcement.
Does the First Minister agree that it is unreasonable and unjust that, thanks to the deal that was signed in December, in Scotland's traditional fishing grounds fewer than 40 miles from our coastline, for every one box of haddock that Scots can catch, foreign boats can catch three boxes of haddock? Does he also agree that it is unjust that the new restrictions apply only to Scottish white-fish vessels in the North sea and not to the white-fish fleets from other states that fish the same waters for the same stocks? Does he accept that it is absurd to give the Scottish fleet a larger quota but not the time or space at sea to catch it?
I call the First Minister.
Once the First Minister has—
That is enough, Mr Lochhead.
Will he renegotiate the deal and give us an aid package that will ensure the industry's survival?
That is enough.
As Mr Finnie explained yesterday, the analysis is that sufficient days at sea have been allocated to ensure the take-up of the quota and the catches that have been agreed. I recognise Mr Lochhead's disappointment at the good deal that Ross Finnie secured, because it has given him less to criticise this new year. The reality is that, as he demanded one month ago, we have achieved significant increases in quotas and allowable catches, and that is good news for the Scottish fishing industry. However, those increases come against a backdrop of a challenge to the fishing stocks in the North sea and waters round Scotland. We have a responsibility to meet that challenge as much as anyone else has.
We started late, so I will allow two further questions.
Does the First Minister agree that it is essential that we maintain a momentum for the regional control of fisheries? It is a measure that is supported particularly by conservation-minded fishermen and processors.
Yes, I strongly believe that we have to have more regional management of fisheries within the common fisheries policy. That is a far more sensible approach than pulling out of the CFP and having no influence whatsoever. Regional management of the CFP would be right and, despite all the negative predictions that come from certain parts of the chamber from time to time, I welcome the support that the British Government gave to that approach this week. With the Government's support, I am sure that we can develop the argument with more success in future European discussions.
According to press reports, some of the thousands of Scottish fishermen who have been forced away from the sea are emigrating to places such as the Faeroes and Iceland where there are still thriving fishing industries. Can the First Minister offer any hope that there will not be a further exodus of Scottish fishermen as a result of the Brussels settlement? Does he believe that his new advertising campaign to reverse population drift will do anything to attract back those fishing families who have already been forced to vote with their feet and move elsewhere?
I sincerely hope that the policies that we are pursuing will ensure that, although the fishing communities of Scotland might have a difficult time over the next period, the industry can survive and be sustainable during that period and well into the future. Mr Brocklebank's and the Conservatives' position is that there should be a free-for-all in the North sea. That is the last thing Scottish fishing communities need: Scottish fishing communities need a sustainable future, a balance between the right to catch fish and the right to preserve the stock for the long term. That is our position, which is the right one for Scotland and for our fishing communities.
My apologies to George Lyon, who has been beaten by the bell.
Meeting suspended.
On resuming—
Previous
Youth JusticeNext
Question Time