Planning (Falkirk Council)
To ask the Scottish Government when it will approve the Falkirk Council development plan scheme 2014. (S4O-03196)
The “Falkirk Local Development Plan” was submitted to the directorate for planning and environmental appeals on 20 February. On 21 February, reporters from the DPEA were appointed to carry out an examination of unresolved representations to the plan. Following completion of that examination, an examination report will be sent to Falkirk Council. Recommendations contained within the examination report are largely binding on the council. Scottish ministers expect the process from appointment to reporting normally to take around six months and rarely to exceed nine months.
One of the most contentious planning issues in the Falkirk area is the application for unconventional gas extraction, which has resulted in a public local inquiry. I recognise that the minister cannot comment on live applications, but it is clear that the Scottish Government’s commitment in the new Scottish planning policy to introducing buffer zones between unconventional gas developments and communities is very welcome for communities that would be affected. However, can the minister confirm that local authorities will be able to take action retrospectively in respect of buffer zones for applications that have been received during the existing SPP?
Decisions on planning applications and appeals are required to be made in accordance with the development plan, unless material considerations indicate otherwise at the time when the decision is made. The new Scottish planning policy and all other evidence to be submitted are material considerations that will be taken into account when applications and appeals are decided. The reporters from the DPEA who are dealing with the two appeals for coal-bed methane extraction in the Falkirk Council and Stirling Council areas have held inquiry and hearing sessions, and have accompanied site inspections in March and April this year.
The reporters have also decided to take additional evidence from parties, once the new Scottish planning policy is adopted. That is targeted for June. An additional inquiry session will be held for that evidence; the reporters who are dealing with the appeals will therefore take the new Scottish planning policy into account when they make their decisions on those appeals.
Policing (Dumfries and Galloway)
To ask the Scottish Government what impact it considers that Police Scotland has had on policing in Dumfries and Galloway. (S4O-03197)
Thirteen months on from the successful transition to the new policing arrangements, policing in Scotland continues to perform excellently. There are 1,000 more police officers on our streets than in 2007, and confidence in and satisfaction with the police are high.
Dumfries and Galloway now has access to specialist equipment and expertise whenever and wherever it is needed. Those include a human trafficking unit, a national rape investigation unit and an air support unit. There is also increased flexibility for police officers to work in Dumfries and Galloway when needed.
One of the great successes of the then Dumfries and Galloway Constabulary was the impact of community policing, which has resulted in the lowest rates of juvenile crime on record. With the advent of Police Scotland, overtime for working on public holidays has been removed and replaced with an extra nine days’ holiday a year. That has left each policeman and policewoman £1,000 worse off a year. More important perhaps is that it has left the community police service as a whole with a consequential reduction in manpower. How will that reduction of effort in community policing help to keep juvenile crime at its current level? Is this not just a typical example of a one-size-fits-all policy being pursued by Police Scotland in a rural environment where that policy simply does not work?
There are two issues there. First, the change in terms and conditions was negotiated by the Scottish Police Federation with the police senior management team. It was wanted by the Scottish Police Federation and it has been done with the federation’s support and approval. If Mr Fergusson disagrees with that, he can raise it with federation representatives, who are elected by rank-and-file members.
Secondly, policing in the community remains strong because of this Government’s commitment to providing 1,000 additional officers. South of the border, where Mr Fergusson’s party is the lead in the coalition Government, we have seen a drop of 15 per cent in police numbers in Northumbria. Dumfries and Galloway is well served and the SPF welcomes the changes that have taken place.
Commonwealth Games (Rail Services)
To ask the Scottish Government what discussions the Cabinet Secretary for Commonwealth Games, Sports, Equalities and Pensioners’ Rights has had regarding the provision of late night or overnight commuter rail services during the Commonwealth games. (S4O-03198)
I can advise John Wilson that officials from Transport Scotland have worked closely with ScotRail and Network Rail to provide train services that will be scheduled to depart from Glasgow later than ever before during the period of the Commonwealth games. Those will include late-night services connecting to Edinburgh, Perth and Stirling, and to stations in Lanarkshire, Ayrshire, Renfrewshire and Inverclyde. That will help to ensure that spectators can enjoy the sporting and live events that are taking place throughout the city and travel home by train.
Since the Commonwealth games is to be a car-free event, particularly given the proposed road restrictions and closures, how will transport providers get the message out to residents throughout central Scotland that easy transport links will be provided by bus and rail to ensure that people who wish to attend the games have the opportunity to do so?
The additional capacity in late-night services throughout central Scotland will be important in diverting people off the roads and out of their cars. Passengers on the Airdrie to Bathgate line will be able to take advantage of late-night departures to stations serving North Lanarkshire.
As John Wilson highlights, our communications strategy is important in ensuring that the public are aware of the public transport options. I am happy to write to him with more detail on it.
Last week it was announced that an additional 100,000 tickets for all the events in the opening and closing ceremonies would be available to the public. How will the cabinet secretary ensure that those additional tickets are directed to sports clubs and the people who participate in them, given that they are currently being asked to share only 1,000 tickets? Can we do more?
That question is wide of the mark—we are talking about rail services—but if the cabinet secretary wishes to answer it she can go ahead.
I am happy to answer the question. We always want to do more, and we have identified those who give to sport day in, day out as volunteers in local community groups and sports organisations as being one of the key groups to which we want to promote the legacy tickets. Sportscotland is one of the agencies through which the legacy tickets will be distributed. I am happy to write to Duncan McNeil with more details on that, and if we can go further, we will.
“Review of Fatal Accident Inquiry Legislation”
To ask the Scottish Government when it will implement the recommendations of Lord Cullen’s “Review of Fatal Accident Inquiry Legislation”. (S4O-03199)
The Government is committed to introducing a bill to implement the recommendations in Lord Cullen’s 2009 “Review of Fatal Accident Inquiry Legislation” report in the current session of Parliament.
Some of Lord Cullen’s recommendations were addressed to the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service and have already been implemented, including the establishment of a Scottish fatalities investigation unit.
I am sure that the cabinet secretary will join me in marking the fact that the families of those who lost their lives in the Stockline explosion are preparing to commemorate the 10th anniversary of the disaster on Sunday. Does he not think that we owe it to families who have been bereaved by workplace accidents to have in place the best possible fatal accident inquiry system? Will the Scottish Government, if it has no immediate plans of its own to legislate in that area, back—at least in principle—the members’ bill that I will shortly introduce to Parliament?
I pay tribute to all those who lost their lives in the Stockline tragedy, and to all those who have worked hard since to try to find out what happened so that we can learn lessons with regard to fatal accidents and the existing problems and issues that the then Lord President raised in presiding over the inquiry.
We are intent on taking action, which is why we instructed Lord Cullen. There are challenges, given the parliamentary timetable, but we are committed to acting as expeditiously as possible. We have, as I said, ensured that the matters that can be addressed without primary legislation, such as those that fall within the domain of the COPFS, are dealt with. We communicated with Lord Cullen to ask whether he wished to update his review in any respect, but he is satisfied with where matters stand.
I assure Patricia Ferguson that we want to get the best possible legislation, and we will do so during our term of office.
Opencast Mines (South Scotland)
To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on the issues associated with opencast mines in south Scotland. (S4O-03200)
The liquidation of the Scottish Resources Group and ATH Resources in 2013 led to 726 redundancies in Scotland’s coal industry and left many sites in an unrestored state. In response, Fergus Ewing established a cross-party task force to address the situation and created the Scottish Mines Restoration Trust to assist local authorities in restoring the sites. Since the initiation of the task force in April 2013, a total of 450 jobs have been created in the sector, and that is forecast to increase to 550 jobs by the end of this year. As an action of the task force, the Scottish Government launched a formal planning consultation on opencast coal restoration and effective regulation, inviting views on revisions to planning policy and advice.
I am very grateful to the cabinet secretary for that reply and his interest in the matter. Does he acknowledge the environmental damage that has been wreaked by opencast mining companies that are no longer trading, in particular in East Ayrshire? Communities there feel that they have been abandoned to suffer the impact of the devastated landscape with no sign of its being restored. Has the task force decided on a plan to deal with that particular issue and a timescale to deliver?
I quite appreciate the concerns that Mr Pearson has raised on behalf of constituents in East Ayrshire. The current situation is a very difficult one that has arisen from the collapse of companies, and it has had serious implications for local residents around particular sites. It is an urgent and on-going priority of the task force to address the very issue that Mr Pearson has raised, and to find a way to make restoration work possible. I give Mr Pearson the assurance that as soon as there is a clear plan of action that can address and make progress on many of the issues, it will be fully reported to Parliament by Mr Ewing.
Living Wage (Government Contracts)
To ask the Scottish Government what action it is taking to ensure that all staff working on Scottish Government contracts are paid the living wage. (S4O-03201)
We are committed to supporting the Scottish living wage and have done so in our pay policy for the duration of this session of Parliament.
We are, through the normal work of procurement, trying to ensure that all possible steps are taken to ensure that staff working on Scottish Government contracts are paid at least the living wage. We cannot make payment of the living wage a mandatory requirement of our public contracts, but we are seeking urgent clarification from the European Commission of what more can be done within European Union law to ensure that we and public bodies can lawfully encourage contractors to pay the staff who deliver their contracts a living wage.
I previously asked the cabinet secretary to conduct a review of the low-pay loophole in order to ascertain how many staff who are contracted by public sector bodies are being denied the living wage. I believe that the moral achievement of the living wage is undermined if civil servants are on salary scales that are far above it but cleaning and catering staff are not paid the living wage. Recent YouGov research shows that—
Can we just get a question, Mr Kelly?
Sure. The YouGov research shows that 78 per cent of people believe that employers should reveal how many of their staff are paid the living wage. With that in mind—
Question, Mr Kelly.
Can the cabinet secretary confirm whether the review of the low-pay loophole has begun and whether it will report before next Tuesday’s stage 3 debate on the Procurement Reform (Scotland) Bill?
The position on the ability to make the living wage mandatory in public sector contracts has been pretty well discussed in Parliament already and, of course, it will be the subject of discussion at the stage 3 proceedings of the Procurement Reform (Scotland) Bill.
However, the Government takes its commitments on the Scottish living wage very seriously. We are taking active steps, in relation to contracts that are going forward for renewal in the Scottish Government, to take every possible opportunity, through contracting processes, to encourage contractors to pay staff who deliver the contracts the living wage. That is practical action that we are taking in advancing the letting of future Government contracts for services. Of course, we will advise Parliament of progress that is made on those questions as the contracts are concluded.
Genetically Modified Crops
To ask the Scottish Government what its position is on reports that, at a recent European Union environment council meeting, the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs breached an agreement to raise Scotland’s position on genetically modified crops. (S4O-03202)
It is indeed the case that Owen Paterson 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 and other devolved Governments to take our own decisions and not to be bound by United Kingdom Government views. However, he failed to do so.
I wrote to Mr Paterson on 13 March to express my disappointment at that omission and to seek assurances that the UK Government will work to correct the failure to speak on behalf of Scotland’s interests, and ensure that any EU agreement allows for devolved Governments to uphold a ban on GM crops, should we wish to do so. I also sought a commitment from Mr Paterson that, following any deal on Europe, the UK Government would work with Scotland and the other devolved Administrations to ensure that regional bans become a reality in the UK. I have yet to receive a reply from Mr Paterson on those points.
I note the minister’s detailed answer.
Scottish policy opposes GM crops, so any regionalisation of decision making that allows Westminster to bring in approved GM crops in England would need to be legally watertight. Does the Scottish Government agree that a decision on the matter should be delayed until the new European Parliament and Commission are confirmed?
It is up to Brussels to work out the timetable for the agreement. In fact, it is not possible now for legislation to be passed until after the new European Parliament is in place. I agree with Rob Gibson’s point: it is essential that the legislation “be legally watertight”. The Government would welcome the ability to have a ban on GM cultivation enshrined in EU law, but it is essential that it is safe from legal challenge.
Repeat Prescriptions
To ask the Scottish Government what progress it has made in reducing the financing of repeat prescriptions. (S4O-03203)
The significant proportion of spend on drugs is in supporting patients with complex, severe and enduring conditions, which necessarily involves repeat prescribing. That will continue in the context of an ageing population and the increasing prevalence of long-term conditions. It is extremely important to ensure that that does not lead to unnecessary waste through overprescribing.
That is why we are developing the Scottish therapeutics utility, which is currently being piloted in four national health service board areas. It will help general practitioner practices to identify areas of potential medicines waste within their repeat prescribing systems. We aim to roll out that software to all boards during the current financial year.
I thank the cabinet secretary for his answer. Two years ago, in an answer to a similar question, the cabinet secretary advised that an estimated cost of £30 million was attributed to some pharmacies not following the process strictures on repeat prescriptions, as required. Will the cabinet secretary now reinforce the message to all pharmacists and GPs that the process must be followed? Will he seek the equivalent of an amnesty on medicines and ask patients to return all overprescribed medicines to pharmacists, and will he determine where the health boards might seek recovery of appropriate costs?
The schemes to which Chic Brodie has referred are not actually NHS pharmacy services. He will be aware that officials wrote to all NHS boards and contractors about the negative impact that the schemes can have. I will absolutely reinforce that point again. In addition, we will continue to discuss the issue with Community Pharmacy Scotland, which is the national pharmacy contractors body.
I understand the point that Chic Brodie makes about an amnesty. However, I do not believe that it would achieve the outcomes that he expects. NHS boards have a responsibility to take control of prescribing in their areas in order to ensure that prescribers prescribe according to patient need, and that medicines are not given to patients when they are not needed. Patients have a responsibility themselves to order the medicines that they need. The strategies that I mentioned earlier will go some way towards achieving that, together with GP and pharmacists medicines reviews and reviews of repeat prescribing.
Is the cabinet secretary aware that almost all unused medicines—which Mr Brodie mentioned and which result mainly from repeat prescribing—are returned to pharmacists and then incinerated? However, if they are returned to one of the 60 general practices that are linked to a charity called Inter Care, those medicines will, if appropriate, be used in sub-Saharan Africa on order. Will he meet me to discuss how we can promote that alternative to burning millions of pounds’ worth of perfectly usable medicines?
I am aware of that scheme. I am happy to meet Richard Simpson to discuss that, because, like him, I would like to see whether we can recycle some of the drugs—provided that safety is not compromised—to Africa and elsewhere.
Before we move to the next item of business, members will wish to join me in welcoming to the gallery Mr Raffaele Cattaneo, who is President of the Regional Council of Lombardy. [Applause.]