Plenary, 08 Oct 2009

Meeting date: Thursday, October 8, 2009

Official Report 758KB pdf

---

Question Time

---

SCOTTISH EXECUTIVE

---

General Questions

---

Alcohol Awareness

To ask the Scottish Government what steps it is taking to promote alcohol awareness week. (S3O-8114)

Alcohol awareness week is a key initiative from the Scottish Government's alcohol industry partnership, which brings together Government, industry, health professionals and the voluntary sector to promote joined-up messages about responsible drinking. We work together to promote those messages through a wide range of channels, including press articles, events and advertising.

Is the minister aware of reports from Sweden this week that show that restrictions on the price and availability of alcohol there have reduced alcohol consumption by as much as 30 per cent, which contrasts with Finland, where one year of lower alcohol taxation has increased hospital admissions by 10 per cent? In alcohol awareness week, does the minister agree that a minimum pricing policy, as a means of saving lives and of reducing alcohol-based hospital admissions, the incidence of crime and lost working days, is increasingly supported by the evidence base?

Yes, I am very much aware of the Swedish evidence, which is very interesting. It follows on from the in-depth report from the University of Sheffield, which showed the benefits of minimum pricing for saving lives and reducing crime, as well as the economic benefits that can flow from rebalancing our relationship with alcohol. I hope that members across the Parliament will reflect on all the evidence and that we can reach a consensus on the way forward.

Is the minister aware that, as part of alcohol awareness week, many members were asked to take part and to visit stores in their constituency? I visited a David Sands store in Crossford in my constituency this week, and I met the chief executive of the company. He says that, throughout his stores, he carries out his own test purchasing checks and ensures that anyone who looks under 25 is asked for proof of age. Does the minister feel that that is a good example, which should be adopted throughout the country?

All those things can be considered under the alcohol bill that the Scottish Government is introducing before the end of the year. As I have always said, and as the Government has said, there is no one single solution; we need a package of measures. However, in that package of measures there must be something that goes to the heart of reducing alcohol misuse in Scotland. The evidence tells us that that something is minimum pricing, given the clear links between price and consumption. I hope that the member and his party will reflect on that.

At a time of increasing alcohol problems in society, the proposed closure of the award-winning designated place at Beechwood house in Inverness is extremely worrying. Does the minister agree that Highland Council, Highland NHS Board and the Northern Constabulary must do all that they can to maintain at least a minimum service at the designated place, so that its unique benefits are not lost completely to the Highlands?

I know that Beechwood does a lot of very important work, and it will of course continue to provide rehabilitation services under the contract with the council. As I understand it, the reformed partnership—the Highland drug and alcohol action team—is actively reviewing its service provision, including for drunk and incapable people. I encourage the member to continue to hold discussions with those various partners, as I know he has been doing actively. We need to ensure that a range of services are provided to meet the requirements of the whole of the Highland area. I am happy to keep in contact with the member in that regard.

I thank the minister for her replies so far and, although I welcome the fact that the Government has now published the Scottish end of the University of Sheffield evidence, the figures are based on 2003 data on alcohol problems, whereas the latest figures are from 2008. That is a major criticism from the industry, which is attacking the Sheffield report as not providing a firm basis for minimum pricing. Will she say how minimum pricing will help, given that the additional profits that would result from the policy would go back to retailers rather than into alcohol treatment?

If anything, the figures in the University of Sheffield report are an underestimation of the extent of alcohol misuse in Scotland. I do not think that any member will challenge the evidence that we have a major problem—I certainly hope not. The question is what we do about that major problem.

Not just the Sheffield report but all the international evidence demonstrates a clear link between price and consumption. The question is whether the Parliament will be bold enough to take the critical action that is required to tackle the biggest public health challenge that faces our nation. The Scottish Parliament has a good track record of being bold—we were on smoking. Minimum pricing is the bold measure that needs to be taken to address alcohol misuse, and I hope that members on the Labour benches will join us in supporting that measure. I know that Richard Simpson is sympathetic to proposals on minimum pricing, and I look forward to continuing to discuss the issue with him.

---

Schools

To ask the Scottish Executive whether any pupils will be taught in schools announced as being in the initial phase of its school rebuilding programme in the current parliamentary term. (S3O-8149)

This Government has already lifted 100,000 pupils out of poor-condition schools by supporting £2 billion of investment in the school estate the length and breadth of Scotland in our initial phase of school building. We expect more than 250 school projects to be completed during the lifetime of this parliamentary session. More than 200 have already been completed.

In addition, I set out to the Parliament on 17 June that I expect the first primary school to be funded by the new, additional £1.25 billion school building programme to be open by 2011. That will help to lift even more pupils out of poor-condition schools.

I think that it is possible to take that answer as a no.

In the false prospectus that the Scottish National Party put forward as its election manifesto, the SNP made a commitment that it would match Labour's school building programme "brick for brick". Does the cabinet secretary genuinely believe that the parents and pupils of Scotland will be fooled by her Government's disingenuous attempts to assert that its pledge is being achieved, in the face of a programme that will deliver only 14 schools by 2013 and the fact that some local authorities might perhaps build some schools by 2011?

In this morning's debate, SNP speaker after SNP speaker rubbished public-private partnership schools, but the cabinet secretary claims those PPP schools. Does she agree that claiming Labour's schools "brick for brick" is not the same as matching Labour's achievements brick for brick?

I say politely to Michael McMahon that his party lost the election in 2007 because people were fed up with a semi-feudal, one-party state in which the Labour Party claimed everything as its own. These are Scotland's schools, not Labour, Lib Dem or SNP schools—[Interruption.]

Order.

I remind the member that this morning I announced that we have completed 236 schools since 2007, which certainly matches the previous Administration's plans brick for brick. Not only that, but we are funding schools. The previous Administration left a black hole of £60 million per year in the PPP programme. Next year alone we must find £40 million to plug that hole. We are funding and building schools.

---

Genetic Modification (Contamination)

To ask the Scottish Government whether it has undertaken research to determine what losses may be experienced by the food and drink industries if a GM contamination event affects Scottish produce. (S3O-8098)

I expect that the member's question was provoked by the discovery of unauthorised genetically modified linseed in Canadian imports to the European Union.

Scottish produce benefits from a natural image among consumers. Although the commercial impact of any illegal presence of GM material in Scottish produce would depend on the nature of the material and on which sector or sectors were concerned, the Government's view is that any impact would be negative.

Given the loss of markets and profits for North American growers when there was contamination from GM rice in 2006, and given the on-going contamination from Canadian GM flax, there is evidence that GM crops cannot be contained in the open environment. Will the minister confirm that the best policy for the future of Scotland's food and drink industries is to maintain a ban on the trialling and growing of GM crops in the open environment in Scotland?

That is absolutely the Government's position and there is no intention whatever to change it. A great deal of debate is going on in the EU on how GM organisms are handled, and a consultation on the socioeconomic issues that are related to GMOs, into which the Government hopes to make an input, will be finalised in January. It is extremely important that we assess socioeconomic criteria in relation to unauthorised GMO releases and that we continue our important work to ensure that Scotland's produce can continue to be sold into a high-quality, premium market.

---

Recycling

To ask the Scottish Government what assistance it provides to local authorities to meet its recycling targets and how it will encourage the local authorities that are failing to meet these targets. (S3O-8115)

The Scottish Government provided local government in Scotland with record levels of funding—£23 billion in the period 2008 to 2010. To help local authorities to deliver on recycling targets, the Scottish Government has allocated an additional £42 million from the zero waste fund in the period 2008 to 2010 and intends to allocate further funding for 2010-11.

In addition, delivery organisations that are funded by Scottish Government, including the Waste and Resources Action Programme, Waste Aware Scotland and Remade Scotland, provide advice and support to local authorities throughout Scotland, to help them to improve recycling performance.

I thank the minister for her comprehensive reply. She will be aware that Glasgow City Council has the worst recycling rate in Scotland and is projected to spend £30 million of council tax payers' money on landfill tax this year alone. Does she agree that Glasgow must address the issue before the impact of increasing landfill tax becomes "catastrophic", as is acknowledged in the council's corporate risk management report?

I am aware that there has been considerable newspaper coverage of the situation in Glasgow. Glasgow City Council faces a challenging few years, but I understand that in its single outcome agreement it committed to increasing its municipal waste recycling capacity to 31 per cent by 2010. I know that the council is having difficulty, and I understand that a review is being carried out by Glasgow Caledonian University, which will suggest ways forward. I hope that the council will be able to improve its performance in the coming months and years.

I agree that much more needs to be done in Glasgow to increase recycling. However, does the minister fully appreciate that in parts of Glasgow there is a real challenge in that recycling is made difficult by the volume of tenement properties? The proportion is 70 per cent in my constituency, Kelvin, and it is high throughout Glasgow.

Given that much more needs to be done, including the upgrading of the plant at Polmadie, what assistance will the Government give to Glasgow to ensure that practical issues to do with recycling are dealt with? Are discussions going on with Glasgow City Council about the modernisation of the plant at Polmadie?

I am aware that Glasgow City Council faces difficulties in managing waste collection at tenemental properties, but Glasgow is not the only part of Scotland that has to deal with that issue, and other councils have to deal with different issues in waste collection.

Discussions go on all the time in respect of local authority finance on the basis of the concordat that the Government agreed with local authorities. In making funding available to local authorities, the Government fully takes on board the challenges in each and every case. I do not expect that that will change in future.

---

School Estate Strategy (Barrhead High School)

To ask the Scottish Executive for what reason Barrhead high school has not been included in the list of schools granted funding under the new school estate strategy. (S3O-8148)

On 28 September I announced the first 14 secondary schools to benefit from the new £1.25 billion school building programme. Those schools were identified using the following criteria, which were agreed by the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities: the distribution of needs throughout Scotland; the best available information about schools' condition and unsuitability to deliver the curriculum for excellence; additionality; and authorities' own plans, priorities and readiness to proceed.

The Labour-led coalition in East Renfrewshire Council indicated that Eastwood high school was its top priority for secondary school replacement. Other schools in East Renfrewshire, including Barrhead high school, will, like those in every other local authority, be eligible for consideration in subsequent phases of the programme.

The minister should not pretend that it was the local authority that decided that Eastwood high school was the priority: it wants to rebuild Barrhead high school.

The current estates review lasts for the next nine years. Does the minister think that it is acceptable for the pupils of Barrhead high school to wait until 2018 before they are even considered under a new funding system? If not, what does she intend to do about it?

The problems with Barrhead high school have not suddenly appeared in the past two years. I visited the school in August 2008. It has consistently shown in recent core facts publications that it is a category B school. There are issues of unsuitability. I do not want to prejudice the position of other schools in Scotland, but Barrhead high school—if supported by the Labour-led coalition that, in the first instance, put Eastwood high school as its top priority—would be in a legitimate position to apply and be considered for subsequent phases of the programme.

---

Health Services (Highland Perthshire)

To ask the Scottish Executive what recent discussions it has had with NHS Tayside regarding the provision of health services in highland Perthshire. (S3O-8118)

There are on-going discussions with all national health service boards—including NHS Tayside—which are aimed at constantly developing and improving health care services in Scotland.

I know that the cabinet secretary met campaigners from Kinloch Rannoch who are fighting for the restoration of out-of-hours general practitioner cover in that remote and rural area. If NHS Tayside is not prepared to take action to right the wrong that it has perpetrated against that community, will the cabinet secretary be prepared to use her powers of ministerial intervention to force it to do so?

As Murdo Fraser well knows, the service is a matter for NHS Tayside. He is right that I met people from Kinloch Rannoch a couple of weeks ago when I chaired NHS Tayside's annual review. Their MSP, John Swinney, regularly communicates their concerns to me, so I fully understand the concerns that some people in the community have. That is why I have asked NHS Tayside to remain in dialogue with them to seek to address their concerns.

However—to give an important reassuring message to people who live in Kinloch Rannoch—it is important to understand that all out-of-hours services in Scotland are required to meet standards that are developed by NHS Quality Improvement Scotland to ensure a safe, quality service for patients. It is also important to point out that the arrangements covering Kinloch Rannoch that NHS Tayside has put in place meet those standards, and I hope that Murdo Fraser will take care to communicate that to people as he discusses the issue.

---

Unmarried Mothers (Supervised Homes)

To ask the Scottish Executive whether it shares the Prime Minister's vision of supervised homes for poor, young unmarried mothers. (S3O-8071)

I understand that the intention behind the Prime Minister's announcement is to improve support for 16 and 17-year-olds, including teenage parents, who cannot stay with their families and who are provided with housing at public expense. The United Kingdom Government has explained to officials in the Scottish Government that there is no intention to compel pregnant teenagers into supervised accommodation as some reports have suggested.

We have no plans to introduce identical measures in Scotland, but we certainly want all vulnerable young people to receive the housing and any other support that they need. We are working with a range of national and local partners to achieve those goals.

I am relieved to hear that the Scottish Government is not thinking of punishment blocks or gulags for bad girls. Will the minister impress on his colleagues that the programme that is aimed at preventing pregnancies among young teenagers has fallen behind the reality and that there should be a Government programme for it?

I and my colleagues are very much aware of the importance of the campaign on avoiding the problems that young females, in particular, get into. More widely, I recognise that there is a need to examine the provision throughout Scotland of supported accommodation and related services for young single mothers and single people of all ages so that we can deal with the problems that are associated with homelessness, which I think lay behind the member's original question.