Advice Services Transition Fund (Barnett Consequentials)
To ask the Scottish Government whether it expects to receive Barnett consequentials as a result of the United Kingdom Government’s recently announced advice services transition fund and, if so, whether it will allocate those to advice services in Scotland. (S4O-01446)
I can confirm that the Scottish Government has received Barnett consequentials from the UK Government, arising from advice services, which amount to £3.4 million over financial years 2013-14 and 2014-15. We are currently considering how we can best support advice services in Scotland and that will be informed by the draft budget 2013-14 consultation process.
The key phrase in my question was “to advice services”, not “for advice services”. In the past, moneys that have been allocated for advice services have not actually made their way to organisations such as Citizens Advice Scotland or other independent advice services. Those organisations are telling the Welfare Reform Committee and the Parliament about the pressures that they are already under because of the welfare reforms that are coming from Westminster. We need to know that Citizens Advice Scotland and other bodies will receive funding in order to help them cope with the pressures that are coming. Can the cabinet secretary guarantee that the consequentials from that fund will go to those organisations and will he commit to ring fencing that money so that it can be allocated directly?
As Mr McMahon will know—I suspect that this was at the heart of the last point he made—the Government has generally taken the approach not to ring fence funds that have been passed to local government other than for very specific reasons. We have a set of agreements with local government as to how advice and other services are to be supported at local level.
Clearly, significant issues for Scotland are arising out of the welfare reform agenda that is being pursued by the UK Government, with which Mr McMahon and his committee are familiar, and I acknowledge what is at stake in that respect. I say to Mr McMahon that the Government is involved in substantive dialogue with the advice sector in Scotland on this question. As I indicated in my original answer, I expect the issues to be considered fully within the consultation process on the draft budget for the next financial year.
Energy Productivity
To ask the Scottish Government what actions it will take to raise energy productivity in Scotland in order to ease the energy cost burdens on individual households as well as to create a more competitive marketplace for small businesses. (S4O-01447)
We are raising energy productivity in Scotland in line with our purpose to increase sustainable economic growth by spending around a quarter of a billion pounds over the spending review period on fuel poverty and energy efficiency.
Our energy saving Scotland advice network continues to provide support to households and small businesses on all aspects of energy efficiency. From April next year we will bring together business energy, resource and water efficiency into a single integrated resource efficient Scotland programme. It will provide intensive support to help small and medium-size enterprises reduce overheads through improved energy, material resource and water efficiency.
Does the minister agree that the emphasis on greater energy productivity in the future not only helps to compensate for diminishing oil and gas resources but is also, with the Government’s energy efficiency infrastructure and renewables strategy in mind, the best way to ensure a reduction in costs for Scottish families and businesses in the long term?
Scotland’s oil and gas resources are still absolutely massive, of course, and worth £1.5 trillion. An additional 1 per cent of extraction above the current average will lead to £22,000 million of tax revenue if our policies are pursued.
I agree that cutting our energy usage is sensible and necessary, and we are totally committed to that. We are also developing a national retrofit programme, using Scottish Government funding of £65 million a year, to lever in resources from energy companies in the private sector, and others, to create a fund of around £200 million a year to improve energy efficiency in our homes and help address fuel poverty.
Great concern has been expressed in my constituency about the proliferation of wind farms. Is there any guidance for local communities on buy-in schemes to allow communities to profit directly from local energy productivity?
Entirely fortuitously, I spent the morning at a conference that took place at my behest to bring together developers and communities. I am delighted to say that there are more than 3,400 such programmes throughout Scotland and that communities all over Scotland are benefiting from these moves. Indeed, my good friend Stephen Hagan from the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities told me that the island of Westray has received enough money to allow two young men to purchase a fishing boat. The money from renewable energy in Scotland is helping to create jobs in Scotland’s rural and island communities—and the best is yet to come.
Breast Screening (50 to 70-year-olds)
To ask the Scottish Government whether it plans to change the guidelines on breast screening for 50 to 70-year-olds. (S4O-01448)
In keeping with the recent Marmot review’s conclusion that the breast screening programme confers significant benefit and should continue, we have no plans to amend screening guidelines. The review also concluded that breast cancer screening extends lives through early detection and treatment, although it acknowledged that it can sometimes result in overdiagnosis. In light of that and in keeping with the review’s recommendations, we will ensure that women receive the highest-quality information about screening.
With the number of people in Scotland diagnosed with breast cancer as high as 4,000 a year, 20 of whom are men, does the cabinet secretary think that the breast screening programme should be maintained and expanded rather than cut, and does he agree that scaremongering about unnecessary procedures should not deter women from getting screened, given that screening can detect many cancers at a very early stage?
Breast screening saves lives; the Scottish Government fully supports the Scottish breast screening programme and its benefits and there will be no dilution whatever in the service. The Government receives expert advice on who should be screened from the breast and cervical screening national advisory group, all of whose recommendations are evidence based. Current evidence supports screening for all women between 50 and 70.
I welcome the cabinet secretary’s comments that screening will continue. After all, women need certainty about the breast screening programme. However, does he agree that more needs to be done to improve uptake for women in disadvantaged areas where levels of access are consistently lower?
We know that uptake of breast screening is lowest in women with learning disabilities and in areas of deprivation. Although national health service boards are responsible for ensuring local uptake, the Scottish Government supports the boards with high-quality information that has been tested with women from areas of deprivation in a number of languages, and we will continue our efforts to increase uptake overall and particularly in deprived communities.
College Waiting Lists
To ask the Scottish Government how it plans to offer access to training and education to the 21,280 people reported in The Herald on 27 October 2012 as being on college waiting lists. (S4O-01449)
I welcome Anne McTaggart’s question, because my firm hope is that all members will come to understand that waiting lists, which are maintained by colleges for administrative and course-specific purposes, were never intended to and cannot constitute a national means of determining sector-wide demand for places. Many people will appear on more than one list and some lists might contain people who have taken up another place in education or employment or who might otherwise have lost interest. The idea that one can measure demand simply by aggregating such diverse lists in every subject in every college is wholly misleading.
That said, I hope that Anne McTaggart and I can agree on the importance of clearly understanding the process used by colleges in handling applications for places and moving towards the collection of much better quality data on college applications. With that in mind, I intend to undertake an audit of the whole process of college applications, including a detailed examination of Scotland’s Colleges’s data and methodology, to ensure that it delivers maximum benefit for Scotland’s young people.
I understand that the cabinet secretary has been asked on several occasions to provide the Parliament with information on the number of individuals on college waiting lists. It took an article by The Herald finally to reveal the scale of the problem that we face. Despite the cabinet secretary’s protests, it is clear that such numbers are available and that thousands are being left without access to further education each year. Cabinet secretary, how could you let this happen?
I am sorry that the member did not listen to my answer. It is always a mistake to write the supplementary before hearing the answer.
I repeat what I said, which is that some lists may contain people who have taken up another place in education or employment or have otherwise lost interest. The idea that one can measure demand simply by aggregating diverse lists on every subject in every college is wholly misleading. To be fair to The Herald story and to be fair to the statistics that Scotland’s Colleges sent to The Herald, even those involved acknowledged the problems and said that they did not believe that 21,280 people were on waiting lists. That is why—I said this in my original answer, but I am happy to say it again—I intend to undertake an audit of college applications and a detailed examination of the methodology and the data used by Scotland’s Colleges, because we need to ensure that what we are doing is serving Scotland’s young people, not trying to use very doubtful data for political purposes, which is what we have just heard.
Can the cabinet secretary comment on the feasibility, as part of the audit, of looking into a system of clearing for college students that is similar to that which exists for universities and which may take away from some of the issues regarding numbers?
There has been considerable discussion with colleges over many years about how they improve their data collection and their processes for application. We need to balance local measures and the local method of application with much greater clarity about what the national data is. I therefore welcome the member’s suggestion. I intend to remove the scope for confusion by means of the work that we plan with colleges, which I have just outlined. I hope that that will lead to an agreement across the college sector—the reformed college sector, the college sector much in need of reform—that its members will work more closely together to have a better system, just as the member mentioned.
Street Traders’ Licences (Funfairs)
To ask the Scottish Government whether it considers that separate street traders’ licences should be obtained for food stalls that operate within the confines of funfairs that have been granted a public entertainment licence. (S4O-01450)
The Civic Government (Scotland) Act 1982 does not require a separate street trader’s licence for an activity already licensed under a public entertainment licence. However, local licensing authorities enjoy wide discretion in how they administer local licensing regulations and can apply the law to the specific facts and circumstances of individual cases.
I thank the minister for his answer. Does he not agree that local authorities should not—I repeat, should not—insist that a separate street trader’s licence be obtained for food stalls that are operated within the confines of a funfair? As he said, that clearly contradicts section 39(3)(e) of the Civic Government (Scotland) Act 1982.
I advise Mr Lyle that local government has the discretion to deploy the law in the way that I outlined—it will depend on local circumstances as to what is appropriate. I of course encourage local authorities to act proportionately in delivering simplified and streamlined light-touch regulation while looking after both health and safety and proper hygiene. However, I remind the member that it is a matter for local authorities to determine, as long as they operate within the law. The member is perfectly entitled to offer a council appropriate advice.
Biomass Energy (Sustainability)
To ask the Scottish Government how it will ensure high sustainability standards in future biomass energy generation. (S4O-01451)
The Scottish Government is consulting on expanded sustainability criteria for the renewables obligation Scotland, including new and more stringent limits on carbon emissions from dedicated biomass and biomass combined heat and power stations.
I welcome the consultation and its object.
As the minister might know, I was a supporter—albeit as a latecomer—of the stop Leith biomass campaign and have maintained a close interest in the issue since. Would the minister be willing to meet me as part of the consultation, to discuss the issues involved?
Yes, I would.
I acknowledge that the subsidy has been removed from electricity-only stations. Is the minister aware, however, of concerns that the proposal to define good-quality CHP plants across the United Kingdom as those having a 35 per cent efficiency level, which is considerably lower than the European Union directive, which states a level of at least 70 per cent for industrial applications, will create a loophole for inefficient biomass generation, and does he agree that we should be seeking to increase the level of efficiency at which subsidies can be claimed?
The member makes a reasonable point. The consultation proposals—I stress that it is a consultation, so, by definition, we have not prejudged any outcome—suggest a different approach from that which I believe is being proposed down south. We have proposed that a 10MW threshold should apply to the use of biomass to produce only electricity and that, above that threshold, the biomass plants should be capable of providing electricity and heat.
In reaching that view, which we have put forward for consultation, we have taken account in particular of the views of all members of this chamber who have put them to me, including Mr Biagi, and those of the traditional timber sawmilling sector, which has pointed out that timber is a finite resource, that it has a call on it, which we recognise, and that the sector provides a great deal of employment in many rural communities.
National Grid Upgrade (Benefits in South Scotland)
To ask the Scottish Government what recent discussions it has had with stakeholders regarding the economic and employment benefits of the national grid upgrade in South Scotland. (S4O-01452)
On 1 November, I met Frank Mitchell, from Scottish Power Energy Networks, who chairs the energy skills action group, to discuss a range of issues including investment in the transmission and distribution network of southern Scotland.
Planned investment by Scottish Power Energy Networks over the next 10 years amounts to £2,600 million pounds, which will see the creation of up to 1,500 jobs in Scotland. Early indications are that that investment programme will create further employment, with approximately 450 new directly associated jobs being needed, and many other opportunities locally.
Additionally, through Skills Development Scotland, we are supporting Scottish Power and Dumfries and Galloway College in order to develop specialist training provision to meet the expected demand for trained linesmen in that area.
Those figures are welcome. Can the minister confirm my understanding that it is the growth of Scotland’s renewables sector in the south of Scotland that has made the upgrade necessary?
That is entirely right. It is the case that the renewable energy policies of Scotland have led to the certainty that we will see investment in not only the south of Scotland but the north of Scotland on a massive scale. Members will be aware of this morning’s press release from Scottish and Southern Energy, which states that SSE could potentially make an investment of
“£5-10bn in the Highlands and Islands alone, across its energy networks”.
Because of—and only because of—the certainty and clarity of our renewable energy policy in Scotland, we will see untold, unprecedented and unparalleled benefits for this country for the next several decades. [Interruption.]
I remind members that phones and other electronic devices should be switched off.
First World War (Commemoration)
To ask the Scottish Government how it plans to commemorate the centenary of the outbreak of the first world war. (S4O-01453)
The Scottish Government is working with a range of military and veterans organisations, cultural bodies, education groups and the United Kingdom Government on proposals to commemorate the centenary of the conflict and will ensure that Scotland plays its full part in world war one commemorations over the period from 2014 to 2018, remembering the role and the sacrifice of Scottish servicemen and the wider impact on society.
On 3 July, I met 19 Scottish organisations to share and set out plans and have had two meetings with the UK representation, in May and July. Events that are planned include, for example, two exhibitions at the national museum of Scotland.
It is encouraging to hear that. The minister will know that the United Kingdom Government has already announced plans to commemorate the centenary with a new flagship scheme that will offer thousands of schoolchildren the opportunity to visit the great war battlefields as well as a £50 million fund to support community events. The Scottish Government has found some funding for the commemoration of the battle of Bannockburn, so I ask the cabinet secretary to outline what financial support the Scottish Government could provide for the centenary.
Many schools in Scotland already organise visits to world war one battlefields. A school in my constituency does so on an annual basis. We are discussing how those trips and other existing learning activity about world war one might support and complement the centenary education programme. We are looking forward to identifying the consequentials in the autumn budget revision to see what funding is available. The member might be aware of the £50 million that has been announced by the Prime Minister, £35 million of which is for the Imperial War Museum’s refurbishment, which was announced in February.
Particularly at this time, we need to take our roles and responsibilities in commemoration very seriously. The Government places great importance on future generations learning the lessons of war and commemorating those who lost their lives.
Before we move to First Minister’s question time, members will wish to join me in welcoming to the gallery the President of the Australian Senate, the Hon John Hogg. [Applause.]