General Questions
Forth Replacement Crossing
To ask the Scottish Executive whether it will provide an update on the Forth replacement crossing project. (S4O-00659)
The project is making good progress since construction commenced in 2011 and it remains on budget and on time to be delivered by 2016.
Is the minister in dialogue with Transport Scotland and the relevant contractors about the quality of employment on the bridge project? Some constituents are concerned that people will not be permanently employed for the duration of the contract, and that there will be an overreliance on agency workers and bogus self-employed people who do not pay national insurance contributions. Will the Scottish Government make a commitment to ensuring that will not happen on the new Forth road bridge project?
I will be happy to look into specific instances if John Park would like to write to me about them. However, the project has been extremely successful thus far. Perhaps some of the past week’s headlines have missed the fact that the tender came in at around £400 million below budget, so that £400 million will now be available for other things, including job creation. We have been successful in ensuring that business goes to Scottish subcontractors and suppliers, although I am more than happy to look into the issue that John Park has raised.
Transport Infrastructure (North East Scotland)
To ask the Scottish Executive what action it is taking to improve transport infrastructure in North East Scotland. (S4O-00660)
The Scottish Government is continuing to make record levels of investment in transport projects right across Scotland, including in Aberdeen and the north-east. We remain committed to delivering the Aberdeen western peripheral route and the Balmedie to Tipperty project, and we have recently completed the £31.5 million A96 Fochabers and Mosstodloch project. On rail, we remain committed to service improvements between Aberdeen and Inverness.
I welcome the £5 million that has been earmarked for the design of the improvements at the Haudagain roundabout that was announced yesterday, but people in Aberdeen have waited for a long time for them. When will the work begin? Also, having rightly agreed that the Balmedie to Tipperty dualling should no longer have to wait until completion of the western peripheral route, will the minister also now agree that the works to address congestion at Haudagain should not have to wait until then, and so prevent further years of delays?
If Richard Baker looks at the case on the Haudagain roundabout that was made by the north east of Scotland transport partnership, he will realise that the benefits from the roundabout rely on the AWPR and the Balmedie to Tipperty project being in place. He should really read that case because it explains why we have always said that we will start the improvements to the Haudagain roundabout once we have completed the AWPR. It is also true to say that the member got it wrong last week when he talked about the Balmedie to Tipperty project. Construction is not starting there, but design work is. We are doing that work in the same way as we are now doing the work on the Haudagain so that, as soon as the AWPR is finished, we can start work on those projects without further delay.
We know the reasons for the delay; Richard Baker also knows the reasons. They are not just because of the on-going court cases, but are because of the delays of previous Administrations in getting started on the project in the first place.
Recent local press coverage has made much of the advertising of the contract for ground investigations on the Balmedie to Tipperty project. Will the minister set out his timetable for the building of that vital link? Is he saying today that the project has not been decoupled from the AWPR? He could decouple it and get it built right away.
We have listened to representations from a number of interested parties, including Ms McInnes’s council colleagues, and we are bundling together the AWPR with the Balmedie to Tipperty project. There are good reasons for doing so. What we announced last week will ensure that we can start the design work on the Balmedie to Tipperty project in anticipation of a positive outcome for the AWPR in the courts. We will then be able to start on that with no delay. That approach has the full support of Aberdeenshire Council and Aberdeen City Council, and that is how we intend to proceed.
Higher Education (European Union Students)
To ask the Scottish Executive whether it welcomes the increase in the number of students from European Union countries receiving free higher education in Scotland’s universities. (S4O-00661)
Scotland welcomes students from all over the world. I am pleased that increasing numbers of overseas students from the EU and further afield recognise the superb quality of the higher education that is available in this country.
Further to his previous parliamentary answers, will the cabinet secretary advise us of what—if any—progress he has made on introducing a management fee for students from other European Union countries, which would defray at least some of the £75 million a year that it costs us to provide them with free higher education? Does he expect to introduce that fee in the forthcoming academic year?
My officials and I continue to have discussions with EU officials and a range of others to explore this difficult area. My view remains that we should introduce such a mechanism if possible; I wish for such a mechanism to be introduced. Whether it is possible is the subject of the discussions that are taking place.
PIP Implants (Public Inquiry)
To ask the Scottish Executive whether it will hold a public inquiry into the PIP breast implant situation. (S4O-00662)
The regulation of medical devices is currently reserved and lies with the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Authority. As a follow-up to the expert group’s interim report, which was published on 6 January, Lord Howe is leading a review of what happened with the PIP silicone breast implants and what lessons need to be learned. My officials will work closely with colleagues in the Department of Health on that review and we will consider fully any implications for the national health service in Scotland.
I thank the cabinet secretary for her helpful response. I am sure that she agrees that the women involved have had their lives turned upside down by the scandal and that they deserve answers. Will she provide us with an update on the number of women who are affected and the latest information on rupture rates? Does she believe that there is now merit in introducing a national register of surgical implants? How will we ensure that such a situation never happens to anyone ever again?
I thank Jackie Baillie for asking a number of questions. I will try to answer all of them, and I am more than happy to write to her to give further information on all the points, as well.
I fully understand the anxiety that women who have had PIP implants have suffered; what they are going through is difficult for the rest of us to imagine. The Scottish Government stands ready to do everything that we can to assist those women.
On the number of patients, we have confirmed that no women received PIP implants on the national health service. Our best estimate is that 4,000 women in Scotland might have received PIP implants from private providers. That figure is not exact, but it is our best estimate right now.
I have made it clear, and do so again today, that private providers—which, we should remember, took advantage of the business opportunities and made money from implants—have a moral obligation to do the right thing by the women involved. I expect private providers to meet that obligation. However, I have also made it clear, and do so again, that the NHS will leave no woman high and dry if a private provider is not facing up to its moral obligation. I have made clear the support that will be provided and I advise any concerned women to contact their general practitioners in the first instance.
Jackie Baillie asked about a register. As she is aware, Professor Sir Bruce Keogh is leading a further review of the regulation of cosmetic surgery, which is—critically—looking at the value and feasibility of a comprehensive register of significant surgical devices, including breast implants, and how best to put that into action. My officials will work closely with colleagues in the Department of Health on that and will consider any implications for the NHS in Scotland.
I assure Parliament that I take the issue very seriously. If any member wants to discuss it further with me or to have any of the information to which the Scottish Government has access, I am happy to have such discussions and to provide whatever information I can.
Normally, we do everything possible to encourage breastfeeding. However, given that the French regulatory authorities have recommended that women with PIP implants should not breastfeed their children, what advice can the cabinet secretary give mothers in Scotland with PIP implants?
I know of Elaine Smith’s close interest in breastfeeding and I understand the concerns that have been raised. I am sure that she understands that it is for experts to give the best possible advice to women who have PIP implants and for me to advise women to listen to and follow that advice.
The Government’s wider efforts on breastfeeding will continue. As Elaine Smith is aware, we are doing a range of work to encourage women to breastfeed, because of the advantages and benefits that breastfeeding delivers for their children. We will continue to do that, and I am keen to work with members across the chamber to continue to get that message across.
Dyslexia
To ask the Scottish Executive what assistance it provides for the early identification of, and how it raises awareness of and supports people with, dyslexia. (S4O-00663)
In order to help all teachers to identify the signs of literacy difficulties and dyslexia early in a child’s school life, the Scottish Government, in partnership with Dyslexia Scotland, launched the online assessing dyslexia toolkit in June 2010. That was supported by four regional seminars, which were attended by 338 teachers.
On 17 November 2011, the Scottish Government announced an additional £40,000 grant to Dyslexia Scotland, which will be used to review and update the toolkit, to add new materials on how to support children and young people with dyslexia effectively, to make it more accessible for teachers, and to develop a section for local authorities on how best to implement it.
In addition, Education Scotland supports public and third sector organisations that support adults with dyslexia. In 2010, they delivered 45 training sessions across Scotland. The Scottish Government has also allocated £38,000 to Dyslexia Scotland for this financial year to support its headquarters running costs, and an additional £10,000 to develop an awareness-raising DVD to be used in prisons.
I thank the minister for that comprehensive answer. Does he endorse the working definition of dyslexia that has been developed and agreed by Scottish Government officials, Dyslexia Scotland and the cross-party group on dyslexia as a good working definition? If so, what is the Government doing to promote its wider use? Will the minister consider encouraging all local authorities to introduce, as part of teachers’ continuing professional development, a mandatory session to make them aware of the working definition and the toolkit to aid the early identification of, and the provision of support for, children with dyslexia?
I thank Margaret Mitchell member for her question and the spirit in which it was asked. Needless to say, I know that, through her involvement in the cross-party group on dyslexia, she is very knowledgeable on the matter.
Teacher training endeavours to ensure that teachers are aware of a range of conditions, not least dyslexia, given the immense impact that it can have on people’s later lives. I mentioned prisons in my initial answer because we are acutely aware of the proportion of people in prison who have dyslexia and the role that staff in school have in ensuring that we deal with that.
As far as the working definition is concerned, the toolkit has an involvement in that, but we have not gone down the route of introducing mandatory standardised assessment tests for dyslexia because that approach was rejected by, among others, the cross-party group on dyslexia in 2009.
Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
To ask the Scottish Executive what action it will take to improve services for children and adults with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. (S4O-00664)
In our consultation on a new mental health strategy for Scotland, we continue to highlight the importance of action in the early years and childhood, and the role in that of child and adolescent mental health services, through which many children with ADHD will be treated. We also identify services for adults with developmental disorders, which include ADHD, as a priority for service development. We will publish the mental health strategy later in the spring.
In addition, NHS Healthcare Improvement Scotland is supporting service providers through an exercise to follow up on areas for improvement and development that it identified during the scoping of the ADHD Scottish intercollegiate guidelines network guideline.
I thank the minister for that response, and I certainly acknowledge the work of Healthcare Improvement Scotland on childhood ADHD.
However, at a recent meeting of the cross-party group on mental health, we were told about the lack of a strategy, guidelines, training and clinics for adult ADHD, in particular. Given that improvement challenge 2 of the draft mental health strategy refers to developmental disorders, will the minister ensure that the development of services for child and adult ADHD is given particular attention in the final strategy?
As Malcolm Chisholm knows, we have given priority to the matter and we highlighted it in the consultation document. I hope that, in the next few weeks, we will be in a position to publish some of the detail that we have received from the more than 300 submissions to the consultation exercise. This is an area in which we want continuing progress.
I mentioned the work that Health Improvement Scotland is undertaking. Part of that work is to identify exactly where each individual health board needs to make more progress on improving and developing services around ADHD. Health Improvement Scotland will then undertake a number of regional events with individual boards in order to consider how we can improve services yet further. This is an area in which I wish further progress to be made. I intend to see something within the forthcoming mental health strategy to assist in doing that.
Question 7, in the name of Dennis Robertson, has been withdrawn, for understandable reasons.
Home Energy Efficiency
To ask the Scottish Government what support it gives to people living in homes without cavity walls to help them reduce their carbon footprint and stay warm. (S4O-00666)
The Scottish Government is aware of the issues affecting householders living in homes without cavity walls, and we are also conscious that that property type is more prevalent in rural parts of Scotland. Advice is provided through the energy saving Scotland advice centre network, which has advisers who are specially trained in dealing with such properties. The Scottish Government also provides an interest-free loan scheme for householders.
Local authorities can include within their bids for support under the universal home insulation scheme special programmes aimed at dealing with properties without cavity walls.
I thank the minister for his recognition that such properties are often in rural communities. Does the minister agree that the green deal, although it is welcome in principle, is unlikely to give us a structure and a model that will help rural communities, simply because of the low density of buildings that will be appropriate?
Nigel Don makes a valid point. We have highlighted issues relating to remote areas of Scotland to the United Kingdom Government, and we have encouraged other stakeholders to highlight such issues in their consultation responses to the Department of Energy and Climate Change. At the same time, we are investigating a number of innovative finance options that might support delivery of green deal finance in rural and urban areas of Scotland. Yesterday, we announced a fund to assist certification bodies to become accredited and pass on the benefits to installers and assessors to ensure that Scotland can provide skilled people to deliver at the time of the green deal launch, particularly in remote and rural areas.
I encourage Nigel Don to make his views known also to the UK Government.
Ensuring that the existing housing stock, particularly private homes, reaches minimum energy performance standards presents a challenge. Section 64 of the Climate Change (Scotland) Act 2009 provides for the introduction of regulations in this area. Does the Scottish Government intend to introduce those regulations and, if so, what is the timescale for introduction and delivery?
It is fair to say that those issues have to be considered at the same time as the green deal, and how that takes things forward. As I have mentioned previously, that is still a matter of consultation with the UK Government. We will continue to examine that area and will take a decision on it at the right time.
Transport Priorities (Scottish Borders)
To ask the Scottish Executive what its transport priorities are for the Scottish Borders. (S4O-00667)
The Borders railway project remains a priority for our investment in the Scottish Borders transport infrastructure.
I note that the minister did not mention Selkirk. A few weeks ago, I received a letter from a constituent. It reads:
“I voted for the SNP last year because I supported their campaign and petition to bring a bypass to Selkirk.
Can you find out for me when the bypass will be built by the SNP please?”
Does the minister still support the building of the Selkirk bypass and, if so, when will it be built?
It is perfectly clear from the statements that were made prior to the election that the Selkirk bypass was not supported in the strategic transport projects review. We do not have plans for a bypass in Selkirk. [Interruption.]
Order. There is too much noise.
We are spending several hundreds of millions of pounds on the Borders railway, which was not taken forward by previous Administrations. That underlines the commitment that we have to the Borders. Spending that amount of money on transport infrastructure in the Borders obviously takes us well past the commitment of previous Governments. Of course, we could spend even more, were it not for the fact that the Government that Mr Lamont supports has withdrawn £800 million of funding from our budget.
The minister will be aware that, although Gorebridge residents in my constituency fully support the development of the Waverley line, they are not being given advance notice of structural works. Will the minister undertake to get in touch with the relevant agencies to ensure that they explain to people what is happening along that line with regard to tree felling and so on?
We will do that. We have seen the letter that the member wrote, which seemed to concern one particular household being omitted. We have reiterated to the relevant agencies that they should make people aware of work in advance. That will happen in the future.