Meeting of the Parliament

Meeting date: Thursday, December 9, 2010

Official Report 1127KB pdf

---

First Minister’s Question Time

A few seconds early, we come to questions to the First Minister.

---

Engagements

1. To ask the First Minister what engagements he has planned for the rest of the day. (S3F-2762)

Later today I will have engagements to take forward the Government’s programme for Scotland.

This is fast becoming First Minister’s apologies. We have had apologies for losing our tax-varying powers; apologies for losing our money in dodgy loans; and, this week, the apology from the Minister for Transport, Infrastructure and Climate Change for losing the plot and leaving hundreds of Scots stranded in their cars overnight. Will the First Minister now apologise to Scotland for his Government’s incompetent response to Monday’s severe weather?

I see that Iain Gray is now stealing David McLetchie’s lines from yesterday. If Iain Gray had felt, as the rest of Scotland did, that the weather last week was worthy of his questions, he would have asked questions about it last week.

Very precisely—[Interruption.]

Order.

I believe that the Scottish Government should have done much better in terms of the information flow last Monday to people—our citizens—who were caught in the extraordinary conditions. The transport minister apologised for that, and I follow his apology. We should have done much better in providing the information flow to help our fellow citizens who were in a position of extremity. Improvements in that will be made by this Government.

To be honest, last week even I could not have foreseen the degree of incompetence that the Scottish Government demonstrated this week. The problem is not just information flow; it is the minister’s incompetent response.

Why was nothing done to prevent more traffic from joining motorways that were already blocked? Why were motorways not closed sooner to get them cleared? Why, at 4.30 pm, was the minister saying that roads were clearing when they were not? Why was there no emergency meeting until 9 pm, when some people had already been stuck for 12 hours? Why did it take until 11.15 at night to announce a helpline number, do so on television and get the number wrong anyway? Above all, why is Stewart Stevenson still the transport minister?

If I can just correct Iain Gray, I saw a statement of his in which he said that the Cabinet contingency committee did not meet until the evening on Monday. That is not true: as was said during the statement yesterday, if Iain Gray was listening, that was the second meeting of the day on Monday. If Iain Gray is going to complain about people getting their facts wrong, he should at least pay some attention to his questions and his ability to summon the most simple facts to bring along.

He said that he did not anticipate—well, exactly: perhaps even the great Gray did not anticipate the extraordinary combination of weather conditions that people in central Scotland endured last Monday—[Interruption.]

Order.

Iain Gray asked about the closure of motorways. Even he should know that those are police operational matters—[Interruption.]

Order.

I am sorry, but if Iain Gray actually believes that a Cabinet sub-committee should make decisions to close the motorways or manage the road service around Scotland, I must tell him that those are matters for Transport Scotland and our police authorities which, incidentally, under the most trying circumstances have done an extraordinary job.

At some point, members in the chamber will have to recognise that what fell on central Scotland last Monday morning was an extraordinary event in weather conditions. Thousands of people were affected very seriously indeed, but thousands of people—public services, emergency services and volunteers—did their absolute best to help their fellow citizens. Amid this political argy-bargy, we should try to unite in thanking those who helped their fellow citizens.

For three days, the First Minister and the transport minister have tried to blame the Met Office. Now, it would appear, they are blaming the police for the decisions that were taken—[Interruption.]

Order.

Frankly, the people of Scotland expect greater leadership from their Government. Last week, Alex Salmond was praising The Sun newspaper’s coverage of the weather. This week, the paper says that the transport minister

“turned incompetence into an art form.”

As for the First Minister,

“it’s his total failure to show any kind of leadership in a crisis that will be remembered long after the snows have melted.”

It is clear that the hundreds of Scots who were stuck in their cars, the hundreds of thousands whose lives were disrupted and the national media en masse have lost confidence in the transport minister. Does the First Minister really still have confidence in him?

I have full confidence in Stewart Stevenson as transport minister.

Just for the record, and as a correction, I did not criticise the police service in Scotland. I was admiring the dedication and commitment of the police, which should be acknowledged just occasionally by Iain Gray. [Interruption.]

Order.

The police deployed more than 1,000 extra officers to help people in extremity. It is a good job that there are more than 1,000 extra officers in Scotland to be deployed.

At some point, Iain Gray will have to acknowledge that the occurrence last Monday was an extraordinary weather combination. Yes, we will learn lessons on communications and other things, but if Iain Gray’s platform in seeking election is that he will have control over the elements and the weather, he and his band behind him are going to find it difficult to sell their message to any serious person in Scotland.

Of course the weather last Monday was extraordinary, but what was also extraordinary was the incompetence of the response from the Government and its transport minister. I say to the First Minister that, as the apologies mount week by week, there has to come a point when he realises that standing by incompetent ministers is not a show of strength but a sign of weakness.

Let us go back to those editorials that he loves so much to read out. The Daily Record states:

“They lurch from crisis to crisis”—[Interruption.]

Order.

It states:

“They lurch from crisis to crisis with the look of an administration in terminal decline.”

As for platforms in May, I tell the First Minister this: if I was First Minister and my transport minister proved as incompetent as his, I would sack him. What on earth does a minister have to do to get the sack in Alex Salmond’s apology for a Government?

Apart from Iain Gray’s ability to forecast the elements, the other notable aspect is his total inability to come forward with a single constructive suggestion that would assist the country’s resilience.

Let me offer Iain Gray some of the things that are being done. As we recover from the disruption to our transport services, people today are working to ensure that fuel supplies are accessible, that the tankers are indeed rolling out of Grangemouth and that people’s vehicles are being refilled. We will still have difficulties but, as Iain Gray is talking politics, people throughout Scotland are talking sense and are acting to restore the country’s infrastructure and economy. The general public are talking about issues such as snow tyres. We have already been in contact with the Department for Transport regarding heavy goods vehicles. If Iain Gray would care to have a glance at the traffic disruption in Scotland, he would find that the vast majority of it involved HGVs jackknifing across key points in the transport infrastructure. [Interruption.]

Order.

Constructive, positive suggestions to improve things are not the lot of the Labour Party, but with the Department for Transport, which has that reserved power at the moment, perhaps we can bring about an improvement as the ability to handle the extreme winter weather becomes more pertinent for our economy.

People throughout Scotland are taking action and volunteering to help their neighbours, and our police forces and emergency services are taking action to deal with the extreme weather conditions. Is it too much to hope that the Opposition parties will recognise the efforts that I recognised when I mentioned the examples in The Sun last week, will bring forward some intelligent, constructive suggestions and, just for once, will think of the interests of the Scottish people in dealing with these national emergencies?

---

Prime Minister (Meetings)

2. To ask the First Minister when he will next meet the Prime Minister. (S3F-2763)

I have no immediate plans to meet the Prime Minister.

On its website, under the banner “Ready Winter”, the Scottish Government tells the nation:

“Even the worst effects of winter can be reduced by a few simple steps ... such as ... being more aware of the weather forecast, especially weather warnings”.

[Laughter.] It is a pity that the transport minister did not follow his own advice.

On the website, we also find a report entitled “Scottish Road Network” on the events of last winter. Published back in August, the report mentions a

“wider review of the resilience of Scottish transport which will be published in the autumn”.

Now that we are in the grip of winter, where is that review? Was it indeed published? No one can find it.

As Annabel Goldie should know, a key aspect of the review was increasing the resilience of salt and grit stocks around Scotland, which is of course one of the actions that have been taken.

Where is it?

Order, Mr Brown.

As for the other question on forecasting, I have some information that might be of interest to Annabel Goldie. On weather warnings and flashes such as those that were, indeed, given last Sunday night, in Scotland in 2010 we have had 96 such weather flashes for ice and 130 for snow. In even a normal Scottish winter, these are significant and common occurrences. However, what we faced last Monday was not the orange warning of a weather flash that we regularly get but an extraordinary circumstance of weather conditions.

Each year in Scotland, the Met Office puts forward four red flashes in their system for exceptional events. My view is that last Monday was an exceptional event. The issue with forecasting is not to suggest that it should be perfect; we are just explaining the combination of circumstances that put the Scottish Government, the emergency services, Traffic Scotland and every single person trying to deal with the emergency in a difficult position. Annabel Goldie’s attitude stands in contrast to the highly constructive attitude that she took last week, and she should at least come forward with some constructive suggestions for improving resilience.

I find it absolutely unbelievable that initiatives mooted by the Scottish Government because of last winter’s atrocious conditions cannot even be delivered by the Scottish Government to deal with this winter’s challenges.

In light of what the First Minister has just said, I point out that the Scottish Government spent yesterday pretending that no severe weather warnings had been issued on Sunday night. Last night, though, we caught it red-handed. It also spent yesterday claiming that, as the First Minister has said, the actual fresh snowfall was twice or three times the amount that had been predicted. The Met Office warned of up to 10cm of fresh snow across the central belt. Overnight, my office spoke to the Met Office, which confirmed that on Monday there was between 5cm and 10cm of fresh snowfall across the central belt. Frankly, how can anyone believe anything that this Government says about this crisis any more?

Scotland is losing patience and losing confidence in the transport minister, who has been complacent, negligent and belligerent. Are those essential components for being a Scottish Government minister or just optional extras?

I would have hoped that Annabel Goldie would have paid attention to the key details in yesterday’s statement. The national severe weather warning issued at 16:01 predicted 2.5cm of snow and 10cm in the higher areas and hills. The 20:41 flash warning forecast was for 2cm to 5cm of snow with 10cm in the hills and higher areas, not, as Ms Goldie put it, across central Scotland. The Met Office, which sits on the resilience committee, has absolutely confirmed to us that there was 5cm in Glasgow and 10cm in Edinburgh but 12cm in Livingston and 20cm in Lanarkshire. Unfortunately for us and unfortunately for Scotland, key aspects of our motorway network are not only in Glasgow and Edinburgh; they go through West Lothian and Lanarkshire.

The conditions were exceptional and extraordinary. At 10:30 last Monday, the Met Office said that the conditions were worse than those that were forecast.

We have never said that forecasting can be a perfect science. That is not the point that we are making. We are suggesting that, when people are thinking about the response that was put in place, the extraordinary weather circumstances should at least be acknowledged. Whatever the failings in communication—and there were failings in communication—there was an extraordinary response on the ground from the emergency services, gritters and a combination of the public and service personnel, who worked hard to help their fellow citizens in distress. I hold to that position because I saw what happened. The Government acknowledges the contribution of those people.

---

Secretary of State for Scotland (Meetings)

3. To ask the First Minister when he will next meet the Secretary of State for Scotland. (S3F-2764)

I have no plans to meet the Secretary of State in the immediate future, but we will no doubt discuss the outcome of consideration of the Scotland Bill.

I am sure that the First Minister now appreciates the frustration and anger of hundreds of Scottish motorists and truck drivers who have been trapped for long periods in snow and ice on central Scotland’s road network this week. Scottish drivers expect him to learn what went wrong and to know that his Government is putting it right.

Yesterday morning, the First Minister said on Radio Scotland that the

“forecast ... told us it would be a normal winter day in Scotland”.

Why has the Met Office stated that it gave his Government further updated and more severe weather warnings on Sunday evening? He has just stated that his Government received severe weather warnings at 8.40 and 8.49 on Sunday evening. Why did the Minister for Transport, Infrastructure and Climate Change’s statement to the Parliament yesterday not include those significant facts?

Let me clarify matters. The Met Office’s forecast on Sunday morning that went to the resilience committee told us to expect normal winter conditions on Monday. That was changed at 16:01, as the Minister for Transport, Infrastructure and Climate Change indicated, and a national severe weather warning came out. That forecast 2cm to 5cm of snow and 10cm in the higher areas. At 20:41, a further flash warning was forecast that suggested that there would be 2cm to 5cm of snow and 10cm in the higher areas. That was immediately put on the Traffic Scotland website.

The minister also pointed out that, at 8 o’clock on Monday morning, the Met Office suggested that there would be 2cm to 5cm of snow and 10cm in the higher areas. That is significant snowfall, but that level is not unusual in Scotland. I suspect that my constituency experienced at least that snowfall yesterday and that Tavish Scott’s constituency did so as well. What was unusual about the snowfall on Monday was that it was far greater than 2cm to 5cm or 10cm in the higher areas: it was 12cm in Livingston; 20cm in Lanarkshire; and, according to the president of the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities, whom I have every reason to believe, touched 30cm in East Kilbride. That is the reality.

This was an exceptional weather event. Thank goodness so many people on the ground performed exceptionally to help their fellow citizens in distress.

Members had an expectation that we would be told those figures and that they would have the information that has now come out about the Sunday evening weather warnings. Does not the First Minister appreciate that the forecasters were trying to do their best to help the Government and motorists with accurate forecasts? Alex Hill from the Met Office said:

“The forecast was right in timing, the forecast was right in location and we upped the amounts as we went through the entire period ... We got the information to them.”

Is it not clear that the Government received a great deal more information about severe weather the evening before it hit Scotland than it has said until now? Should not the Government’s contingency planning have ensured that those warnings became clear, unambiguous motoring advice overnight on Sunday and early on Monday not to travel in central Scotland? So that Scottish motorists know for next week, when winter weather is set to return, how deep does forecast snow have to be before the Government will act on a severe weather warning?

Let us be accurate. I have not attacked forecasters for forecasts that underestimated what happened. I will quote what Stewart Stevenson quoted yesterday. The view is not my view; it is the Met Office’s view not before the event, but after it had started. At 10:37 on Monday morning, after the snow was falling, the Met Office said that there were

“more significant snow accumulations than were expected yesterday across eastern parts of the Central Belt”

of Scotland. That statement, on Monday at 10:37, accepted that what was happening was greater than forecast.

The argument is not about attacking anyone; it is about trying to understand why our transport resilience was put under such extreme pressure. My view is that it was because of a combination of circumstances that, I hope, will occur once in a generation. However, I suspect that the lesson from what has happened is that, in considering the resilience of this country, we must expect such extraordinary weather events on a regular basis. On that, I hope that the Parliament and all the parties can start to identify what needs to be done to improve Scotland’s infrastructure and its ability to withstand the extremities of the climate. That will not be achieved if people do not agree and accept that what happened on Monday was truly exceptional, as every person who experienced it on the ground knows.

What happened on Monday is having real implications for my constituents today. Many communities have no fuel, trains from Motherwell to Clydesdale have been cancelled and motorways and trunk roads remain treacherous. How are the tankers that roll out of Grangemouth being allocated to ensure that rural areas such as Clydesdale are reached? What is being done to give rail commuters a fair service, rather than have points locked to service the west coast main line? Would it not be better to take the decision to close a road for a period, clear it properly, give the grit a fighting chance and let people get about their communities safely and securely?

I will deal with the first part of the question first. When I had to leave the debate this morning, it was to deal with exactly that sort of issue. There were key discussions about how, in recovering the fuel levels, fuel can be allocated to ensure that areas that have had most difficulty get priority. We are in a recovering and improving situation, but there will still be pinchpoints in key areas. That is being taken on board. I will reflect on the member’s question, as I appreciate that some areas of her constituency and elsewhere have had particular difficulties.

---

Tuition Fees (Impact on Scottish Higher Education)

4. To ask the First Minister what impact a decision to lift the cap on tuition fees at English universities would have on Scottish higher education. (S3F-2766)

It would be substantial, of course. We hope that the vote that will take place in Westminster today does not result in a major change in the way that England supports higher education. That is because, as we all know, if the change takes place to move the burden entirely on to the student, the impact on the consequentials for Scotland will be substantial and will leave us facing great challenges. We recognise that the situation in England affects Scottish higher education, but it should not be allowed to dictate it. Later this month, we will publish a green paper that will set out the range of options for the future of the higher education sector in Scotland. As part of that process, we will have to consider how best to respond to any pressure that is created by a misguided move in England to hugely increase tuition fees.

Will the First Minister confirm for us once again that there will be no imposition of tuition fees on Scottish students under a Scottish National Party Government? Will he call on the other parties to join the SNP in voting against the changes to tuition fees? In particular, will he encourage the Lib Dems to stick by the pledge that they made during the election campaign earlier this year and ask them to vote against tuition fees?

I am prepared to issue that rallying call to the Liberal Democrat group at Westminster to vote against tuition fees. The Scottish National Party will vote against, on the perfectly legitimate grounds that the vote today can affect Scottish higher education. However, there is hope, because a newspaper was passed to me just a few days ago that was delivered in Edinburgh and which shows the former student leader and Liberal candidate Alex Cole-Hamilton holding up a banner with the headline, “No to Student Fees”. I can only hope that that message gets across to the Liberal Democrat group at Westminster.

Will the First Minister acknowledge that, irrespective of the result of today’s debate at Westminster, the real issue at stake is the increased funding gap between Scottish universities and those south of the border? Will his Government provide a more sustainable long-term future for Scottish universities than that under proposals that Labour and Plaid Cymru have just announced in Wales?

I say as gently as possible to the member that she has put her finger on exactly why we are bringing forward the green paper: to find a distinctively Scottish approach to the issue. The member must remember that the immediate pressure on funding in Scotland is exactly because of the course that her party has chosen to take along with the Liberal Democrats—a path that will cut substantially the funds that are available for Scottish higher education. In joining to seek a solution, I hope that, at some point, she will remember the cause of the problem.

---

Energy Use (Independent Advice)

5. To ask the First Minister, in light of the decision to close the Sustainable Development Commission in Scotland, where the Scottish Government will seek independent advice on energy use in the public sector. (S3F-2774)

As the member will be aware, the Scottish Government provides funding to a number of organisations to provide independent advice to the Scottish Government, the wider public sector and individuals on energy consumption. It is true that the Westminster Government, which provided the majority of funding to the Sustainable Development Commission, has withdrawn its funding. However, the Scottish Government will continue to draw on independent advice and guidance on sustainability and energy use from a number of bodies.

This year the Scottish Government has provided £5.5 million funding to the Carbon Trust and £4.5 million to the Energy Savings Trust for its work on energy use. Through the Carbon Trust’s carbon management programme, our Scottish public bodies saved more than 350,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide and more than £35 million in energy costs, between 2005 and 2009.

Is the First Minister aware of last week’s announcement of the merger of the Sustainable Development Commission Wales with Cynnal Cymru to maintain independent advice and scrutiny of Welsh Assembly Government actions? Did ministers consider taking a similar approach to SDC Scotland? If so, why did they choose instead to abolish SDC Scotland?

If we had established a new Scottish Sustainable Development Commission, it would have meant establishing a new non-departmental public body in Scotland, which would have resulted in significant cost. In my first answer, I made the point that the Government provides substantial funding to bodies such as the Carbon Trust and the Energy Savings Trust and to the central energy efficiency fund, which provide substantial and independent guidance on energy savings. Of course, scrutiny of the Scottish Government is also done by bodies such as Audit Scotland. The scrutiny and support are there.

We would rather that the United Kingdom Government had not withdrawn the funding. Given the circumstances that we face and the successful track record of the bodies that I mentioned, we think that it is better to invest in bodies that provide such independent advice.

---

Prisoners (Festive Entertainment)

6. To ask the First Minister what discussions the Scottish Government has had with the Scottish Prison Service regarding additional entertainment for prisoners over the festive period. (S3F-2771)

None, sir.

I suggest that he have some discussion.

In this deep midwinter, as the halls of Barlinnie are no doubt decked with holly, as Saughton prisoners puff on a cigar after a Christmas dinner of turkey and Christmas pud and as the Addiewell cons enjoy their flat-screen TVs with some 15 channels, including soft porn, the only prisoners who are concerned are those in the open estate who fear that they may be granted home leave and so miss out on the jollification. Does the First Minister not realise the degree of anger and concern about the way in which prisoners are being mollycoddled? Will he instruct his colleague, the Cabinet Secretary for Justice, to ensure that all those treats are earned rather than given? Will he get prisoners out of the jails, clearing snow and doing some hard work? [Laughter.]

Order.

Such entertainment for prisoners in the Scottish Prison Service is very much a privilege; it is earned at the discretion of prison governors. Bill Aitken cited Addiewell prison. I thought that he might. I was reminded that the contract to run Addiewell with Sodexo was signed under the previous Administration. I was also reminded of the three prisons south of the border that the company runs. I did a wee bit of checking and found out that the policy in England is exactly the same as that in Scotland, so I will send the member’s excellent question to Kenneth Clarke and make clear that, once again, the member has been railing in the Parliament against a soft-touch England.

Does the First Minister accept that the real question is not Christmas bonuses and treats but the lack of adequate provision of skills training and work opportunities in prisons? Does the prisoner—[Laughter.] Does the First Minister agree that the Scottish Prison Service should give offenders worthwhile activities to stop idleness in jail and to give them useful skills that will assist their attempts to stop reoffending after prison?

As Robert Brown knows, our policy—and his—is to end short prison sentences, which do not do anything to support rehabilitation or to stop reoffending. As he also knows, the policy has another advantage. Community service winter emergency figures tell us that those on community service have spent 14,566 hours on snow clearing and other useful activities. Robert Brown and I can unite to say that that is another reason why community service orders are a much superior alternative to short prison sentences.