Plenary, 10 Jan 2008

Meeting date: Thursday, January 10, 2008

Official Report 781KB pdf

---

First Minister's Question Time

---

Engagements

To ask the First Minister what engagements he has planned for the rest of the day. (S3F-399)

Later today I will have meetings to take forward the Government's programme for Scotland.

I take this opportunity to wish the Presiding Officer, every member in the chamber and all our viewers a very happy new year.

Highly appropriate compliments of the season.

Earlier this week, the SNP Government trailed a new telephone hotline for the public to report concerns about young children who are at risk from drug or alcohol abusing parents. I welcome the initiative, but a phone line is no substitute for a national strategy to protect vulnerable children. One of the best ways to protect every vulnerable two-year-old is to see them every day, day-in, day-out, at nursery. Alongside asking the public to live up to their responsibility to at-risk children, will the First Minister live up to his responsibility and commit to our plans to provide a nursery place for every vulnerable two-year-old in Scotland?

I welcome Wendy Alexander's welcome for the announcement on the hotline, and I am sure that she agrees on its importance. I gently remind her that our plans for nursery education are to increase provision by 50 per cent during this session of Parliament—something that was not even attempted by the previous Administration in eight years.

The First Minister promised a 50 per cent increase in nursery education, but he is not providing it. What he is delivering for three and four-year-olds is exactly the promise that my party and other parties in the chamber made.

The issue is what we do with our most vulnerable children. I did not get an answer to my question, so I come back to the issue. The care of the most vulnerable children in Scotland is in not only the public's hands but the First Minister's hands. The cash that the previous Executive provided for the purpose runs out in June and there is no commitment to keep the funding, or the places, available. Just so we are all clear, because we have been here before, is the First Minister willing today to guarantee to maintain the current funding for vulnerable two-year-olds and will he extend the scheme to the rest of Scotland? Yes or no?

Wendy Alexander said that the 50 per cent increase that we are planning for nursery education across Scotland matches the promises of the Labour Party. It does, but the Labour Party made that promise at two previous Scottish elections and never delivered on it.

I am willing to look closely at anything that will benefit vulnerable children in Scotland. I will do that on the basis that Wendy Alexander looks closely at the national outcomes that have been agreed between the Government and local government throughout Scotland—in particular outcome 8, which she will find on page 9 of the concordat, to improve

"the life chances for children, young people and families at risk."

At some point, Wendy Alexander will have to join the growing consensus north and south of the border that the new relationship that this Government is building with local authorities throughout Scotland will benefit every citizen of this country.

I am happy to acknowledge that there has been too much red tape and too much redundant monitoring in the past, but that is no excuse for the Government to pass the buck on tackling the nation's toughest challenges and remove the funding for vulnerable two-year-olds that is currently in place.

I turn to the facts: today, this year, more than £150 million is dedicated to children's services throughout Scotland. Under the SNP Government, that sum will fall to below £50 million later this year—a fall of more than two thirds in the moneys dedicated to children's services. The changing children's services fund has been halved; the local youth works scheme has gone; the improving fostering fund has gone; and sure start moneys and the child care workforce development fund are up for grabs.

Scotland might be gaining a phone line, but more than £100 million that is currently dedicated to Scotland's children is now at risk. I ask the First Minister a question that goes to the heart of the issue: why is he content to protect the funding for some causes but willing to leave it to a postcode lottery when it comes to vulnerable children?

I say as gently as I can to Wendy Alexander that continuing this failed line of general attack on the end to ring fencing is going to get her absolutely nowhere. In the four previous examples of her attempts to scaremonger to vulnerable groups throughout Scotland, she has failed to make any progress whatsoever, resulting, unfortunately for her, in a magisterial put-down from Councillor Pat Watters, the president of the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities, during the Christmas holidays. I remind Wendy Alexander of exactly what the president of COSLA—a Labour councillor—had to say. He entered the debate

"not on a party political basis, but in an attempt to provide reassurance to vulnerable members of our communities and those who make provision for them that removal of ring-fencing can lead to better, more effective services—not, as some claim, the opposite."

He continued:

"The bureaucracy of ring-fencing was staggering and its demise will see more funding available for direct service provision to communities, rather than it being wasted on needless and useless reporting."

Given that councils throughout Scotland, the president of COSLA and even Wendy Alexander's colleagues south of the border have bought into the new idea of co-operation between central and local government, will Wendy Alexander now finally stop scaremongering to vulnerable groups and join the consensus?

I doubt it surprises anybody that the deal's negotiator is sticking up for the deal.

Oh!

Is the First Minister accusing Save the Children of scaremongering when it says, as it did today, that it is extremely concerned that there is no national target or outcome in the budget for reducing child poverty in Scotland?

We can all trade quotations from third parties, but the people of Scotland are interested in what the First Minister believes. Ten years ago, this country voted for a Parliament so that members could protect the vulnerable two-year-olds of Scotland, our homeless, those with mental health issues, children with disabilities and women facing violence. The truth is that the Government is taking the guarantees to the poor, the weak and the dispossessed out of the nation's budget and leaving it to chance. [Interruption.]

Order.

The question is this: if a postcode lottery is so wrong when it comes to Scotland's health services, why is it so right when it comes to vulnerable children, nursery places for two-year-olds and protecting the weakest in our society?

Wendy Alexander says that I am quoting third parties—I am quoting the Labour Party. I remind Wendy Alexander of what Pat Watters had to say. He described the attitude that she has displayed today as

"a slur on local government politicians and a silly argument."

He also said:

"It is ironic that we have heard more from some opposition parties about these groups as part of an attack on the government's Budget than we have ever heard over the last eight years."

I remind Wendy Alexander that the local government councillors across Scotland at whom, according to Pat Watters, she is casting slurs sit on councils, most of which—12 out of 32—are led by her political party. Those are the very people who she thinks will not follow the outcome agreements that will protect vulnerable groups across society. [Interruption.]

Order.

It is not a question of third parties; for Wendy Alexander, the party is almost over.

---

Prime Minister (Meetings)

To ask the First Minister when he will next meet the Prime Minister. (S3F-400)

I expect to meet the Prime Minister at the British-Irish Council summit in Dublin in the very near future.

This week, there have been two disturbing criminal cases in Scotland of sex offenders coming before our courts, and sheriffs feeling powerless to act to protect the public. In particular, in Perth sheriff court, a violent rapist who was imprisoned for a subsequent sexual offence involving a 13-year-old girl was released after only six months of an 18-month sentence on conditions that he broke within three days. The sheriff described the man as posing a "high risk of re-offending".

Is the First Minister content that predatory sex offenders get early release, only to breach their release conditions? I am not. We cannot continue to betray victims and imperil public safety. Does he agree that it is time to scrap early release?

No, I do not believe in a general scrapping of early release. I think that everyone in the chamber will share Annabel Goldie's concern about predatory sex offenders. Given that it is probably invidious for me to comment on an individual case, I will ask the Cabinet Secretary for Justice to write to Annabel Goldie to see whether he can reassure her on these important matters.

When it comes to protecting the public, the Scottish Conservative position is absolutely clear: we would end early release. We would certainly not extend home detention curfews as the SNP Government is hell-bent on doing. Mr Salmond may think it acceptable to have an ever-increasing number of convicts in the community, but I do not.

On the issue of sex offenders, when we met the Scottish Government seven months ago to discuss Scottish Conservative proposals for compulsory lie-detector tests and GPS satellite tracking, we met an encouraging response. Sadly, seven months later, instead of taking forward those sensible proposals, the Scottish Government seems to be more interested in emptying our jails. Why is it betraying victims and the public?

For the sake of clarity, I point out to Annabel Goldie that predatory sex offenders are specifically excluded from home detention curfew. I want to reassure the public on the matter. Annabel Goldie should understand and acknowledge that point of fact.

On the general matter of prison provision for sex offenders, one of the first decisions that this Government took—a decision which I think was welcomed—was the decision to go ahead with the long, long delayed plan to rebuild Peterhead prison. Through its pioneering provision of a jail-based system for sex offenders, Peterhead prison has done outstanding work in keeping our community safe from harm. I think that Annabel Goldie will agree that the early decision that we took is a signal of how seriously we take these matters in order to keep our society safe.

---

Cabinet (Meetings)

To ask the First Minister what issues will be discussed at the next meeting of the Cabinet. (S3F-401)

The next meeting of Cabinet will discuss matters of importance to the people of Scotland.

Before the election, on a BBC programme, a voter asked Nicola Sturgeon, "If I vote your party into power next May, will you promise to immediately stop all PPP funding for schools in Scotland?" Nicola Sturgeon replied, "Yes."

The First Minister said that his Scottish futures trust would be up and running by Christmas. Has either of those things now happened? [Interruption.]

Order.

I do not know what Nicol Stephen was doing over the Christmas holidays, but perhaps he should have been reading the Government‘s consultation paper on the new methods of financing public services across Scotland, which was published immediately before Christmas.

I see that Nicol Stephen has the document in his hand. Rather than just have it in his hand, perhaps he should have spent the Christmas holidays doing some background reading.

Alex Salmond spent the election campaign promising that he would scrap the public-private partnership system for schools, but all he has done is sneak out a consultation document on the last day before the Christmas recess. The document makes nine excuses about why he is going to keep PPP and why his Scottish futures trust cannot work. PPP for schools is to remain. He complains in paragraph 6.2 that one reason for that is that his Government, outrageously, is being forced to follow new international financial reporting standards—along with every other country in Europe.

People do not want excuses. Councils are waiting to get on with building new schools. Projects have ground to a halt. People are waiting in St Andrews, in Laurencekirk, in Angus, at Ellon academy and throughout East Lothian. There is not a penny in the First Minister's Scottish futures trust—far from being up and running, it does not even exist. I ask him this simple question: how many schools does he pledge to build in his term of office with money from the Scottish futures trust? Will there be any, or is this just another fully broken promise from our First Minister?

Nicol Stephen mentions Angus schools. I thought that his knowledge of the north-east did not even extend to Aberdeen, but he should go and have a look at the building programmes in Carnoustie and Forfar, where he will see schools actually being built. [Interruption.]

Order. Excuse me, First Minister—

The additional £40 million allocated in the early stages of the Government—

Order. I am sorry to interrupt the First Minister, but I must have better order in the chamber. Members will obviously make interventions when they wish to do so, but when I cannot hear the answers I think that it has gone too far.

As Corporal Jones used to say, "They don't like it up 'em, do they?"

I am enjoying myself enormously, Presiding Officer, and I apologise for not allowing you to interrupt me. I was pointing out to Nicol Stephen that the distribution model that is set out in the consultation document will point the way to a better system of providing public services in Scotland. That model is a light year in advance of the PPP system that has cost this country so much and to which the Liberals in Scotland were addicted when they were in government here—while their Liberal colleagues in Westminster, some of whom are visiting today, made speech after speech against it.

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. To be helpful to you, Presiding Officer, I advise you that you would get better order in the chamber if you insisted that the First Minister actually answered the questions that are put to him.

I do not need to point out to somebody of Lord Foulkes's experience that I have no control over ministerial answers. I will get better order in the chamber when members obey my instructions, please, to make fewer sedentary interventions. I speak to members of all parties—there is no need for any members to point fingers at others.

I have an impossible number of requests for supplementaries, but I will do my best to get in as many as possible.

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I apologise for raising this point of order yet again, but we do not have the same tradition as at Westminster, where the Speaker can name members. If we cannot do that, can we please have microphones that will allow those of us who want to hear the First Minister being brought to account to do so? Without that, the meeting is useless.

That is not a point of order for me.

Is the First Minister aware of the European Commission state aid ruling against Shetland Islands Council that has a Monday deadline? Does he acknowledge that the ruling will mean repayment by Shetland fishing businesses and 78 Shetland share fishermen?

I thank Mr Lochhead and his staff for the help that they are providing to the council, but will the First Minister urgently ensure that the council is assisted in appealing to the European Court of Justice against the Commission ruling, if that proves to be necessary and appropriate?

I thank Tavish Scott for giving me notice of his question. As he knows, officials and the cabinet secretary are in close contact with Shetland Islands Council officials. Mr Lochhead will write to ministers from the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs later today to ask them to continue to press the European Commission along the lines that Tavish Scott suggested.

We are aware that any support given at any point has to abide by European Commission state aid rules, but it seems extraordinary that Shetland Islands Council is being forced to take back money when it does not want to take it back but wants to use it to assist our fishing industry. The local MSP can be assured that the cabinet secretary and everyone in the Government are acutely aware of the problems that the decision is causing for Shetland fishermen.

During the passage of the Family Law (Scotland) Bill, I raised the issue of parents who breach court contact orders, denying the child the opportunity to have time with the non-resident parent. Helpfully, the Executive at the time agreed that pilot projects would establish family court facilitators to try to reduce the number of breaches, but a letter from the Government department that deals with justice states:

"ministers have concluded that it will not be possible to proceed with the pilots".

It appears that the important pilot projects will be abandoned.

Does the First Minister understand the disappointment of those who argued for the important pilot projects? Does he acknowledge that the issue is, in essence, one of child welfare? Will he confirm that the Government will reconsider the matter as soon as possible? Will the Government meet me and Mary Mulligan—the Labour spokesperson on children—so that we can discuss other ways of ensuring that the projects can proceed?

The cabinet secretary will be delighted to meet Pauline McNeill and Mary Mulligan to discuss the issue further. The issue is slightly more complex than Pauline McNeill was able to describe in the limited time available to her. No appropriate tender came in for the work to spread the projects across Scotland. That is a substantial difficulty that cannot just be wished away. However, the difficulty makes it all the more important that Pauline McNeill and Mary Mulligan come to see the cabinet secretary to discuss the issue in more detail and to see whether a way of dealing with the problem can be found.

How does the Scottish Government intend to build on the successes of the 2007 year of Highland culture, which comes to an end on old new year's night next Saturday?

Scotland's year of Highland culture has been a great success and I congratulate everyone involved. The Scottish Government is working with the board of Highland 2007 to guarantee the legacy from the project. We will continue to promote creative excellence and access to cultural opportunities such as those offered by the winter festivals that draw on and celebrate our unique communities' heritage and landscape.

I will be delighted to participate this coming Friday in a Highland culture event; and I will be equally delighted to open the new Gaelic school in Inverness. Rob Gibson will be particularly interested in that.

---

Scottish Government Priorities

To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government's priorities will be for 2008. (S3F-406)

Before we discuss 2008, I will say that 2007 was a year of historic success and achievement for Scotland. We remember saving hospitals and accident and emergency departments; abolishing prescription charges, bridge tolls and student fees; freezing the council tax; cutting business rates; axing Government departments and quangos; rejecting nuclear power; opposing Trident; replacing the private finance initiative; and ending private involvement in the national health service.

I assure the member that in 2008 it will not just be more of the same. Our priority will be to build on the momentum and ensure that the people of Scotland begin to feel the full benefit of the Government's policies to build a stronger, more prosperous nation—now and over the long term.

I concur with everything the First Minister says—which will come as no surprise. I am sure that he will share my opinion that a main concern of people in Scotland in 2008 is the possible loss of their local post office. That policy was pushed through by Labour MPs in the face of widespread opposition from other parties.

Four post offices in Glasgow, Argyll and central Scotland have been saved, but it was announced yesterday that four others will close. Does the First Minister agree that what is not needed around the country is a piecemeal approach? The UK Government should call a halt to the process and take a more considered look at the future of post office services in Scotland.

I hope that everyone across the chamber will join me in expressing deep concern about the ravages on the post office network across Scotland. The whole Parliament might agree that it would be better if the issue fell under the competence of this Parliament and this Government.

One thing that puzzles every constituency member across Scotland is that if the Government in Westminster is able to provide £1.7 billion of financial support to close up to 2,500 post offices, why on earth was it not able to back the post offices and keep the services that would have allowed a viable post office network to continue?

I am sure that the First Minister agrees that the spread of live information to everyone in Scotland must be at the heart of extending democracy throughout the country. Will he join me in welcoming the launch of the Jubilee 1 radio station, which is committed to what I understand is the only live communication of First Minister's questions in our communities? It is now broadcasting to the communities of Kirkliston, Dalmeny, South Queensferry, North Queensferry, Dalgety Bay, Aberdour and Inverkeithing.

I am told that the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Sustainable Growth will give the station an update on the Forth replacement crossing every week in more live broadcasts. I congratulate the station and its initiative on live broadcasting. I am sure that members will unite in believing that the broadcasting of question time in the Parliament will result in a dramatic upsurge in the listenership of the new radio station.

---

Tourism

To ask the First Minister what steps will be taken to meet the Scottish National Party's target of expanding tourism in Scotland by 50 per cent by 2015, in light of recent comments by Philip Riddle, chief executive of VisitScotland. (S3F-421)

This Government is working with the tourism industry as it seeks to respond to international competition and grow revenue. Several industry-led groups are working to drive the changes that are needed to achieve the shared ambition of 50 per cent tourism growth by 2015.

Philip Riddle commented that the ambition is achievable, but he recognised that some areas might struggle to achieve it, while others could well exceed it. VisitScotland believes that Scottish tourism has a lot more potential for growth than has hitherto been realised. I agree with that analysis.

We share the desire to meet the 50 per cent target, which was introduced under the previous Executive. One way of supporting tourism is to promote air links to Scotland. In recent days, the proposed Aberdeen to Houston link has been postponed and the established Inverness to Heathrow route has been lost. Will the Government now revisit its decision not to replace the air route development fund, which has enabled hundreds of thousands of visitors to fly directly to Scotland?

We should remember that, in the recent debate on tourism, Patricia Ferguson pointed out that the Parliament should understand that the target that was set during the previous Administration was not a Government target but an industry target that the Government pledged to support. This Administration shares support for that target.

As regards the route development fund, the member should be well aware that the discretion that was granted under European rules to buy all Scottish airports in the fund came to an end. That left us in a position in which pursuit of that particular avenue was no longer the way to encourage direct flights for Scotland. The Government is actively considering the matter because we recognise the importance of having more, not fewer, direct flights from Scotland. The Scottish Government very much welcomes anything that enables us to avoid going through the London connection to make our case internationally.

---

Norovirus

To ask the First Minister what measures are being taken to prevent the spread of the norovirus in hospitals in Scotland. (S3F-412)

As I know Ross Finnie is aware, control of outbreaks of the norovirus in closed settings such as hospital wards is extremely difficult. Environmental cleaning, hand hygiene, isolation of patients, restrictions on the movement of staff and patients, and the exclusion of affected staff from work are all key measures that are being taken. Health Protection Scotland is also providing expert assistance on outbreak management when that is requested.

No one would disagree with the measures that the First Minister described.

As at one stage during the past two weeks the virus was affecting no fewer than 20 hospital wards in Scotland, does the First Minister share my concern that the message about how the public can co-operate properly with efforts to contain the virus is not clear? There has been a distinct lack of public information to assist public understanding. Indeed, there have been confused messages. Some newspaper reports advised people not to visit surgeries. That might be correct in general terms, but I am sure that the First Minister agrees that misunderstanding of the message could lead to serious consequences for young and elderly people, for whom dehydration could be a serious issue. Does the First Minister agree that a higher-profile public information campaign would have greatly assisted?

The Cabinet Secretary for Health and Wellbeing will be delighted to consider that. Of course, Ross Finnie was talking about a newspaper report, not a Government statement. I accept his argument that we should try to have as much public information as possible.

Ross Finnie and all other members should understand the impact of such a highly infectious virus on our health services. Wards have had to be closed in 29 hospitals and, as at 7 January, 347 patients had been affected. I am sure that all members acknowledge that because of the highly infectious nature of the virus not only patients and the general public but health service staff have been affected—159 staff members have become infected as a result of the infection on wards. That should remind us to ensure that at all times we recognise our health workers for the role that they play in protecting the community and for the fine job that they do in what can be dangerous circumstances as they work and pursue their careers for the public interest.

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. Have you changed the policy of Presiding Officers during the past eight and a half years, whereby points of order are not taken during First Minister's question time but are held over until the end, or are there special privileges for particular members?

I accept that the approach has normally been to take points of order at the end of First Minister's question time, but that is entirely at the behest of the Presiding Officer. Today, I took points of order as they were made, but I will reflect on what you have said.

Meeting suspended until 14:15.

On resuming—