Plenary, 10 Feb 2000

Meeting date: Thursday, February 10, 2000

Official Report 1074KB pdf

---

First Minister's Question Time

---

SCOTTISH EXECUTIVE

---

Scottish Executive Cabinet (Meeting)

To ask the First Minister what issues were discussed at the most recent meeting of the Scottish Executive's Cabinet. (S1F-101) The First Minister (Donald Dewar): We discussed several matters of significance to the Executive and to the people of Scotland.

Will the First Minister lead a discussion on joined-up government in the Cabinet, after a week in which it emerged that the Scotland Office has disappeared from the Scottish Executive's phone book, the Secretary of State for Scotland has recalled the Scottish Grand Committee with only passing reference to the First Minister, who will not turn up anyway, and the First Secretary of Wales resigned without telling the Prime Minister?

Also this week, Mr Brian Wilson blew his top on "Newsnight" and attacked the concept of a Scottish Six on the ground that BBC Scotland is not fit to run it and runs "a Mickey Mouse operation". On behalf of the Scottish Executive, will the First Minister repudiate the comments made by Mr Brian Wilson in a blatant attempt to undermine the campaign for a Scottish Six?

I did not have the pleasure of seeing that particular edition of "Newsnight", which seems to have been a splendid intellectual version of a good-going stairheid brawl.

I congratulate the programme on achieving an increased number of viewers—100,000. That is encouraging. I have always made clear my view that the important thing is that current affairs broadcasting in Scotland is of a good standard, serious of intent and fair of presentation. I hold to that.

I find the other examples advanced by Mr Salmond very odd. I see nothing objectionable— indeed, I welcome it—in my colleagues at Westminster's interest in the Scottish Grand Committee's consideration of areas of reserved responsibility, which are of such importance. At the moment, for example, Scottish MPs are examining the new deal. I know that Mr Salmond will join me in rejoicing at the fact that, during the past 18 months, youth unemployment in Scotland has been cut by 59 per cent, which is excellent.

I notice that in the very paper that reported the discussion on "Newsnight", the SNP's Margaret Ewing complained about the broadcasters sending

Scotland to sleep. She said that, frankly, she was bored by their efforts. I would not agree with her about that. Everyone is entitled to their opinion.

Mr Brian Wilson said of BBC Scotland:

"on the basis of the Newsnight Scottish opt-out, I wouldn't trust them to run a raffle."

Clearly, there is disagreement between the First Minister and the Minister of State in the Scotland Office.

Does the First Minister recall telling this to the chamber only three weeks ago?

"I can assure the chamber that an Administration or Government that tried to bully or to over-influence the broadcasting process would be open to very considerable criticism."—[Official Report, 20 January 2000; Vol 4, c 359.]

Is Mr Brian Wilson open to "very considerable criticism" or not?

I have said that I was not involved in the discussion. As I ought to be evenhanded, when I praise, I may also criticise. I was amused—I hope that he will not resent this—by the Deputy First Minister's predicament on the Scottish opt-out of "Newsnight" when there was a technical difficulty, which turned out be that they had forgotten to unlock the studio door. The Deputy First Minister therefore had to be interviewed on his mobile phone while standing in the street. I do not know the particular circumstances that raised the temperature of the discussion with Brian Wilson.

If Mr Salmond is telling me that there are no disagreements about individual television programmes and their merit among his number, the SNP is reaching a level of discipline that is unbelievable and undesirable. I am always interested in controversy, and I hope that it will continue.

I worked with Alun Michael, my colleague in Wales, when he was minister of state at the Home Office and when he was Secretary of State for Wales. He has made a considerable contribution to setting up the National Assembly for Wales. I am sure that his race is not run and that he will contribute again to the politics of his country. Wastage among First Secretaries for Wales is as nothing compared with the wastage that we see among, for example, managers of Celtic Football Club or editors of The Scotsman newspaper.

Hang on a second, Mr Salmond. We are in grave danger of moving away from the First Minister's responsibilities, on which he is required to answer by standing orders.

The First Minister will recall that Mr Alun Michael opposed the concept of a Welsh

Six, and look what happened to him. Will the First Minister join me in making representations to the BBC's new director general during this period of consultation to disregard Mr Brian Wilson's comments on the quality of Scottish journalism, or will he sit on the fence while Brian Wilson puts the boot into BBC Scotland?

I think about the great issues that face Scotland, such as unemployment and the economy, and I shake my head in puzzlement—although not necessarily in anger— at the choice of subject of the leader of the Scottish National party.

---

Prime Minister (Meeting)

To ask the First Minister when he next intends to meet the Prime Minister and what subjects he intends to raise in discussion with him. (S1F-96) The First Minister (Donald Dewar): I welcome the change—the question usually relates to what we did discuss, but on this it occasion it relates to what we intend to discuss. However, I am not a futurologist. It will be an interesting and full agenda, highly relevant to the interests of Scotland.

I hope that the First Minister will convey to the Prime Minister that this side of the chamber looks forward to his visit next month to address members of the Parliament. As befits the dignity of his office, he will receive the warm and courteous welcome that last week the Parliament accorded to his successor. [Laughter.]

Order.

Will the First Minister also raise with the Prime Minister the subject of asylum seekers, which was referred to last night in the Parliament and earlier today at question time by Shona Robison? As a result of the dispersal programme, we are about to receive 6,000 asylum seekers. Although people in Scotland recognise that we must play our part in helping genuine refugees, the source of the problem is the failure of the Labour Government at Westminster, which has made us not so much a safe haven for refugees as a soft touch for bogus asylum seekers. Will the First Minister ask the Prime Minister to ensure that Jack Straw sorts out this problem at source so that it does not become a permanent problem for local authorities in Scotland?

I understand that the consortium of local authorities in Scotland that is talking to the Home Office is anxious to offer assistance to asylum seekers who find themselves in this country. It is important that that is done properly, and I agree with Mr McLetchie if that is the point he is making. I thought he was about to announce a conversion to a rather different point of view on how these people should be treated, but it turns out that he is back on the soft touch argument, which I rather regret.

I must confess that I cannot remember anything that the leader of the Conservative party said. I thought that he had bad luck in being rather overshadowed by the coincidence of George Foulkes's visit to the Parliament. However, I thank Mr McLetchie for his remarks about the courteous welcome that ought to be accorded to all distinguished visitors.

I want to return to the subject of asylum. The Labour Government has declared an amnesty for 30,000 asylum seekers. As 70 per cent of all applications are refused, it is likely that a high proportion of those people should not be resident in this country today. The Labour Government also abolished the list of safe countries from which applications could be fast- tracked, so that we now have a backlog of more than 100,000 applications for asylum, costing the taxpayer £600 million. That is a very serious problem. Is it not another example of the Government failing to think through the consequences of its decisions and actions for which councils in Scotland will have to pick up the pieces?

I do not want it to look as though I am sheltering behind this, but that is, to say the least, rather far from my remit and responsibilities.

We have to give proper refuge to those who make application, but we must also try in every way possible to expedite examination of their cases quickly, so that people know where they stand, and so that they can either stay or depart as circumstances and judgment demand. It does not help us if we stray into what I would say are rather intemperate statements that suggest that there is wide abuse and that we ought somehow to take a tougher line than we are presently taking.

Dennis Canavan (Falkirk West) Will the First Minister be in Westminster on 29 February for the meeting of the resurrected Scottish Grand Committee, or will he stay here, just in case—

Order. This question is about the Prime Minister.

I am coming to the Prime Minister.

Will the First Minister stay here just in case there is a coup in his absence, and he ends up like the Prime Minister's other poodle, Alun Michael?

That is not in order.

I think that that was a somewhat offensive presentation. I have already

said this to Alex Salmond, and I will repeat it for Dennis Canavan's benefit: it is not a resurrection of the Scottish Grand Committee, which was never disbanded. There are substantial areas of policy on which my colleagues at Westminster can very properly take an interest, but which are not within the remit of this Parliament.

I was consulted about the programme of the Scottish Grand Committee this year and I warmly welcome the fact that it is examining youth unemployment and the new deal. I think that that is admirable and entirely appropriate.

---

National Parks

To ask the First Minister what progress is being made towards the introduction of national parks in Scotland. (S1F-106) The First Minister (Donald Dewar): Good progress is being made on national parks. The consultation paper on the draft bill was launched on 21 January. That keeps us on track to meet our commitment in our programme for government to

"establish the first National Park for Scotland in Loch Lomond and the Trossachs by summer 2001."

I hope to progress with some speed to the establishment of a similar national park in the Cairngorms.

Will the First Minister comment on my view that the setting up of the first national park in Loch Lomond and the Trossachs, which fall within my constituency of Stirling, will be both exciting and challenging in bringing together groups and individuals to devise a new model for rural sustainability?

I can agree with that. I know Sylvia Jackson takes a great interest as a local constituency member and that she will shortly meet my colleague, Sarah Boyack, who has responsibility to consider the interim budget for the current year.

I agree that the point about rural sustainability is one of the really interesting aspects of national parks. We will have a system that allows us to monitor events and developments closely. It is inevitably a matter of balance to consider the interests of residents, tourists and visitors passing through, wildlife and agriculture. I hope that, within the rational framework that we are establishing, we will have real success in getting the balance right and in justifying both the expenditure involved and the effort from local authorities, local interests and Government.

As a regular holiday visitor to Argyll, can the First Minister tell us whether he has noticed the perilous economic condition of Dunoon? Does he also recognise the economic advantage to Dunoon of being a gateway town to the new national park? If he does realise that advantage, will he give us a commitment to include the area of Loch Eck and Argyll forest park in the new boundary, so that Dunoon can once again prosper?

This question is about national parks, not Dunoon.

I think that this is a time for being quite shameless: I am not at all familiar with the arguments going on about the boundary of the national park. When the legislation is debated, there will certainly be opportunities for discussing the matter Mr Hamilton raises. If he has adopted Argyll as his particular interest and wishes to make representations, I am sure that they will be listened to carefully.

I heard the First Minister's comments with interest. Can he allay the concerns of many residents of the Trossachs area who are fearful of the large increase in the number of visitors, for whom there will be insufficient numbers of toilets, lay-bys and other resources and who will bring only traffic jams, pollution and erosion to a lovely area that we seek to preserve?

Can the First Minister tell us what finance he will make available to local authorities to alleviate that problem?

Mr Monteith approached the word "Trossachs" with all the diffidence of a foreigner, but I am glad to say that he got there.

We want to establish proper control of visitors and associated issues. The land erosion and damage to tree roots, which can be seen, and the problem of water skiing on Loch Lomond, are good examples of why we must strike a balance. The point of a national park is to create and enforce that balance.

We provide the interim authority with 80 per cent of its revenue. If I remember rightly, that figure will rise to 85 per cent next year. Sylvia Jackson, along with other interested people, is holding discussions with the minister about finance and future structures.

We should all unite in welcoming this long- overdue initiative that is an important part of our legislative programme. We want to ensure that the machinery that we put in place is effective and has the desired results. That means that we have to have the wherewithal to carry out the policies that are agreed.

---

Scottish Media Group

To ask the First Minister whether he or any member of the Scottish Executive has met the Scottish Media Group to discuss the implications of its current plans for regional identity in Scotland. (S1F-98)

I have had no recent meeting with the Scottish Media Group. I have contact with the management from time to time. Clearly the fate of the SMG and the way in which it conducts its business are of general interest, but it is an independent company that is not and should not be under the control of government.

As I suspect that this is what Mr Lochhead is getting at, I will say that I strongly favour broadcasting that reflects local interests and local needs. I recognise that there should be a regional dimension to broadcasting. That is as true of Scotland as part of the United Kingdom as it is within Scotland. I hope that I have the support of every member on that point.

Does the First Minister accept the view that proposals by the Scottish Media Group to downgrade its regional television division will erode regional identity in Scotland? Pay levels and jobs are under threat at SMG—all four producer-director posts at Grampian Television could go. If they do, that will be devastating for the station. Since its takeover of Grampian, SMG has disregarded its obligation under its franchise and is doing its best to take the Grampian out of Grampian Television.

Will the First Minister and the Executive join the campaign to remove the threat to regional identity in the north and north-east of Scotland—and throughout the country—express his concerns to the Independent Television Commission and demand action to promote regional broadcasting in Scotland?

I cannot go down that road with Richard Lochhead. That would be extremely unwise. I know that the matter concerns an industrial dispute involving the Broadcasting Entertainment Cinematograph and Theatre Union and I know that it is an important matter for the area. It is not for me to take sides in that dispute. I appreciate the importance of the conditions that are imposed by the ITC and I expect them to be fully honoured.

Further to Mr Salmond's comments, does the First Minister agree that, unlike the worrying situation at Grampian Television, the BBC has made a substantial investment in its Scottish service, including a commitment to full and impartial coverage of this Parliament? Does he agree that that shows the benefits of being within a British public broadcasting service?

We are discussing the Scottish Media Group, not the BBC.

I have already said that we want very high standards of reporting and commenting on Scottish politics and current affairs. That is part of the tradition of public service broadcasting to which the BBC tries hard to cleave.

---

NHS (Temporary Nurses)

To ask the First Minister whether he will outline the Scottish Executive's response to the Accounts Commission report regarding the £25 million per year spent on temporary nurses by the NHS in Scotland. (S1F-107) The First Minister (Donald Dewar): I am aware of the report from the Accounts Commission, and I welcome it. It will insist that employers make more effective and appropriate use of bank and agency nurses to the benefit of patient care. It is important that we organise our resources effectively, to get the best possible return for patients.

I am grateful for the First Minister's response. In light of his recent staffing problems, how would he advise the NHS in Scotland to correct the management difficulties that are outlined in the report, to ensure better staff management, rigorous employment checks and effective induction and appraisal?

I am sure that Mrs Scanlon, as a front-bench spokesperson, recognises that we do rather well in Scotland. According to the last official figures, from April 1999, the vacancy rate was 1 per cent. Given the inevitable turnover, that is very low indeed. Mrs Scanlon will know that the number of nurses who are employed per 100,000 of population means that we are much better placed than the rest of the country, and we want to maintain that.

I do not know whether Mrs Scanlon heard Margaret Pullin, the acting Scottish secretary of the Royal College of Nursing, being interviewed on the radio the other day. She said:

"This Government is saying all the right things and to be fair they are trying to come through and deliver what they are saying."

She finished by saying:

"I do honestly believe we have a Government that listens now, and I think that is helping, but you are not going to overturn the situation overnight."

We have a good, strong situation, we are making progress, and I hope that we have the support, in that, of Mrs Scanlon.

Does the First Minister accept that the thrust of the Accounts Commission report on agency nurses is to highlight the need for more sensitive management by local NHS trusts? Does the Scottish Executive

intend to issue guidelines to health boards and

NHS trusts governing the administration of nurse banks, to include safeguards to record the number of hours that are worked? That would ensure the presence of key skills in the nurses who are chosen for particular jobs in the workplace, following examples of current good practice among wards.

I agree that it is important to have close co-operation in this matter. I deliberately referred to good management in my first reply, as that is as important as anything else. I know that the Minister for Health and Community Care, Susan Deacon, is working closely on that.

We are also anxious to retain and encourage people in the nursing profession. That is why, in this year's pay review, there was 7 to 8 per cent for senior nurses. Last year, for nurses at grade D—which is at the bottom end of the grading system—there was a 12 per cent increase. The first increase was to encourage entry, the second to encourage retention. That, plus good practice, good management and the high base from which we work, will mean that the service will be well looked after in the years ahead.

That concludes question time.

On a point of order. In an earlier response, during First Minister's questions, a reference to me was made by the First Minister. I was surprised to find that Uncle Donald, who is not listening now, could be so ungracious—

Order. I am sorry to interrupt you, but I looked at the screen to see whether you were pressing your button to seek to intervene. However, you did not do so at the time.

I did.

No, your name was not on the screen. I looked very carefully.

I pressed my button.

We cannot continue the argument, as it is not a point of order.

I am sure that it was not the intention of the First Minister to mislead the Parliament. He knows full well from my voting record, speeches and comments, that I support—

I am sorry, but that is not a point of order. It is a point of continuing argument, and you must resume your seat.