Engagements
I have a range of engagements to take forward the Government’s programme for Scotland including, I am delighted to say, the announcement of 5,000 new modern apprenticeship places, which have been made possible with the use of European social fund money. Those extra modern apprenticeships, which are for all ages, bring the total number of opportunities for work-focused training in Scotland to almost 40,000 this coming year. I know that Iain Gray will want to congratulate Skills Development Scotland on its success in this initiative.
The First Minister well knows that I always welcome apprenticeships. That is good news indeed. Unfortunately, when it comes to the economy in Scotland, it is not all good news. We have also read today about the loss of 350 printing jobs in Dundee. Unemployment is still higher in Scotland than it is in the rest of the country, our growth is still trailing that of the United Kingdom and this week we saw that small business start-up rates are lower in Scotland than they are in the rest of the UK. Alex Salmond said that he would make Scotland the most competitive nation in the UK. What has he actually done?
Of course, through every year of Labour’s term in office, Scotland underperformed against the UK and just about every country in Europe in terms of growth. Iain Gray is right in the sense that we face serious challenges with the economic situation. Therefore, when examples such as the work of Skills Development Scotland and efforts to internationalise Scottish business bear fruit, we should congratulate those who are involved.
My question, of course, was about what the First Minister has done. One of the things that he has in train is a revaluation of business rates. In the past, he has said that most businesses will benefit from this revaluation. However, I have with me the figures for a typical Scottish high street. In the town of Ballater, there are 18 small businesses that are all just getting by in tough times. I acknowledge that, last year, 12 businesses did not pay any rates because of the small business bonus; however, this year, that has turned into the small business bombshell for those businesses, all but two of which face a massive rates increase. None of them is better off and, this year, Ballater’s high street will pay about 470 per cent more in rates than it did last year. Can the First Minister tell us how much extra money his Government is raking in from these punitive increases in small business rates?
I will try to explain the process of rating revaluation. It is set by independent assessors and does not benefit the Government for the obvious reason that 60 per cent of businesses in Scotland will be no worse or better off as a result. If we were to introduce a transitional scheme, it would mean that the people who would benefit—those who had been evaluated independently, their businesses found to be struggling so that their business rates came down—would have to pay for those who had been revalued upwards.
I ask both participants to speed up a little. We are six minutes in and have got only two questions out of the way.
The trouble is that nobody in the business world believes that 60 per cent of businesses are better off. Last week in the Parliament we had 26 nursery owners from Fife, all of whom will see their rates soar; seven of them will pay 150 per cent more and one of them will pay 200 per cent more. In my constituency, Alexander Pollock Ltd engravers’ rateable value has gone up from £25,300 to £41,800. The Scottish Chambers of Commerce tells me that the worst example that it has been able to find is in Ballater again, where a restaurant faces an increase of over 400 per cent in rates payable. The First Minister should probably not drop in there for lunch on his way home tomorrow. Does he understand that such hikes in rates could close those businesses down?
I do not know about Iain Gray’s understanding of geography—it would be a substantial detour to go to Ballater on the way to the north-east of Scotland. Nonetheless, there is no doubt that Iain Gray’s knowledge of Ballater is greater than his question suggests.
It is a fact that small and medium-sized enterprises employ thousands in Scotland. It is a fact that the rates hikes put those jobs in danger. It is a fact that in England, the same changes are staggered over five years. It is a fact that in Northern Ireland they have stopped the process because of the damage that it will do to the economy.
Rates revaluation is in statute and is part of the process of business rates. Rates are independently evaluated. I repeat that if we introduced a transitional scheme, those who would benefit—the majority—from the rates revaluation would have to pay more. I am sure that even Iain Gray would not suggest the unfairness of saying to businesses whose rates have been revalued downwards as a result of an independent process of revaluation that they should be asked to pay for Labour’s recession.
Secretary of State for Scotland (Meetings)
I met the Secretary of State for Scotland on Monday and Tuesday of this week.
I have asked the First Minister on numerous occasions to spell out his plans for sorting out the mess that Labour has made of the UK finances. No answer has he given. Labour has left this country with the biggest national debt that we have ever seen. Although it is Labour’s mess, it is also the First Minister’s responsibility to sort things out in Scotland. The buck stops with him.
I agree that we will set out the
Not for the first time I see a complete lack of connection between my question and the First Minister’s answer. I am not asking about George Osborne’s budget; I am asking about the Scottish budget, as known to the First Minister. I have been asking the First Minister about it for well over a year now, and the Finance Committee has now backed that call.
“Secret plans”. My goodness!
Order.
Something that exists but that is not disclosed to others is a secret. Secret plans to make savings have been drawn up by John Swinney’s civil servants. Now is the time to be transparent. We should be told what the Scottish Government is going to do. The First Minister should show some leadership and stop the secrecy. When is the First Minister going to come clean about his budget?
I remind Annabel Goldie of the process under which the Scottish Parliament and the Scottish Government operate at present. The funding comes through a block grant, substantially from Westminster. We know what the block grant is for this year, and we have set a budget for this year as a result.
Cabinet (Meetings)
Issues of importance to the people of Scotland will be discussed.
Last week, the First Minister wrote directly to the councillor who is in charge of education in each of Scotland’s 32 local authorities. There were lots of issues that he could have raised, including school buildings, places for probationer teachers, the curriculum for excellence, strikes in the classroom, teacher training and his broken class-size promise. Will he tell Parliament today what his letter was about?
I wrote a letter specifically at the request of a former MSP, Dennis Canavan, who piloted a bill for a St Andrew’s day holiday through the Parliament. Many of us think that a public holiday on our national day would be a substantial and progressive move. Given the fact that the Parliament passed the bill not unanimously, but by a substantial majority, I hope that there is no reneging on the issue by the Liberal Democrats. Dennis Canavan approached me at a meeting some weeks ago and suggested that we renew our efforts to see whether local authorities around Scotland would be able to follow the policy lead that was taken by the Scottish Parliament, and I wrote to local authorities on that subject.
So, it is Dennis Canavan’s fault. Despite all the problems in Scottish education, Alex Salmond says that that is the “important matter” that merits a letter from the First Minister. It turns out that the SNP Government has written to councils about the matter before, without much luck. The First Minister’s letter says:
The curriculum for excellence is being pursued by the Cabinet Secretary for Education and Lifelong Learning, who has announced a range of initiatives to help with its implementation. The vast majority of people in the Parliament and throughout the country support the curriculum for excellence, even if Tavish Scott is doubtful about its objectives.
I wish to declare an interest, in that my brother works for D C Thomson and has been informed that his job is at risk, and my dad is in receipt of a works pension.
I share the constituency member’s concern. Even in a city, 350 job losses is a substantial number. I spoke to the chairman of D C Thomson earlier this week. I can confirm that the Scottish Government has acted immediately to offer support through PACE. That initiative will be available to those D C Thomson employees who face redundancy.
Joint Ministerial Committee (Meetings)
John Swinney, Fiona Hyslop and I attended the plenary session of the joint ministerial committee on Tuesday 9 June, which was hosted by the Prime Minister. There were a number of substantial outcomes, one of which was a commitment that ministers of the Scottish Government and the other devolved Administrations will attend and speak at European Council meetings and, where appropriate, represent the United Kingdom at those meetings.
I welcome the achievements of the Scottish Government in getting the JMC structure to deliver some positive changes for Scotland. Is there a lesson in the outcome of this week’s meetings that the devolution settlement must never return to a situation in which any UK Government treats Holyrood simply as a department of Whitehall, to be bullied or ignored as it sees fit?
There is a substantial amount in that question. I should remind members that the tendency of some people in central Government to treat this Parliament and, indeed, other assemblies and Parliaments in that fashion did not arise with the advent of the SNP Government but predated it. Indeed, the JMC plenary, which is the key meeting between ministers, First Ministers and Prime Ministers, did not take place between October 2002 and June 2008, when it was revived.
VisitScotland
I last spoke to Dr Cantlay on Tuesday 25 May 2010 about homecoming.
Does the First Minister acknowledge the statutory duties of the chief executive, as VisitScotland’s accountable officer, to be responsible for the proper use of public funds? Does he believe that Scottish ministers have been kept informed of any changes that are likely to impact on the strategic direction of VisitScotland, as required by the agency’s management status? Will he tell us who, today, is VisitScotland’s accountable officer?
The strategic direction is as was laid out in the statement from the tourism minister last week. All of that has been accorded with. I hope that Lewis Macdonald is not seriously suggesting that ministers direct personnel matters at VisitScotland. That is not the job—[Interruption.]
Order.
The meeting of Tuesday 25 May was actually a press conference at which Dr Cantley and I announced the independent research into homecoming Scotland 2009. It showed that homecoming generated £53.7 million of additional tourism revenue for Scotland—22 per cent above target. That is an example of the strategic direction that was set by ministers and which is proving to be an extraordinary success, despite the carping criticism throughout of Lewis Macdonald.
Given that success, does not it seem a bit strange that VisitScotland seems to be intent on sacking its chief executive? Will the First Minister now answer the questions that we tried to get answered last week? Which ministers discussed the future of the chief executive with the chairman of VisitScotland before his appointment, during the appointment process or since his appointment? We did not get clear answers to our questions last week. We need those clear answers.
Other ministers answered that last week. As far as I am concerned, I spoke to Dr Cantley on Tuesday 25 May about homecoming. I did so in front of the majority of the Scottish press corps. I was entitled to do that—it was a thoroughly good thing to do. The success of homecoming 2009 is to be welcomed across the chamber. I join Murdo Fraser in hoping that homecoming 2014 will be an even greater success.
Public Sector Staff Bonuses
We are taking action to reduce the maximum bonus that is available to chief executives of public bodies. This year, we are again asking chief executives to waive all or part of any bonus, as many of them agreed to do last year. Within the Scottish Government, performance pay for senior civil service staff has been halved in 2010-11, compared with last year.
In March, the First Minister told Parliament that reviewing the remuneration packages of the chief executives of quangos would
I am delighted to say that a number of recent new appointments and new posts do not have bonus arrangements. For example, that is the case for Creative Scotland, the Scottish Futures Trust and the Scottish Police Services Authority. I hope that Jeremy Purvis accepts that it is somewhat easier to introduce a no-bonus policy for new appointments and new bodies than it is to try to rewrite contracts that were signed at a time when the Liberal Democrats were in coalition government with the Labour Party.
I would not wish to push a wages policy on the First Minister, particularly as could not carry one out in any case—he does not have the powers to do so. What will he do to encourage people in the private sector to exercise restraint and to show some sensitivity to the folk who are losing their jobs?
The Government has some powers over wages policy. For example, in the “Public Sector Pay Policy for Staff Pay Remits 2010-11”, we set out the pay parameters for staff in public bodies, limiting basic awards to 1 per cent. It is true that senior staff in the public sector are governed by pay arrangements from Westminster, but there are a variety of pay bodies in the public sector into or on which the Scottish Government has a strong input or impact. I join Margo MacDonald in saying that, in the toughest imaginable times to come, people throughout the public and private sector will have to show restraint in terms of their wages. I support the view that those with the broadest shoulders should bear the largest burden.