Plenary, 10 Oct 2002

Meeting date: Thursday, October 10, 2002

Official Report 682KB pdf

---

First Minister's Question Time

---

Prime Minister (Meetings)

To ask the First Minister when he will next meet the Prime Minister and what issues he intends to raise. (S1F-2155)

I expect to meet the Prime Minister again on 22 October. Among other things, I will tell him about the Dewar art awards, which I launched today in Glasgow to mark the second anniversary of Donald Dewar's death. Such recognition of young people and young talent will be an appropriate tribute to Donald Dewar's memory and I am sure that members of all parties will join me in welcoming it. [Applause.]

I associate my party with the remarks that the First Minister has made about the art awards.

In order to reassure the public that there has been no breach of the Scottish ministerial code, will the First Minister today fully disclose to Parliament his knowledge of irregularities in his local Labour party?

The Presiding Officer is shaking his head, so I will try to stick to parliamentary business. I will speak about the Parliament's reputation, which is dear to me.

I am aware that the Labour party has agreed to investigate concerns that I raised with it about my local constituency party's accounts. The matter is not a parliamentary matter, but it is important to clarify things. I am happy for the party to investigate such concerns. It should investigate them quickly and thoroughly and we should support any resultant action that it takes. It is also important to mention that the constituency party clarified yesterday that it will publish its report openly and make it available. Perhaps that addresses the issue that Mr Swinney has raised.

As First Minister of the Parliament, I regard the reputation of the post that I am honoured to hold and the reputation of the Parliament as important and I will never do anything that will bring the Parliament into disrepute.

The First Minister may question why I raise the issue. The reason is that the ministerial code of conduct makes it clear that

"Ministers must ensure that no conflict arises, or appears to arise, between their public duties and their private interests".

In respect of the First Minister's declaration of private interests, the finances of his local Labour party are integral to that return, as he declares in the "Register of Interests of Members of the Scottish Parliament" that his constituency association received £5,000

"as a contribution to local party development."

That is now under question, which is why it is important to raise the issue.

When did the First Minister first become aware of the problem? If he has known about it since February, as the media suggest, and his party may be the subject of a criminal investigation, why did he not report the matter to the police?

The Labour party made a statement about a criminal investigation yesterday as a result of investigations that it carried out yesterday morning. It would be inappropriate for me to say a lot about that, as that might prejudice a future investigation. However, I understand that the party referred to information that it was able to uncover or at least start to consider in detail yesterday morning. I was able to give information to the Labour party some three months ago about my constituency party accounts. There seemed to be a problem in that the auditor asked questions that did not produce answers. The party has followed up the matter carefully and properly; it has contacted the right person and has asked for the right answers.

I recognise that some members do not regard the issue as a parliamentary matter, but I regard the reputation of each and every one of us as a parliamentary matter. That is why I have been assiduous since I became an MSP in, for example, registering my interests, to which Mr Swinney referred. If I remember correctly, in May 1999, newspaper diary columns laughed at the fact that I declared so much in the register of interests. I have always thought that we should be open and transparent about such matters. We should follow the rules and involve the police where that is necessary.

I thank the First Minister for his answer. I accept the line of argument that he is developing about the need for openness and transparency. However, my first question to him was whether he would divulge to Parliament his knowledge of what is involved. In order to protect the integrity of the office of First Minister, we need to hear directly from him what he knew and what he has now put into the public domain. Parliament deserves that from the First Minister.

I am happy to tell Mr Swinney exactly what I know, which is that the auditors of my local constituency Labour party asked questions, which may or may not produce answers that are of concern, of the treasurer and of the local constituency party. The auditors were not receiving answers to those questions. I reported that situation, which was worrying for me, to the Labour party nationally and asked it, as is right and proper under the constitution of the party, to investigate the local party situation.

I want to make it absolutely clear in the chamber that there is no question that my constituency office accounts have even been questioned as part of the exercise. The issue is about the local Labour party's voluntary bank accounts. I have never seen and should not need to see those bank accounts, but the Labour party should. That is what it is going to do. If the Labour party acts on that, it will have my full support.

---

Secretary of State for Scotland (Meetings)

To ask the First Minister when he next plans to meet the Secretary of State for Scotland and what issues he intends to raise. (S1F-2162)

I expect to meet the secretary of state again soon.

I thank the First Minister for that terribly revealing answer. I wonder whether he might explain to the Secretary of State for Scotland, whenever they meet, why his Minister for Education and Young People is refusing to tackle the shortcomings of the comprehensive education system, which result in problems such as the widespread inability of Labour party members to keep simple accounts—as was obvious from yesterday's statement by Cathy Jamieson.

Will the First Minister acknowledge that the current comprehensive system is failing far too many of our children and young people in Scotland today? Will he remove the reek of complacency that hangs over his Administration on the issue?

The only complacency about Scottish education was the complacency with which Mr McLetchie's party, the Tory party, regarded the system for so long when it was in government. I will just remind Mr McLetchie of some of the significant achievements of the comprehensive system over recent years. There have been increases in the number of pupils achieving not just satisfactory, but very good levels of attainment in reading, writing and mathematics. In reading, the figure has gone from 44.5 per cent to 56.4 per cent; in writing, it has gone from 38 per cent to 45.9 per cent; and in maths, it has gone from 41.7 per cent to 51.2 per cent. Those are real increases because of real, new resources, better buildings and equipment, more teachers and a real commitment to choice, diversity and a free state education system. Those things were never there when his party was in power, but they are there now and they are making a difference.

I remind the First Minister that the only people who are paying for education in Scotland today who did not do so previously are students, who are being taxed by the Labour party. If some people are committed to a free education system, they certainly do not include members of the Labour party and the Liberal Democrats, who have imposed fees and graduate taxes. We must put that in perspective.

Will the First Minister say, while he is enunciating all his satisfaction with the system, whether he is satisfied with the fact that 95 per cent of our pupils in our worst-performing schools fail to pass three highers by the end of their fifth year? How can he be satisfied with that when the very people whom he claims to champion are being let down by the system? I am thinking of the people who, unlike Labour MSPs, cannot afford to buy smart houses in smart catchment areas.

When will the First Minister recognise that what we need are reforms to create a school system that is based on choice and diversity? When will he recognise that that is the real way in which we can bridge the opportunity gap in Scotland today, instead of hanging on to a system that is failing?

If Mr McLetchie visited a proper state school in Scotland, I do not think that he would recognise the picture that he has painted. Furthermore, in me he has picked the wrong person to ask, as I have never lived in a big fancy house in a fancy area with a fancy school next door.

The local schools in my constituency, which is one of the poorest in Scotland and has areas of serious multiple deprivation, are among the highest achieving of their type in Scotland. That is because they have excellent head teachers, a record level of resources and a commitment not just to the academic curriculum but to music, art, sports and other activities. They are driving up standards and winning international competitions. They are doing so because of the commitment to change, excellence and improvement that is being driven through the state system across Scotland.

I am not satisfied if any pupil in Scotland who could pass highers is not doing so. I want to ensure that the practices of the best schools in Scotland are replicated in every school in Scotland. Every school in Scotland should be excellent, improving or—preferably—both. That is what I intend to deliver.

I am certain that when the First Minister meets the Secretary of State for Scotland he will bring to her attention the support for a comprehensive, yet flexible, state education system that has been shown in the responses to the national debate on education. Can the First Minister give us an idea of the level of support that was shown in responses to the Scottish Tories' proposals to privatise the state education system? The Conservatives are determined to restore the discredited voucher system and to get schools to opt out of local authority control.

I know that I am not meant to talk in much detail about political parties. However, this week I watched with interest the Conservative party trying to pretend at its conference that it had learned some new ideas. On education, it has learned absolutely nothing. The school to which David McLetchie refers, at which 94 per cent of children have not passed three highers by the end of their fifth year, is the school from which he would remove resources to benefit schools in other areas. That is not acceptable in modern Scotland. We need excellence in every school and classroom in Scotland. Where excellence does not exist, those responsible should be replaced by people who can deliver and who should have our full support.

---

Genetically Modified Crop Trials (Contamination)

To ask the First Minister whether the Scottish Executive will ensure that conventional crops within the immediate vicinity of GM crop trial sites are tested for contamination by GM materials. (S1F-2156)

The independent advice that we receive from the Advisory Committee on Releases to the Environment and the Advisory Committee on Novel Foods and Processes is that testing would only confirm what we already know: that extremely low levels of cross-pollination can occur and that that poses no threat to human health or the environment.

I am deeply disappointed by the First Minister's answer. Why does not the First Minister accept the findings of the European Environment Agency, which said that

"oil seed rape can be considered to be a high risk crop for pollen mediated gene flows from crop to crop"?

That means that there is a real danger of GM contaminating conventional crops and entering the human food chain.

If the First Minister will not listen to public concern, will he listen to his scientific advisers from the Scottish Agricultural College, who yesterday called for the immediate testing of crops grown next to GM crop trials?

I have said this before in the chamber and I will say it again: I do not believe that politicians should try to second-guess scientific advice on these matters. All of the scientific advice is that the tests are being carried out properly. I want to state on the record that it is not the case that the crops that are being tested have never been tested before. They have been tested over and over again in other circumstances.

It is right and proper that the tests should be carried out under the appropriate scientific conditions. We would not have it any other way. Until the scientific advice changes, it would be very wrong for politicians to second-guess it. The Scottish nationalist party may be anti-science, but we are not.

Given the new knowledge that we have about the ability of transgenic pollen and other contaminants to travel greater distances than the 50m buffer zone, would it not have been wise before harvesting this year to have kept the surrounding crop out of the human food chain?

That would be an issue if cross-pollination were at a level that our independent scientific advisers regarded as serious. They have said repeatedly and quite clearly that the level of cross-pollination is absolutely minuscule and that it is not a threat to health or to the environment. I believe that, when we get such independent scientific advice, it is wrong for the Parliament to try to cross-check or cross-guess it. If we have independent and scientifically based advice, we should use it.

---

Begging

To ask the First Minister whether the Scottish Executive plans to take any action in the light of the suggestion of the Association of Scottish Police Superintendents regarding begging. (S1F-2170)

I am not convinced that the zoning approach apparently advocated by the ASPS will work. We must not tolerate incidents involving intimidation, robbery and assault, wherever they occur. Such behaviour is already a criminal offence under common law. The police have the powers to deal with it and they should do so.

I welcome the First Minister's answer and strongly support action to protect people from intimidation, robbery and assault. I commend the work that was carried out in the Edinburgh city centre initiative with the police and with the use of closed-circuit television. I draw to the First Minister's attention the need to support organisations that work to tackle the underlying causes of begging and homelessness. Does he agree that we need joined-up action between housing and social work departments, voluntary organisations and the police to tackle the related problems of alcohol and drug abuse, particularly the activities of drug dealers who prey on vulnerable people?

I agree with multidisciplinary action to try to ensure that people are kept off the streets and have homes and proper services that can help to lead them to a more fulfilling lifestyle. However, I do not accept drug dealing or any other social problem as an excuse for violence or intimidation on our streets. Yes, we need to be helpful and to provide the services to get people off the streets into proper homes and jobs, but we must also be clear that violence and intimidation on our streets by any person in any area is unacceptable and that the police must act.

Begging is a growing issue in the streets of Aberdeen. Given that the mainly young people who are involved tend to have drug or alcohol problems, does the First Minister believe that the issue is related to the chronic lack of drug and alcohol rehabilitation services in the north-east and throughout Scotland?

To suggest that there is a chronic lack of services might be an exaggeration, but there is a case to be made for arguing that there is a gap in provision in the north-east of Scotland, as I saw during discussions with the families of drug users when the Parliament sat in Aberdeen in May. That is one of the key reasons why in the budget for 2003-06 we decided to allocate a significant increase in money to drug rehabilitation services. We intend to improve drug rehabilitation services throughout Scotland, including in the north-east, where those services are so badly needed.

---

Wind Farms

To ask the First Minister what guidance the Scottish Executive issues to planning authorities in respect of the consideration of proposals for wind farms. (S1F-2168)

There is existing guidance, such as national planning policy guideline 6, which is on renewable energy developments, and planning advice note 45, which is on renewable energy technologies. Both sets of guidelines were revised and reissued recently, but ultimately it is for local planning authorities to take decisions relating to individual sites.

Clear policies and sharing best practice are helpful to planning authorities. Given that many of the best sites for wind farms are likely to be in remote areas with the least robust connection to the national grid, what is the First Minister doing to press the case for the proposed subsea cable off the west coast of Scotland to be installed as quickly as possible to open up possibilities and to help us to meet our 40 per cent renewables target?

I believe that wind, wave and tidal power opportunities in the Western Isles—and perhaps elsewhere, in the north Atlantic in particular—might give us a fantastic resource not just for Scotland but for selling outwith the borders of Scotland. Therefore I regard as a priority the development not just of the cable but of the technologies, research and infrastructure and the decisions that will lead to those developments. We signalled the importance that we attach to the issue in our consultation document, which set the much-increased, ambitious but achievable targets for increased renewable energy production in Scotland. We are in discussions with those who are responsible in the United Kingdom Government to ensure that that development and generation opportunity can take place.

Does the First Minister agree that a real danger exists? Although local authorities may sign up to green energy in principle, they may vote against individual applications, because such proposals bring little local economic benefit and no lack of local objections on the ground of amenity. How does he propose to overcome that serious problem?

I understand when local people are nervous about the possibility that the development of windmills in an area will damage the landscape and the environment in some way. However, I do not think that the facts in Scotland back up that nervousness. Where developments have taken place, they have been welcomed after time because they have been seen to benefit the local economy and the economy of Scotland as a whole.

I praise Alasdair Morgan for his stance on this issue. Unless I misheard him, when he spoke on the radio a few days ago, he defended the proposed scheme in his area against local objections. He was quite right to say that it is important to keep the issue in perspective. It is good that local members take that stance and it is important that we reassure people and that local authorities scrutinise and treat planning matters carefully. However, it is also important to recognise that, whenever Scotland has made a major shift to improve energy production and generation over the past 30 or 40 years, there have been local difficulties. There have been challenges, whether in connection with the development of power lines, hydro production or any number of other initiatives. It is important that we keep the matter in perspective for the long-term benefit of Scotland and that we go ahead with the development of renewable technologies.

Can the First Minister give us further information about the discussions that have taken place on how the necessary improvements to the existing grid and to the connection from the Western Isles are to be accommodated? How are we to fund them?

Fortunately, perhaps, transmission and generation issues are reserved and are not entirely our responsibility. However, we have a responsibility to generate discussion and to speed up decisions on such matters. That is exactly the process in which we are involved and to which we are committed, as are the energy companies that are active in Scotland. Working together, the energy companies, the local authorities, the UK Government and the Parliament and the Executive in Scotland can make a real difference over the next two decades.