General Questions
Grangemouth Freight Hub
To ask the Scottish Executive, following the final acquisition of land for the A801 Avon gorge upgrade, when its support will be forthcoming to enable the further progress of this project and other improvements related to the Grangemouth freight hub, as identified by the national planning framework 2 and the strategic transport projects review. (S3O-9810)Stewart Stevenson (Scottish National Party)
I recognise the value of the work undertaken by Falkirk Council and West Lothian Council in moving this project forward. Under the terms of the concordat with local government, Falkirk Council and West Lothian Council are free to bring forward proposals for the upgrade of the A801, should they wish.
The priorities arising from the strategic transport projects review are clear—the Forth replacement crossing, and the Edinburgh to Glasgow, Highland main line and Aberdeen to Inverness rail improvements. We will bring forward future road and rail proposals arising from the STPR and national planning framework as resources permit.
Does the minister agree that early support for the A801 upgrade and the Grangemouth freight hub would not only make my constituency a safer place but would make a fundamental contribution to the local and Scottish economy and would meet the Government’s climate change commitments? Will he make the proposal the highest priority? People in Falkirk East simply cannot wait. I think that people in Scotland also cannot wait.
We have to manage within the resources that we have, given the constraints of the reduced funding that is now available from Westminster as a result of decisions that Cathy Peattie’s colleagues there have made. I share her enthusiasm for this project; it is an important one, coupled with support for Grangemouth. That is, of course, why the projects that I set out made it into the STPR and national planning framework. We will act at as early a stage as finance permits.
Will the minister examine, alongside any plans to upgrade the rail facilities at Grangemouth freight hub, the potential to reintroduce passenger services to Grangemouth, not least because the infrastructure is in place and given the positive impact that that would have on the local economy?
My colleague Jamie Hepburn has already been on the case. The proposal has the potential to deliver significant local benefits. The rail line from Grangemouth that connects into the network is really only configured to allow trains to run to the west. One would therefore want to look to establish whether connections to the east would be of greater utility to Grangemouth than those to the west. We will keep the proposal under review, although I do not expect any early decisions on the matter.
Agenda for Change (Pay Banding)
To ask the Scottish Executive what action the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Wellbeing is taking to resolve outstanding disputes regarding pay banding under the agenda for change. (S3O-9800)
National health service boards report that all appropriate staff are now being paid under the agenda for change system. Boards have received a number of review requests regarding pay banding outcomes and I have put in place arrangements to monitor boards’ progress in completing review requests as quickly as possible. Monitoring shows that some boards have completed the review process and for those remaining, significant progress is being made with over 75 per cent of the post holders concerned now having been completed. I have asked boards to work towards completion by the end of March
I am pleased to hear that the cabinet secretary is in contact with boards. I wish to draw some cases to her attention. Senior podiatrists who are graded at band 6 across most of Scotland are graded at band 5 in Glasgow, and specialist motor neurone disease nurses who are graded at band 7 across Scotland are graded at band 6 in Glasgow. I have written to the cabinet secretary on the issue of school nurses. Those who were on the former D and E grades should now be on band 5, and those who were on the former F grade should now be on band 6, but that is not the case in Glasgow. Is it acceptable for the matter still to be dragging on—in some cases, for longer than five years? What action can the cabinet secretary take to expedite matters?
I outlined the action that we are taking to expedite matters. Last year, we put a great deal of effort into ensuring completion of the assimilation and payment of arrears part of the process. We are now focusing very much on reviews. As I said, reviews will be completed by the end of March. I will not comment on individual cases, as it would not be appropriate for me to do so. I am sure that Ken Macintosh is aware of the philosophy that lies behind agenda for change, given that the pay system was introduced by the previous Administration.
I stress the different outcomes under agenda for change—if staff previously worked under the same job title or were on equivalent grades, that does not automatically indicate that the job evaluation process has failed. Previously, job titles were often used fairly generically, and separate services or areas of service are organised differently from one health board to another. The important principle of agenda for change is that the right job profile for the post is identified through the job evaluation process. The reason for the review process is to allow staff who are not satisfied with their banding to appeal.
The whole process of agenda for change, from its introduction through to where we are today, has been agreed in partnership with the unions and staff-side representatives. I understand the frustration that many staff feel at the length of time that the process has taken, and that is why it is so important to reach a conclusion as quickly as possible.
The minister may or may not be aware that agenda for change issues remain to be solved in NHS Ayrshire and Arran. I have raised the subject with her in the past. Will she use her influence to encourage NHS Ayrshire and Arran to bring matters to a conclusion, because staff are being financially disadvantaged and demoralised by the unsatisfactory nature of this protracted process?
I acknowledge that John Scott has raised these matters with me previously.
As I think that I have said before in the chamber, I understand staff’s frustration at the length of time that it has taken to progress agenda for change. Looking back to when the system was introduced in 2004, it beggars belief that anybody could have thought that its introduction would be completed within the timescales that were set by the previous Administration. We have taken steps to ensure progress, with a greater pace of implementation over these past months. NHS Ayrshire and Arran is under exactly the same pressure to complete the review part of the process by the end of March. As we have done over recent months, we will continue to monitor the progress that boards are making very carefully.
Electronic Bus Service Registration System
To ask the Scottish Government what its position is on the progress being made regarding the introduction of the electronic bus service registration system. (S3O-9834)
Electronic bus service registration is a business system to register a bus service with the traffic commissioner for Scotland and the Vehicle and Operator Services Agency, which is an agency of the United Kingdom Government’s Department for Transport. The Scottish Government has no responsibility for the system.
I draw the minister’s attention to the failure of Strathclyde partnership for transport to implement EBSR properly. I have passed to the minister correspondence that was generated by EBSR on 18 December 2009, concerning the withdrawal of a vital bus service in my constituency. As the area’s transport authority, SPT failed to notify East Ayrshire Council of the service withdrawal. Its failure to implement EBSR continued up to this week. Will the minister do what he can to re-establish SPT as a credible transport authority, instead of being a mouthpiece for Glasgow city Labour Party? If that cannot be done, will he consider abolishing SPT and allowing local authorities to establish a useful organisation in its place?
I note what the member says about SPT. I endorse the remarks that the First Minister made in the chamber last week regarding our expectations for SPT to reform itself. I shall be meeting the regional transport partnership chairs, including the new chairperson of SPT, on 2 June, and I plan to discuss with them their governance arrangements and any need for legislative change in the future.
Public Services (Translation and Interpretation)
To ask the Scottish Government what steps it is taking to review translation and interpretation services across public services. (S3O-9836)
We are working with internal and external stakeholders to consider ways, within the current budget restraints, to improve translation and interpretation services across public services. For example, NHS Health Scotland has been working with all health boards to agree a framework for delivering improved translation, interpreting and communication support services for their communities.
I encourage the cabinet secretary to consult not just service providers in the national health service but those in councils and at many other agencies that provide services to the public. I base my question on the experience in Aberdeen, where a very large number of people do not have English as their first language. I would like progress to be made throughout the public service, if that is possible.
I agree strongly with Nigel Don’s point. He might be interested to know that the Scottish Government is hosting an event in June to bring together stakeholders and service providers to discuss how we can all work together to improve the quality and standard of translation and interpreting, not just in the NHS but across the public sector. Invitations will go not just to the NHS but to the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service, the Scottish Refugee Council, the centre for translation and interpreting studies in Scotland at Heriot-Watt University and a range of other public sector organisations. Given the number and range of people living in Scotland who do not have English as a first language, it is correct that we enable them to access public services in the same way as everybody else.
Kintore (Proposed Railway Station)
To ask the Scottish Executive whether it has revised estimated passenger usage numbers for the proposed new railway station at Kintore. (S3O-9820)
Network Rail is at an early stage of feasibility work on improvements to the Aberdeen to Inverness line, which includes consideration of a station at Kintore. Work to assess estimated passenger demand for the proposed station will be carried out as part of the business case. That will be done when the technical feasibility of the station has been assessed.
The minister said in October last year:
“we underestimate patronage in new railway stations. It might be worth saying that we use a Great Britain-based model, which we are increasingly of the view does not properly reflect Scottish circumstances.”—[Official Report, 7 October 2009; c 20356.]
In his letter to me of last month, the minister stated that the Department for Transport was leading on the development of a new model for estimating patronage. Estimates for the discredited model suggest that 68,000 passengers would use a crossrail service, although it is fair to mention that those in the know suggest that those passenger figures could safely be doubled and still be achievable. Why has the minister backed off from developing a properly responsive Scottish model? When will he grasp the opportunity to bring about a significant modal shift at Kintore?
It is an interesting suggestion from a unionist party that I should not work with the Department for Transport. I find that we can make common cause on a range of issues. Some of the issues that affect us in Scotland affect other parts of the GB rail network, and the same can be said on a number of other matters. I intend to continue to work with the DFT.
As the minister knows, the new model that is being examined by the DFT uses evidence from new stations that have been opened in Scotland. Does the minister believe that it is important to learn from the lessons that are offered by comparing estimated passenger numbers and actual passenger numbers at other stations that have been opened by the Scottish National Party Government, so as to apply them to future projects such as that at Kintore?
It is important to have a model that takes account of the specific local circumstances that will apply to proposals that may come before us. Transport Scotland has already provided the Department for Transport at Westminster with information relating to the Larkhall to Milngavie link, the Stirling-Alloa-Kincardine link and Laurencekirk station. We will work with colleagues at Westminster to ensure that the model that is developed by the Department for Transport, with our co-operation and participation, is fit for purpose in a Scottish context.
Police, Public Order and Criminal Justice (Scotland) Act 2006
To ask the Scottish Executive what its position is on exempting common ridings and other similar community events from the provisions of the Police, Public Order and Criminal Justice (Scotland) Act 2006. (S3O-9765)
The guidance to local authorities that was published by the working group on marches and parades in December 2006 makes it clear that, if a local authority makes a case why a certain type of procession should be excluded from the notification process, the Scottish ministers will consider it and make an order if necessary.
Only funeral processions are currently exempt from the notification requirements under the Civic Government (Scotland) Act 1982. I do not consider that it would be appropriate at this time to make an order exempting common ridings and other similar community events. There are important reasons why even non-contentious marches and parades need to be planned carefully.
In discussions with me, representatives from the Association of Chief Police Officers in Scotland and the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities advised that they would not support the reinstatement of exemptions.
I acknowledge that it was the previous Liberal-Labour Administration that introduced the 2006 act, but I hope that the cabinet secretary recognises the importance of the historic common ridings and festivals to their communities in the Borders, and that he acknowledges the many hundreds of volunteers who organise and manage the events. Many volunteers and groups feel that the regulations are now strangling their events with red tape and extra administration. Will the cabinet secretary agree to meet me and some of the organisers of the events to discuss their concerns and to seek to agree a way forward
I fully recognise the contemporary and historical importance of those events and I am more than happy to meet the member. The meeting at which the issue was recently discussed was a result of similar issues being raised in Dumfries and Galloway. The Administration does not rule anything in or out, but the clear advice from representatives of local authorities and the police was that they did not wish to vary the rules or provide any exemptions. I am happy to meet the member, but perhaps he should also act by asking the local authority in his area to speak to COSLA, because the clear advice from police and local authorities at present is that they do not want changes.
The cabinet secretary is aware that Dumfries and Galloway Council applied for an exemption last year and was rejected. Will he comment on why events such as common ridings are considered to be so disruptive that they are dealt with in the same manner as sectarian parades such as Orange order marches? If he is not prepared to reconsider the issue now, when will he reconsider it?
I am always prepared to listen to advice from local authorities and the police. The clear advice from them is that, no matter how small an event may be, it impacts on traffic and there are dangers to others. I am more than happy to review the matter. Dumfries and Galloway Council raised the matter initially, but I spoke with COSLA and ACPOS. Perhaps Dumfries and Galloway Council should seek to lobby on the matter in COSLA. The chief constable of Dumfries and Galloway Constabulary, Pat Shearer, is the current president of ACPOS. Perhaps the member should seek to achieve a change in the views of the police locally, because their view was to keep the situation as it stands and not to vary it.
Economy (Fiscal Stimulus)
To ask the Scottish Executive what its position is on the fiscal stimulus measures that the United Kingdom Government has taken and their impact on Scotland’s economy. (S3O-9793)
In the past 12 months, Governments throughout the world have put forward a wide range of fiscal stimulus packages, which have helped stimulate global demand and support economies through the downturn. A large proportion of the global stimulus has come from infrastructure investment programmes, which International Monetary Fund analysis shows can have major economic benefits. In Scotland, the ability to accelerate capital expenditure is estimated to have supported more than 5,000 jobs in the economy. That is why it is disappointing that the chancellor ignored the compelling case to accelerate additional capital spending into 2010-11.
Boring.
That is enough, thank you, Lord Foulkes—no more.
For the record, I point out again that the United Kingdom Government is the only G7 Government that is not implementing a further discretionary stimulus measure this year.
If the cabinet secretary would care to reflect on the Scottish Futures Trust, which has cost at least 28,000 jobs in our construction sector, he might not make such inappropriate statements regarding the UK measures. He mentioned the International Monetary Fund. Statements by the IMF and Professor David Blanchflower have made clear that
“the Tories’ economic plans have the potential to harm the British economy in these fragile times”—
and, in turn, the Scottish economy—and that the Tories have no
“credible plans to raise growth, lower unemployment or increase the incomes of ordinary working people.”
Will the cabinet secretary share his views on the measures that the Tory party currently promotes?
I do not believe that that is within the cabinet secretary’s responsibility, although I would be surprised if he does not have a view to share.
I am glad that you have exonerated me from responsibility for the Conservative party and its programme, Presiding Officer—that is an enormous relief.
Andy Kerr and I probably agree that a significant issue that will affect economic recovery is the level and impact of public expenditure in 2010-11. That is why the First Minister has asked the chancellor and the Conservative and Liberal Democrat shadow chancellors to clarify their position on whether the 2010-11 budget, which the Parliament has agreed, will in any way be revisited. To say that the answer from the chancellor lacks clarity is to exaggerate its precision.
The IMF has published a clear analysis that demonstrates that, in 2010, there will be no UK fiscal stimulus package. The United Kingdom Government has withdrawn fiscal stimulus measures in 2010-11, which will be bad for the Scottish economy, and we encourage the chancellor to think again.
Previous
Schools (Management)