Support for Rape Victims (Edinburgh and the Lothians)
To ask the Scottish Government how it supports victims of rape in Edinburgh and the Lothians. (S4O-03346)
The Scottish Government is providing funding of £100,000 per year from 2012 to 2015 to Edinburgh Women’s Rape and Sexual Abuse Centre. In addition, we support the rape crisis helpline, which is receiving £260,000 per year from 2012 to 2015.
I thank the cabinet secretary for mentioning Edinburgh Women’s Rape and Sexual Abuse Centre. Is she aware of the extent of the cuts that the centre is facing, which are threatening essential front-line support services? The centre is now relying heavily on donations to stay afloat. Will she meet the centre’s management to discuss its situation, with a focus on finding a possible resolution?
I am aware of the issues, which have been raised previously in the chamber, and which Kezia Dugdale has mentioned. Edinburgh Women’s Rape and Sexual Abuse Centre receives funding from the violence against women fund and the rape crisis specific fund. Rape Crisis Scotland has funded a consultant to work with and support the centre on a range of issues, including its funding strategy.
All the money to address violence against women is allocated, but I am more than happy to meet the centre’s managers and staff to hear their concerns. We will take that forward as soon as possible.
What progress—if any—is being made with the proposal to give rape victims legal advice when use of their medical records and sexual history is requested?
I will write to update Margaret Mitchell on that, to ensure that my information is accurate.
Independence (Start-up Costs)
To ask the Scottish Government when the work that is under way in 2012 on the start-up costs of an independent Scotland will be completed. (S4O-03347)
The Scottish Government has undertaken a range of work to prepare for the transition to independence, and our approach is set out in “Scotland’s Future”. Pages 343 to 350 explain that a number of factors will influence the size of the one-off investment that Scotland will make in the transition to independence. They include the negotiations that will take place between the two Governments on apportioning assets and securing public services in Scotland, and the options that are chosen for improving systems and providing more modern and responsive public services for people in Scotland in the period following independence.
It is right to point to Patrick Dunleavy’s critique of the Treasury’s numbers, but has he not also made it clear that the First Minister’s £200 million—without the aid of a fag packet—would not cover everything? Why is there a cover-up of whatever figures emerged from the work that we know took place?
As Malcolm Chisholm would know, if he had heard the discussion at the Economy, Energy and Tourism Committee’s meeting yesterday, a number of factors will influence the position, all of which will be influenced by the negotiations between the two Governments. Those factors have been explained before, but I am happy to explain them again.
First, much of the infrastructure that is associated with delivering reserved services already exists in Scotland and will be transferred to the Scottish Government. Welfare and pensions are examples of that. Secondly, we will have choices to make about the transition timescales and about options for more efficient delivery. Thirdly, there will be wider negotiation about the allocation of the United Kingdom’s £1.3 trillion of assets.
We are taking a sensible approach, which is set out in the white paper. I note that Professor Young—another academic whom the UK Treasury relied on—pointed in a blog to the degree of preparation for the white paper. In contrast, the UK Government is guilty of attempting to mislead people or, as the permanent secretary to the Treasury said, of having “misbriefed” people. I know which option I prefer. If the poll in today’s Daily Record is anything to go by, it is clear which option is winning favour with the Scottish people, too.
Capital Investment (Non-profit Distribution Finance)
To ask the Scottish Government what value was delivered on the ground in 2013-14 by non-profit distribution financed capital investment. (S4O-03348)
The Scottish Futures Trust will update the forecast capital spend at the time of publication of the draft budget for 2015-16. The SFT has commenced the update process and will publish the value of investment on the ground in 2013-14, along with future forecast capital spend, at that time. In 2013-14, the value of projects that had entered construction—post financial close—was approximately £640 million, and projects in procurement totalled approximately £1,390 million.
Almost four years on from the NPD pipeline being announced, can the cabinet secretary tell us how many of the 47 projects are built and operational?
The first revenue-funded finance project was opened in 2013-14; that was the Aberdeen health village. As Mr Brown knows, a range of projects are under way, including the City of Glasgow College and Inverness College UHI projects, the M8, M73 and M74 motorway improvements and a range of other projects around the country. I have made no secret of the fact that it took the Government longer to implement the non-profit distributing programme than we originally predicted. I have been absolutely open with Parliament about that over time and I have answered numerous questions from Mr Brown and others on the issue.
The question that we should focus on is why the Government had to embark on the non-profit distributing programme. We had to embark on it because of the savage cuts in capital expenditure that the Conservative Government applied when it came to office—cuts of £1 billion every year in our capital budget. The only reason why the City of Glasgow College and Inverness College buildings are being built just now, and why the M8, M73 and M74 motorway improvements are being undertaken is that the Scottish Government decided to proceed with the NPD programme, which we are now in the process of delivering.
Fishing (Support)
To ask the Scottish Government how it supports the fishing sector and what its position is on the suggestion that the European fisheries fund should be spent elsewhere. (S4O-03349)
Any suggestion that Scotland does not require a fair share of European fisheries funds is simply outrageous and is, of course, not in Scotland’s interests. Reform of the common fisheries policy will be the biggest challenge that our fleet has faced. It is only right and proper that available European funding reflects the task in hand. To put the available funding into context, Scotland has 8 per cent of European Union landings by value, but presently receives only 1.4 per cent of the current European fisheries fund. Scotland receives €21 per tonne of fish landed, which is the second-lowest allocation in the EU.
Will the cabinet secretary give a bit more detail on how the rest of the fund is spread around Europe?
Clearly, that is down to negotiations. Unfortunately, as members are aware, the United Kingdom Government negotiates on behalf of Scotland on access to European fisheries funds. Many other countries whose fishing industries are not nearly as significant as ours receive much bigger shares of European fisheries funds while we get way below our fair share. That says a lot about the priorities of the UK Government and how those Issues are decided. Therefore, we should have our own voice in Europe, so that we can get a fair share of European fisheries funds.
Does the cabinet secretary agree that the intention of the European fisheries fund has always been to support struggling fishing communities, and that the communities and parts of the fishing industry that are struggling in Scotland do have access to that important funding stream? Does he agree that the Scottish fishing fleet is strong, and that part of our commitment as EU members is to support fishing communities across the union that are struggling, rather than to subsidise some of the strongest fishing communities that are already sustaining themselves with great success?
That is a startling intervention from Jamie McGrigor, which will be noted by every single fisherman in Scotland and by our sea fishing sector more widely. The fact that a Scottish Conservative MSP has just stood up and said that there is justification for Scotland’s not having a fair share of the European fisheries fund absolutely beggars belief, and just shows that the Conservative Party and Jamie McGrigor clearly do not have the fishing industry’s interests at heart.
Environmentally Friendly Public Transport
The Scottish Government is investing in the European Union’s largest integrated hydrogen transport project, which will refuel Europe’s largest fleet of zero tailpipe emission hydrogen fuel cell buses in the city of Aberdeen from late 2014.
The Scottish green bus fund is helping our bus industry to invest in the latest emissions-reducing technology, and is another clear indication of this Government’s commitment to Scotland’s bus industry. I recently announced round 5 of the fund and a budget of £4.75 million—the largest yet.
In addition, operators receive the bus service operators grant at double the standard rate for services that are operated using low-carbon buses.
Given that the technology and opportunities to take the issue further and faster in Scotland are increasingly obvious, will the minister look this year at the total amount of money that is allocated to supporting bus services in the round, and see what can be done to ensure that that resource is focused on extending environmentally friendly services?
That is exactly what we are doing. As I said, there have been five rounds of the Scottish green bus fund, which has not only helped to introduce low-carbon buses in Scotland but has enabled manufacturers who have won contracts—one of which, Alexander Dennis Limited, in Falkirk, is indigenous—to develop the technology to help them to win orders abroad worth upwards of £700 million. That is substantially to the benefit of the whole of Scotland.
We are considering further measures. I mentioned the hydrogen project for buses in Aberdeen—we are considering whether the technology can be used for ferry services, too. We have a good record of supporting the bus industry. Whether we are talking about the bus service operators grant, the concessionary travel scheme or investments in hydrogen buses, low-carbon buses and one or two fully electric buses, such as the one in Stranraer, we have a record to be proud of. Of course, we will try to do more in the future.
To ask the Scottish Government what plans it has to extend support for the adoption of environmentally friendly public transport, such as hydrogen fuelled and electricity fuelled buses. (S4O-03350)
Problem Gambling
To ask the Scottish Government what action it is taking to promote awareness of problem gambling, given its impact on communities. (S4O-03351)
I recently led a summit that considered one aspect of the issue: the prevalence and concentration of betting shops in our town centres. Following the summit, we are considering a range of proposals that are aimed at tackling the problem. For example, we are looking at what planning policy can deliver.
Together with the other devolved Administrations, we recently wrote to the United Kingdom Government to encourage it to maximise all the options that are available to address the public health concerns that are associated with gambling.
The minister will be aware that I recently secured a members’ business debate on problem gambling and fixed-odds betting terminals. I subsequently wrote to all 32 local authorities to ask them to consider inviting speakers from Gamblers Anonymous into schools to speak to pupils. A number of authorities, including Inverclyde Council, agreed to do that.
Does the minister agree that providing education for young people on the dangers of gambling is important? Does he welcome the move by councils to do that? Can he say more about his thinking as a consequence of the summit that he led?
The summit will produce a report of all the issues that we discussed. We heard from many experts and directly from communities, and we worked closely with local authorities.
The Scottish Government agrees that a preventative approach to problem gambling is important. The preparation of young people for adulthood involves alerting them to risks. We thank Mr McMillan for his proactivity on the issue and hope that local authorities, in partnership with us, will do all that they can do to raise awareness of the risks.
Before I call question 8, I say to members and ministers that there is the opportunity to ask slightly longer supplementary questions and to give slightly longer answers.
Farm Produce (United Kingdom Market)
Post independence, Scotland will continue to be a major exporter of fantastic food and drink produce.
I note the comments of Mr Forbes, who is described in The Scottish Farmer as a member of the better together campaign, and I also note that Lewis Macdonald did not mention the name of the supermarket that allegedly made those claims. We are unaware that any supermarket has made such claims.
Independent France exports £3.8 billion of food and beverages to England, the independent Netherlands exports £3.7 billion of food and beverages to England, Germany exports £3 billion, the Irish Republic exports £2.7 billion, and independent Spain exports £2.2 billion. An independent Scotland will continue to export our fantastic food and drink produce to England and the rest of the world. Lewis Macdonald should stop talking down the food and drink sector in this country.
The cabinet secretary is aware of the success of Scotland’s food and drink, which he salutes, as do I. However, does he share my concerns that, given the loss of cattle and sheep from the hills and uplands of Scotland, over time enough produce might not be available to meet the growing export demand for Scottish produce?
I share some of the concern that has been expressed by John Scott, which is why I was utterly appalled by the poor budget deal that the United Kingdom Government negotiated for Scotland’s farmers during renegotiation of the common agricultural policy. It is also why yesterday, during my statement about how we will implement that new policy in Scotland, we announced substantial support for Scotland’s livestock sector to give confidence to our producers so that they can produce for the wonderful international market opportunity that exists. That includes our unprecedented support for the beef sector, with a £45 million investment during the next three years to help to develop the beef sector for Scotland, and to capture the wonderful market opportunities to which John Scott refers.
I recently visited a food business in my region. It sells three quarters of its food with a union jack on it and one quarter with a saltire on it. The business told me that if Scotland became independent, it would have to move production and 200-plus employees down south.
We also know that Scottish produce, such as beef and lamb, has the benefit of being able to be marketed and sold in Europe as having been produced in Scotland and the UK. Will the minister tell us how much Scottish meat is sold with the union jack on it?
I remind Jim Hume that since this Government announced the referendum Scotland’s food and drink industry has absolutely boomed. I also remind Jim Hume and the other scaremongers in the better together campaign that the success of Scotland’s food and drink sector has been built on the back of the Scottish brand, not on our political and constitutional arrangements. That success will continue beyond independence.
To ask the Scottish Government what proportion of Scottish farm produce is sold elsewhere in the UK. (S4O-03353)
The Scottish Government does not hold specific information on Scotland’s farmers’ trade with the rest of the United Kingdom. However, estimates in the growth sector statistics database, which are derived from the latest Scottish Government global connections survey, suggest that in 2012 Scotland exported approximately £655 million-worth of crop, animal and hunting-related products to the rest of the UK.
Those are the figures that I had identified, which I think the cabinet secretary will agree represent nearly 90 per cent of the Scottish farm produce that is sold outwith Scotland.
My constituent, John Forbes, farms near Stonehaven, and provides about half of all the broad beans that are sold in UK supermarkets, as well as peas, pork and beef, all of which are marketed and sold as produce of Britain, under a British brand. Will the cabinet secretary simply confirm that in the event of a yes vote it will no longer be possible to market any of those foods anywhere as produce of Britain, to British farm standards?
Local Authority Transport Appraisal Guidance Reports
To ask the Scottish Government what assistance it gives to local authorities in updating their transport appraisal guidance reports. (S4O-03354)
Transport Scotland provides advice, if requested, to local authorities and others on the application of the Scottish transport appraisal guidance at any stage of a transport appraisal study. That includes providing advice on transport appraisal reports.
During the past two years, has Fife Council made any representation to the Scottish Government, Transport Scotland or the south east of Scotland transport partnership to promote the Levenmouth rail link? Can the minister tell me whether it is Fife Council’s top priority?
Transport Scotland has regular meetings with SEStran to discuss rail issues, and there have been two meetings of that type this year. Neither meeting has included a specific discussion about the proposed reopening of the Levenmouth rail link. In fact, I am not aware of any representations that have been made by Fife Council through SEStran or to Transport Scotland on that issue.
I should say that we have, of course, had discussions with local community groups about St Andrews. We have also had a member-led debate in the chamber about the Halbeath facility. However, we have had no representations that I am aware of from the council in relation to the Levenmouth project, although we have had discussions with individual members who have shown an interest. As things stand, people can make an application to the stations investment fund; the fund will confirm that Fife Council has made no such bid, so far.
In the context of the transport advice that the Scottish Government gives to local authorities, does the minister agree with SNP councillor and head of economic development Frank Ross that extending the Edinburgh trams is “a no-brainer”?
It is obviously for the City of Edinburgh Council to decide whether it would like to extend the trams. As John Swinney has said, we made it perfectly clear some years ago that we have contributed £0.5 billion to that project and will not fund it any more. We have made the position clear. It is obviously up to the council to consider further extensions, if it wants to.