Skip to main content

Language: English / Gàidhlig

Loading…
Chamber and committees

Plenary, 12 Nov 2009

Meeting date: Thursday, November 12, 2009


Contents


Question Time


SCOTTISH EXECUTIVE


Justice and Law Officers


Criminal Appeals

To ask the Scottish Executive, in light of the recent criminal appeal statistics that show a 34 per cent increase in the duration of solemn appeals, what action it will take to shorten the duration of all criminal appeals. (S3O-8437)

The Solicitor General for Scotland (Frank Mulholland):

Criminal appeals vary greatly in complexity from case to case. Rightly, the hearing of appeals is a matter for our independent judiciary. It would be entirely inappropriate for ministers to have direct involvement.

Pauline McNeill:

Does the Solicitor General not think that the huge increase in the time that it takes to hear appeals could damage the Scottish legal system? If appeals continue to take longer than they should, can the Cabinet Secretary for Justice appoint additional judges, which might solve the problem? Why does the Scottish Government think that there has been such an increase in the duration of appeals?

The Solicitor General for Scotland:

The statistics must be put in context. The vast majority of appeals—79 per cent of them—were concluded within six months. The number of appeals concluded was 2,191, which is more or less the same as that for the previous year—it represents a decrease of 3 per cent. The number of lengthy, complex appeals has increased significantly, and there have been a number of full-bench cases, which tie up multiple judges. The point should be made that judges can proceed to hear an appeal only when the appellant's counsel or legal representatives are ready to present it.

I do not want members to think that the judiciary is unaware of the issue. Measures have been put in place to deal with it. First, the number of days that the appeal court sits has increased significantly. In 2007, the figure was 189; the projected figure for 2009 is 262. Secondly, along with other practitioners, I have noted an increase in the use of written submissions, which focuses argument and allows for detailed preparation by judges. Thirdly, an administrative judge has been appointed to oversee the efficient management of court business, with one judge focused on appeals. A recent judicial conference was held to address these matters and will no doubt bear fruit.

I am confident, and I anticipate that the judiciary are confident, that the measures that I have outlined will bear fruit. The answer is not always to appoint additional judges, but the Lord President will no doubt give great consideration to that in his discussions with the Cabinet Secretary for Justice.


Scottish Crime and Justice Survey

To ask the Scottish Executive what action it will take to reverse the increases in vandalism, violent crime, assault and robbery shown in the recent Scottish crime and justice survey. (S3O-8418)

The Cabinet Secretary for Justice (Kenny MacAskill):

The reality in Scotland is that overall recorded crime is at its lowest level for nearly 30 years. However, there are areas that continue to give concern, hence the Government drive to tackle both knife crime and alcohol abuse. The Scottish Government is working with the Association of Chief Police Officers in Scotland, local community safety partnerships and others to tackle crime in Scotland. We are investing £13 million through our cashback for communities projects, £1.6 million to support the community initiative to reduce violence in Glasgow and £400,000 in the safer streets programme to deliver crime reduction measures through community safety partnerships.

Helen Eadie:

Does the cabinet secretary agree that now is the time to introduce Labour's policy of a minimum mandatory sentence for carrying a knife? When he answers, will he bear in mind the stabbing to death of my constituent in Lochgelly—a father who intervened to try to calm a violent situation and was slaughtered on the streets of Lochgelly by a person carrying a knife? Should the message from the Parliament be, "Carry a knife and you go to jail"?

Kenny MacAskill:

I have sympathy, as does the Government, with anyone who is the victim of crime, especially when a life is lost. On the case to which the member referred, our sympathies go out. A trial is outstanding and it would be wrong of me to comment further.

I stand with the chief constable of Strathclyde Police in considering that the best way of tackling knife crime is by having the severe punishments that we have, by supporting our judiciary, by tackling education to ensure that we deal with matters, by bringing in Ferroguards so that we apprehend people who carry knives, and, ultimately, by leaving the matter to the discretion of the judiciary. Anyone who uses a knife is almost certainly going to go to jail. People who carry knives know that there are severe consequences, including jail. However, as I said, I prefer the advice and evidence of Detective Chief Superintendent John Carnochan and of Steve House. I stand with the people who make operational decisions on the front line.

Bill Aitken (Glasgow) (Con):

Does the cabinet secretary agree that the efforts that we all want to succeed are likely to be negated to a considerable extent by his own proposals, which will mean that people who would normally be sent to prison for at least two of the offences to which Mrs Eadie referred will no longer be sent to prison? There will be a presumption against sending such people to prison, and many people who are sent to prison are released, at the cabinet secretary's insistence, after serving a quarter of their sentence.

Kenny MacAskill:

Yet again we hear the old Tory line about early release. We can only point out that early release was instigated by the Conservatives many, many years ago. It was not Mr Aitken's responsibility, and he was certainly not convener of the Justice Committee at the time, but it was the Tories who brought in early release and it is this Government that is taking action to deal with the situation.

We stand four-square not just behind the people who are in the front line of policing, such as Chief Constable Steve House, but behind the wise decisions that have been made by the judiciary, whether at senator or sheriff level. That is why we allow the judiciary to make the decisions. Although we believe that short sentences do not work, in that they do not tackle the problem of reoffending—we are supported in that direction of travel by a variety of organisations, such as Victim Support Scotland—we have made it clear that if a sheriff thinks that a short sentence is appropriate, they have my full support. I have given that undertaking to Sheriff Raeburn, who argued that some people should get a short, sharp shock, especially in domestic violence cases, when someone needs to be taken out of the household for others' protection. Members on the Government benches were persuaded by that point. We trust our judiciary as we support our police.


Sex Offenders

To ask the Scottish Executive what steps are being taken to improve the management of sex offenders. (S3O-8367)

The Cabinet Secretary for Justice (Kenny MacAskill):

Through the Criminal Justice and Licensing (Scotland) Bill we will tighten sexual offences prevention orders to impose new, positive obligations on high-risk sex offenders, strengthen the requirements for homeless sex offenders, and ensure that anyone who is subject to a foreign travel order will have to surrender their passport to the police.

We are also monitoring the community disclosure pilot in Tayside. If it is successful, it will be rolled out nationally.

John Lamont:

In answer to Bill Aitken in the Parliament last week, the cabinet secretary said that the Government has significant doubts about the value of a system of satellite tracking of people on the sex offenders register, principally because although the technology can show where people are, it does not reveal what they are doing. However, the technology could have a number of benefits, particularly when used as part of a package of measures to improve the monitoring of known offenders. For example, it could be used to identify an individual in the vicinity of a school or similar establishment. Will the cabinet secretary therefore agree to look again at the potential benefits of the technology?

Kenny MacAskill:

As I said to Mr Aitken last week, on new technology, whether we are talking about satellite tracking or polygraph tests, which Mr Aitken also mentioned, we do not rule anything in or out. We consider what is operating and we learn from other jurisdictions. Polygraph tests are being trialled south of the border.

It is not a matter of agreeing to "look again"; I can assure Mr Lamont that we continually consider such matters. If an approach is shown to be appropriate and cost effective, we will be happy to adopt it. However, as I said, currently the police appear to take the view that the approach that Mr Lamont described would not add to what we have. Should that change, we will be more than happy to act, as we are doing with the Tayside community pilot.

Why, when the justice budget is increasing by more than £7 million in real terms, has the budget for the monitoring of sex offenders been cut by £21,000?

Kenny MacAskill:

Because we use a variety of methods to monitor sex offenders and do not just do so through the criminal justice directorate. Mr Kelly might not know about how we make up multi-agency public protection arrangements. We have to involve local authorities because of their responsibilities in housing and social work. The Scottish Prison Service is also involved. Other agencies, such as health and voluntary sector agencies, come on board when it is appropriate. The resources for MAPPAs to monitor sex offenders in the community come not just from the justice directorate's budget but from others who contribute in a variety of ways.

If Mr Kelly is so mindful of budget cuts, I ask him to support this Government in seeking to oppose the £500 million of cuts that Westminster is imposing on it—£21,000 is but petty change in comparison with the £500 million of cuts that we face from Westminster, never mind its further expenditure on weapons of mass destruction.


Antisocial Behaviour etc (Scotland) Act 2004

To ask the Scottish Executive what action is being taken to ensure that the full powers of the Antisocial Behaviour etc (Scotland) Act 2004 are being used. (S3O-8442)

The Minister for Community Safety (Fergus Ewing):

In March this year, the Scottish Government, the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities, the Association of Chief Police Officers in Scotland and other key national partners joined together to launch a new framework for tackling antisocial behaviour. That framework confirms our collective determination to put prevention and effective intervention at the heart of our approach.

On 26 October 2009, I visited the Fife equally well project in Kirkcaldy, which is an excellent example of how to put the approach into practice, specifically in tackling and preventing alcohol and drug-related antisocial behaviour. I am sure that the member will join me in congratulating Fife Constabulary, NHS Fife, Fife Council and local voluntary sector partners on their continued efforts to make communities in Fife safer.

John Park:

I certainly do join the minister in congratulating the agencies that he mentioned on the work that they are doing in Fife.

One issue that I face regularly is antisocial behaviour between neighbours. When I look at my mailbag and the work that my office is doing, I see that Fife Council in particular is not using the full powers that local authorities have at their disposal to tackle antisocial behaviour. Will the minister or his officials engage with officials from Fife Council to find a way forward? I would be more than happy to provide him with specific evidence and to show him some trends in the area.

Fergus Ewing:

I thank Mr Park for his offer. If he wishes to put to me the specific examples from which he has reached his conclusion, I would be more than happy to consider how to take matters forward. In the absence of knowledge of specific examples, it would be unwise for me to offer any conclusions.

Finally, it is entirely a matter for local authorities whether to pursue the powers conferred by the Antisocial Behaviour etc (Scotland) Act 2004. They are entirely free to do so if they wish, but we will not impose on any local authority the way to ensure community safety in their part of Scotland.


“Joint Thematic Report on the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002”

5. Elizabeth Smith (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con):

To ask the Scottish Executive what plans it has to take forward the recommendations of Her Majesty's inspectorate of prosecution in Scotland and Her Majesty's inspectorate of constabulary for Scotland in the "Joint Thematic Report on the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002". (S3O-8364)

The Cabinet Secretary for Justice (Kenny MacAskill):

The serious organised crime task force will discuss what action to take on the report at its next meeting on 8 December 2009. The Scottish Government has allocated an extra £1.2 million to the Crown Office and arranged a funding package of £1 million for the police to recruit specialist staff to boost our capacity to recover assets from criminals. We will continue to do everything that we can to maximise the effectiveness of asset recovery, as we committed to do in the serious organised crime task force strategy that we published on 2 June 2009.

Elizabeth Smith:

I thank the cabinet secretary for that informative reply. Does he agree that one option that could help to establish a more effective approach towards the gathering of intelligence on the financial assets of criminals would be to amend the 2002 act to ensure that the onus was on the criminals rather than the Crown to demonstrate that their excessive assets had not been obtained as a result of criminality?

Kenny MacAskill:

The member misunderstands the current legal position. The balance of proof switches in such matters and it is for the individual to show that an asset was from a legitimate source.

We constantly review matters, which is why we will review the joint thematic report. Bill Skelly and others will be involved. Although the presumption switches and the onus is on the individual, that is not to say that there are no difficulties. I recently met the civil recovery unit and officers who deal with specialist and serious organised crime. We know that we have to take further action, and we will examine all the relevant areas. Some of the legislation is devolved and some of it is reserved to Westminster. Where it is appropriate we will take action, and where the legislation is reserved we will encourage the Home Secretary to take action.

The law is as I have described it, but we seek to learn lessons, whether from Ireland or elsewhere.

Richard Baker (North East Scotland) (Lab):

Does the cabinet secretary agree that funds that are recovered through proceeds of crime legislation should continue to be focused on cashback for communities schemes? What discussions have taken place with police forces on the introduction of an incentivisation policy, whereby forces would be able to retain a proportion of such funds?

Kenny MacAskill:

We discussed those matters at the outset of the serious organised crime task force and the cashback for communities scheme. It seems perfectly sensible that some element of providing more money to be able to bring in more money is a good thing, which is why money was allocated to the police in discussions with the Association of Chief Police Officers in Scotland. Indeed, other funds have been provided to ensure that we can process matters.

The principal aim of cashback for communities will always be to allow our children from disadvantaged or, indeed, not-so-disadvantaged areas to be all that they can be. To ensure that we do that as best we can, we must maximise the resources that are available to strip criminals of their assets and put them back to use for the good of our community.


Criminal Activity (Closed-circuit Television)

To ask the Scottish Executive what support it can offer to communities wishing to extend the use of CCTV cameras to combat antisocial behaviour and other criminal activity. (S3O-8434)

The Minister for Community Safety (Fergus Ewing):

CCTV can play a significant role in the prevention, detection and prosecution of crime. The Scottish Government is providing record levels of funding to local government and the police service in Scotland to allow them to respond positively to local needs such as the extension of CCTV provision. We will shortly publish the strategic report on improving the efficiency and effectiveness of public space CCTV in Scotland, which will help local agencies to make better decisions on the use of CCTV.

Ken Macintosh:

I hope that the minister is aware of the level of demand for CCTV among our communities. Does he recall—I am sure that he does—the funds that the previous Executive made available to Scotland's ethnic communities to install CCTV at places of worship, with the accruing benefits of peace of mind and improved security? Is he considering granting a further allocation of funds to Scotland's ethnic communities to reduce racially motivated incidents and to give our communities peace of mind and the ability to worship safely?

Fergus Ewing:

I appreciate and share Ken Macintosh's concern and his belief that CCTV can play an extremely useful role. Indeed, the Solicitor General for Scotland has just advised me that CCTV evidence helped to secure a conviction in a recent vile, racially motivated murder. I think that we are all agreed on the use of CCTV.

I am also aware of the funding initiative to which Ken Macintosh referred. As he will recall, I explained in my reply to a question by Stewart Maxwell on 18 December 2007 that that fund was set up after the events of 11 September 2001 and that it had been fully utilised.

I understand that the issues continue to be under consideration. The Scottish Council of Jewish Communities is taking matters forward. I am pleased to tell the member, if he does not already know, that the First Minister is meeting the director of the Scottish Council of Jewish Communities, Ephraim Borowski, on 24 November to discuss various incidents of concern about defiling gravestones and other absolutely unacceptable behaviour. I am quite sure that the matters that the member raises will form part of the discussion between Ephraim Borowski and the First Minister.

I am sorry, but that must conclude justice and law officers questions. I will allow a few seconds for people to change places.


Rural Affairs and the Environment


Zero Waste Plan

To ask the Scottish Executive when it expects to publish the zero waste plan and how it will work with local authorities to deliver it. (S3O-8439)

The Cabinet Secretary for Rural Affairs and the Environment (Richard Lochhead):

The consultation on the draft zero waste plan for Scotland ends tomorrow, 13 November. The Scottish Government will consider carefully the views expressed in all the responses to help us produce a final zero waste plan, which we intend to publish in spring next year. We continue to work closely throughout this process with local authorities, and they will be vital partners in delivering the plan's objectives.

Mary Mulligan:

I am sure that we all agree that the challenging targets for waste management will be met only if we all work together. What is the view of the Cabinet Secretary for Rural Affairs and the Environment of the suggestion by West Lothian Council to establish a number of fora of local authorities on a geographic basis to encourage the strategic and operational exchange of best practice and, where appropriate, shared services?

Richard Lochhead:

I agree with the member's sentiments. There is, of course, nothing stopping what she described from happening now. We certainly join the member in encouraging local authorities to work together as much as possible, particularly in the regional context. I pay tribute to West Lothian Council, because it is the fifth-best performing council in Scotland for household recycling, which is good news. It is well over the 40 per cent target, and it has achieved that early. Local authorities working together is certainly the way forward, and I am in no doubt that that will be a feature of the final zero waste plan for Scotland.

Nanette Milne (North East Scotland) (Con):

Last Friday, I visited the community food initiative in Aberdeen, which the cabinet secretary launched earlier this year, and I was shown a very large quantity of so-called dry foods, such as pasta, wrapped biscuits and bottled water, which the organisation distributes free to needy groups as a fair share project. I was told that all that perfectly useable food would otherwise go to landfill. Is the cabinet secretary as shocked as I am about that? Will he investigate whether that sort of massive food wastage is a problem across Scotland? If it is, will he work with local authorities to ensure that such food is put to good use in our communities, rather than going to waste?

Richard Lochhead:

Again, I agree with the member's sentiments. Of course, the Scottish Government has been funding and running the love food, hate waste campaign to try to reduce the waste of good-quality food that costs each household several hundred pounds a year. We have also been working with a number of local authorities over the past year or two on food collection trials, so the issue is certainly high on our agenda. The member is right to highlight it as something that must be at the heart of our zero waste policy.


Dairy Industry (Meetings)

To ask the Scottish Government when the Cabinet Secretary for Rural Affairs and the Environment last met representatives of the dairy industry. (S3O-8362)

The Cabinet Secretary for Rural Affairs and the Environment (Richard Lochhead):

I chaired a meeting of all parts of the dairy supply chain in Edinburgh on 24 September 2009. More recently, on 29 October 2009, I met the president of NFU Scotland to discuss a range of issues, including the challenges facing our dairy sector.

Derek Brownlee:

Given the difficulties that the sector faces, can the cabinet secretary tell us what actions the Scottish Government is taking to further the cause of an ombudsman for the grocery sector? In particular, has he had any discussions with the Office of Fair Trading or the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs?

Richard Lochhead:

The member raises a good point about the campaign to establish a supermarket ombudsman, which I believe has cross-party support. Of course, the ombudsman was a recommendation from the Competition Commission after its thorough investigation into the issue, which unveiled many horror stories about how some suppliers have been treated by some supermarkets and large retailers.

I can also inform the member that I happen recently to have had a meeting with the chairman of the Competition Commission, who wanted to discuss that issue with me during his visit to Edinburgh last week. He paid tribute to the Scottish Government for our support for the idea, which I explained has cross-party support in the Parliament. We are concerned by the lack of a positive response from DEFRA. I assure the member that I have made numerous representations time and again to the United Kingdom ministers who have responsibility for the issue, and I will continue to do so in the weeks and months ahead.


Marine Regions

To ask the Scottish Executive whether it intends to make it a duty to ensure that the Scottish marine regions cover the whole of the Scottish marine area. (S3O-8400)

The Cabinet Secretary for Rural Affairs and the Environment (Richard Lochhead):

The Marine (Scotland) Bill contains provisions to create Scottish marine regions through secondary legislation, which will be subject to an affirmative resolution of the Parliament. I am committed to consulting on the criteria for defining the boundaries of the Scottish marine regions.

Mike Pringle:

That sounds like not exactly a yes and possibly a no, but I thank the cabinet secretary for clarifying his position. However, his answer will perhaps trouble some in Scotland's coastal communities as well as many stakeholders, who will now be a little uncertain as to whether their area will be deemed worthy of being covered by a dedicated Scottish marine region. Will he attempt to dispel some of that uncertainty by detailing the processes and criteria that will be involved in designating a Scottish marine region, so that any communities that might be affected will at least know what to expect when decisions on a marine region's eligibility are taken?

Richard Lochhead:

There is a distinction between allowing organisations or local authorities around Scotland who want to do so to apply for their area to be part of a marine region, and placing a duty on the Scottish ministers to establish marine regions throughout Scotland. We are reluctant to introduce too many duties into the bill because doing so would in effect make it a lawyer's charter and would lead to our being required to establish marine regions throughout Scotland, irrespective of whether there was a case—or, indeed, demand—for doing so. That is the root of our reluctance. For instance, if there were such a duty, we might be required to establish marine regions around St Kilda or Rockall, which could take us into a whole different debate.

I have already given the commitment that we will carefully consult on what criteria should be used to determine whether a marine region should be established in any particular area of Scotland. I give the member that assurance.

In the marine region that it is hoped will be set up in Highland, has any assessment been made of the impact of the Ministry of Defence bombing range on the special protection area for seabirds in the waters adjacent to Cape Wrath?

Richard Lochhead:

I am aware of the issue, as a NATO training exercise took place just last month. My understanding is that the MOD works closely with Scottish Natural Heritage when planning such exercises. The MOD also undertakes appraisals showing the environmental impacts both at sea and onshore. However, the member raises an important dimension of the need to safeguard our marine environment from all harmful activities, including those of the MOD. As he will be aware, the MOD has certain rights under existing legislation to conduct such exercises, but we will continue to press the MOD and work closely with the ministry to ensure that safeguards are put in place to protect our environment.


Flood Defences

To ask the Scottish Executive what action it is able to take with private companies that do not maintain flood defences on our coastline. (S3O-8407)

The Minister for Environment (Roseanna Cunningham):

This is a matter for the relevant local authority, not the Scottish Government. Under the Flood Prevention (Scotland) Act 1961, local authorities have discretionary powers to repair and otherwise maintain in a due state of efficiency any barrier or other work for defence against flooding.

Under the Flood Risk Management (Scotland) Act 2009, most of which will come into effect later this month, it will be for the local authority both to assess whether the maintenance of privately owned defences substantially reduces flood risk in its area and to act accordingly.

Jim Tolson:

A large multinational company that owns some of the coastline in my constituency has taken more than two years to agree to replace a broken sea valve that is located on its land. The sea valve is suspected of being the cause of repeated flooding in nearby homes. Despite the minister's answer, I hope that she will be able to do something to encourage such companies to respond more timeously when such incidents come to fruition.

Roseanna Cunningham:

As I have already indicated, the primary responsibility is with the local authority. If the member cares to write to me about the specific issue that he has raised, I will endeavour to establish the background to it and try to work out why there has been a delay.

In general terms, the first ports of call for members on such issues should be the owner, whether the owner is domestic or commercial, and the local authority.

John Scott (Ayr) (Con):

The minister will be aware that, as a result of climate change, there is an increased risk of tidal surges in the Forth and the Clyde; evidence on that was heard by the Rural Affairs and Environment Committee, of which she was, until recently, the convener. Does the minister propose to take any measures—or does she propose to ask companies or local authorities to take any measures—to protect key installations, such as the oil refinery at Grangemouth that represents 30 to 40 per cent of the United Kingdom's oil-refining capabilities, or Longannet power station, from the increased risk of tidal surge?

Roseanna Cunningham:

The increased risk of tidal surge is a factor in the general issue of flood risk assessment. It is a matter that the Rural Affairs and Environment Committee has considered and which is in our minds.

The member raises the issue of specific large companies and the work that they do. I am aware that Longannet power station wants to make some upgrades and that a flood risk assessment will be carried out as part of that. That would be the normal process by which those matters would be assessed. If the member has any indication that anything other than that is happening, I hope that he will communicate it to me.

Question 5 was to be asked by Jackie Baillie, who does not appear to be in the chamber. I hope that members will relay my disapproval of that.

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. Is it in order for any other MSP to ask that question?

No, it is not. That is well established.


Lamlash Bay (Marine Conservation Area)

To ask the Scottish Executive whether the no-take zone in Lamlash bay is achieving its objectives and what progress is being made with the wider marine protected area in the bay. (S3O-8451)

The Cabinet Secretary for Rural Affairs and the Environment (Richard Lochhead):

The objectives of the marine reserve in Lamlash Bay are to protect and enhance biodiversity and to help to conserve and improve scallop stocks to support sustainable fishing. It is too early to say to what extent these objectives are being achieved. Work on possible management measures for the remainder of the bay is on-going. The Lamlash Bay working group is scheduled to meet again on 14 January 2010.

Patrick Harvie:

It is a matter of disappointment that, almost a year after the wider marine protected area was announced, it is still not in place. Is the cabinet secretary aware of reports from the local community that the dredgers are repeatedly operating in the no-take zone? That is equivalent to the people who are expected to manage and police the no-take zone continuing to dredge it. Have those reports come to the attention of the cabinet secretary? If they are true, what hope do they give us for the future of marine protected areas in Scotland?

Richard Lochhead:

I will inquire whether my officials are aware of the points that the member raises.

Progress has been made, and I want to pay tribute to the Community of Arran Seabed Trust and the residents of Arran who have campaigned for years for protection for the bay on their doorstep. Their work resulted in the Government implementing legislation. As the member says, there is more to do, and discussions are continuing between COAST and the fisheries interests in Lamlash Bay.

I remind the member that existing legislation includes safeguards around dredging activity and the impact that that can have on the environment. The sector is, therefore, already regulated.

I take on board the member's points. I hope that we can make progress, but we need discussion among the various interests in the bay. It is important that we try to iron out any conflicts and ensure that people are working together towards common aims. I am pleased that there are signs of progress in that regard.


Fly-tipping

To ask the Scottish Executive what guidance it has issued to local authorities on fly-tipping. (S3O-8433)

The Cabinet Secretary for Rural Affairs and the Environment (Richard Lochhead):

The Scottish fly-tipping forum produces guidance on fly-tipping for local authorities. The forum is funded by the Scottish Government and brings together key bodies with an interest in fly-tipping, including the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities, the Scottish Environment Protection Agency, police, farmers and the Scottish Government.

Lewis Macdonald:

What advice would the cabinet secretary give—or anticipate that the forum would give—to councils on the issue of charging for uplift of single large items of domestic waste, such as fridge freezers? There is evidence that such charges can lead to increased levels of fly-tipping, and to items not being recycled when they ought to be, which has consequences for Scotland's ability to meet its national recycling targets.

Richard Lochhead:

I am sure that all members in the chamber join me in condemning anyone who fly-tips anywhere in Scotland, including in the member's constituency. The legislation gives the authorities powers to prosecute such people, and a great deal of effort is taking place through the fly-tipping forum to collect data on the number of people who are fly-tipping. It is—as the member might expect me to say—largely for local authorities to decide whether or not they charge for uplifts. They would have to take into account the scale of the charge and the impact that it would have on fly-tipping or on any other issue. Each council is in a different situation, and they must decide on the appropriate charges for particular items.

I have no intention of intervening in the right of local authorities to impose a charge or not. It is important that all local authorities—and all authorities—identify the culprits in whichever way possible, and take the appropriate action. So far, up to September this year, the database—which I understand Aberdeen city is not part of—has identified that there have been 16,688 fly-tipping incidents throughout Scotland. That is an appalling figure, and I hope that we can continue the good work that is being carried out to reduce it.


Ponies (Hot Branding)

8. Bill Wilson (West of Scotland) (SNP):

To ask the Scottish Government what its position is on reports that the scarring of tissue caused by the branding of ponies is not predictable and that numbers are often impossible to read, and the statement by the head of the Scottish Government's animal welfare branch that he had difficulty reading some branded identification numbers. (S3O-8393)

The Cabinet Secretary for Rural Affairs and the Environment (Richard Lochhead):

Hot branding of ponies is a less effective method of identification than microchipping. It is a painful procedure, and we agree with the British Equine Veterinary Association that it should be phased out. Hot branding of equines is only permitted in exceptional cases in Scotland, and only where a specific authorisation has been issued.

Bill Wilson:

The cabinet secretary agrees that hot branding does not allow clear identification; the British Equine Veterinary Association and other bodies believe that the pain that it causes is unacceptable and that the practice should be phased out on welfare grounds; and microchipping is a virtually pain-free and reliable alternative that is mandated by the European Union. Does the cabinet secretary therefore agree that it is iniquitous to allow the continued hot branding of Scottish Exmoor ponies, which are not roaming free anywhere whatsoever, when this cruel and unnecessary practice has been outlawed for other species?

Richard Lochhead:

I assure the member that the position in Scotland differs from that in other parts of the United Kingdom, where no authorisation is necessary to hot brand equines. Hot branding in Scotland is strictly controlled, and limited to a very few animals per year. An authorisation will only be issued in cases in which hot branding is necessary to create a visual identification mark, and where freeze branding is not considered a suitable alternative.

Hot branding is only permitted where horses or ponies are living in a semi-feral state and are not used to being handled. Indeed, only nine authorisations have been issued this year, all for a semi-feral herd of Exmoor ponies that live on the Scoraig peninsula in a remote part of Wester Ross. A microchip cannot be read from a distance and, where horses and ponies are living wild and unused to being handled, it may not be possible to get close enough to them to read the microchip. The practice only happens under very strictly controlled circumstances in Scotland. I hope that that answer assures the member somewhat.

Question 9 was not lodged.


Flood Damage

To ask the Scottish Government what strategy it has in place to support local authorities in dealing with flood damage during the winter months. (S3O-8387)

The Minister for Environment (Roseanna Cunningham):

The overall aim of the Government's flood risk management strategy is to reduce flood risk by investment in flood protection schemes and flood warning arrangements, which will increase the resilience of people and communities. That will allow them to recover more quickly and easily from the consequences of flooding. Flooding will never be avoided completely, which is why resilience is so important.

With regard to the implementation of the Flood Risk Management (Scotland) Act 2009, can the minister say whether there has been an uptake of upstream management schemes, which allow flooding in places where little or no damage is done?

Roseanna Cunningham:

We are in the very early stages of implementing the 2009 act. As I indicated in response to an earlier question, it is not yet fully implemented, so we will have to wait a little while to find out whether, under the new arrangements, some of what Gil Paterson would like to see will happen. The Government continues to consider and develop national policies to ensure that local responders are prepared for major emergencies, but it also wants to lead the development of a national adaptation framework that will provide direction for public service delivery and for understanding and responding to the risks. Some of that work will include the matters about which the member indicates he is concerned.

The Presiding Officer:

That concludes question time, but before we move on, I add that I have reflected on Mr McGrigor's point of order, which is an exact example of why the other Presiding Officers and I frown on members not turning up when they are due to ask questions. Other members will have come to the chamber with a view to asking supplementary questions and it becomes a complete waste of their time. That is why we frown on the practice.

We will now move on to the next item of business. I will allow a few seconds for members to change places.