Plenary, 13 Sep 2001

Meeting date: Thursday, September 13, 2001

Official Report 625KB pdf

---

Question Time

---

SCOTTISH EXECUTIVE

---

Scottish Enterprise Budget (Social Justice)

To ask the Scottish Executive what proportion of Scottish Enterprise's current budget is spent specifically on social justice issues and what steps it is taking to ensure that Scottish Enterprise is involved in supporting the Executive's commitments in this area. (S1O-3766)

Scottish Enterprise estimates that it will spend £76.5 million during the current financial year on matters relating to social justice. Our strategy document, "A Smart, Successful Scotland", made it clear to Scottish Enterprise and Highlands and Islands Enterprise that the Executive expects its cross-cutting initiatives, particularly social justice, to be at the centre of their work.

I am sure that the minister will agree that it is a central commitment of the Executive and the Parliament that equality and social justice are the responsibility of all departments and agencies, not just those that fall under the remit of social justice.

Does the minister agree that all agencies and bodies funded by the Scottish Executive should play their part in using the levers of influence, power and money at their disposal to support that commitment? Recognising the potentially powerful role that Scottish Enterprise can play in a constituency such as mine, will the minister give a commitment to monitor and review progress on this within Scottish Enterprise and to consider ways in which good practice can be developed across Scotland?

I am happy to give a commitment that we will monitor and review good practice. The member might want to note that in "A Smart, Successful Scotland" we said that we were going to consult on the performance measures for the Scottish Enterprise network. The performance measures are currently out to consultation and some of them are drawn directly from the Executive's social justice strategy.

Does the minister recognise that the social justice agenda would be more deliverable if the Minister for Finance and Local Government had not recently cut—sorry, I meant to say realigned—£35 million from the social justice budget?

The general point that is being made is that social justice is the responsibility of us all. I am sure that Mr Gibson would not demur from the fact that meeting some of our objectives in health care, for example, makes a strong commitment to the social justice agenda.

Will the minister confirm that Scottish Enterprise was established to promote the economic development of Scotland? Does she agree that the best way to improve Scotland's social welfare would be to ensure a healthy business climate? On that basis, does the minister not agree that Scottish Enterprise would do better to concentrate on its core product?

The member will understand that I prefer to trace the antecedents of Scottish Enterprise to the Scottish Development Agency, which was created by a Labour Government in the 1970s. Mr Gallie points to perhaps the fundamental philosophical difference between Conservative and Labour members: we believe that social justice and economic efficiency are two sides of the same coin and not irrevocably split in the way that the Conservative party believes.

---

European Union (Education and Training)

To ask the Scottish Executive what plans it has to encourage young people to take up opportunities available through the European Union's ERASMUS, LEONARDO and European voluntary service education and training programmes. (S1O-3742)

The Scottish Executive currently offers regular opportunities for participation in these EU programmes to schools, students and youth groups. Regular information days and conferences are held, roadshows are planned on youth for Europe, and Eurodesk provides information and advice electronically and directly on request.

The minister may be aware that considerably fewer young people go from Scotland to other European countries under the aforementioned schemes than vice versa—with the exception of the Republic of Ireland. Bearing that in mind, does he accept that one factor could be our poor record in foreign language teaching? What concrete proposals does he have to encourage more young people to participate in such exchanges?

I think that the problem may be foreign language learning, rather than foreign language teaching, but I agree with the general thesis. There is a problem, not just in Scotland, but throughout the UK, with the number of young people taking up those particular opportunities. I would like to think that in Scotland we could take a particular initiative that would increase participation. I would be happy to consider that.

---

Oil and Gas Industry

To ask the Scottish Executive what plans it has to support the oil and gas industry to ensure that it continues to play an integral part in the economy. (S1O-3744)

As vice-chairman of pilot, the joint oil industry and Government working group, I take a close interest in the work to sustain a strong and vibrant UK oil and gas industry. I expect that industry to continue to have long-term importance for the Scottish and UK economies.

The minister will be aware of the success of the "Offshore Europe" conference in Aberdeen last week. It is the second-biggest oil and gas show in the world and attracted 25,000 visitors from 78 countries. However, a major concern was raised about the impact of skills shortages onshore and offshore. If not addressed, they may impact on future investment decisions in the UK sector over the coming 30 years, when another generation of young Scots could be finding employment in the industry. How does the Scottish Executive intend to ensure that those skills shortages are tackled?

Elaine Thomson is right that the exhibition in Aberdeen was a great success. I will correct her on one detail though; 25,000 people attended from 89 countries. The spirit at that exhibition was successful and upbeat.

We recognise that there are skills shortages in the industry, which threaten it to some extent. One of the achievements of the pilot working group has been not just forecasting requirements, but ensuring that we meet the needs of the oil and gas sector. The Executive, with UK colleagues, is playing a full role in that.

Further to Elaine Thomson's question on skills shortages, does the minister agree that part of the problem is that oil companies have been too willing to downsize and outsource and in various other ways create a climate of uncertainty and a lack of confidence in the future? Will the minister take every step to encourage the industry to maintain staff levels throughout any future fluctuations?

Given the tone of Mr Adam's question, it is obvious that he has not recently engaged with people in the oil industry. He certainly could not have engaged with them at the conference last week. We appreciate that there is a skills shortage and we are addressing it.

While this Parliament has no locus to levy corporation or windfall taxes on the industry, it can influence the competitiveness of the support businesses to the extraction sector, especially the high-tech and expanding companies in the north-east. Will the Executive give an assurance that there will be a return to uniform business rates, and an assurance that the use of the tartan tax, which would drive those small companies out of Scotland, will be avoided?

It is worth documenting that we have no plans to use the tartan tax and that we are engaged with the oil industry at both Executive and UK levels.

---

School Meals (Nutritional Standards)

To ask the Scottish Executive what progress is being made in encouraging local authorities to adopt the guidelines under the Scottish diet action plan on nutritional standards in school meals. (S1O-3768)

Responsibility for the implementation of the Scottish diet action plan guidelines lies with local authorities. However, implementation has not been uniform and consideration is currently being given to the most appropriate way to ensure that those standards are adopted throughout Scotland.

In view of the fact that implementation has not been the same across the board, will the minister consider making the guidelines mandatory?

Creating mandatory guidelines would not be without its difficulties, but we must consider that option. Standards are applicable across the board for schools in England, and minimum standards may be appropriate in Scotland. We wish to discuss the issue further, and to ensure improved uptake and better quality. I will be discussing that with my colleagues and others in the months to come.

What nutritional health qualifications are the suppliers of school meals to children obliged to hold?

That is a matter for local authorities, but may be precisely the sort of issue that requires discussion when addressing national minimum standards.

Does the minister share my concern about the basic hypocrisy of trying to improve school meals when schools in some of the poorest areas of Glasgow are installing giant sweet-vending machines, containing tooth-rotting material, because under Labour Glasgow cannot afford to run her schools without getting children's sweetie money?

I hesitate to dignify the question, but it requires a full response. It is easy to see some of those issues in isolation. The result of schools managing to attract more young people to stay in the school grounds during the school day is that fewer young people are involved in motor vehicle accidents in the local community, there is less litter in the local community and schools have fewer problems. In addition to healthy eating, a number of other school management issues must be taken into account.

Tomorrow I will be involved in launching the kidzcard—a very good Glasgow City Council scheme. I have to say that Glasgow City Council in particular has been taking the lead in Scotland in introducing breakfast clubs, healthy eating, fruit for every young school pupil and a number of other initiatives, for which they should be praised, not condemned. I hope to do that tomorrow morning at the Gorbals leisure centre.

The minister answered my question.

Well you do not need to ask it then, Mr McAveety. [Interruption.] Order.

I hate to be heckled by a Glasgow sweetie wife. Glasgow City Council pioneered the provision of fresh fruit for young kids in schools, free swimming for all under-18s, and a whole range of other initiatives. Next week, at Quarry Brae Primary School, we will identify how we can support kids' healthy eating. That should be welcomed, not misrepresented. [Interruption.]

Meeting suspended.

On resuming—

Order. I suspended the meeting for quarter of an hour. Members will be pleased to know that that was due to a false alarm. Someone was repairing the fire alarm system next door at New College and pulled the wrong wire out. It is always better to be safe than sorry.

We may find that question time is a little interrupted by the public coming back into the gallery, but we must rise above the noise. I will extend open questions for quarter of an hour and then First Minister's questions for quarter of an hour. We will see how we get on with the debate. I would still like to have decision time at 5 o'clock but it depends on the pressure on the debate.

I will not go back to Mr McAveety's supplementary question because it was not one anyway. [Applause.]

---

National Qualifications Framework

To ask the Scottish Executive what progress is being made on simplifying the national qualifications framework. (S1O-3767)

The national qualifications task group has met twice and is taking early action to simplify new national qualifications and to reduce work load for teachers and lecturers. I will publish a consultation paper in the near future on longer-term issues connected to internal and external assessment within the new national qualifications.

I thank the minister for his response. He will be well aware of concerns among students, teachers and parents about the over-complex nature of the national qualifications framework and its adverse impact on work loads. Can he reassure me that when the task force reports, change will be implemented as speedily as possible?

I can absolutely reassure the member that any changes agreed will be implemented as speedily as possible. As I explained this morning, some specific changes will be possible this year. Longer-term changes need to be the subject of proper consultation. I am not in favour of making radical changes to the education service and our systems. We do not have consent within the system, but I believe that we can achieve consent if we conduct the consultation exercise properly. There will be changes, if changes are the outcome of the consultation.

I point out that some of the extra complexities of higher still, such as the intermediate levels, have worked well. Will the consultation ensure that attention is paid to what is genuinely considered to be serious over-assessment in the system and too much administrative bureaucracy?

I will introduce a little more complexity by asking whether the minister will reconsider the idea of one-size-fits-all subjects. I hope that he will consider each subject on its merits when the simplification takes place.

The national qualifications task group is currently looking at all subjects one by one, and quite rightly too. There is a problem of over-administration and over-assessment in the higher years of the school curriculum. That needs to be tackled, and I am sure that it will be tackled as part of this exercise.

Question 6 has been withdrawn.

---

National Flag of Scotland

To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answer to question S1W-15533 by Mr Jim Wallace on 14 June 2001, what heraldic conventions the flags flown from its buildings observe and whether any heraldic definition of colours for use in the national flag of Scotland exists. (S1O-3759)

Flags flown from Executive buildings are supplied by reputable flag makers, whose production techniques observe heraldic conventions. Those conventions regard such matters as size, shape, proportion and the positioning of crosses and shields.

On the heraldic definition of colours, the saltire is variously described in the public register of all arms and bearings in Scotland as an argent cross on an azure background or as the white cross of St Andrew on a blue field. Argent, as members will know, is a silver colour, although it is conventionally shown as white given the practical difficulties of using silver. It is worth noting that heraldic descriptions of the colours of the saltire are not prescriptive in their application to flags. Any saltire whose background colour is clearly blue is acceptable.

Given that the heraldic definition of colours for flags is problematic, is the minister aware that the Lord Lyon King of Arms is on record as agreeing that the definition of a colour for the national flag would best be done by the Scottish Parliament? Does not the minister agree that it is entirely appropriate for the Parliament to take a view on the recognised and approved colour of our national flag to avoid the present uncertainty and confusion about shades of blue?

I accept that it is within the power of the Parliament to stipulate the shade of blue that is to be used. It is no doubt also in our power to stipulate whether we want to opt for argent or white. However, for the reasons that I am about to elaborate on, the Executive does not believe that it would be beneficial to have such regulation. To stipulate a precise colour would mean that people who had been flying flags with different shades of blue would suddenly find that the flags that they had been flying quite properly and in all good faith might no longer fit the statutory requirement. They might find that they had been inadvertently contravening the law. Also, if one thinks about it, flags that are exposed to the elements are subject to weathering and fading, even if manufactured to a precise specification.

We fly the saltire with great pride, and it would not be to the dignity of the saltire if people felt inhibited in some way because they felt that they were not meeting a precise definition.

As the blue of the union flag represents Scotland's proud and prominent position within the union, could not we at least guarantee that the two shades of blue are the same?

Although I am not as knowledgeable about the union flag as I am about the saltire, I imagine that the same considerations would apply to the shade of blue in the union flag as to that in the saltire.

Was the Deputy First Minister serious in his answer to Irene McGugan and in his previous written answer to me, in which he told me that regulation would be in inappropriate because

"the colour and condition of flags flown outside for example is inevitably affected by exposure to weather and sunlight."—[Official Report, Written Answers; 14 June 2001, p 388.]?

Is not that as daft as saying that football clubs should not define their colours because, as the match goes on, the jerseys inevitably get sweatier and dirtier?

Mr Canavan should have listened carefully to a practical consideration. No one has ever suggested that the colours of Rangers, Celtic, Aberdeen or Dundee should be defined by law.

---

Crown Estate (Meetings)

To ask the Scottish Executive when it last met representatives of the Crown Estate and what matters were discussed. (S1O-3748)

The Scottish Executive is in regular contact with the Crown Estate on a range of issues.

I am pleased about that.

Is the minister aware that the Crown Estate removes £1 million per annum from salmon farms in Shetland and many millions of pounds per annum from salmon farms throughout Scotland? On the grounds of rural development, will she consider the proposals that the Shetland Salmon Farmers Association put to her department and the Crown Estate for a reinvestment of those moneys in, for example, environmental impact assessments, hydrographic surveys and sea bed monitoring? Does she accept that such reinvestment is badly needed and would be a positive contribution to businesses that pay corporation tax and so certainly should not pay any other tax at the same time?

I am aware of those issues. The Crown Estate understands the importance of fish farming to the rural economy. Rents are kept under regular review and a significant sum is reinvested each year in support of research and development—for example, in improvements to fish welfare management and environmental practices.

Given the record of the Crown Estate in recent years in facilitating rural development, is it time to make representations to the Westminster Government to bring the Crown Estate, in Scotland at least, into public ownership and under proper democratic control?

Matters that relate to the Crown Estate are reserved. I repeat that significant reinvestment is being made in fish farming from the money that is taken in rents. We accept that the Crown Estate commissioners are acting correctly in that respect.

Will the minister assure us that moving responsibility for fish farm leases from the Crown Estate to local councils will not simply result in a heaven-sent opportunity for those bodies to levy excessive rents on the fish farm industry?

The intention is that planning controls will provide greater accountability and transparency under the remit of local authorities. We strongly believe that decision making will be brought closer to communities and that more attention will be given to potential conflicts of use and to the environmental impacts of fish farming.

Question 9 has been withdrawn.

---

Young Offenders

To ask the Scottish Executive whether the present children's hearing system is effective in respect of young offenders. (S1O-3735)

The children's hearing system has been effective and well regarded since it was introduced in Scotland in April 1971.

Does the minister agree that his perception is not shared by the police, the public or members of the Scottish Parliament? If the system is to retain any credibility, does he agree that it is essential that changes be introduced to make it much more robust?

I do not agree with Bill Aitken. It is interesting that the Conservatives were in Government for 18 years and that during that time, the issue was such a high priority for them that they did nothing about changing the system. There was nothing on the topic in the 1999 Conservative manifesto for this Parliament. As I said, the system is well regarded and is one of the best aspects of the justice system in Scotland.

I refer the minister to a reply to my colleague, Richard Lochhead, about secure places for young offenders, which disclosed that for the whole of Scotland, there were 87 secure places in 1998 and only 95 in 2000. Indeed, there have been only 12 for the whole of Lothian in those three years, and there are no places in Mid Scotland and Fife. My information from senior police officers is that the lack of secure places is of great concern and leads to inappropriate placements for young offenders. Does the minister share that concern? If so, what will he do about it?

I appreciate the fact that Christine Grahame's question is couched in a more constructive manner than Bill Aitken's. The matter to which she refers is under review. A report on the issue was submitted recently to ministers and we will consider it in detail before reporting on it to Parliament and others in due course.

Does the minister agree that the children's hearing system has worked well for children who offend and for those who are offended against? Does he welcome the Auditor General's current report into youth justice, which covers eight to 21-year-olds, and the Justice 2 Committee's interest in the report?

Yes, indeed. The report underlines the point that I made earlier, which is that the success of the system has been such that we are considering the lessons that can be learned for older young people—those in the 18-to-21 age bracket.

---

Local Authority Boundaries

To ask the Scottish Executive whether, as part of its review of cities, it intends to redraw local authority boundaries. (S1O-3765)

The review's remit is deliberately broad. It is too early to rule any issue in or out of the review and the particular areas in which it might draw conclusions.

Is the minister aware of the strength of feeling among my constituents in Rutherglen and Cambuslang regarding recent speculation that they might be brought out of the control of South Lanarkshire Council? As my constituents are happy with the service that they receive from the council, and given that the leader of Glasgow City Council has stated that he believes the issue to be dead in the water, can the minister reassure my constituents that such a change will not happen against their will?

The important thing about the review is that the Executive seeks to give all the people who will input to it the opportunity to raise the issues that they believe are important to cities in general and to their own cities in particular. Some people might wish to raise the issue of boundaries and that is for them to decide. We will listen to all the representations before reaching a balanced conclusion based on the interests of the cities and the regions in which those cities sit.

Does the minister agree that any major boundary changes must take place for good reasons and with the consent of the people? Does he accept that the real problem for cities such as Glasgow and Dundee is gaining adequate central Government funding for their services? That is the problem that must be solved and it cannot be done by simply redrawing boundaries against the wishes of local communities.

We have no plans to redraw boundaries against the wishes of local communities or of other interested parties. We are trying to establish a review process that will enable us to take the experience and wisdom of a range of individuals and agencies and pull together a cities policy that will ensure the future economic, environmental and cultural well-being of our cities so that they continue to be places where people want to live, thrive and do business.

In the course of the review, people from different sectors and with different experiences might wish to raise a host of issues that they think are germane to the future success of our cities. We will not stop people raising with us issues that they think are important. Equally, we will not jump to conclusions about how we should proceed with policy before we have reflected on the issues that have been raised.

Does the minister accept that Scotland needs another local government boundary review like it needs a hole in the head? To follow up Andrew Welsh's point, I ask the minister whether he accepts that the finances of cities such as Glasgow would be assisted considerably if cities had access to the proceeds of the business rate, which come from the investment that is made in cities.

The cities have access to the proceeds of the business rate through the grant distribution system, which is organised in such a way that it benefits every part of Scotland and every local authority equitably. My party supports that system and I hope that every other party supports it.

In answer to Robert Brown's other question, we are not having a boundaries review; we are having a review of cities policy.

Does the minister agree that the review of cities should benefit and target resources at communities with greater needs and that, for local authorities such as East Renfrewshire Council, talk of local boundary review is an unhelpful distraction from delivering good quality services to residents?

Members who have asked questions on this subject might have noticed that individual members, newspapers and others occasionally talk of boundary reviews, but ministers are not talking about such reviews—we are talking about a review of cities policy. We want to ensure that we develop more co-ordinated ways of developing policies and of joining up policy delivery. That could mean, for example, examining the ways in which local enterprise companies, health boards, local authorities and others deliver the kind of services that require them to act in concert rather than in silos. That type of action can benefit our communities, irrespective of the level of funding, the boundaries or other issues. We have not ruled anything out. We want to hear what can be done better or differently.

Questions 12 and 13 have been withdrawn.

---

Foot-and-Mouth Disease (South of Scotland)

To ask the Scottish Executive what steps it is taking to measure the continuing economic impact of the foot-and-mouth disease outbreak in the south of Scotland. (S1O-3760)

The economic impact assessment group, which I set up in March, continues to meet and provides a valuable contribution to the ministerial committee for rural development sub-group in informing the actions that we take to provide assistance. The group has already commissioned two impact surveys and I look forward to seeing its third report early this autumn.

Although everyone welcomes the fact that we now have disease-free status in Scotland, will the minister assure the chamber that there will be no complacency in dealing with the economic impact of the crisis? Many businesses that have traded through a very difficult time have done so on their reserves, so may look for support as they go into what will be a difficult autumn and winter.

I assure the member that we are not standing down the economic impact assessment group. We will continue to receive reports, not only this autumn but for a considerable time, so that we can keep on top of the impact as it develops.

Does not the minister agree that we need more precise quantification of how effective the resources that have been put in so far have been? Do not we need to quantify the number of businesses that are still—or will be—in serious difficulties, so that remaining resources can be targeted more effectively? Surely we need something more than an assessment group.

I should perhaps explain that the economic impact assessment group is a group of individuals who also conduct surveys among and take soundings from businesses throughout Scotland. That information is collated to provide an indication of the number of businesses involved and the extent to which they are affected. In the most recent assessment there has been a very interesting movement: it is not uniform and we have seen changes as some areas have recovered. It is important that we continue that work. The economics division in my department guides the group on the methodology that is applied.

Will the minister indicate how he thinks the Borders recovery plan, which was presented to ministers earlier this year, is progressing? Will he assure us that meetings will continue between officials in the Scottish Executive and the Borders economic development forum to take the plan forward?

I assure Ian Jenkins that members of my department are in touch with Scottish Borders Council and Dumfries and Galloway Council on the implementation of the plans that they presented to ministers. We are working in close collaboration with the councils. As far as I know from our recent meetings with them, both councils and the economic groups are satisfied with the progress that has been made.

Will the minister also recognise and monitor the economic impact of foot-and-mouth disease on areas adjoining the previously infected areas, especially areas such as South Ayrshire?

I assure the member that we are not confining the economic impact assessment surveys to the infected areas. We are taking surveys throughout Scotland so that we have a complete picture of how the disease impacts on the economy.

---

Local Authority Boundaries

To ask the Scottish Executive what discussions it plans to have with local authorities regarding possible changes to local authority boundaries. (S1O-3733)

We have been here before.

While boundary issues arise from time to time in the course of our discussions with local authorities, any specific changes will be a matter for the independent Local Government Boundary Commission for Scotland, when it undertakes the next statutory review.

I thank the minister for his reply. Ken Macintosh has said in his local paper that he will accept the incorporation of Eastwood into Glasgow "over his dead body". The leaders of Glasgow City Council and South Lanarkshire Council have responded in similar fashion. Given those comments and the comments we have heard from members across the party divide today, will the minister exclude the possibility of boundary changes from the cities review? Will he further acknowledge that the real issue is, as Andrew Welsh said, the level of funding? According to the finance director of Glasgow City Council, George Black, in evidence to the Local Government Committee, funding for Glasgow has fallen by £50 million since new Labour came to power.

This is a bit like "Groundhog Day" and I am afraid that Kenneth Gibson is the groundhog. I explored the matter earlier. I am happy to give the assurance that we are conducting a review of cities policy, not a boundary review.

Kenneth Macintosh should not fear for his health as far as the conclusions of the cities review are concerned. We will not rule out allowing each individual, organisation and body that submits evidence and recommendations to the review to raise any subject it wishes. Those subjects could include funding for Glasgow, how policy is joined up and delivered, funding for other cities and the well-being of the businesses and individuals who work in those cities. We are more than happy to hear other people's views on the best way to sustain and nurture our cities for the future.

Will the minister try to keep in mind that the current local government boundaries were not created by independent commissioners acting impartially, but were established by gerrymandering Tory politicians determined to carve out a political advantage for themselves? The fact that the Tories were as pathetic at gerrymandering as they were at everything else should not blind us to the fact that current local government boundaries are unsustainable. Does the minister accept that any review of the cities that does not restore to Dundee its natural boundaries and a viable economic tax base should not and will not be taken seriously?

I did not hear most of John McAllion's first question, but I heard the words "gerrymandering" and "Tory politicians" and I am more than happy to agree with that part.

As for Mr McAllion's second question, I am very much looking forward to discussions in Dundee with representatives of Dundee City Council and other organisations in the city. I know that they will all make a strong case. In fact, quite apart from the cities review, I already plan to meet representatives of Dundee City Council to hear their concerns about the future of the city council and its service delivery. I am sure that Dundee will make a strong case. Any proposals that we introduce will have to focus clearly on opportunities for the city to grow and thrive in the future.

---

Public Transport (Clydesdale)

To ask the Scottish Executive what steps it is taking to improve public transport provision in Clydesdale. (S1O-3764)

The Executive will allocate £16 million to Strathclyde Passenger Transport as part of a joint £23 million package for the Larkhall to Milngavie rail project. We have also announced funding totalling £880,000 from our rural transport fund for the improvement of rural public transport services in South Lanarkshire between 1998-99 and March 2004. Furthermore, three community organisations in Clydesdale have received almost £112,000 for local rural transport initiatives.

I very much welcome the investment in public transport in my constituency, in particular for the Larkhall extension. I congratulate the minister and the Executive on their bravery in publicly funding the first rail link in Scotland in more than a generation. The move has also been welcomed by my constituents, who recognise that, without the Scottish Executive's support, the rail link would have been dead in the water and the economic and social regeneration of the area could not take place.

Two technical issues still have to be resolved—

We probably have time for only one.

What progress has been made in resolving those technical issues?

Now that the money is on the table, two key issues have to be resolved. First, there must be negotiations involving the Executive, SPT, Railtrack, Scotrail and the Strategic Rail Authority to ensure that the performance regime is in place for approval by the rail regulator. Secondly, we must secure a contractual deal on signalling timing, which must be agreed between SPT and Railtrack. We are actively pursuing those matters.

Given the inordinate delays in reaching decisions on the Larkhall rail link, will the minister tell us when the project will start? Furthermore, does she approve of proposals from SPT to establish local services on the west coast main line, including the reopening of passenger stations at Law and Symington in Clydesdale?

According to the contract that Railtrack currently has on its books—which, as I told Karen Gillon, is the key matter for discussion—the Larkhall line will be reopened by 2003. We must find out about Railtrack's resources as far as signalling is concerned, and hope that putting money on the table will make our discussions more fruitful.

Mr Ingram did not mention the fact that we are reopening a 4.7km railway line from Larkhall to Hamilton Central and the Dawsholm section of the Anniesland to Maryhill line. We are opening new railway stations across Scotland and are dealing with an historic underinvestment in rail infrastructure. More railway stations will open as a result of the public transport fund in future. The most important point is that today we have given the go-ahead to ensuring that the rail companies will examine the Larkhall line. The SNP would do well to congratulate us on that instead of trying to ignore the fact.