Meeting of the Parliament

Meeting date: Thursday, June 14, 2012

Official Report 1143KB pdf

---

Scottish Executive Question Time

---

General Questions

---

Factoring (Buildings in Mixed Tenure)

1. To ask the Scottish Executive whether consultation with owner-occupiers is mandatory prior to a registered social landlord introducing factoring arrangements in blocks of flats in mixed tenure. (S4O-01119)

Consultation is mandatory if the matter is included in the title deeds. When the deeds do not make provision for the process of appointing a factor, the tenement management scheme in the Tenements (Scotland) Act 2004 may apply. The scheme makes provision for majority decisions at meetings or, failing that, following consultation.

The cabinet secretary’s answer will be of interest to my constituents. If a ballot has been undertaken of householders in a block—involving both owner-occupiers and tenants—regarding future factoring arrangements, will all householders be bound by the result of that ballot to comply with the terms of the factoring agreement?

The answer is more complex than a straight yes or no because it depends on the status of the title deeds and various other factors. I suggest that Ms Murray writes to me with the specifics and we will do our best to give her a definitive reply on what applies in the circumstances.

The cabinet secretary will be aware of my concerns about unintended consequences of the Property Factors (Scotland) Act 2011, which is admirable legislation. For example, East Kilbride and District Housing Association feels that it is obliged to set a factoring cost for a limited number of shared equity owners for whom it had agreed that it was not worth it economically to set up a factoring system. Can he give some comfort to associations such as that?

The member has written to Keith Brown, the Minister for Housing and Transport, on that point and will receive a detailed reply in the next few days.

We are looking at any unintended consequences of the legislation with a view to making any necessary amendments in the housing bill that is planned for introduction next year.

Question 2, in the name of Ken Macintosh, has been withdrawn. The member has provided me with an explanation and I am satisfied with it.

---

NHS Boards (Targets)

3. To ask the Scottish Executive what recent discussions it has had with national health service boards that show significant variation below the mean in the recording of either referral-to-treatment or waiting time targets. (S4O-01121)

Ministers meet regularly with NHS chairs and discuss issues of importance to the service, including waiting times. Each board and the health department also closely monitor each individual health board area as part of their routine discussions on delivery of waiting times standards.

The referral-to-treatment target is for 90 per cent compliance. The latest statistics show that the linkage rate from initial referral to treatment was 90.5 per cent for March 2012.

I thank the cabinet secretary for that answer but what I was really asking was what specific conversations she had had with boards such as NHS Ayrshire and Arran, which accounted for 93 per cent of all the breaches over nine weeks in the waiting time target for diagnostics and, in addition, accounted for nearly 50 per cent of the breaches of six weeks, which is the current target.

Almost another 50 per cent was accounted for by NHS Fife. Out of the total breaches of the diagnostic target, two health boards accounted for well over 90 per cent. I have asked NHS Fife about it and it has explained what happened and how it is being tackled. Has the cabinet secretary asked the questions of NHS Ayrshire and Arran? Can she tell us what the problem is in NHS Ayrshire and Arran and what support she is offering both boards, or has she yet again failed to ask the right questions?

If Richard Simpson had listened to my original answer, he would have heard me say that we discuss all of those issues on an on-going basis with health boards, as appropriate. Where there are questions relating to the data submitted to Information Services Division by an individual health board or indeed the apparent performance around waiting times standards by that health board, that will be interrogated and followed up, as appropriate, by ISD, where it considers that appropriate, and by my officials.

I am more than happy to write to the member specifically in the case of NHS Fife, although I hear him say that he has already done that, and in the case of NHS Ayrshire and Arran, to ask them to offer their explanations for the issues relating to the data in each case.

---

Sheriffhall Roundabout

4. To ask the Scottish Government what plans it has to redevelop the Sheriffhall roundabout and achieve grade separation. (S4O-01122)

Our plans for junction improvements at the Sheriffhall roundabout on the A720 Edinburgh city bypass are outlined in intervention 22 of the strategic transport projects review, commonly referred to as the STPR.

We continue to engage with the relevant authorities regarding their proposals for future development around Sheriffhall to help to inform the further detailed design and development work required to determine the nature of those junction improvements.

Sheriffhall roundabout continues to be a congestion nightmare for my constituents and those travelling to my constituency. It also remains a safety hazard for drivers, cyclists and pedestrians. Does the cabinet secretary agree that some form of grade separation is urgently needed as part of a solution to the problem? Does he agree that in order to resolve the chronic congestion, urgent action is needed?

We recognise the importance of upgrading Sheriffhall roundabout, which is why it is included in the STPR. The timetable for the junction improvements will be set in the context of overall affordability and our commitments to other STPR proposals. Inevitably, the 30 per cent reduction in our capital budget that Westminster has imposed is delaying programmes such as that one because, if we had the money, we would have been able to carry out many such projects far sooner than we will now be able to.

As the Sheriffhall roundabout impinges on my constituency, will the minister confirm that I have taken a correct note of his words—is it intervention 22 in the STPR? Is that what will help me?

That was a welcome intervention on intervention 22. I am absolutely sure that every intervention in the STPR is there primarily with the Borders in mind and will help Christine Grahame. We are absolutely determined to improve transport in the Borders, as we are throughout Scotland.

---

Commonwealth Games (Benefits to North-east)

5. To ask the Scottish Government what benefit the 2014 Commonwealth games will bring to the north-east. (S4O-01123)

The Scottish Government is committed to creating a lasting legacy and maximising the benefits for the whole of Scotland from Glasgow’s hosting of the 2014 Commonwealth games.

Activity throughout the north-east is being delivered with national partners and the three local authorities. Thirteen community sports hubs are, or soon will be, delivering services to the local community. One business that is based in the north-east is benefiting from having won a Commonwealth games-related contract, with many more contract opportunities to come. Six youth legacy ambassadors are developing new skills by engaging in a wide range of legacy activity and championing that to their peers and communities.

Local people and groups are also getting involved through our annual games for Scotland events and grant funding from the Big Lottery Fund’s 2014 communities programme.

Is the minister satisfied that councils such as Aberdeenshire Council are doing everything that they can to embrace the principle of the Commonwealth games in the interests of our young people and are ensuring that the community sport hubs and our school estates are accessible and affordable for our young people?

Dennis Robertson focuses on an important issue. I am satisfied that there is good engagement with all local authorities in Scotland on the issue. We have made a commitment to deliver 150 community sports hubs throughout Scotland by 2016, and that is because many of them are the mechanism for opening up schools, so that schools are not closed beyond the school day. The facilities, which are often the best sporting facilities in a community, should be open in the evening and on the weekends. The community sports hubs provide us with a good way of achieving that.

---

Scottish Government (Off-payroll Employees)

6. To ask the Scottish Government how many of its employees have their salaries paid off-payroll. (S4O-01124)

There are no such cases.

I am pleased that action has been taken since I lodged the question. The issue of tax avoidance in the public sector is incredibly important. Will the minister advise when the 20 employees who were off-payroll will come on-payroll?

Going beyond individual employees, will the cabinet secretary consider action to ensure that fear of legal action does not discourage public bodies from contracting private firms that have responsible tax arrangements?

There has been no requirement to take action to remedy the situation since the question was lodged because there are no circumstances, and never have been, in which employees of the Scottish Government have been paid off-payroll.

As part of my review of public bodies appointments across 143 organisations, I identified 20 cases in which individuals were not being paid through the payroll, with tax deducted at source. The average remuneration for those individuals was £2,000 a year, so we should have a sense of perspective about this particular question.

The other point with regard to the remuneration of contractors who manifestly are not civil servants and manifestly are not employees of the Scottish Government is that the framework agreement from the Government requires consultants and contractors, including suppliers of temporary workers, to satisfy the Scottish Government that they conduct all financial accounting and reporting activity in full compliance with tax laws and regulations. That is what I expect, and that is what I will enforce.

---

Ferry Routes (Tendering Process)

7. To ask the Scottish Executive what progress it is making with the tendering process for CalMac routes. (S4O-01125)

Our current focus is on finalising the Scottish ferries plan, which will define the main features of the future procurement of the Clyde and Hebrides ferry services. An announcement on the timescale for the tendering of those services will be made in due course.

Is the cabinet secretary aware of the serious concerns of RMT and Nautilus International about the significant increase in the number of foreign seafarers who are employed to work within United Kingdom waters at well below the national minimum wage and on inferior conditions?

Will he undertake to ensure that the new tendering process for the 2013 to 2019 routes is conducted on a level playing field, with no unfair advantage being accrued to one operator?

Does Mr Neil share my view that CalMac’s consistent and successful record in investment in and training and employment of seafarers is critical to the future of the Scottish maritime sector?

I am aware of the concerns. Within the procurement legislation and the framework of the European Union, we will do what we can to ensure that there is a level playing field in ferries procurement, as we do throughout the Government procurement process.

Like David Stewart, I am very impressed by the work that CalMac has undertaken, but of course I cannot allow that to dictate the outcome of any particular contract award.

---

Scottish Futures Trust (Hubs)

8. To ask the Scottish Government what social and economic impact the Scottish Futures Trust’s hub programme is having on local communities. (S4O-01126)

The long-term nature of the hub programme facilitates the creation of new employment and training opportunities, and supports the development of long-term sustainable businesses.

Central to being appointed as a hub territory partner is making a pledge to create employment opportunities for small and medium-sized enterprises and the third sector and supporting and engaging with local communities and training programmes. To date, more than 80 per cent of the value of hub construction work has been locally procured among SME companies.

The hub programme is also delivering high-quality public buildings for joint occupation by health, education, social work and other community staff, and the co-location of services is supporting the on-going drive to improve public services for communities right across Scotland.

Since its opening four months ago, the Drumbrae library hub has attracted more than 55,000 visitors. Does the minister agree that the all-round success of the project is evidence that the hub model’s joint working and shared delivery approach is succeeding in delivering value-for-money public services for local communities?

The Drumbrae library hub is the first project to be completed by hub South East Scotland Ltd, and the first hub project to be completed in Scotland. I am delighted that it has received an enthusiastic welcome from local residents.

The hub programme that the Scottish Futures Trust is taking forward will deliver £1.4 billion of community infrastructure across Scotland over the next 10 years. It is an innovative approach, and central to its success is collaborative working among local authorities, health boards, blue-light services and private sector development partners.

I look forward to many more projects like the Drumbrae library hub being delivered, bringing benefits to local communities throughout the country. That would not have happened if we had listened to the Labour Opposition and its opposition to the creation of the Scottish Futures Trust.

Given that single-supplier framework agreements are restricted to four years under the European Union procurement directive, is the cabinet secretary confident that hubs are compatible?

Assuming that they are—and I hope, in the interests of the north Edinburgh health centre, that they are—will he tell me why the north Edinburgh health centre is taking so long to materialise, given that an initial agreement on the project was approved by the Scottish Government capital investment group in 2009?

I am totally satisfied that the procurement arrangements are perfectly in order in relation to both EU legislation and our own requirements.

The reason for the delay in the specific project to which Mr Chisholm referred is to get agreement on some of the details among all the constituent partners, but my understanding is that substantial progress is now being made.

Last week, the Scottish Futures Trust won a clutch of awards for being the “Best Central/Regional Government PPP Promoter”. Is it not about time that we had some honesty from the minister and that he accepted what everyone else knows—that SFT schemes are just public-private partnership schemes under another name?

I do not think that any member of the Labour Party is in a good position on this, given the huge disaster that private finance initiatives have left both north and south of the border. Let us take a Labour Party PFI project such as the one at Hairmyres hospital, where we will end up spending three to four times the original cost of the project. Labour opposed the SFT, but the SFT is delivering for the people of Scotland. Labour imposed cuts and the Conservatives endorsed them, and if it had not been for the SFT, we would not be getting new colleges in Inverness, Kilmarnock and Glasgow, we would not be making progress with the sick children’s hospital in Edinburgh, and we would not be doing all the other things that the Government is doing that Labour failed to deliver over eight years.

---

Renewable Energy Investment Fund

9. Perhaps this issue will be less controversial than the previous one.

To ask the Scottish Government when the renewable energy investment fund will be open for bids from community bodies. (S4O-01127)

Alongside the announcement in March of our plans to establish a renewable energy investment fund, we announced an interim package of support worth £2 million for community renewables for this financial year. That transitional support is open for applications, and community bodies that are interested in the scheme should contact Community Energy Scotland. That support will build on existing support specifically to ensure that communities can obtain finance for capital build. It will thus help to maintain the momentum towards our target for community and locally owned renewables while arrangements for the renewable energy investment fund are being finalised.

I hope that, in answering my supplementary question, the minister will confirm when the renewable energy investment fund will be up and running and open for bids.

Previously, I have sought assurances from the Government that the definition of “communities” will be broad and inclusive and will allow joint bids in association with public bodies, such as councils. Will the cabinet secretary confirm that communities of interest will be able to apply for support, rather than only geographic communities?

I will write to Patrick Harvie on the specific point that he has raised to clarify matters, as there is a very specific definition of community interest companies. I will need to confirm that with him.

I reassure Patrick Harvie that an interim package of support, which was announced back in March by the Minister for Enterprise, Energy and Tourism, is available for applications as we work through the details of the renewable energy investment fund. There is no impediment to applications coming forward and being considered for the interim funding that we have put in place.

What is the minister’s response to urgent concerns that renewable energy developments by communities and individuals are being hampered by a lack of grid connection availability?

It is clear that ensuring the alignment of individual projects with grid connections is a major factor in ensuring that renewable energy projects can be taken forward. As Mr McGrigor will know, questions about access to the grid are essentially points for discussion with the power companies. If there are specific cases about which Mr McGrigor is concerned, ministers will be happy to try to assist in forming solutions. Ensuring that there is alignment between emerging projects and the available grid connections is a very practical issue that is at the heart of taking forward the agenda, and ministers would be happy to help out in any way that they can to resolve such questions.

What part can local authorities play in encouraging communities to make a contribution to the climate change effort? Does the cabinet secretary share my regret that Glasgow City Council’s obstruction over the Castlemilk and Carmunnock Community Wind Park Trust has meant that people in my constituency have lost out on years of potential benefit from the project?

Under the Climate Change (Scotland) Act 2009, public bodies must act in a way that will contribute to the delivery of the targets that are set out under the act. Therefore, on Mr Dornan’s key question, Glasgow City Council and other local authorities have a key role in helping us to reach the targets.

I understand that it was not possible for Castlemilk and Carmunnock Community Wind Park Trust and Glasgow City Council to reach an agreement on the lease of land. We encourage dialogue, in the spirit of the Climate Change (Scotland) Act 2009, to make progress on such questions.

Before we come to First Minister’s questions, members will want to join me in welcoming to the gallery the Speaker of the Hungarian National Assembly, Mr László Kövér. [Applause.]