SCOTTISH EXECUTIVE
Council Tax (Second Homes)
To ask the Scottish Executive when it will make an announcement on the proposed removal of the 50 per cent council tax rebate from second homes. (S2O-1062)
The issue is complex and we in the Executive want to get it right—we are working hard to resolve it. I cannot at this stage indicate exactly when we will make an announcement, but it will be fairly soon. We hope to reach a decision soon, but that decision will not affect council and council tax decisions before the financial year 2005-06.
I thank the minister for that answer, but I am sure that he realises that the fact that no decision has yet been taken will cause disappointment among the many local authorities in whose areas there are substantial numbers of holiday homes. Will he assure me that the Scottish Executive will, in reaching its conclusions, give full regard to local authorities' need to have discretion to determine whether they wish to remove the 50 per cent discount to take account of the specific needs of their local communities, particularly where affordable local housing is in short supply because of the number of second homes? Will he also take into account local authorities' need to make use of the additional revenue that would accrue from the removal of the discount to protect and improve local services that might be under threat because the number of second homes is affecting the viability of some communities' populations?
I accept that disappointment might be felt outside and inside the Parliament about the fact that we have not yet reached a decision, which has not been for the want of trying. I am sure that Iain Smith understands that, when we start playing around with one part of the local government finance system, certain things will happen elsewhere in the system, which needs to be studied closely. We are also trying to take cognisance of the variety of views that we received in the consultation about the working of the system. The Deputy Minister for Finance and Public Services, Tavish Scott, and I hope that we will be able to announce a decision to the Parliament as soon as possible.
Drink Driving
To ask the Scottish Executive what action it will take to deal with the rise in drink driving offences over the Christmas period. (S2O-1064)
The Scottish Executive will continue, in association with the Association of Chief Police Officers in Scotland, to address drink driving through a combination of education and enforcement.
Has the Executive considered lowering the drink-driving limit from 80mg of alcohol to 50mg, in line with limits in other European countries?
That is a matter for the United Kingdom Parliament. In March 2002, the UK Government announced that it did not propose to reduce the drink-driving limit.
Does the minister agree that it is important that those people who are convicted of drunk driving remain off the road during their period of disqualification? Is he aware of the most recent statistics on motoring offences, which demonstrate that some 22 per cent of those who have been disqualified from driving—that is, some 4,500 drivers—continue to drive on our streets? Will he tell the Parliament what he intends to do to ensure that those who are disqualified from driving do not go back on the roads during their disqualification?
That is clearly a matter of concern. Those people are and have been proven to be a danger to the wider public—hence their disqualification. On ensuring that they abide by the terms of the sentence that has been imposed on them, enforcement is a matter for the police. It is something that police forces take seriously and it will be addressed as part of the routine and extensive work that the police do on road traffic affairs.
Is the minister satisfied that sufficient accurate information and statistics are available on drink-related crime?
I hesitate to say that the information and statistics are completely satisfactory and could never be improved on. I am sure that we could always do better, and more information is always welcome, but I am satisfied that the level of analysis is proving useful and resulting in an influence on strategy and policy. I would never be complacent, however, and we will do everything that we can to improve on the existing work.
Will the minister explain why he is saying, on one hand, that the information will influence the Executive's strategy and, on the other hand, that the issue is a reserved matter over which the Executive has no influence?
I hesitate to think whether I could usefully answer that question. There are different aspects involved. I hope that I stated clearly that the drink-driving limit was a matter for the UK Government; I also stated, in my answer to Michael Matheson, that enforcement is a matter for the police. Any information that we can get that helps to influence our strategy and policy on enforcement is to be welcomed. I am quite clear that the problem has two different aspects; one of them is a matter for the UK Government and the other is a legitimate concern for this Parliament.
Prescriptions (Terminally Ill People)
To ask the Scottish Executive whether it has any plans to provide free prescriptions for terminally ill people. (S2O-1047)
We sympathise with the very difficult situation that patients who are receiving palliative care face. However, as a group, they suffer from a variety of medical conditions and there are no plans at present to create an additional category of exemption to cover palliative care.
I am genuinely grateful for that substantive reply. The minister will be aware that, at the time of their diagnosis, by no means all terminally ill patients are on medication and are therefore unable to seek extra payment through the usual DS1500 form. As their illness progresses, such patients almost always end up on several prescriptions per week for the relief of their suffering and pain. Does the minister agree that those patients should be given free prescriptions at source, to ensure that dying is not a very expensive process? Will he go a step further by agreeing that a review of exemptions from prescription charges, as well as the review for people with chronic health conditions to which he has referred, is long overdue?
We have recognised the case for a review—that is why the Executive will engage in a review later this year. We want to ensure that the remit for that review is as wide as possible and that the people affected and the various interest groups have the maximum buy-in. As I have said, we have the greatest sympathy for people in such situations, but we also want to ensure that palliative care is associated not only with cancer; we want to expand the role that palliative care plays by enabling other end-stage conditions, such as heart disease, Parkinson's disease, HIV and AIDS, to attract such care.
Is the minister not playing the role of King Canute, in that he is desperately trying to hold back the tide of public opinion, which believes that the system of charging for prescriptions is both archaic and byzantine? Does he agree that, when a psoriasis sufferer on working families tax credit, for example, has to pay £6.30 per item on their prescription, while a millionaire with diabetes is exempt, or when, out of two women in the same social conditions, one of whom has an underactive thyroid, while the other has an overactive thyroid, one pays and one does not, it is time that the Parliament stood up for patients and followed the example of the National Assembly for Wales by abolishing prescription charges altogether?
By the end of this parliamentary session, we will be spending more than £9 billion per year on the health service in Scotland. I think that that shows that we are standing up for patients here. The Minister for Health and Community Care is trying to grapple with a whole series of difficult public policy decisions—most of the decisions on health are difficult—and we are trying to balance a considerable level of demand against significantly increased resources, which are always under pressure.
High Court (Appeals)
To ask the Scottish Executive whether it is considering reviewing the system of appeal against High Court judgments. (S2O-1051)
I recognise that delays in the determination of appeals by the appeal court can cause additional distress to victims and their relatives. However, the senior judiciary has recently taken action to improve the efficiency of the appeal court, particularly in relation to solemn appeals.
I thank the minister for her reply and, in particular, for her emphasis on victims. I do not expect the Executive to comment on particular circumstances or cases, but does she share my concerns that an individual who was convicted of rape in May 2001 did not submit his grounds for appeal until August 2002 and that the appeal procedural hearing has not yet been taken, almost three years from his conviction date? Does she agree that, like the High Court sentencing process, the appeals system requires modernisation?
As the member said, I cannot comment on a particular case, but I know that she has raised the principle involved by lodging a motion. I emphasise that a procedural hearing has been introduced to enable the appeal court to determine whether an appeal is ready to proceed to a hearing. If it is not, the court can identify what requires to be done in what time scale. That should avoid requests for continuations when one or other side is not fully prepared by the appeal hearing date that has been fixed.
The Executive has confirmed that the proposed supreme court, if introduced, would not affect criminal appeals in Scotland. It also said that early in the new year a debate would be held on that court, at which such issues could be more widely discussed. When will that debate take place?
I hope that Miss Goldie has received my letter to her in which I said that we intend to hold such a debate. Determining its date is rightly a matter for the Parliamentary Bureau.
Council Tax (Second Homes)
To ask the Scottish Executive whether it will now consider allowing local authorities (a) the discretion to remove, or restrict, the 50 per cent reduction which second homes receive from council tax, (b) to set out categories to which such provision would apply and (c) to retain the whole benefit of the additional sum raised. (S2O-1095)
I refer the member to the answer that I gave to question 1.
That was a rather inscrutable reply. The newspapers are being more candid, by suggesting that the Executive is about to do a U-turn and to adopt the position that I exhorted the minister's predecessor, Mr Peacock, to take early in the first session—that if people are wealthy enough to afford a holiday home, they should pay the same council tax as everyone else does.
Question, question, question.
Does the minister agree that the additional yield would supply vital investment for the provision of affordable housing in many rural parts of Scotland that have more holiday homes than homes for young people?
I understand that the member was not in the chamber when I gave my long and detailed response about the matter to Iain Smith. I said that the issue is complex and has implications for the local government settlement and for all councils. My colleagues and I are working hard to resolve the question.
ScotRail (Meetings)
To ask the Scottish Executive when it last met representatives of ScotRail. (S2O-1067)
The Scottish Executive meets ScotRail regularly to discuss a wide range of issues. Officials last met ScotRail on 14 January.
The minister may be aware of the continuing overcrowding problems on the Fife circle and of the improvements that were promised last year. New rolling stock has been introduced, but the use of Turbostar trains on peak-time services has reduced seating capacity, which means that many morning commuters must stand all the way from Dunfermline Town or Rosyth stations and that other passengers cannot board at either Inverkeithing or Dalmeny. Given that, when does the minister believe that ScotRail will be in a position to fulfil the commitment that no passenger will be required to stand on Fife trains for more than 15 minutes?
We are disappointed to hear of the problems that Mr Barrie's constituents and other rail travellers are encountering. Investment was made in 22 new trains on key Scottish rail routes, which include the Fife circle, primarily to tackle overcrowding. That investment was a direct response to rail passengers' requirements. I cannot give Mr Barrie today the information that he seeks about that commitment, but I will ensure that officials respond to him as quickly as possible.
The minister will be aware that one difficulty that ScotRail customers face at Haymarket, Waverley and Glasgow Queen Street stations relates to the availability of taxis, as Railtrack imposed substantial charges on taxi drivers who use stations. Since that organisation has been replaced by a not-for-profit, publicly owned body—Network Rail—is it not time that charges ceased and that taxis were encouraged, not discouraged? Will the minister make representations to Network Rail that such charges should cease?
The fact that Mr MacAskill is imploring me to make representations to Network Rail on a United Kingdom basis is interesting. We will certainly consider the matter. We always seek to ensure that a range of public service options is available for rail passengers travelling to and from rail stations and we will continue to do so.
I support what Scott Barrie said about overcrowding. Is the minister aware that commuters from Fife face the most expensive rail fares per kilometre in Scotland? Over the past four and a half years, members have repeatedly raised issues relating to overcrowding, but little progress seems to have been made on some of those issues, which is unacceptable. Will the minister hold urgent talks with his colleague with responsibility for enterprise to discuss not only resolving the transport issues, but relocating badly needed jobs to Fife so that constituents from Fife do not have to travel into Edinburgh to secure employment? Currently, they do not have sufficient opportunities to enable them to avoid having to commute to Edinburgh.
There are a couple of strands to what Mrs Eadie says, including about relocation. I would be happy to talk to Lewis Macdonald about the points that she has raised. On rail services, I can only repeat what I said to Mr Barrie about the investment that has been made and our intention to ensure that the commitments that have been made by ScotRail are adhered to as quickly as possible.
Council Tax (Second Homes)
To ask the Scottish Executive what the total annual cost is to the public purse of the 50 per cent council tax relief on second homes. (S2O-1082)
That information is not held centrally, but the estimated cost of the 50 per cent discount, which currently applies both to second homes and to long-term empty properties, is of the order of £25 million.
I thank the minister for his useful answer. Will he confirm that the abolition of the 50 per cent discount for second homes would in itself not provide additional or new funds for councils because the discount is paid for by other council tax payers? If that is the case and if the relief were abolished, should there be a corresponding tax cut for the remaining council tax payers?
I refer to my two previous answers. It is clear that councils that have a large number of homes that are liable for the council tax discount of 50 per cent have a policy interest in the matter. That has implications for other councils. My colleagues and I are working the matter through.
Question 8 has been withdrawn.
Haymarket Station
To ask the Scottish Executive what plans are in place to ensure that all railway passengers will have full access to rail facilities at Haymarket station for the duration of the temporary suspension of services at Waverley station from 17 to 19 January 2004. (S2O-1056)
The Executive is aware of the problems that people with disabilities will face as a result of the closure of Waverley station this weekend, as disabled access is possible only from platform 1 at Haymarket. We have sought assurances from Network Rail that all that can be done to ease the difficulties that are caused to passengers has been done. People who require assistance should contact the train operating company in advance so that necessary arrangements can be put in place.
The minister might not be aware that the former Lothian Regional Council approached British Rail 25 years ago about installing lifts at Haymarket station. Does he agree that it is simply unacceptable that, in the year that part III of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 comes into force, not all rail passengers have appropriate access to Scotland's busiest station? Will the Scottish Executive give clarity to stakeholders on exactly who is responsible for taking the lead on the issue to ensure compliance with the act and to ensure that funds are available to deliver full access to Haymarket station? Not one of the railway representatives to whom I have spoken is prepared to take responsibility for such a vital improvement.
The Scottish Executive very much takes on board the points that Sarah Boyack has made. It strikes us all that it is unacceptable for the matter to take 25 years to be resolved. With regard to clarity about who is responsible for the matter, that issue is currently being assessed. She is right to express concern on behalf of all rail users. We are giving urgent consideration to the matter and are seeking to make progress on it.
Given that Haymarket station may be unable to cope with the heavy demand of passengers diverted from Waverley station when services are suspended at the weekend, can the minister confirm the nature of all the alternative provisions that will be made to accommodate the needs of the passengers concerned?
I do not think that I can confirm the nature of all the arrangements that have been made without going on for a considerable length of time, which I am sure members would not wish me to do. All the train operating companies have made clear statements about the matter. ScotRail issued a further statement today that intimated the details of how rail passengers could contact it for information. The especially important point that Sarah Boyack raised related to people with disabilities. That point has been particularly taken into account by the train operating companies.
Skills Councils
To ask the Scottish Executive what discussions it has had with the Sector Skills Development Agency about the establishment of skills councils covering Scotland. (S2O-1050)
My officials are in regular contact with the agency to ensure that the new sector skills councils meet Scotland's needs, and I will meet the chair and chief executive of the agency to discuss those matters later this month.
I am sure that the minister is aware of the concern that has been expressed about the delay in the establishment of many of those councils. How many sector skills councils covering Scotland have now been set up compared to the target number to be set up? What budget will the Scottish Executive set aside in this financial year to fund sector skills councils in Scotland?
We now have licensed sector skills councils covering a total of 10 different sectors. They include: automotive skills; construction; science, engineering and manufacturing; information technology; electricity, water and plumbing; clothing and footwear; and sport and fitness. We will continue to work with our colleagues in the United Kingdom Government and with the Sector Skills Development Agency to put in place more SSCs in the course of the next few months.
Is the minister satisfied that through the sector skills councils, or in other ways, the need for skilled people is accurately assessed and that meeting those needs—if they are not currently being met—will be properly done?
Yes, I am satisfied, because in partnership with the Sector Skills Development Agency we consult with other interested parties in the Scottish economy—including the enterprise networks, the trade unions and others—to ensure that their views are included in our consideration before any sector skills council is licensed. That is the process that we undertake. The licence is issued by the Secretary of State for Education, but it is done in consultation with us and the other devolved Administrations; in turn, we consult relevant parties within the Scottish economy.
Teachers (Qualifications)
To ask the Scottish Executive what legislation it will introduce to ensure that school teachers will require to have a teaching degree after the repeal of the remaining sections of the schools code. (S2O-1046)
We have already announced that we will bring forward new regulations to ensure that teachers continue to be registered with the General Teaching Council for Scotland and continue to hold a teaching qualification.
The minister will be aware that there is a great deal of concern about the repeal of the code. The previous Minister for Education and Young People promised consultation on the matter. Will the minister ensure that there is consultation, particularly in relation to teaching qualifications? Can he give us a guarantee that the repeal will not be used as a means of lowering the entry standards for teachers in order to meet the target of 3,000 new teachers?
There is no question of lowering standards. We will continue to have an all-graduate profession. The General Teaching Council for Scotland will continue to decide who gets to teach in Scottish schools. It will have the authority to do that in terms of the standards for full registration—the competence standards for teachers. That will continue, so there is no question of reducing standards.
East Lothian (Schools)
To ask the Scottish Executive what recent contact it has had with East Lothian Council and the Innovate consortium in respect of the public-private partnership project in East Lothian's schools. (S2O-1063)
The Executive's role in all school public-private partnerships, including that of East Lothian Council, is to consider councils' initial bids for financial support on the basis of the outline business cases that are submitted and, subsequently, to offer general advice and guidance as the projects progress. Given that the Executive is not a party to the contract between the council and the Innovate consortium, it is not for the Executive to enter into discussions with the consortium.
Does the minister accept that it is his Executive's insistence that East Lothian Council should go down the private finance road that has led to the present mess? Schools have been left with no library, canteen or gym and with rain coming in walls and roofs. Will he assure the parents of East Lothian that their children's education will not be damaged? Will he further assure the council tax payers of East Lothian and the taxpayers of Scotland that they will not face an even bigger bill than the already inflated cost of £43 million? Finally, can he assure us that the work will be completed by August so that East Lothian schools stop being abandoned building sites and become schools again?
I do not accept that, because the Executive has introduced record funding into schools, somehow or another that led to the problem in East Lothian. Far from that being the case, the matter is one of the collapse of a private company that was involved in the consortium, which is something that happens in ordinary commercial relationships. From an announcement that East Lothian Council made on 16 December, I understand that specialists were to be back on site on 9 January and that the council hopes that work will recommence on site in February. However, we shall have to await developments.
The minister will be aware that schools all over Scotland, including schools in places such as East Lothian and Inverclyde, are in urgent need of major refurbishment. I welcome the fact that the PPP scheme makes it possible for all six of the secondary schools in my constituency to be upgraded this year, instead of that having to be done one at a time over a decade or more. Will he congratulate East Lothian Council on getting the project back on track so soon after the failure of Ballast Nedam? The Trotskyites in the Parliament—[Interruption.]
Order.
—and the Liberals in Inverclyde might prefer to have crumbling schools, but I ask the minister to support East Lothian Council's determination to invest in all the high schools in my constituency.
It is reassuring that East Lothian Council accepted its responsibilities and that it appears to have put the project back on stream. It will be advantageous for the children in East Lothian to have refurbished secondary schools. I understand that they are also to have a swimming pool.
Glasgow School of Art
To ask the Scottish Executive what discussions have taken place with Glasgow School of Art regarding its estate at Garnethill, Glasgow. (S2O-1076)
The Scottish Higher Education Funding Council has been working with Glasgow School of Art to develop its estates strategy and has provided financial support for the work that has been done to date.
Does the minister acknowledge that Glasgow School of Art makes an important contribution to the Scottish economy, particularly the creative industries, and that its character and setting are an international asset? Glasgow School of Art has one of the few remaining problem estates in higher education and I am led to believe that SHEFC, the funding body, is unable to fund such a large capital project. Therefore, will the minister assure me that he will at least consider discussions with Glasgow School of Art's board to talk about the options that are available in respect of the estate so that we can preserve the reputation of this important institution?
I certainly share Pauline McNeill's views: first, on the significant contribution that Glasgow School of Art makes, in the creative and cultural spheres, to economic life in Glasgow and in Scotland as a whole; and secondly, on the importance of the Mackintosh building at Garnethill as part of the school's estate and as a building of international significance that is widely recognised as such.
Fisheries Agreement
To ask the Scottish Executive whether it intends to seek a renegotiation of the fisheries agreement concluded in Brussels in December 2003. (S2O-1054)
As colleagues have observed, it is good to know that there are two of us in the chamber with a heart. Others might wish to apply later. On a personal level, I am grateful to Richard Lochhead and I thank him for his kind remarks.
I thank the minister for that answer—I just wanted to check. Given that time is ticking away before the most complex and draconian fishing deal ever signed by a government kicks into force, it is interesting the European Commission has indicated that some parts of the deal are set in stone and other parts are not. Will the minister explain to the chamber which parts of the deal he understands are set in stone and which parts he understands are not? Will he indicate whether the Government still has an open mind on delivering a further aid package to the white-fish sector?
It must be made absolutely clear that the comments and interviews that have been given by Mr John Farnell of the European Commission were made in direct response to the approaches that have been made by the Executive in the past few days, and in particular to the meetings that opened in Brussels yesterday between my officials and Commission officials, including Mr Farnell. The issue of what is and what is not set in stone has arisen entirely in response to the pressure that we are applying in relation to the detailed arrangements.
Does the minister agree that the best way to protect our fishing communities' interests is to ensure that we put in place adequate and proper measures to protect fishing stocks? Does he further agree that the SNP's cheap sloganising about withdrawal from the common fisheries policy both debases politics and insults the very communities that the SNP wrongly claims to serve?
At least I am getting due notice of the questions—nothing has been asked so far that was not asked at yesterday's meeting of the Environment and Rural Development Committee.
I associate myself with Richard Lochhead's comments on the minister's health. I hope that he returns to the chamber speedily and in excellent health.
No, I do not, which should not surprise anybody. On the latter point, I do not believe that the deal is discriminatory. One has to look at the situation in much more detail rather than make the glib assertion that fishing for haddock by Scotland is in any way comparable with fishing for haddock by other nations. One has to have regard to the fact that it is proven—indeed, it is in the Commission's records—that Norway, France and Germany, which are three of the four states that fish haddock, have historically taken up less than 25 per cent of the haddock fishery. For example, Norway takes up only 10 per cent of its haddock fishery, so the situations are entirely incomparable. Denmark fishes for haddock south of the 57° latitude line so that it is not even fishing in the same areas.
Does the minister agree that it is vital that fishermen do not fulfil their threat to fish illegally outside agreed quotas? If they do so, our fish stocks, and therefore the long-term future of our fishing industry, will be put in jeopardy. On Monday, in response to the concerns raised on toxic chemicals in farmed salmon, the Executive announced that it would underwrite any loans incurred by the salmon industry to keep it afloat and to safeguard jobs. Will the minister now consider giving the same support to fishermen who might suffer as a result of the recently agreed fish stock recovery plan?
I have no intention of entering into a confrontation with the Scottish Fishermen's Federation because, as I indicated in my first reply to Richard Lochhead, we are presently examining certain important details of the agreement. I hope that fishermen do not have to resort to illegal action. We will not contemplate such illegal action, and I hope that they will not do so either, and that they will await the outcome of the further deliberations. As I also said to Richard Lochhead, once we know the precise outcome of the deal and how it will impact, we will give the matter due consideration, but it would be premature to do so in advance of that.
Eco-tourism (Northern Highlands)
To ask the Scottish Executive what action it is taking to promote eco-tourism in the northern Highlands. (S2O-1069)
The Scottish Executive promotes eco-tourism through a wide range of bodies and organisations. Those include the tourism environment forum, which is based in VisitScotland's Inverness office, VisitScotland, Highlands and Islands Enterprise, Scottish Natural Heritage and Highland Council.
The minister clearly recognises the potential of eco-tourism. For example, visitors flock to Easter Ross to see the golden eagles and ospreys. Does he agree that it is hugely important that our unspoilt environment, which nurtures such special creatures, continues to be safeguarded? Does he recognise that eco-tourism is ultimately sustainable, which means that it could be around for a long time? Will he ensure that all relevant agencies—local, national and international—direct their activities, resources and publicity accordingly in the future?
VisitScotland already recognises the role of eco-tourism in establishing tourism markets. Today, I met with another member of the Scottish Parliament to discuss ways in which we can encourage such bodies to work more effectively. That work will match the work being done by organisations such as RSPB Scotland, which has taken great responsibility for the flow country and tried to ensure that opportunities that are developed there respect the natural environment and encourage visitors to the northern Highlands to respect the environment and get maximum enjoyment from it.
Previous
First Minister's Question TimeNext
Points of Order