First Minister’s Question Time
Engagements
1. To ask the First Minister what engagements he has planned for the rest of the day. (S3F-2320)
The Parliament will have the opportunity to decide on the issue as a full Parliament. Of course I respect the seriousness of an issue that affects the livelihoods and lives of many people, but I do not respect the wish to play party politics with it.
I am not at all sure what the Labour Party is suggesting. I have seen the amendment in question, but I also have copies of the various petitions that the Labour Party has brought forward. The first said:
“Carry a Knife, Go to Jail”.
That petition called for a minimum sentence for knife criminals. The second petition changed that; the proposal became a mandatory sentence for knife criminals in Scotland. The amendment that the Justice Committee considered argued that there should be a sentence unless there were exceptional circumstances. The Labour Party’s story varies north and south of the border, the wording of its petitions has changed, and at every stage it seems to be more concerned with politicking on a serious matter of public safety than with respecting the voices of those who work to make our communities safer.
Tens of thousands have supported Labour’s carry a knife, go to jail campaign and petitioned the Parliament. They are clear about what they want: they want those who have been convicted of carrying a knife to be sure that they will go to jail. The amendment to the Criminal Justice and Licensing (Scotland) Bill is clear, and following the Justice Committee’s meeting this week, it has been included in that bill. Will the First Minister respect that decision, or does he intend to try to remove that amendment from the bill when it comes to the chamber?
The Parliament will decide on that matter, and I am sure that Iain Gray will want to respect its views. When the full Parliament discusses the issue, members will remember that the average length of custodial sentence for carrying an offensive weapon has more than doubled from 2005-06, that the percentage of those who are given a custodial sentence of more than six months has doubled, and that the number of persons who are convicted and given a custodial sentence has increased by almost 40 per cent. Those are the facts and that is the reality behind how the Government has dealt with the serious issue of knife crime, as opposed to the previous Administration’s record of inaction.
It is a fact that only 70 per cent of convicted knife criminals go to jail. That is bad enough, but it is worse that Alex Salmond wants to end six-month sentences and get the percentage of convicted knife criminals who do not go to jail up to 90 per cent. Only one in 10 convicted knife criminals would face a jail sentence. The Justice Committee rejected that, too.
Alex Salmond has been around Scotland saying that Scotland needs local champions to articulate community concerns. We know that he loves to articulate at great length and at even greater volume, but exactly which community in Scotland is telling him that it wants to see knife criminals released on to its streets?
My engagements for today will now be taken up by the emergency and contingency committees dealing with the volcanic ash issue that is causing disruption to airspace across the United Kingdom. Following a volcanic eruption in Iceland, an ash plume has entered UK and Scandinavian airspace overnight. At 4 o’clock this morning, the National Air Traffic Service took the decision to cancel all Scottish flights due to safety concerns, and that cancellation will be in force until further notice. At 12 noon, the rest of the United Kingdom has followed suit, and that cancellation will also be in force until further notice. The Scottish Government’s resilience room was activated at 5.45 this morning, and officials from a variety of policy areas have been meeting since then. I convened the Cabinet sub-committee at 11 o’clock this morning, and a further sub-committee meeting will be convened at 3 o’clock.
The current situation is that airports are closed. An update will be provided at 6 o’clock this evening. The Scottish Ambulance Service has advised that guidance provided by the aviation authorities is that no aircraft should fly above 5,000ft. All aircraft that are flying are flying under visual rules only. The ambulance service, supported by the Ministry of Defence and the Maritime and Coastguard Agency, will, as far as possible, continue to undertake missions where patients are in a life-threatening condition. Any missions in respect of non-life-threatening conditions are being deferred to ensure that the resources are utilised effectively. However, where that is not possible due to cloud or visibility restrictions, the patients must be cared for in the locality, and territorial national health service boards are ready to support that. Helicopter flights to the North Sea have also been suspended.
The quantity of ash that has been emitted is still unknown, as is the height to which the ash has been elevated. The meteorological forecasts indicate that the ash may be present over the United Kingdom today, tomorrow and perhaps into the weekend. Contingency travel plans are being put in place to keep the population and essential air travel moving across these islands, and emergency plans are being developed to deal with health service issues—in particular, cases in which patients must be transferred. The indications from the Scottish Environment Protection Agency’s monitoring across the country are that there is no immediate threat to air quality at ground level. Forecasts and reports are being issued on an hourly basis.
A statement and briefing will be offered to the spokespeople of the Opposition parties at 5 o’clock this evening, after the next Cabinet sub-committee meeting.
Let us listen to the people who are actually working with this issue, as opposed to trying to make an issue work for them politically. At the Public Petitions Committee knife crime debate, Detective Chief Superintendent John Carnochan of the violence reduction unit opposed mandatory sentences by saying:
“I have been a cop for 34 years. If I thought that it would work to give people four years in the jail the first time they are caught carrying a knife, I would be your man”.
He went on to say that jail does not work and that we need early intervention and to reduce access to alcohol and knives. The people who are dealing with these issues in Scotland and making our communities safer back the Government’s approach to them.
Iain Gray talks about England and Wales. The sentences for knife crime in Scotland are higher than they are in England and Wales. He thinks that the people of England will accept that they do not have a problem with knife crime. Of course they have a problem with knife crime, but what they will not accept is a Labour Party that is saying something different in opposition from what it was prepared to do in office; which says something different north and south of the border because it thinks that it suits it politically; which seeks to persuade this Parliament when it cannot even persuade the Prime Minister, who wanted no extra police in Scotland, as opposed to the 1,000 extra who were delivered; and which talks about law and order and public services when the Chancellor of the Exchequer—a Scottish Labour MP—is promising the people of this country cuts in public services that will be deeper and tougher than those of Margaret Thatcher.
When the Labour Party starts to back our police and our public services, Iain Gray can come to this chamber with a shred of credibility. If he ever gets any consistency in his policies, he will be fit to be First Minister, instead of not being fit to be an Opposition leader.
I thank the First Minister for that update. Clearly, the whole chamber will support the Government in its efforts to deal with the problem that has developed.
This week, the Justice Committee stood up for knife crime victims throughout Scotland in backing Labour’s policy of carry a knife, go to jail. The number of knife murders in Scotland is more than double the number in the rest of the United Kingdom. Will the First Minister finally listen to the victims and to our communities? Will he respect the Justice Committee of the Parliament?
It is absolutely right that the Scottish National Party should offer community champions to the people of Scotland, just as it is right that communities throughout Scotland are celebrating the fact that there are 1,000 more police officers on the streets and in the communities of Scotland, as opposed to the zero record under the Labour Party and its offer of no extra police officers at the previous election. The communities of Scotland are celebrating the lowest level of recorded crime for a generation. [Interruption.]
Order.
They are also celebrating the fact that they have a justice policy and a Government that takes action on policing and solving crime, as opposed to the inaction of the previous Administration.
While I have been going round Scotland and celebrating with community champions who articulate the voices of communities, Iain Gray has been launching a manifesto. The English version of that manifesto does not propose the action that he has proposed in the chamber. Why did the Labour Party, when it was in government, not propose such a policy? Why should we be persuaded by Labour members’ arguments today if they cannot even persuade Gordon Brown that they are on the right course?
I think that the First Minister rather missed the point that knife murders are running at double the rate in Scotland that they are in England. That is why we need special action here in Scotland. There is not much point having those 1,000 extra police officers if, when they arrest and convict knife criminals, the First Minister lets those criminals out.
John Muir, whose son was murdered; Kelly McGhee, whose brother was killed; Christine Halley, whose son died at the hands of a knife criminal—Alex Salmond is not their champion.
Whether it is Alex Salmond on knife criminals, Nicola Sturgeon on a benefit fraudster or Kenny MacAskill on the Lockerbie bomber, the SNP is all too ready to champion those who commit the crimes, not those who suffer the consequences. When the time comes and the bill comes before the chamber, will the First Minister choose to champion the criminals or our communities?
Prime Minister (Meetings)
I will continue to protect the national health service and other front-line services in Scotland. However, the Conservative party and all the London parties will now have to face the reality of what their spokesmen are suggesting and what they are trying not to reveal in this election campaign. In addition to the dramatic cuts in public spending that the Labour Party is proposing, the Conservatives want to cut earlier and, indeed, they are planning a special cut—a Cameron cut—in Scottish public spending. Therefore, if the London parties in this election campaign are making forecasts—and implicit in their assumptions are reductions in public spending of 10 to 15 per cent over the next few years and of much greater than that over the next 15 years—it will be difficult for any MSP representing those parties in this Parliament to say that they are the defender of public services when the budgets being pursued by Westminster threaten to cut Scotland’s public services faster and deeper.
I asked a specific question about the health service, and I failed to get a specific response. We now know the truth about the SNP: it is more nats, more cuts. It is utterly disgraceful that the First Minister is unable to give a pledge to protect the Scottish NHS. He might want to play politics in the chamber, but he cannot play fast and loose with our NHS patients. I ask him once again: in light of the Conservative pledge on the health budget, will the First Minister increase Scottish NHS funding?
I would have loved to have met the Prime Minister this evening, but I understand that he will be otherwise engaged. I have no plans to meet the current Prime Minister in the near future.
2. To ask the First Minister when he will next meet the Prime Minister—the current one, that is. (S3F-2321)
Earlier this week, Nicola Sturgeon, the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Wellbeing, said that progress on the national health service in Scotland is threatened by what she described as
“the cuts agendas of the London parties”.
The Conservative party has confirmed that a Conservative Government at Westminster will increase NHS funding in real terms every year. Will the First Minister give the same pledge to Scotland? Will he confirm that in his next budget he will also increase NHS spending in Scotland in real terms?
Yes—I gave the answer the first time. Yes, we will, because we will continue to protect front-line services in Scotland. As we have defended the health service this year, we will defend it to the utmost extent throughout the next few years, and indeed over the many years in which the SNP will be in government.
Annabel Goldie chose not to pick up the key point that the spokesman for her party, David Cameron, and her shadow chancellor, have been making over the past two weeks: the revelation that, in addition to the billions of pounds of cuts that are to be “tougher and deeper” than those of Margaret Thatcher, according to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, the Conservative party is planning cuts that are earlier and deeper. In that context, with the London parties competing to make cuts that are tougher and deeper, how can Annabel Goldie come to this or any other chamber and tell us that she is intent on defending the national health service? If public spending is cut, that threatens vital services in Scotland. When the Tories accept the reality and join the rest of us in really defending Scottish public services, they will have an ounce of credibility with regard to the health service in Scotland.
Cabinet (Meetings)
I gave a statement to Parliament in an answer a few minutes ago. We are considering particular contingencies for emergency flights. Tavish Scott will be aware that an emergency patient could not be transferred from the northern isles today. Contingencies have been made to ensure proper treatment. There is a possibility—it has been used already at least in the case of one patient—of flying by helicopter under 5,000ft, using visible means only. That option will be deployed on a case-by-case basis, for dealing with emergency cases.
Regarding transport across these islands, contingencies are being worked on with regard to how long the aircraft and airport ban is likely to stay in place. We have substantial additional capacity for north-south travel on the railways, but the longer the situation pertains, the more difficult it will be to sustain transport, not just from the islands but across these islands in terms of the volumes that presently apply. As far as Tavish Scott’s representative is concerned, John Swinney will be glad to give a briefing after the second Cabinet sub-committee meeting this afternoon.
That is exactly what we have been doing today. All the issues that Tavish Scott has mentioned are being dealt with in the Cabinet sub-committee and by our officials on an on-going basis.
Picking up on one such issue, I point out that there is capacity for 20,000 additional places a day on existing north-south rail services. In comparison, roughly 57,000 people fly from Scottish airports but, of course, not all of them are going from north to south. We are looking at that additional capacity in the railways as well as examining additional capacity from extra bus services.
I will seek to update Tavish Scott on the detail of the measures that are being taken. I am very sympathetic and sensitive to the particular issues with regard to island transport in the northern isles, the Western Isles and other islands in Scotland and the fact that essential, not discretionary, services are jeopardised when airports are closed.
That said, I am sure that, like everyone else, Tavish Scott understands that safety must be paramount in evaluating when airports can be reopened. Aircraft cannot fly unless there is absolute satisfaction about the safety of the mode of transport. We hope that by this afternoon we will have a better evaluation of the likely timescales that we are working to. However, Mr Scott must accept that the issue is extremely difficult at the moment.
Lastly, I reiterate that according to the information that we have to date, which appears pretty solid, the present atmospheric conditions make it unlikely that ash will descend below 5,000ft and there is no immediate danger to ambient air quality in Scotland. The situation is being kept under strict hourly monitoring and, again, if circumstances change, I will ensure that Tavish Scott is updated.
Will the First Minister join me in expressing condolences to the family of the workman who died this week while working on Stewarton viaduct in my constituency? He will recall that consideration is being given to the proposal for the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Office to have powers over all fatal accidents in Scotland, including those related to rail services. Will he ask the Cabinet Secretary for Justice to raise the issue with the UK Government and request that this fatality and others related to rail services are brought within the scope of fatal accident inquiry legislation?
Today in Parliament an event will highlight the Cancer Research UK relay for life, an inspirational demonstration by many Scots of their commitment to cancer relief. The Shetland representative cannot attend the event, because his Loganair flight has been cancelled as plumes of volcanic ash drift across northern Europe. What steps is the Government taking to reinforce the advice that passengers should not travel to Scotland’s airports and should instead contact their airlines? What steps is the Government taking to assess the impact on transport and to help forms of transport other than air to take up the burden?
The First Minister will be aware that earlier this week BASF Ciba in my constituency announced 232 planned redundancies. I welcome the Minister for Enterprise, Energy and Tourism’s recent visit to the site and am sure that the Government will want to ensure that all possible assistance is offered to those affected by the redundancies. However, the First Minister might also be aware that Scottish Enterprise is currently undertaking a study into the site’s economic future. Will he ensure that that study is published when it is completed later this summer?
3. To ask the First Minister what issues will be discussed at the next meeting of the Cabinet. (S3F-2322)
The next meeting of the Cabinet will discuss issues of importance to the people of Scotland.
I am grateful for that. I will pursue a couple of those points. Air transport is clearly the service that has been hardest hit, but there will be implications for other transport modes today and over the coming days. Has the Government contacted Highlands and Islands Airports Ltd? What steps are being taken to extend airport opening hours and to allow flights to catch up and aircraft to be repositioned once airspace is clear? Has the UK Border Agency been asked to take special steps should flights from overseas arrive in quick succession, once airports reopen? Are there any indications of disruption to mail delivery across Scotland, without Royal Mail flights? Edinburgh airport has a large mail operation. Have Network Rail and ScotRail been contacted to ensure that weekend engineering works are kept to a minimum so that people can use the trains with confidence? The challenge for Government is surely to clear the in-tray and to do all that it can to assist people at this time.
I—and I am sure the whole chamber—join the member in expressing those condolences. I will arrange for the Cabinet Secretary for Justice to address with Willie Coffey the detail of his specific points. There is an argument to be made here, and we would obviously want the facility of fatal accident inquiries, which provide flexibility in the examination of fatalities, to be as widely available as possible. As I said, I will get the cabinet secretary to consult the member on the detail of his proposal.
As the member knows, the Minister for Enterprise, Energy and Tourism visited the site on Monday. Everything is being done to maintain employment both on the site and in the company, and I will consult the minister on the nature of the study in question and seek to accede to the member’s request.
As the member knows, I was able last week to make a very positive jobs announcement in Renfrewshire and I am very aware of the challenges that that community and other such communities in Scotland are facing. However, everything will be done, including mobilising the partnership action for continuing employment team that has been successful in other areas and other issues, to find continuing employment for the people affected by this announcement. As I said, I will discuss with the Minister for Enterprise, Energy and Tourism whether we can accede to the member’s specific request for the report to be published.
Anti-English Sentiment
I am grateful to the First Minister for his answer and for confirming that Scotland welcomes and values the contribution of students from England and other countries to the academic, cultural and social life of Scotland. Indeed, if I may declare an interest, I am one such immigrant and have experienced nothing but positive support since coming to this country many years ago. Does the First Minister agree that the key to successful assimilation of newcomers in any nation is a sense of national self-confidence and purpose among all citizens, and that the more Scotland is able to control its own future, the more likely we are to progress towards that goal?
I agree with that. I would also agree that Scots have a long history and tradition of extending a warm welcome to migrants coming to Scotland to work, study and live. The Scottish Government welcomes the contribution that everyone makes to the economic and cultural life of Scotland and we remain committed to an independent Scotland in which Scots from all backgrounds feel respected and have a sense of belonging.
I am grateful to Ian McKee for raising the issue, particularly because I noticed that the co-author of the report, Ross Bond, wrote to The Scotsman yesterday about the media coverage, which he saw as a misrepresentation. He criticised The Scotsman for encouraging
“the very conclusions we”—
the authors of the report—
“took pains to avoid”.
It is right and proper that Ian McKee raised the issue because we should take every opportunity in this national Parliament to emphasise the nature and characteristics of what is best in Scotland and our attitude to people coming from overseas, and indeed to make the connection between Scottish self-respect and Scottish self-government. We should all respect our internationalist, outgoing attitude.
The report to which Dr McKee refers confirms that anti-English sentiment in Scotland appears to increase during major sporting tournaments such as football’s world cup. In that context, I welcome the example being set by the First Minister in saying that he will support England at the world cup, and ask him whether he will encourage the rest of his party to follow his lead.
We should be careful before we accept a characterisation of Scots’ attitudes towards our neighbours on the basis of one report, and still less on newspaper articles on that report. The recent press articles are based on interviews carried out in 2005 with some 80 graduates who completed their undergraduate course at Edinburgh University in 2000. It is therefore hardly representative of Scottish society today.
We are proud of our reputation as a welcoming nation for students from any country and background, grateful for the contribution they make and keen that our own students can benefit from the opportunities that are offered by a diverse student population. The attraction of Scotland is reflected in the numbers of international students choosing to come here—about 40,000 overall. Looking specifically at English entrants to higher education in Scotland in 2008-09—the latest data that are available—the number has increased by almost 6 per cent since the previous year.
In a race equality statement published in December 2008, we are clear that we want a Scotland where people from all backgrounds—irrespective of race, faith, belief and place of birth—feel respected, have a sense of belonging and are confident that they can achieve their full potential in our country.
I have many and various responsibilities as the First Minister of Scotland, but when it comes to supporting football teams, I take the responsibility for my own words and my own actions. I would not dare to tell any member of Parliament, least of all Murdo Fraser, which team they should support at a national or international level.
4. To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government’s response is to the report from the University of Edinburgh’s department of sociology, published in the Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, that finds that anti-English sentiment expressed toward undergraduates from England has the potential to weaken the capacity for Scotland to retain highly skilled graduates from that country. (S3F-2329)
Liquor Licences (Suspensions)
There were 29 licences suspended in 2007, a figure that was up considerably from 2005. There were 60 and 116 convictions for selling alcohol to underage persons in 2007-08 and 2008-09 respectively. The average fine in those years was £305 and £244. Data collection has been suspended to avoid unnecessary burden on local authorities because new legislation is being implemented, as the member well knows.
The Parliament recognises the urgent need to rebalance Scotland’s relationship with alcohol. The framework for alcohol contains more than 40 measures, many of which focus on our children and young people.
In relation to Dr Simpson’s specific point about effective enforcement, that is indeed part of the solution. Six months into the new legislation, we are beginning to see the police and licensing boards taking the tough action that is required against rogue retailers.
We came to First Minister’s questions quite late, so I will take question 6 from Liam McArthur.
5. To ask the First Minister how many retailers have had liquor licences suspended for selling alcohol to children since 2007 and what the average fine has been. (S3F-2324)
Presiding Officer,
“It’s time to get tough on the irresponsible sale of alcohol ... The sale of alcohol to underage Scots will result in the loss of a premises’ license”.
That was an SNP manifesto promise in 2007, yet from answers to me just now and answers from the Cabinet Secretary for Justice, we know that of the 561 recorded offences in which a licensed person sold alcohol to a person under 18 in 2008-09, only 202 were proceeded against. As the First Minister just indicated, there has been no collection of any data from the courts on the suspended licences, which I cannot understand. Is that yet another broken promise by the SNP?
Does the First Minister have any comment on the situation in Perthshire, in my constituency, where no such offences were recorded and where there were no prosecutions in 2008-09? Are there really no underage drinkers in Perthshire?
The reason for the interruption in the data is that the Parliament introduced the Licensing (Scotland) Act 2005, which put in place a range of measures, including test purchasing, that has prompted a tightening up of sales to underage young people. As that act is implemented, as is happening at present, the data will come forward, as the member very well knows.
I cannot help but encounter the unworthy suspicion that the reason for Richard Simpson’s pursuing that aspect of alcohol policy, which is hugely important as the whole chamber agreed, is the embarrassment, shared by many of his colleagues, that they have been unable or unwilling to find the courage to confront minimum pricing and recognise that as long as supermarkets and other establishments in Scotland are awash with alcohol that is cheaper than water, we will have a problem that will be prevalent among many sections of Scottish society. When Richard Simpson finds the courage to back the Government and others who want to confront that problem, he will be listened to with even more respect when he raises other aspects of the anti-alcohol agenda.
Nuclear Waste (Storage)
6. To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government’s policy is regarding the storage of nuclear waste. (S3F-2335)
The Scottish Government is consulting on its policy for the storage of higher activity radioactive waste. We are against the deep geological storage of that waste and want to ensure that the need for transporting it over long distances is kept to a minimum.
The waste is the result of Scotland’s nuclear legacy. The Scottish Government—with others in this chamber, I hope—is committed to enhancing Scotland’s generation advantage in the future of electricity based on renewables, fossil fuel with carbon capture and storage, as well as energy efficiency, as the best solution to Scotland’s energy security.
On a point of order, Presiding Officer.
The issue of volcanic ash is extremely important, so much so that surely the First Minister should have requested under the standing orders to make an emergency statement to Parliament this afternoon so that all members would have the opportunity to question him about the matter, rather than spending nearly five minutes of First Minister’s questions making what he called a statement and eating into the only time during the week that members have to question him. For example, the lack of time meant that I could not question the First Minister on a current constituency issue that relates to the National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers dispute. I hope that you will consider that and whether a request for a statement would have been more in order, Presiding Officer.
I say with respect, Ms Smith, that you could not ask your question because I did not call it and not because we ran out of time. It is now five minutes past the normal finishing time; I allowed time because the First Minister gave an update on the situation. It is entirely open to him to request a statement if he wishes to do so. The update did not affect the time that was available for First Minister’s question time.
I thank the First Minister for his answer, much of which I agreed with. However, in 2007, the SNP promised to
“say no to new nuclear-power stations or dumps.”
The Cabinet Secretary for Rural Affairs and the Environment described burying nuclear waste as an
“out of sight, out of mind policy”.
Will the First Minister therefore explain why his Government and its advisers appear to be advocating to the Dounreay stakeholder group and others that disposal of some nuclear waste will now take place to depths of up to 100m?
I—
Further to that point of order, Presiding Officer. I make it clear that we have offered a briefing to Opposition party spokespeople. If members would prefer a statement to be made in the chamber—perhaps before the close of business—the Government would be perfectly prepared to do that.
I tried to be as helpful as possible to Parliament during First Minister’s question time. If some party leaders chose not to ask questions about this most serious issue, that is their responsibility and not mine. I acknowledge that at least one party leader asked about the matter.
12:36
Meeting suspended until 14:15.
14:15
On resuming—
I saw the report in one of the Sunday newspapers. Given that we are consulting on that very aspect and seeking people’s views on it from a clear Government position that we
“support long-term near surface, near site storage facilities so that the waste is monitorable and retrievable”,
would it not be best to base views on the Government’s clearly stated policy and objective and respond to the consultation rather than to quote a newspaper report of what an official might have said to an individual meeting somewhere in Scotland?
I am responsible for Government policy along with the rest of the ministerial team. That is the Government policy and I am glad that Liam McArthur is prepared to back it.
Is this a point of order, First Minister?