Plenary, 15 Sep 2005

Meeting date: Thursday, September 15, 2005

Official Report 703KB pdf

---

First Minister's Question Time

---

Prime Minister (Meetings)

To ask the First Minister when he will next meet the Prime Minister and what issues will be discussed. (S2F-1803)

Presiding Officer, I am sure that members will want to welcome to the chamber the children from Minga Community School in Malawi, who have spent the past week with their colleagues and friends from Sanday Community School in Orkney. [Applause.]

I am sure that members will also want to congratulate national teams that have been successful over the past week. Our national football team in Scotland has made us all feel an awful lot better for the past 10 days, and we wish it well for the end of the world cup campaign. I am sure that members will also want to congratulate the English cricket team on its success in winning the ashes. [Applause.]

I also congratulate the Scottish football team and the English and Scottish cricket teams on their success. Just so that nobody feels left out, it is probably also appropriate to mention Northern Ireland's historic football victory last week.

Turning to more serious matters, I note that the First Minister said in the chamber last year that he made regular representations to the Chancellor of the Exchequer about fuel duty and the impact of fuel prices in Scotland. Given that fuel prices are now at an all-time high, will the First Minister tell us what representations he has made recently?

There are two issues here. First, I believe that we should support the chancellor's efforts to secure a worldwide increase in supply and thereby to secure a sustainable reduction in the cost of fuel. That is the right strategy and one that we support. Secondly, we want the chancellor and the United Kingdom Government to monitor the impact on rural areas, particularly in Scotland, of the fuel price increases in recent weeks and months, and if action is required in the months ahead, to take appropriate action to reduce that burden.

Action is required. We all accept that high oil prices are an issue, but does the First Minister accept that not all of the recent increase in the price of a litre of fuel is down to oil prices? More than 2p of it is down to increased VAT. Is he aware that for every penny increase in the price of a litre of petrol at the pumps the chancellor rakes in an extra £20 million in VAT? Why will he not ask the chancellor to reinvest that money, which the chancellor was not even expecting to get when he set his budget, in a cut in fuel duty, to relieve the burden on families and businesses all over Scotland?

I believe that the chancellor should keep open those options, but I also believe that it would be entirely wrong for either the chancellor or us in Scotland to adopt the Scottish National Party's economic policy, which is entirely dependent on high fuel prices to sustain the sort of Scottish economy that it envisages. The SNP cannot have it both ways. It has tried with public spending, and even in the past week we have heard individual members on the SNP front bench talking about reductions in public expenditure on the one hand while, on the other, demanding more spending on specific projects. Yet again, we see the Scottish nationalist party trying to be on the side of those who are, rightly, deeply concerned about higher fuel prices and about the cost of oil, while at the same time pursuing a policy that would have the whole Scottish economy dependent on the high price of fuel.

I am not sure that anybody in Scotland would have understood that answer. Does the First Minister accept that high oil prices mean pain at the pumps for individuals but a bounty of extra cash for the chancellor, not just in fuel taxes but in revenues from Scotland's oil, which this year will hit £13 billion? We know now that Labour concealed the truth about Scotland's oil wealth for 30 long years. Is it not about time that the First Minister started arguing for Scotland to feel the benefit of our massive oil wealth, and would a good starting point not be lower fuel prices?

Nobody has concealed the fact that there was a serious debate in the 1970s in Scotland about the benefits of oil to our economy and the political decisions that should result from that. Indeed, it is on record that in 1974, at the age of 14, I joined the Scottish National Party because of that very argument. However, I soon woke up. I soon saw the light and realised that we cannot base our economic policy for all time on the price of oil. We must have a more sustainable pattern for economic growth than that. It is important therefore that we in the United Kingdom do two things. First, we must have a strong and sustainable economy inside which we in Scotland can grow our economy and, secondly, we must take a prudent approach to economic management. Within that, it is important that the chancellor—and I absolutely agree with him on this point—not only puts pressure on the oil-producing companies to supply more oil to the world market and to bring down the price more sustainably, but keeps under review the price of fuel as it is affected by taxation. I am sure that the chancellor will listen to the Executive's representations on that, as he has done in the past.

I remind the First Minister that not a single Labour politician has ever told the truth that thanks to oil an independent Scotland would be one of the richest countries in the world. Is it not the case that we are an oil-rich nation, yet we are paying through the nose for petrol? When will the First Minister stop kowtowing to the chancellor and start standing up for Scotland?

The best way to stand up for Scotland in the chamber and elsewhere is first to ensure that the price of oil worldwide comes down, that it comes down sustainably and that it comes down far enough to have an impact not just on the price at the pump but on the price for Scottish business across the board. Secondly, it is to ensure that we in Scotland make the right representations to the chancellor—which we have done, and to which in the past he has listened—and to urge him to keep his options open on the taxation front. The SNP might want to blame somebody else, but the chancellor should not let up on the absolute imperative of bringing down the worldwide price of oil and of ensuring a sustainable and secure reduction in the oil price that will have an impact for all Scottish drivers and businesses.

---

Cabinet (Meetings)

To ask the First Minister what issues will be discussed at the next meeting of the Scottish Executive's Cabinet. (S2F-1804)

The Cabinet will, as ever, discuss progress with the legislative programme, with the partnership agreement and with all the actions that we are taking to build a safer and stronger Scotland.

If reports in the media are accurate, the Cabinet may well be told by our Minister for Finance and Public Service Reform, Mr McCabe, in an echo of the words of the late Tony Crosland, that the party is over in relation to public spending. We are told that the next spending round will apparently lead to a lower rate of increase in spending than was previously envisaged. If Labour does indeed plan a lower rate of increase in spending after 2007, does the First Minister think that it would be fair to describe that as a Labour spending cut?

No.

Well, I very much hope that that terse and accurate answer will be reflected in all observations made by the Labour Party in future literature about Conservative proposals. I find that a refreshing outburst of frankness and we will hold the First Minister to that sentiment.

The First Minister likes to tell us about all the extra money that has been spent by the Scottish Executive over the past six years, particularly on the national health service. However, as we learned this weekend from the response to the reports of the Audit Committee and the Auditor General for Scotland, that has not led to an increase in clinical activity or to improved productivity. Despite that, Mr McCabe is telling us that we can find £1.2 billion in efficiency savings. Will the First Minister therefore acknowledge that all the Executive's extra spending to date has not produced the desired improved results, and can he give us an estimate of how much taxpayers' money has already been wasted over the past six years?

Dear, oh dear. There has been a remarkable increase in health spending not just because of the commitment to the health service from our benches and from the United Kingdom Government but because of the prudent management of the economy as it recovers from the chaos of the previous two decades, which has ensured that money has been made available for public services. Now that we have had those six years of increases in expenditure, it is important that we review how it is being distributed and ensure that the money is being spent on the right priorities in the right way, with maximum efficiency and minimum waste.

Mr McLetchie chooses his words carefully. It is not that long ago that he would have been quoting the most recent statistics announced by the health service, independently of us, on improvements in waiting times—although he might have used other ways to describe it. In August, we found that there had been dramatic reductions over the previous year: a dramatic reduction in the number of people on the out-patient waiting list; a dramatic reduction in the amount of time that people are waiting for an out-patient appointment; and yet another dramatic reduction in the number of people waiting more than six months for an in-patient appointment. The money is being used properly, with investment in additional services and reforms that make those services more efficient and effective.

I hope that the Conservative candidate in the forthcoming Cathcart by-election will be as much in favour of reform as Mr McLetchie and his colleagues say that they are when he has to make choices about what to say on the important reforms that are taking place in Glasgow. Those reforms will reduce waiting times and produce safer and more effective hospitals, and will not only secure for local people the services that need to be delivered locally but do so in a far safer and more effective environment.

Mr Cook will do an excellent job in Cathcart, defending the voters there from the cuts that are being imposed by the Labour-Lib Dem Executive. People will find it very odd that we can apparently save hundreds of millions of pounds over the next six years yet, according to the First Minister, not a penny has been wasted over the past six years. Let us nevertheless welcome all these late converts to the Conservative point of view.

The First Minister told us last week that the efficiency savings that he had identified to date would be used to cut taxes for businesses in Scotland. Would he agree that further efficiency savings to be identified could and should be used to cut taxes for individuals and families in Scotland?

One of the ways in which we approach such matters, which I think has widespread support across Scotland, is to strive to get the right balance between the income that we raise and the money that we spend, and to ensure, in that context, that money is spent on the key priorities of people in Scotland. We strike that balance not just in relation to business rates but in other areas. We have had the lowest council tax increases in the whole of the United Kingdom in each year since devolution in 1999, and the increases in Scotland have been lower than they were in any of the last six years of the Conservative Government to 1997. We strike that balance within a context of dramatically increased expenditure on transport, schools, hospitals and the health service, and other areas. It is that increased expenditure that is leading to Scotland having a growing economy, with improvements in education, health and transport that people could only have dreamed of when Mr McLetchie's party was in power.

---

Council Tax

To ask the First Minister what his position is on the fairness of council tax for pensioners and low-paid workers in particular and on whether it should be replaced by a system based on personal income. (S2F-1815)

The independent review of local government finance, which we commissioned last year, is undertaking a full review of the different forms of local taxation and the committee's report is due next summer.

Last week, Age Concern Scotland gave evidence on the Council Tax Abolition and Service Tax Introduction (Scotland) Bill that, on average, pensioners have to spend 11 per cent of their meagre incomes on council tax bills and that some have to spend as much as 20 per cent. Will the First Minister confirm that those who wish to see the council tax scrapped and replaced by an income-based alternative can vote for it this December? Will he confirm that the council tax benefits system is woefully inadequate and is in need of radical transformation? Will he confirm that attempts to reform the unfair council tax would involve a property revaluation throughout Scotland?

Of course, a considerable number of Scotland's pensioners receive full council tax benefit and a considerable number receive partial council tax benefit. It is simply not true for Mr Sheridan to try to disguise those figures and dismiss that benefits system as one that does not help the poorest pensioners in Scotland.

I agree that there is an issue for other pensioners in Scotland who have to pay either the full council tax or part of their council tax. It is important that the independent review considers that issue. It is an issue for us. Given how the council tax has developed over the years, I believe that the relationship between it and those who are on relatively fixed incomes is an issue. That is a matter for the independent review to consider. I certainly do not believe, and I do not believe that the independent review will believe in a month of Sundays, that the way to replace or reform the council tax or improve the system of local taxation in Scotland is to introduce a national tax on employment–a national tax on jobs–which is the policy of the Scottish Socialist Party. That would be damaging for the Scottish economy, for families in work and, ultimately, for the independence and democracy of our local government.

It is regrettable that the First Minister does not follow his own advice and answer the questions, rather than saying what he has written down in front of him. I asked him three questions and he did not answer one of them. I asked about the property revaluation, whether the Parliament could vote in December to scrap the council tax and whether he thought that the council tax benefits system was unfair.

Is the First Minister aware that a single worker in a band B property loses the entitlement to council tax benefit on an income of £6,001 a year? That is how inadequate the council tax benefits system is. Does he accept that independent research into the Scottish service tax shows that 80 per cent of workers throughout Scotland would benefit under such a tax as compared with the council tax? Does he accept that people like him, me and others on £50,000 a year or more, should pay more for local services in order that pensioners and low-paid workers should pay less? That is called income redistribution. He used to agree with it. Does he still agree with it?

Of course I agree with it. One of the ways in which we contribute to local services in this country is to pay for 80 per cent of local services through national taxation. There is a contribution from business, but there is also a contribution from all of us who pay income tax and other taxes. Therefore, the balance of local services funding comes partly from national taxation and partly from local taxation. That element of local taxation is important.

Mr Sheridan is keen to remind many of us about things that he claims we once said or believed in, but I remember that when he was a local councillor he said that he believed in local taxation, decided locally by local authorities. His policy in the Parliament is diametrically opposed to that; he advocates a national tax on jobs that would fund local services, that would be the same everywhere and that would be detrimental not just to those in employment or those who might be attracted into employment but to democratic local government in Scotland and the ability of local authorities to set their own levels of taxation to pay for part of their services.

---

Air-guns

To ask the First Minister what steps can be taken to ensure that there are restrictions on the sale of air-guns. (S2F-1816)

The most effective and fastest way to ensure that access to air-guns is restricted will be to introduce changes across the United Kingdom through the Violent Crime Reduction Bill. The Home Office is in the final stages of considering our proposals for a workable and enforceable scheme to ensure that there is a responsible and accountable trade in air weapons. We expect to be able to announce details of new restrictions soon.

Does the First Minister agree that, although there have been successful campaigns to encourage people to hand in air-guns to the police, those campaigns are not enough on their own to ensure that communities across Scotland are free from the intimidation and danger that are caused by those who misuse air-guns? Further, does he agree that restrictions on the sale of air-guns are now required, including the introduction of a licensing scheme and the raising of the legal age for their purchase?

Those are important proposals, but they are only part of the story. I welcome Richard Baker's suggestions, but we want to ensure that air-gun sales are restricted not only in Scotland but throughout the UK. That opportunity exists in the legislation that could go before the UK Parliament this year. We intend to pursue that case because we believe that Scotland will be safer if we restrict air-gun availability and use not only in Scotland but in the rest of the UK as well.

Is the First Minister aware that a convicted armed robber and, indeed, any person who has served a prison sentence of more than three years is, correctly, banned from possessing a firearm but that the law allows them to own a replica weapon? Given that neither a bank teller nor a firearms expert is able easily to tell the difference between the two, will the First Minister use the powers that are available to him under prison regulations to end that absurdity?

My sincere apologies, Presiding Officer but, because of the noise in the background, I had difficulty hearing the question. Could Mr MacAskill repeat the question?

Second cut, Mr MacAskill.

A convicted armed robber and, indeed, any person who has served a prison sentence of more than three years is, correctly, banned from possessing a firearm but is allowed to own a replica weapon. Will the First Minister end that absurdity by using the powers that are available to him under prison regulations, which could be used immediately without impinging on areas that are reserved to Westminster?

Mr MacAskill makes an interesting suggestion. We are determined to tighten the availability and use, for whatever purpose, of replica guns. We have been considering proposals that we will bring forward in that regard and Mr MacAskill's suggestion will form part of that consideration.

I call Mike Pringle.

In effect, Mr MacAskill asked the question that I was going to ask.

---

Fuel Poverty

To ask the First Minister what impact rising fuel costs will have on targets to end fuel poverty by 2010. (S2F-1813)

We are making good progress—sorry, that is the answer to question 6. However, of course, we are also making good progress in the area about which Christine Grahame asks.

Fuel poverty has more than halved and we remain on target to end fuel poverty by the set date of 2016, not 2010. However, we will continue to monitor the impact of fuel prices on our plans and their impact.

I thank the First Minister for whichever answer he gave me.

I remind the First Minister that, for every 5 per cent increase in fuel costs, 30,000 people are sent back into fuel poverty. Given that 3,000 people, most of them elderly, died in Scotland last year as a result of the cold and that 72 per cent of pensioners are completely unaware of Government programmes to help with heating, what is the First Minister doing to ensure that that figure is reduced, or at least does not increase?

I am happy to assure Christine Grahame, although I expect that she already knows, that most of the details that she raises have received a full and detailed answer. However, I will inform her of a number of things that have happened in connection with the matter that she has raised.

In the past eight years, fuel poverty has reduced by more than half, which has reduced the number of households in fuel poverty to way below a quarter of a million. Our central heating programme is the best targeted and most effective in the United Kingdom and, as anyone who has spoken to any pensioner who has benefited from that programme knows, it has gone a long way towards ensuring that Scotland's pensioners have far warmer and more comfortable winters. We have also devoted £64 million to the warm deal, which has insulated more than 200,000 homes, which is nearly a tenth of Scotland's housing stock.

We continue to invest not only in the warm deal but in the central heating programme, making it available to more and more of Scotland's pensioners. As we do that, we will reduce the number who are in fuel poverty. Every figure that we mention in the chamber and elsewhere represents an individual who lives in their own home and who requires better heating and better insulation for a far more comfortable life and a better quality of life.

---

Robert Burns (250th Anniversary)

To ask the First Minister what progress the Scottish Executive is making with its plans to commemorate the 250th anniversary of the birth of Robert Burns. (S2F-1814)

Given my answer to the previous question, members will not be surprised to hear that we are making good progress. Just last week, Patricia Ferguson announced a grant to the Robert Burns World Federation to enable it to maximise support for the year of homecoming. Alongside the establishment of a board, which is chaired by Allan Burns of Diageo, and the appointment of a project director, a programme is well under way to ensure that the year of homecoming is celebrated by Scots here in Scotland and attracts people from all over the world to Scotland to celebrate the anniversary of Robert Burns's birth.

Will the First Minister ensure that, in addition to finding imaginative ways to commemorate the great contribution that Rabbie Burns made to human happiness throughout the world, those who are responsible for the programme give a due opportunity to current Scottish artistic and cultural people? We have a very high standard of performance and such people should have the opportunity to show that they are the rightful heirs of what Rabbie Burns did and that Scotland has something to offer in the cultural world.

I certainly hope that, not just in the international year of homecoming, but in the highland year of culture in 2007 that was celebrated in the Parliament last night, in our many events, festivals and activities and in our promotions in the Parliament in the years between now and 2009, we will give our artists opportunities to display their talents not just to us in Scotland but to an international audience.

One great advance of the devolution years has been the renaissance in Scottish cultural life. The talents of our artists and other creative people have come to the fore to exhibit what is here in Scotland not just at our own festivals but worldwide. I hope that we will celebrate and support those artists even more in the years to come.

I call Margo MacDonald.

Thank you, First Minister—sorry; I should say thank you to the Presiding Officer. The First Minister has not yet agreed with me.

I welcome everything that the First Minister said and that Donald Gorrie introduced into the debate, but I urge the First Minister to use some of the extra money that is available to the chancellor—I realise that some negotiation could be involved—to underwrite travel to and from Scotland. As we discovered during the business in the Parliament conference, unless we have the air links and the travel links, all the good ideas will underperform their potential.

That was a bit wide of the original question, but the First Minister may wish to reply.

A great opportunity arises to mention the progress that we have made and to commit to building on that progress. Three years ago this month, we launched the route development fund, which has not just subsidised individual routes but created a culture in our airports and among airlines that recognises that airlines can justify direct air routes to Scotland commercially and build on such routes, which can be very successful. We have seen that each route that has been established—particularly each long route—has been improved and expanded.

The rest of the Cabinet and I are determined to continue to build on and maintain the route development fund and to advertise the fact that Scotland is open for business and the fact that it is possible to make a success of commercial air routes directly into and out of Scotland so that people do not have to rely on airline trips into and out of London.

That concludes First Minister's question time a little early, which allows me to give another word of welcome. Along with the Malawians and the Valencians, we have a delegation from another place: Scottish peers have observed from the gallery. They, too, are very welcome. [Applause.]

Meeting suspended until 14:15.

On resuming—