Plenary, 17 Jun 1999

Meeting date: Thursday, June 17, 1999

Official Report 767KB pdf

---

Open Question Time

We now move to open question time. The format is slightly different, in that once a question has been answered by a minister, any member may ask a supplementary question, indicating a wish to do so by pressing the request button. Supplementary questions must be brief. We have only 15 minutes for this item, which means five minutes per question.

---

SCOTTISH EXECUTIVE

---

Partnership Agreement

Will the First Minister answer this in a phrase or two? To ask the Scottish Executive to explain how the partnership agreement lives up to the desire for radical change in Scottish society which is symbolised by the advent of Scotland's first Parliament for 300 years. (S1O-54)

I like the phrase or two.

As a partnership, we are committed to introducing a programme of initiatives that is in the interests of Scotland. That will be done in a number of ways: in the legislative programme that we announced yesterday, in the spending priorities that we will advance and reflect, and in administrative action. We are committed to changing and improving the standard of life in Scotland across a whole range of issues, including

education, health, housing, jobs and the environment.

Can the First Minister tell us what the environmental reasons are for imposing a toll tax on the M8?

I would not describe it as a toll tax. It is very important that we try to reduce the gridlock and congestion on motorways and in urban centres. In debate earlier today, there were some impassioned speeches from Alex Salmond's benches on the need to do something about urban congestion. Although people make those statements, when imaginative and difficult ideas are brought forward—difficult because we know that they will be controversial but believe that they must be examined—there is a barrage of criticism and complaint. There is a good deal of courage in the legislative programme that we announced, and the measures are an example of that.

There has been a barrage of criticism and complaint from Graeme Maurice, the Labour leader of West Lothian Council. Does he not have a point when he argues that a toll tax on the M8 will divert traffic to less suitable roads, making things worse for the environment and raising safety concerns?

It is perfectly legitimate for the Scottish National party—or any outside party— to draw attention to diversion. It is one of the factors that must be examined carefully. There are other possibilities for congestion charging which may have a part to play. It is important that, if there is to be a move in the direction of charging, it must be clear that any money raised will be used to improve transport services and infrastructure. When people sit down and think about that, it might be more popular than Mr Salmond would like.

The First Minister says, "if" there is a move in that direction—does that indicate some doubt? Let me try a simple question. When the ministerial car takes the First Minister back to Glasgow, who will pay the toll tax? Will he pay, or will the taxpayer, and how much will it be?

I imagine—and I suppose that this is a dolefully inadequate answer to that penetrating general matter of principle—that the Scottish Office will probably follow exactly the same procedure that it follows when we cross the Forth road bridge.

The taxpayer.

Will the First Minister indicate what the Executive will do to help young people? The word youth, or young people, does not figure in the lists of ministerial duties. Who will be in charge, and what can he offer young people in this dynamic new

Scotland?

I know that Donald Gorrie takes a great interest in those things, and I suspect that he rather fancies himself as a representative of youth. It shows a confidence in that matter that I find implausible. I have never taken the view that young people had totally different interests from those of the rest of the population. Young people are interested in educational opportunity and—essentially—in job opportunity. Mr Gorrie might want to consider the impressive statistic that, since the Government came to power at Westminster, the new deal has halved the number of 18 to 24-year-olds claiming unemployment benefit.

It is the same with housing, the health service and a range of social services. If we get those matters right, and bring about the kind of improvements that we want, we will appeal to people of 18 as much as we will appeal to people of Mr Gorrie's age.

In relation to the question about toll tax, will the First Minister introduce immediate legislation to bring us into line with England and Wales, and announce an amnesty for poll tax non-payers, in order to alleviate poverty in Scotland?

Mr Sheridan is indulging in wishful thinking, because there is no such amnesty in England and Wales. I take the view that when people owe money, and when money is due, that debt should be met. I have no intention of introducing an amnesty. There are difficulties about collecting, and other principles of law apply, but local government is right to recover due debt. If it does not do so, there will be an additional burden on others in society—I do not include Mr Sheridan—who have been meeting their dues.

---

Tax

To ask the Scottish Executive whether it plans to increase the tax burden on people resident in Scotland during this session of the Parliament. (S1O-24) The First Minister (Donald Dewar): As Mr McLetchie knows, "Partnership for Scotland" makes it clear that we will not use the tax-varying powers in the course of the first Parliament. After April 2000, people in Scotland will enjoy the benefits of the 1p reduction in the United Kingdom basic rate of income tax.

I thank the First Minister for his courtesy in answering the question and for the surprising brevity of his answer. If Mr Dewar does not intend to increase the tax burden during the lifetime of the Parliament, will he advise us which taxes he plans to reduce to compensate the residents of Scotland for the tolls, taxes and city

entry charges that we will all have to bear as a result of the legislative programme announced yesterday?

I know that Mr McLetchie finds the concept difficult to grasp, but the Parliament has no powers to raise charges or taxes that were not previously available to the Scottish Office. Apart from the 1p variation in income tax, there is nothing in the Scotland Act 1998 to give the Parliament powers that were not already available.

If we do go down that road, it will be for a direct return, both in terms of the better management of our road system and our cities, and through the use of any funds that are raised in that way to address concerns about gridlock, greenhouse emissions and motorway queuing.

I am not interested in raising taxation for the sake of it, but I am interested in seeing tax reform—such as that which is being implemented by the Chancellor of the Exchequer—in order to address opportunity in society. The new 10p band, the working families tax credit, the important and generous tax credits for nursery and pre-school care—which will come into effect later this year— are examples of how, without victimising people who earn more, we can use the tax system to unlock opportunity for those who have been denied it in the past.

The First Minister seems to be following the lead given by the Prime Minister, by—contrary to election pledges—increasing the tax burden on people resident in Scotland, and the United Kingdom as a whole. He seems to be confirming that the legislation is designed to ensure that local authorities in Scotland are turned into the Parliament's tax gatherers.

On the subject of local authorities, given the First Minister's desire to be a friend to the business community, will he categorically rule out that during the lifetime of the Parliament, local authorities will be given sole or partial discretion to set business rates—a measure to which the Scottish business community is wholly and rightly opposed?

I trust that I will not try Mr McLetchie's patience if I repeat what I have often said: the McIntosh commission report is due soon and a whole series of important consultations that we promised on the issue will also take place soon. I have made it clear repeatedly on behalf of my party, and I believe that it will be the view of the Administration, that we would not want in any way to put Scotland's commerce, industry and business at a competitive disadvantage against other parts of the United Kingdom. On that at least we can make common ground.

Scottish business will be very pleased, for example, to note that the unemployment claimant count fell again this week and, at 5.5 per cent, is still the lowest that it has been since 1977. The International Labour Organisation unemployment figure fell by 11,000 and the numbers in employment went up by 7,000 in the quarter to the end of April. As a result of the management of the economy over the past two years, Scotland has a good, strong economic position, which, I assure Mr McLetchie, the Administration has no intention whatever of putting at risk.

Given his desire to keep taxes down, what representations has the First Minister made, or will he make, to his friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer about the successive increases in road fuel tax? Those increases have had a dire effect on Scotland, particularly in the rural areas that I represent, where people on very low incomes often have no alternative but to own a car and pay the high taxes imposed by the Government.

That is why we are spending more—£13.5 million over three years— on urban transport. It is why we are helping some—not a lot, but some—rural petrol stations. And it is why we have asked the Office of Fair Trading to consider again the alleged profiteering among the petrol companies.

One of the difficulties is that only about 0.25 per cent of petrol sales in this country are made in the Highlands and Islands, which unfortunately has a large land mass. Therefore, there are problems with petrol stations, which have a small throughput and have to push up margins in order to survive. That is the sort of issue that we will look at.

We are introducing a whole range of initiatives, such as the substantial increase on remission of vehicle excise duties for lorries that have cleaner engines and the £55 annual reduction in vehicle excise duty for cars under 1,100 cc.

As I am sure Alasdair Morgan accepts, we have a duty under the Kyoto accord to meet the CO2 emissions targets, which represent a substantial reduction of 12.5 per cent on the 1990 totals, by the period 2008 to 2010. People will recognise that that might mean some quite uncomfortable and difficult decisions, but we have to get the balance right. We cannot simply ignore the threat of greenhouse gases and global warming.

---

Children and Young People

To ask the Scottish Executive what measures it proposes to ensure that the interests and views of children and young people are taken into account in future legislation. (S1O-17)

The new legislative process will reflect the arrangements that were proposed in the consultative steering group report. We will ensure that children and young people's groups have an opportunity to comment on the issues that affect them. I will announce shortly how we intend to consult on the education bill and how young people can be involved in that process.

Thank you for that helpful answer. Is the minister aware of the recent case in south Ayrshire, in which a sheriff felt that the provisions of the Children (Scotland) Act 1995 did not give him powers to stop a convicted sex offender, on his release from prison, returning to live in close proximity to his young victim? If he is aware of that case, will he comment on how legislation could be improved to ensure that children in such cases are afforded the protection that they need, to allow them to live safely and without fear in their homes and communities?

First, I want to recognise the work that Cathy has done with young people and children. She worked for a number of years with Who Cares? Scotland, an organisation that looks after a particularly vulnerable group. Her work has been a credit to her and an example to us all. The fact that she did that work for less than she is earning here is also to her credit and should not be sneered at by other individuals in newspaper articles. People who do real jobs with real people in the real world do not need lessons from people who do not possess such qualities.

Looking after vulnerable kids is important, as are their views. A number of legislative measures have been taken recently and guidelines have been produced—dealing with the social justice system, the criminal justice system, local authorities and the social work services—on how their views can be taken into account. There are still some problems. If Cathy Jamieson wishes, we can discuss the matter to see how we can take it forward.

Services and legislation will be affected by concordats. When will the Executive make those concordats available to this Parliament, so that they can be properly and publicly scrutinised?

When young children's issues are addressed, it is important to ensure that views are taken on board, that there is a concordat and that there is consensus, as none of us has complete knowledge of those issues; few of us are in our youth, although we may think that we are.

When they are ready, concordats will be presented here, and this chamber will make decisions on them.

That brings our first question time to an end.