Meeting of the Parliament

Meeting date: Thursday, November 17, 2011

Official Report 1135KB pdf

---

Scottish Executive Question Time

---

Justice and Law Officers

---

Scottish Prison Service

1. To ask the Scottish Executive when the Cabinet Secretary for Justice last met the Scottish Prison Service. (S4O-00369)

I meet the Scottish Prison Service’s chief executive monthly to discuss matters relating to the operation of Scotland’s prisons—we most recently met on 3 November. In addition, I have regular meetings and conversations with other senior members of SPS staff on a variety of prison-related issues.

From those regular meetings, the cabinet secretary will be aware of the SPS’s plans to close HMP Gateside in Greenock and replace it with HMP Inverclyde on the former site of Greenock high school. The new prison is due to open in August 2015. Can he confirm that work will begin on schedule by 2013 and that the prison will open for use in 2015? Given the reported current and projected capacity problems in Scotland’s prisons, has discussion taken place on prolonging HMP Gateside’s life beyond 2015?

The staff and the governor at HMP Gateside in Greenock have given exemplary service, but the prison is ageing. That is why the SPS has acquired a site and secured planning permission to construct a new prison to replace HMP Gateside. However, before work can commence, preparatory work is required, including the demolition of the school on the site, once it has relocated.

The SPS’s spending plans for 2013-14 and 2014-15 include the commencement of the construction of HMP Inverclyde. That shows the direction of travel. We obviously monitor progress and discuss the matter with the local authority, which clearly has an interest with regard to the school. That is as specific as we can be.

Has the cabinet secretary discussed with the SPS the 28 per cent increase in remand prisoners at Barlinnie since 2009 and the effect of that on overcrowding, which I witnessed at first hand on my visit to the prison on Monday?

Yes. Remand prisoners are one reason why we have a significant increase in prisoner numbers. The other aspect is women prisoners. With regard to women prisoners, we have set up a commission under Dame Elish Angiolini to investigate the issue. Remand is a more complicated issue, but we are looking at it.

One aspect is the understandable and correct tightening of the Crown’s approach to those charged with a crime of violence. It may be that Labour is now suggesting a looser approach, but the Government is not in favour of that. Given that Labour previously called for an even tighter approach—indeed, it called for mandatory sentencing—I would have thought that the suggestion that the situation is devastating and drastic, which it is, is something that Labour should have considered when it still championed mandatory sentencing.

In the light of publicity in the press today about Barlinnie prison, can the cabinet secretary share with us any plans that he has for Barlinnie and any timescales that apply? Will he also note the heartfelt support that I offer to the staff at Barlinnie, who carry out their duties very impressively for us?

First, I concur with Mr Pearson that the staff at Barlinnie prison are exceptional. The governor is outstanding, as was his predecessor, Bill McKinlay. The staff do a good job in difficult and pressing circumstances.

I have regular discussions with the chief executive of the SPS and with other staff. I think that it is accepted that, at some stage, Barlinnie requires to change. However, as I have argued at the Justice Committee, I can build any number of prisons that any Opposition member wishes—some have argued for a new Cornton Vale and some for a new Barlinnie—but it is incumbent on them to tell us what projects they wish to cut, whether they be in transport, housing, education or health.

At present, we recognise the priority. Our priority is to open Low Moss and to prepare for HMP Grampian, where planning is proceeding and a contract has been issued. We accept the challenges that Cornton Vale and Barlinnie face. The SPS is considering, thinking through and planning on those matters.

---

Police Complaints Commissioner for Scotland (Single Police Force)

2. To ask the Scottish Executive what role it anticipates the Police Complaints Commissioner for Scotland having once a single national police force is established. (S4O-00368)

On 9 September, we published the consultation paper, “Keeping Scotland Safe and Strong: A Consultation on Reforming Police and Fire and Rescue Services in Scotland”, which set out the Scottish Government’s commitment to maintaining recourse to an independent body for dissatisfied complainants. It stated our belief that an independent body should undertake investigations into serious criminal allegations and incidents involving the police. The paper invited views on a number of options for meeting those commitments.

The consultation closed on 2 November. We are now carefully considering the responses before reaching a decision about how complaints will be handled when we have a single police service.

In light of the major reforms that the cabinet secretary proposes to the police service, does he agree that key to public confidence in a single Scotland-wide police force will be ensuring that Scotland has a dedicated independent oversight body that can effectively hold the police to account? Will he commit today to strengthening the role of the Police Complaints Commissioner by handing investigative powers to him, thus ensuring that the investigation of criminal complaints against the police is completely independent?

Alison McInnes outlines a fundamental principle that is made clear in the consultation document. There are various options. One is to consider expanding the powers of HM inspectorate of constabulary. Another is to expand the role and remit of the Police Complaints Commissioner. I will make an announcement on that shortly.

I am going through the submissions that we have received. However, I can say that I recently met the Police Complaints Commissioner and many of his staff, who do an outstanding job. I will outline my position once we have properly considered the views of those who have taken the time to make submissions.

I take on board and am sympathetic to Alison McInnes’s comments.

On the planning for a single national force, the cabinet secretary will be aware of the publication from Reform Scotland showing that 899 police support staff have lost their positions. Will he give a guarantee that, in its model for a single national police force, the Government will not axe vital support staff, which would compromise police officers on the street?

There are two issues. The division of labour—if I can put it that way—between serving officers and backroom staff is an operational matter for the chief constable, who will be held to account by the board.

I put it on record yet again that we have an outstanding police family, including those who hold the office of constable and those who serve in a variety of ways, such as technical staff.

It would be appropriate if Mr Kelly came to Parliament with the proper information. The Reform Scotland paper did not take into account staff employed by the Scottish Police Services Authority and the Scottish Crime and Drug Enforcement Agency, so his scaremongering is without foundation. Reform Scotland has acknowledged that its paper was erroneous.

---

Proceeds of Crime (Allocation)

3. To ask the Scottish Government what factors are taken into consideration when allocating funding from the proceeds of crime. (S4O-00370)

The Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 allows the Scottish Government to seize illegal gains from organised crime and—uniquely, through the highly successful cashback for communities initiative—to invest bad money in community programmes, facilities and activities, largely for young people, to the ultimate benefit of Scottish communities affected by crime and antisocial behaviour.

The key factors that we take into account are that projects must deliver improved facilities and build better, safer, healthier communities—outcomes that simply would not have existed otherwise. That gives our young people positive, purposeful and constructive opportunities to contribute to Scottish society.

Many groups and organisations across north-east Scotland have benefited from cashback funding. In last week’s justice debate in the chamber, Labour’s justice spokesperson called for the funding to be directed purely and simply to those communities that the cash actually comes from. Will the cabinet secretary resist that call and ensure that communities across Scotland continue to benefit from that worthwhile funding?

As I said in last week’s debate, the funding should be allocated across Scotland. Frankly, although some areas of Scotland are much worse hit by criminality and offending than others are, every area should have the opportunity for its youngsters to achieve their full potential. It is for that reason that I was delighted to go to a cashback initiative yesterday in Brechin and will be delighted to go to an event on Sunday for the roll-out of a 3G pitch in Haddington. Neither of those communities is without its challenges but, to be fair, neither would be viewed as a hard-pressed, deprived urban area.

It is important that what Mr McDonald suggested is carried out. Children and young people in communities such as those to which I referred are as entitled to have the opportunity to be all that they can be as those in other communities are. That is why we will not impose a postcode lottery on cashback funding. Every youngster will have the opportunity to achieve their full potential.

---

Drug Dealers

4. To ask the Scottish Executive whether it considers that drug dealers are dealt with adequately by the justice system. (S4O-00371)

Maximum penalties up to life imprisonment are available for drug dealers on conviction. In addition, the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 allows us to deprive criminals at all levels of cash and assets gained through their criminal activity, including stripping drug dealers of their ill-gotten gains. Earlier this year, we made changes to the proceeds of crime legislation to make it easier for law enforcement agencies to recover criminal profits from all levels of criminals, including street-level drug dealers. We support all efforts by the police, the prosecutors, the courts and the law enforcement agencies to use the full power and force of the law to crack down on drug dealers and help make our communities safer.

Two families in Elderslie in my constituency were burned out of their homes for 16 months because a convicted criminal caused a fire by tapping into street electricity to cultivate cannabis in his flat. He recklessly endangered lives, including the life of his own son, who was in the flat at the time. The police said that they had a great deal of evidence, but the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service dropped a number of charges and the drug dealer was fined £500. Does the cabinet secretary think that that is acceptable? Will he order an inquiry? Will he meet my constituents?

Mr Henry, as a former justice minister, will be aware that I cannot comment on a specific case. However, if he writes to me I will have the matter investigated and, if needs be, I would be delighted to meet with him and his constituents. I can assure him that we will investigate the matter thoroughly, because we take such matters most seriously. I will do him and his constituents the courtesy of ensuring that there is a full and important investigation.

---

Criminal Cases (Evidence of Similar Fact)

5. To ask the Scottish Government what its position is on the use of evidence of similar fact in criminal cases. (S4O-00372)

The Scottish Law Commission is considering this issue as a part of its project on similar fact evidence and the Moorov doctrine. The commission expects to present a final report to ministers in early 2012, at which point we will closely consider any recommendations. This is the final part of the substantial reference that I made to the commission in November 2007. I have always been broadly supportive of reform in this area and referred the subject to the commission as an essential part of ensuring that our laws of evidence are fit for purpose.

The cabinet secretary will no doubt be aware of the murder trials of Peter Tobin and, more recently, Robert Black, in which evidence of their previous convictions for similar crimes was used to help to establish their guilt. In Scotland, however, those previous convictions would not have been known to the jury, despite their being directly related to both men’s cases.

In light of Lord Carloway’s report, which was published this morning and, in particular, the use of evidence of similar fact in both the Tobin and Black cases, does the cabinet secretary agree that there is, indeed, a gap in the law of Scotland and that that emphasises the pressing need for reform in this area?

I thank Mr Maxwell for raising again an issue that he has raised with me over a considerable period. I do not want to comment on individual cases or on different jurisdictions that have different systems. Suffice it to say that the matter was remitted to the Scottish Law Commission because it raises legitimate public concern. Mr Maxwell has articulated that concern very ably today, as have others.

The community in Scotland has cause for concern when it sees other jurisdictions deal with matters in a way that our jurisdiction is deprived of using. I will not pre-empt the Scottish Law Commission’s consideration of the issue; as I said in answer to the principal question, I remain firmly supportive that it should consider the matter, and I will do it the justice of awaiting its response. However, it is correct to raise the issue and I think that there is a great deal of public sympathy for the point that Mr Maxwell made.

---

Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007

6. To ask the Scottish Executive what evidence it has that the Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007 has been effective in terms of convictions and as a deterrent. (S4O-00373)

The Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007 was brought in by the United Kingdom Government. We support the act as we believe that it sends a robust message to organisations that failures to meet their duty of care to employees and the public will not be tolerated. To date no company has yet been convicted of corporate homicide in Scotland. The health and safety division—a specialist division—is currently considering a number of cases under corporate homicide.

I thank Mr Mulholland for his response and the information that he has provided today. Given that there is some concern about the effectiveness of the legislation, does he believe that the time is right perhaps to consider a review of its effectiveness and make proposals in the Scottish Parliament that we can debate and discuss to find a robust Scottish solution in relation to corporate homicide and corporate manslaughter?

First, I make the point that health and safety is reserved, of course. The act is new and still to be tested in the court. Where there is sufficient credible and reliable evidence to bring such a charge it will be brought. I should perhaps recognise the progress made in health and safety prosecutions in Scotland as a result of the establishment of the health and safety division at the Crown Office, which has been in existence for two years. That division is considering cases under corporate homicide. To date, it has dealt with 76 cases, which have all resulted in convictions, and it is considering approximately 100 cases involving potential health and safety breaches and prosecutions, including, potentially, cases of corporate homicide.

---

Prisoners (Looked-after Children)

7. To ask the Scottish Executive how many and what proportion of prisoners were previously looked-after children. (S4O-00374)

The Scottish Prison Service does not routinely receive information about whether prisoners had previously been looked-after children. However, the 2011 prisoner survey contained, for the first time, a question about prisoners who had previously been in care. Responses to the survey are being collated and the findings will be published in December 2011. I will provide the member with the information that prisoners gave to the SPS.

The cabinet secretary will be aware that the Education and Culture Committee is examining the educational attainment of looked-after children. Does he agree that investment in the education and care of looked-after children, particularly in their early years, will feed into the Government’s preventative agenda and will affect justice budgets in future years?

Absolutely. Although we do not have any raw data—even the data that we have, which I will happily share with the member and others, will be dependent on the information given by individual prisoners—I do not think that it is rocket science to recognise that a significant percentage of Scottish prisoners have been children in care, which is clearly disturbing.

We must address prisoners’ offending, but equally it is imperative, and not simply on a moral basis, that we ensure that those who have been dependent and deprived in many ways do not become involved in the criminal justice system. As Joan McAlpine suggests, there is a clear cost saving. If we can prevent these young people from spiralling into the criminal justice system, the criminal justice budget will be reduced significantly. I undertake that we will provide Joan McAlpine with the information. We recognise that there is something manifestly wrong and that not just the justice department but every department in Government and local government is required to try to tackle that problem, which starts with children being neglected, dependent or whatever else and results in their becoming part of the problems in the criminal justice system.

---

Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service (Discussions with Victims’ Families)

8. To ask the Scottish Executive whether the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service has any discussion with the families of victims prior to deciding not to proceed with a case. (S4O-00375)

In deciding not to proceed with a case, the procurator fiscal has regard to all the relevant factors of the case, including an assessment of the available evidence and the public interest. Although the final decision on whether to prosecute remains the responsibility of the procurator fiscal, it will be appropriate in many cases for the procurator fiscal to meet the victim or the nearest relatives of a victim to explain the reasons why criminal proceedings can not be commenced or why it is considered that criminal proceedings already commenced require to be discontinued.

The Lord Advocate may be aware of the case of Dean Geary, who tragically died outside Gartocharn on 6 February last year. A related case was due to be heard in Stirling sheriff court. It was dropped, but Dean’s parents found out about that only through the media. Given that a lack of information to the family has characterised that case, will the Lord Advocate be good enough to agree to meet me and Mr and Mrs Geary to discuss their experience?

Obviously, I am not fully aware of the circumstances of the case, but once I have looked into them, I would be happy to meet Jackie Baillie and the Geary family in due course .

---

Rural Affairs and the Environment

---

Animal Welfare

1. To ask the Scottish Executive what plans it has to protect and improve animal welfare. (S4O-00379)

The Scottish Government will consult on new legislation on the welfare of animals at slaughter that will implement European Union legislation early next year. Other issues under consideration include the use of wild animals in circuses, the regulation of equine establishments, the use of electronic shock collars for dog training and the tail docking of dogs.

I remind the minister that, over four years ago, he promised to introduce within two years secondary legislation that dealt with pet dealers, animal sanctuaries, travelling circuses, electric shock collars, pet vending and livery yards, and in the following two years secondary legislation that dealt with riding establishments, cat and dog boarding, dog breeding, the sale of dogs and performing animals. As far as I know, only pet dealer regulations have been introduced. When will the minister address the backlog of animal welfare issues?

I know that John Pentland was not an MSP in the previous session, but I well remember discussing those issues with members of the Rural Affairs and Environment Committee and other members time and again, and I gave a commitment to consult on a number of those issues, of course.

Legislation has not yet been introduced on electric shock collars, as the results of that consultation exercise were inconclusive and we are awaiting further research findings. There has been no ban on wild animals in travelling circuses, as there is insufficient evidence to demonstrate that their welfare is any worse than that of animals in other forms of captivity. We are concurrently considering other mechanisms for dealing with that issue and we retain an open mind.

There have been a number of consultations and there are a number of other issues in the pipeline. As the member correctly said, we have, of course, already taken action on a number of important animal welfare issues.

The Government recently made much of its success in negotiating with the European Commission for a more proportionate electronic identification cross-compliance system for Scottish sheep but, in response to a question from George Lyon MEP, the Commission confirmed that it is not in a position to approve a precise accuracy requirement. In essence, that is entirely the responsibility of the Scottish Government. Why has the cabinet secretary been misleading the industry about sheep electronic identification over the past few months?

If it is not the disallowance of agricultural funds in the European Union or sheep ID, Jim Hume and his colleague-in-arms George Lyon MEP mislead farmers throughout Scotland on a range of other issues. They scaremonger and put inaccurate information into the public domain to try to get publicity, which is a real pity, as I would much rather have a mature debate. In particular, I would like to debate the fact that sheep EID, which is a big challenge for the sheep sector in Scotland, was introduced and agreed to by the Labour-Lib Dem Administration a few years ago. I will continue to remind the industry in Scotland of that fact.

I know that many sheep farmers in Scotland welcome the concessions that have been achieved by the Scottish National Party Administration to try to ease the pain of the introduction of sheep EID. We will continue to work closely with the sector in Scotland, and we are taking a proportionate approach to compliance. As long as sheep farmers maintain their paperwork as required by the regulations, we will do our best to maintain that proportionality in applying the compliance regulations.

---

Landfill Sites (Life Extensions)

2. To ask the Scottish Executive whether life extensions for landfill sites are compatible with its zero waste policy. (S4O-00380)

The need for landfill capacity in Scotland will dramatically fall as landfill tax increases, bans on landfilling certain materials take effect and recycling rates increase. Last year, we published information on the landfill capacity that Scotland will need for the next 10 years. If we are to meet our zero waste targets, we will landfill around 80 per cent less than we currently do. That might mean that certain landfill sites might need to operate for longer to reach full capacity or create the desired landscape profile stipulated by the local authority prior to restoration.

Is the cabinet secretary aware of issues around the Stoneyhill landfill site in Peterhead, where the operator has applied for a life extension, and does he believe that such an application fits with the prospectus that he has just set out? Does he also acknowledge the possibility that applications for such extensions are being made because there has not been enough progress in introducing alternative forms of waste disposal?

I am sure that the member will acknowledge that the Government has made tremendous progress in taking Scotland down the road towards a zero waste society. Of course, many of the concerns that he has highlighted about landfill sites should be raised by the local authorities in his region—Aberdeenshire Council and Aberdeen City Council.

Unfortunately, as Scotland goes through the transformation phase from its current waste profile to zero waste, tens of millions of tonnes of waste will still be required to go to landfill, but at least we are travelling at a reasonable pace in the right direction. Indeed, there might be a positive aspect to such a move. The success of and progress with recycling might require licences for existing landfill sites to be extended because they will take longer to fill.

With regard to the zero waste strategy, the cabinet secretary will be aware that the 2010 householder survey showed a significant boost in household recycling rates. What timeframe does he envisage for providing all households in Scotland with separate recycling bins, which will help with the country’s recycling effort and assist households in recycling more waste?

Again, many local authorities are making good progress in collecting material for recycling—and, of course, it is up to those authorities to decide the roll-out of recycling, kerbside collections and so on. We are taking steps to expand this approach, given that our zero waste regulations will make it mandatory for local authorities to collect dry recyclables and food waste from households, wherever economically or environmentally practicable, from 2013. The Government is putting in place ambitious measures to support the progress that a number of Scottish councils have already made.

---

NFU Scotland

3. To ask the Scottish Executive when it last met representatives of the National Farmers Union Scotland. (S4O-00381)

I met the president and other representatives of NFU Scotland yesterday at AgriScot—and I am meeting the president and his team again today to discuss the proposals for reform of the common agricultural policy. I assure the member that that is just coincidence.

The president of NFU Scotland, Nigel Miller, recently called on the Scottish Government to address the mounting threat of cattle scab. Despite its eradication from the United Kingdom almost 50 years ago, the disease has been identified in more than 20 herds in Wales, England and Ireland, with imports from Europe thought to be responsible for its resurgence. How does the cabinet secretary respond to Mr Miller’s warning that if the disease is already in some of Scotland’s herds the Scottish Government needs to intervene with the necessary restrictions on movement to prevent its spread?

My response is to welcome very much the seriousness with which Nigel Miller and NFU Scotland have taken the issue, and I note that the organisation is doing a lot of good work on preventing animal disease in Scotland and promoting animal health.

I listened to Mr Miller’s speech yesterday at AgriScot—after all, I was sitting next to him—and discovered that tackling cattle scab was the new priority. Cases of the disease have been identified in Wales and the south of England and, following Nigel Miller’s remarks, the chief veterinary officer in Scotland has signalled that he is prepared to look at the issue again. There were discussions last year between the industry and the chief vet at the time, but we have to address a number of complex issues with regard to treatment processes and disease identification and we cannot commit too hastily to legislation or otherwise as we might not be able to back it up with enforcement or other measures. Nevertheless, we are taking the issue seriously.

Perhaps not this afternoon but doubtless at subsequent meetings with NFU Scotland, the cabinet secretary will discuss the report on disease surveillance produced by the group headed by John Kinnaird. As he will be aware, the report highlights the serious concerns expressed by the local farming industry and vets in my constituency at the rundown in recent years of the Thurso vet lab. Given the recommendation by Mr Kinnaird’s group of a reduction in disease surveillance centres and the creation of a single central laboratory, can the cabinet secretary assure me that Orkney’s interests will be safeguarded in such a model and will he commit to ensuring that any strategic management board that might be established includes representation from Orkney?

I know that the member has a long-standing interest in this and I hope that, like me, he welcomes John Kinnaird’s report on the future delivery of the veterinary surveillance service in Scotland. It will ensure that we have services appropriate for the 21st century. I am aware that John Kinnaird interviewed around 750 farmers and others across Scotland as part of that exercise. I have already indicated that we will set up the strategic management boards in the very near future.

As Liam McArthur rightly points out, there were other proposals and recommendations in the report about the number of labs that we should have in the future, so a great deal of work must be done in order to identify the way forward following those recommendations. There are, however, a number of good recommendations that we can proceed with in the meantime and I give a commitment to Liam McArthur and to the chamber that we will consult members and the Rural Affairs, Climate Change and Environment Committee as we take this very important debate forward.

---

Litter

4. To ask the Scottish Government what further action will be taken to reduce litter. (S4O-00382)

We fund Keep Scotland Beautiful, through zero waste Scotland, to support local authorities and others in tackling litter and raising public awareness of the problem. This includes the annual national spring clean, which has grown from 11,500 to 97,000 volunteers in just four years. Importantly, those are mainly young people. Carrier bags are another highly visible litter problem and we have given a commitment to consult shortly on proposals to introduce charging for carrier bags to cut the numbers used and discarded every year.

I thank the cabinet secretary for that response. Does he agree that the time has come for a national zero tolerance approach to litter to ensure that we address this continual problem?

Derek Mackay is right; litter continues to be a problem in Scotland. I know that when he was convener of his local authority, Derek Mackay led from the front, ensuring that there was a big campaign in that part of Scotland to tackle litter and I hope that that leadership is followed by other local authorities in Scotland. Anyone who drops litter is irresponsible and shows a complete lack of respect for the local environment and their own community. I urge all local authorities to use existing enforcement measures, such as fines—which some councils use and others do not—as a means of deterring littering in Scotland. I agree that we must raise the profile of the issue and do a lot more.

Will the minister join me in welcoming Highland Council’s recent initiative with the chewing gum action group to tackle gum litter and get chewers to bin their gum rather than spitting it on the pavement?

Yes. I will chew over the member’s contribution, which was very good and which raises a very important issue. Chewing gum is a big social nuisance for many communities in Scotland. We should remember that local authorities spend up to £100 million per year cleaning our streets and that one of the biggest menaces is chewing gum, which is a particular problem in our cities and larger towns. I join the member in welcoming Highland Council’s work and I hope that we can see progress in the coming years.

---

Common Agricultural Policy (Reform)

5. To ask the Scottish Government what discussions it has had with the United Kingdom Government regarding reform of the common agricultural policy. (S4O-00383)

The Scottish Government has regular interaction with the UK Government on the common agricultural policy. Most recently, I met the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, Caroline Spelman, and the Minister of State for Agriculture and Food, Jim Paice, ahead of the agriculture and fisheries council meeting in Brussels on Monday of this week.

I thank the cabinet secretary for his continuing interest, which I know very well and the farmers know very well. Farmers around me tell me of particular concerns about new entrants and the fact that Scotland, of course, has far more less favoured area than the rest of the UK. Those are particular concerns in negotiating with the UK, and therefore with the European Union. Does the cabinet secretary feel that any progress is being made on those issues?

Scotland is making progress on achieving some of our key principles in the new common agricultural policy. We all accept that there is a long way to go and much more to achieve. The member rightly highlights the need to ensure that Scotland’s voice is heard, because whereas 85 per cent of Scottish land is of less favoured area status, it is exactly the opposite south of the border, where it is around 15 per cent. Therefore, we have distinct needs that have to be recognised in the new common agricultural policy. One of those, of course, is the fact that, because Scotland has been stuck with a historic payments regime, anyone who entered farming over the past few years—indeed, most of the past decade—has been excluded from current supports. This Government is arguing, and I know that we have the support of the chamber, that those who are actively, genuinely farming but are currently excluded from support should receive support from day one of the new common agricultural policy regime.

In the on-going discussions that the minister has with the UK Government on CAP reform, will he do everything that he can to ensure that the change of support from the historical basis that he just mentioned to an area basis, which will come about as part of the reform, will not impact unduly on farmers in the south and west of Scotland, which it could do without considerable Government intervention?

The member raises a good point and highlights Scotland’s diverse agricultural profile. That is one reason why there is sometimes a contradiction in arguing for a simple common agricultural policy while asking for a policy that is tailored to Scotland’s regional needs. There can sometimes be a tension in that.

The proposals on the table allow for basic area payments and lots of other payments for different types of activity. Such a system would be complex, and there are lots of negotiations ahead on what it would finally look like, but it gives us the opportunity to ensure that those who are generally active in agriculture, whether in the dairy or another sector, can in some shape or form continue to receive a reasonable level of support, as they deserve.

---

Greenpark Energy (Licence to Extract Shale Gas)

6. To ask the Scottish Executive what criteria were used by the Scottish Environment Protection Agency in granting a licence to Greenpark Energy to begin hydraulic fracturing to extract shale gas. (S4O-00384)

SEPA’s specific obligations under the Water Environment (Controlled Activities) (Scotland) Regulations 2011 are to consider the risks to the water environment. Those are the only environmental factors considered by SEPA.

The minister may be aware of a report from the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research setting out concerns about ground and surface water contamination as a result of hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, and the recent Caudrilla Resources report on the impact of the process in Blackpool, which stated that it is “highly probable” that fracking triggered the seismic tremors there.

Those concerns and others have led some states in the United States to place a moratorium on fracking operations. Quebec has suspended fracking, New South Wales has introduced a moratorium, and—

Question, please.

France has banned fracking. Is the minister listening carefully to the evidence, and will his Government take action at the very least to support a moratorium on fracking in Scotland?

The member should be aware that consents cover the installation of equipment to monitor microseismic activity, so we are looking carefully at the implications of fracking in Scotland. Let me also say that the Greenpark Energy consent is for coal-bed methane rather than shale gas, as described in the question, although I accept that the same equally applies to that particular gas.

The place in question is in my constituency. What sort of consultation would the minister expect to take place with the community about the application of such techniques? All that happened in Canonbie was an application to drill boreholes to find out how much coal gas is there. With a technique as controversial as hydraulic fracturing, would the minister expect that there should be consultation with and information for the community? People will be quite frightened by some of the information that has come out in the past few days.

I accept that things have been said that could cause some difficulties in people’s minds. However, the scientific position is that the monitoring that is part of the controlled activity regulations—CAR—licence will ensure that we monitor the effects. The member’s constituents should be aware that we are tracking the issue with considerable care. The issue is dealt with through the planning system; as I said, SEPA’s responsibilities relate to the water environment.

---

Climate Change

7. To ask the Scottish Executive what it is doing to tackle climate change. (S4O-00385)

The Climate Change (Scotland) Act 2009 sets the framework and targets for tackling climate change in Scotland. The report on proposals and policies sets out how the statutory annual targets for reductions in greenhouse gases will be met to 2022. The report builds on the work that we have already undertaken to reduce emissions from various sectors including energy supply, homes and communities, business and the public sector, transport, rural land use and waste. A further report for the period 2023 to 2027 will be published next year.

The First Minister and others have long heralded the impact of the climate challenge fund in reducing carbon emissions by 700,000 tonnes, but in response to a freedom of information request the Scottish Government confirmed solely that community groups have reduced their CO2 emissions by 125,866 tonnes. Although those communities are to be congratulated on their reductions, has the balance of 570,000 tonnes been delivered and, if so, how was it done?

It would be astonishing if the balance had been delivered, because the 700,000 tonnes relates to the 461 projects that have been funded by the climate challenge fund, some of which have just started, while others continue to start. The proportion of projects that are complete accounts for 125,000 tonnes of saving. The member must not make the mistake of comparing entirely different questions and assuming that the answers will be the same.

---

Food Safety (European Regulations)

8. To ask the Scottish Government how it monitors compliance with European Union food safety regulations. (S4O-00386)

Compliance with food safety legislation by food businesses is monitored and enforced by local authorities, the Food Standards Agency and the Scottish Government. The Food Standards Agency is also responsible for auditing food law enforcement activities for which it is the competent authority.

Will the minister ensure that Scottish egg and pig producers will not be undermined by imports of illegally produced eggs and pig meat from non-compliant EU producers when the EU welfare of laying hens directive comes into force at the beginning of 2012 and the EU ban on sow stalls comes into force at the beginning of 2013?

My colleague the Cabinet Secretary for Rural Affairs and the Environment remains committed to protecting the interests of egg producers who have invested significant sums of capital to comply with the ban on conventional cages from January 2012. He and his officials are working closely with the UK Government, which is maintaining pressure on the European Commission and non-compliant member states to ensure that eggs from conventional cages are not freely traded in EU markets. It is in our interests to help the Commission to find a solution to the issue, particularly as the agreed approach is likely to set a precedent for the sow stall ban, which will come into force in January 2013. The Government recognises the need for a level playing field in the area and it will continue to work to achieve that.