Plenary, 18 Sep 2003

Meeting date: Thursday, September 18, 2003

Official Report 658KB 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 he intends to discuss. (S2F-202)

I will meet the Prime Minister again at the end of this month.

Will the First Minister confirm that communities in Scotland are facing cuts in front-line health care projects to pay for expensive private finance initiative services and developments?

No. I think that Mr Swinney will find that, in communities throughout Scotland, those public-private partnership projects—in Edinburgh, in Lanarkshire and in other parts of Scotland—are delivering high-quality health care that is significantly better than it was before. The facilities are significantly better used by the local population, which is putting a strain on the local health service, but that is a good thing. It is a challenge for the health service that is leading to better, more local health care in communities throughout Scotland.

I am rather surprised by the First Minister's answer. There were reports at the weekend of a £31 million deficit in numerous health budgets throughout the country—principally in the Lothian region and in Lanarkshire. A letter that was sent to my colleague, Fiona Hyslop, by the chairman of the medical staff committee of the Lothian University Hospitals NHS Trust states that, as a result of

"current financial pressures in Lothian",

options in the review of services

"include the cessation of emergency admissions at the Western General Hospital or St John's Hospital"

in Livingston. Surely, as a result of that unprecedented expression of opinion by consultants in Scotland, it is time to call a halt to the profiteering in the health service and to start putting patients first.

Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear. Here we go again. What Mr Swinney does not realise is that the construction of the new Edinburgh royal infirmary—which was delivered on time and almost exactly within budget, in contrast to most other public sector capital projects—is a significant achievement for Lothian NHS Board, which has put together a project that will deliver world-class health facilities as the hospital improves and develops, as the years go by. It is also at the centre of a significant development that will improve the whole biotech industry in Scotland and is linked into research and other key facilities.

It is those kinds of modern facilities that the Scottish nationalist party thinks that Scotland does not deserve and that it does not want Scotland to have. However, that is entirely wrong. What we need in Scotland are the tight contracts, delivered on time and within budget, that we get from the public-private partnerships. We must then ensure that those facilities are well used, along with the ever-increasing—week after week, month after month—numbers of nurses, doctors and other medical and professional staff in the health service, who are doing their best to cope with the increased demand within increased budgets. In that way, we will ensure that the people of Scotland have the health service that they deserve and need.

All that the First Minister says about the project being delivered on time and within budget is directly contradicted by the statement that was issued by the Lothian University Hospitals NHS Trust last Friday. It stated that the overspend included

"a number of significant exceptional items related to the move to, and start up of, services at the new Royal Infirmary".

I have no idea how the First Minister can say that the project is within budget. What the PFI hospitals are delivering is bed cuts, staff cuts, power cuts in some cases, and now service cuts. Does the First Minister not accept that it is time to give the health service the support that it requires and ensure that we put patients before profit?

We hear a lot of rubbish from the Scottish nationalist party, from time to time, about its being the party of enterprise. Since the recess, we have heard Mr Mather saying that the SNP is the party of enterprise and that it supports private companies in Scotland delivering higher profits and more jobs. Incidentally, that statement was made probably about a week before the SNP's annual conference—it is usually about this time of year that we get that sort of statement from the Scottish nationalist party. Now the SNP is attacking private companies and those who deliver contracts on time and within budget.

It is the health boards that set out the number of beds and staff in any 12-month period, and it is the health boards that manage the transitions. We should praise Lothian NHS Board and the staff at the hospital—every one of them—for managing the transition of accident and emergency services from the centre of Edinburgh to the new hospital with hardly a glitch. Those staff should be praised rather than criticised by the Scottish nationalist party. The new Edinburgh royal infirmary is a successful project; it will be opened formally next month, and we should be proud that it is on our doorstep.

Does the First Minister accept that there is widespread concern in Scotland that our health care services are being put together by companies that are profiteering? Does he accept that, in the long term, the people of Scotland are paying a massive price for the gamble that he has taken with our health care services?

No, I do not accept that. We have had this debate on many occasions, and I am sure that Mr Swinney will remain against the use of private contractors who build projects on time and within budget. If he takes that stance he will be judged, as he was earlier this year, by the people of Scotland.

Of course people in Scotland are concerned about their national health service: they care about it, just as we do. That is precisely why the budget is increasing by 50 per cent. That is precisely why the number of doctors and nurses and other professionals in the health service is systematically increasing, month after month, throughout Scotland. We are ensuring that people are treated, not only in hospital beds, but in their community by their general practitioner and local health care staff, because that is better for them and for the health service. That is why those changes are taking place. The health service is better—day after day and month after month—because of the changes that doctors and nurses themselves are making. We will back them, rather than simply slagging them off about how they handle the transition to a new hospital.

---

Cabinet (Meetings)

To ask the First Minister what issues will be discussed at the next meeting of the Scottish Executive's Cabinet. (S2F-201)

The next meeting of the Cabinet will discuss our progress in implementing the partnership agreement and our legislative programme.

I thank the First Minister for that answer. I trust that the Cabinet might discuss progress—or the lack of it—on justice issues. Two weeks ago, I asked the First Minister about the practice of ending automatic early release from our prisons. He said that that was

"a first priority of the sentencing commission."—[Official Report, 4 September 2003; c 1435.]

I then received a written answer from the Minister for Justice, which made it clear that it was in fact only one of many priorities, that it applies only to short-term prisoners, that no timetable or agenda has yet been finalised, and that in any case it was not her decision to make. I realise that the word "priority" is abused on a regular basis by the Scottish Executive, but will the First Minister tell me which statement is true: the one that he gave to Parliament two weeks ago or the answer from his Minister for Justice? Does he agree that not only it is time for more honesty in sentencing, but that a bit more honesty in answering and less resort to language that is downright misleading, if not plain false, would benefit the proceedings in the chamber a great deal?

The automatic release in sentences is a matter for the sentencing commission, and it will be a priority for that commission. That is the right way to handle the issue. In the course of the past seven days, Annabel Goldie has said:

"We have long been campaigning against the practice of automatic early release of prisoners."

It was the Tory Government that introduced and implemented automatic early release for prisoners in Scotland, and ensured that it happened throughout Scotland. It is the Liberal Democrat-Labour coalition that is referring the matter to a sentencing commission, with a clear remit to review it and get it changed. However, it should be changed sensibly, to ensure that the numbers in our prisons do not escalate and that, in the longer term, we have the right sentences for the right people and that those sentences mean more than they do today.

I said that the answer two weeks ago was downright misleading, if not plain false, and the same applies to the answer that we have just heard. It is a fact that the present Labour Government rushed to repeal Conservative legislation that ended the early release of prisoners. That is the plain, unvarnished fact of the matter. There is no point in the First Minister's trying to pretend otherwise.

The First Minister might care to reflect on the fact that figures issued last week showed that the number of long-term prisoners released early who went on to commit further crimes has risen by 430 per cent since 1997. One of those long-term prisoners was guilty of a sickening rape. I ask the First Minister how many more victims he is prepared to tolerate before he acts to protect the public by ensuring that such criminals remain behind bars and actually serve the sentences that they are given by the courts.

Let us first of all have a little bit of honesty in the chamber. Mr McLetchie talks about the clarity required of statements on sentencing policy. I suspected that he might mention the subject today, so I took the opportunity to check what the Scottish Conservative manifesto for the elections in May said on the matter. In two sentences that follow immediately one after the other in that manifesto, we find the statement that the Conservatives would

"restore honesty in sentencing to ensure that criminals serve the sentences they are given",

implying, perhaps, that all criminals would serve their full sentence from beginning to end without any remission or parole. However, the second sentence states:

"Any remission should be strictly limited and would have to be earned and not granted automatically."

If there was ever a piece of confused policy thinking, there it is. Anybody who believes that criminals should serve their full sentence but also get remission must be pretty confused from start to finish. It was a Conservative Government that introduced early release. Perhaps Mr McLetchie will tell us which policy he supports—remission or serving the full sentence.

I will tell him what I support. I do not support the automatic release of prisoners halfway through their sentence where their sentence is less than four years, but I believe strongly that it should not be politicians with slogans and headlines who change that policy just to appeal to Mr McLetchie's, or any other, basic instincts. That is why we must have a sentencing commission in Scotland, and that sentencing commission, judicially led, will give us a proper way to deal with the matter, to change things and to give us a proper system. In a civilised society, we should have a proper system of parole and remission that ensures not only that people have the option of leaving prison before the end of their sentence, but also that they have to earn that right. That is the right way to go ahead and that is exactly what we will be doing.

I am sure that the First Minister will join me in welcoming to the chamber today the children from Dunbog Primary School, which happens to be the school that my mother went to.

I am sure that the First Minister will also recognise the vital importance to Scotland's transport system of the improvements to and redevelopment of Waverley station to ensure that it has the capacity to deal not only with the Scottish network, but with cross-border services. Can he assure me that the Scottish Executive will continue to put pressure on the Strategic Rail Authority to meet its obligations in financing that vital project?

The redevelopment of Waverley station is critical for the many other improvements that we are committed to across Scotland. Our railway plans for Scotland include an ambitious programme to ensure not only that we have speedier trains on key routes, but that we have important new routes, such as that from Stirling to Dunfermline. Our budget plans will ensure that we have the new trains that we are committed to providing on those routes. If all those improvements are to be achieved in the best possible way, Waverley station must be redeveloped. We are committed to that redevelopment and are still involved in discussions with the Strategic Rail Authority to ensure that the plans meet the purpose. We would not go ahead with any plans that would not deliver the minimum requirement of ensuring that Waverley station can help to service the rest of the rail network in Scotland.

What is the Scottish Executive's position on the impact on the communities of Motherwell and Wishaw of the recent news regarding Motherwell Football Club's removal from administration?

That is slightly better news than the fact that James McFadden is no longer playing for Motherwell and has gone down south, as so many others have before him. Yesterday's announcement is good news, not just for Scottish football and Motherwell Football Club, but for the local community and the many jobs around the club that will be guaranteed by its continuing existence. We all welcome that news. We support local clubs in Scotland, but we also hope that in future clubs will be able to afford to hang on to their main young stars.

---

Secretary of State for Scotland (Meetings)

To ask the First Minister when he will next meet the Secretary of State for Scotland and what issues he intends to raise. (S2F-208)

The Secretary of State for Scotland and I talk regularly and plan to meet again later this month.

I thank the First Minister for his reply. When he meets the Secretary of State for Scotland, I wonder whether he could raise the matter of terrestrial trunked radio—TETRA—communications masts, 700 of which are being installed in communities throughout Scotland. The First Minister will be aware that the Home Office is going ahead with the new communications technology for emergency services despite the fact that Sir William Stewart's inquiry into mobile communications specifically warned against systems such as TETRA that use the same frequency as the human brain. Will the First Minister ask Her Majesty's Government for a moratorium on the roll-out of TETRA until the dangers to public health can be properly investigated by scientists who are independent of Government? If the First Minister will not do that, what action is he prepared to take?

As we have said on a number of previous occasions in the chamber and elsewhere, we continue to monitor the development in Scotland of a variety of radio masts. Clearly, individual planning applications must be determined by a local authority within the guidance that we set out. However, the research to date does not show the level of concern that Mr Harper expresses. I recognise that his concerns about the matter are genuine and I am sure that we will be able to keep him informed of any developments.

The First Minister mentioned the research to date. He may not see a way forward through central Government, but the Executive has powers over all planning applications in Scotland. Will the Executive consider using those powers to call in applications for TETRA masts until any threats to public health can be assessed through the further research that we believe needs to be undertaken?

No, we will not be doing that. We will continue to monitor the local concerns that are clearly being expressed in some parts of Scotland. However, it is also important that we deal with the research and the facts as we have them, which currently do not justify the action that Mr Harper outlined.

---

Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service

To ask the First Minister whether the Scottish Executive is satisfied with the progress of Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service reform. (S2F-196)

I am very pleased with the progress of reform in the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service. A substantial programme of structural, managerial and cultural reform has been put in place, which includes restructuring to match police force boundaries; the expansion of the victim information and advice service; the introduction of new information technology and other management systems; and strengthened corporate support for front-line service delivery. That is backed up by increased funding and more permanent staff.

I thank the First Minister for his response. I think that members are aware of the considerable efforts that have gone into modernising the court system. In his speech this week to an Apex conference in Edinburgh, the First Minister rightly acknowledged the importance of having an independent legal system and judiciary as a cornerstone of our democracy. Equally, he acknowledged the perception of a public lack of confidence in the system, whether that is caused by lack of enforcement, delays in court sentencing or little difference in levels of reoffending. Does the First Minister believe that there is a need for a better balance? If so, should the approach be radical reform or measured improvement?

There may be a place for both. I think that the reforms in the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service are an example of how it is possible to deliver real success, not only by investing in the service, but ensuring that the service is reorganised and that its culture changes to make the service much more effective. That is exactly the sort of change that we should be hoping to see in our court service and other parts of our justice system. We need to invest, but we also need to reform. That is also true in the court system.

I reiterate what I said on Tuesday night about judges and sentencing. An independent judiciary is an absolute cornerstone of our democracy. However, at the same time, our judges and Government need to take account of what is happening in society and our decisions need to reflect the society as we find it and ordinary people's concerns about their quality of life.

That is why we have established a sentencing commission. It is judicially led. It is not going to impose knee-jerk changes in sentencing practices across Scotland. However, I hope, and genuinely expect, that the commission will lead to a greater consistency in sentencing. I am sure that it will also lead to both custodial sentences and community sentences that are more appropriate for the crimes committed and more effective in stopping reoffending.

---

Cannabis

To ask the First Minister whether there are any plans to issue operational guidance similar to that recently issued by Her Majesty's Government to police forces in England and Wales in respect of the possession of cannabis resin. (S2F-206)

The guidance on the policing of cannabis possession in England and Wales was issued by the Association of Chief Police Officers, not Her Majesty's Government.

There are no plans to issue new guidance to Scottish police forces, although we will continue to keep this under review with the Association of Chief Police Officers for Scotland.

I thank the First Minister for that response, which I found unexpectedly comforting.

On Tuesday evening, the First Minister did not hesitate to ripple his political pectorals before elements of the criminal justice system—I found it as unprepossessing as most people. Is he prepared to be similarly muscular with reference to the prosecution of persons in possession of cannabis and does he consider that existing prosecution guidelines in that respect are patently inadequate?

I will try to resist the temptation.

Don't go there.

Ms Curran is absolutely right—others who have stood where I am have faltered when trying to respond to Miss Goldie's remarks.

I do not believe that current prosecution guidelines are inadequate. In Scotland, we have the balance right for the time being, although we need to keep the matter under review. We need to ensure that the agencies in Scotland and the rest of the UK that work together to tackle drugs in our communities continue to be able to do that with increasing success in terms of seizures, convictions and—eventually—a reduction in demand.

Since 70 per cent of the time that the police spend pursuing drug offences is spent chasing people who use cannabis, does the First Minister agree that that is a colossal waste of police time, which would be better spent chasing real criminals?

Police forces have an absolute duty to implement the law and pursue those who break it.

I believe strongly that a reasonable examination of the figures relating to our police forces, the Scottish Drug Enforcement Agency, the National Criminal Intelligence Service, HM Customs and Excise and other agencies shows that the amount of time that is being spent on tackling serious drugs, reducing the supply and convicting those who sell them—not legalising those drugs, as Mr Fox's party wants—is time that is very well spent.

The SDEA is highlighted as a success not only in Scotland; it is currently being used in the UK and elsewhere in the world as an example of the way in which agencies can work together to target the criminals at the top of the tree. In due course, I hope that that approach will reduce the supply of hard drugs in every community in Scotland.

---

Care Homes

To ask the First Minister what action the Scottish Executive is taking to promote transparency in respect of costs and standards of care homes across Scotland. (S2F-205)

The Scottish Executive, supported by the Scottish Parliament, has delivered free personal care for people aged 65 and over and free nursing care for people of all ages in care homes.

In 2002, we established the care commission to regulate care providers in line with the requirements of the Regulation of Care (Scotland) Act 2001. Providers are required to take account of national care standards, which are driving up the quality of care provided in homes.

We have also honoured our commitment to meet the fees recommended by the national review group on care home fees. However, the cost of providing care remains, correctly, a contractual matter for individual providers.

I am sure that the First Minister will agree that it is important that a minimum standard of care is delivered in care homes across Scotland. However, Scotland—particularly the Highlands—has an aging population and there is a growing demand for places in care homes. How does the Scottish Executive intend to deliver acceptable standards of service while planning to meet future demand?

At the same time as we maintain our commitment to deliver free personal and nursing care, we need to ensure that we deliver on our commitment to increase the number of places in care homes to support local authority and other sector provision. We must also ensure that the standards that are set by the care commission are met consistently across Scotland. There will always be variations, but the minimum standard must be clear and must be met by care homes in the 21st century. In the years to come, I hope that we will see not only the successful implementation of the policy of free personal and nursing care, but consistent standards and an increased number of places for people for whom being in their own homes would be inappropriate. We would all agree, however, that for many elderly citizens, services and care in their own home are often preferable to care in a care home.

Is the First Minister concerned that, because of financial problems, the Church of Scotland is closing a care home in my constituency at the same time as Dundee City Council is telling me that it has a shortfall of around 30 to 40 places for elderly people? Does that make any sense to him? If not, what will he do about it?

I would not want to interfere in the decisions of the Church of Scotland. That would be entirely inappropriate. However, it is appropriate that the Church of Scotland and other organisations have to apply the same standards in their care homes as are expected in care homes in other sectors. When the Church of Scotland, or any other voluntary provider of care homes operates in a local authority area, I would hope that the organisation would discuss with the local authority the best use of its facility and whether it had a future. If the local authority believed that care home places were required, I am sure that it would take the necessary action.

I have listened carefully to the First Minister's responses. What are his views on the principle of paying equal rates to all care home operators that provide identical services to an equal standard?

What is appropriate is to discuss how to establish care home fee recommendations. That discussion should take place, decisions and recommendations should be made and we should implement those recommendations to the letter. That is exactly what happened when we implemented the recommendations of the national review group. The care home fees that are now being paid throughout Scotland were agreed with providers from all sectors. I hope that the implementation of the fee strategy will lead to fewer of the year-by-year crises than we have seen in recent years.

Will the First Minister confirm that the legislation that has been passed by this Parliament makes it clear that, once an individual has been assessed by the local authority as needing free personal care, that individual is entitled to free personal care from the local authority from the date of assessment?

Yes, I will confirm that. No local authority in Scotland should be in any doubt about the policy. This Parliament and our Government have made that absolutely clear. We not only have a policy of free personal and nursing care for citizens in Scotland, we have financed it. That is what we will deliver.

What the First Minister says about keeping older people in their homes is commendable. However, in April a constituent of mine received medical advice and support to have a shower installed in her home, only to be told that there would be no money for aids and adaptations in the foreseeable future. That situation is reflected throughout Scotland. What are the First Minister and his Labour and Liberal Government doing to reduce the queue for aids and adaptations?

It is difficult to answer Christine Grahame's point as she does not identify the local authority that made that recommendation. She may want to write to the local authority that made the decision and gave her that response. If she takes the matter up with the local authority, we may see some action.

Does the First Minister agree that there are too few places in care homes throughout the country? Does he agree that the community business model—which, as a Co-operative Party member, I am delighted to see in the partnership agreement—may provide opportunities for the development of more places in communities where there is a significant shortage?

I certainly do not believe that all care home places should be provided by local authorities. As I said earlier, there should be a proper balance between care home places and care that is provided in the homes of elderly citizens or their families, whichever is appropriate.

I believe that not only the private sector, but the voluntary sector and other sectors have a strong role in delivering those places. Through that mix of provision we will not only deliver the requisite number of places, but ensure that there is a competitive edge, so that standards in all sectors come up to scratch. The Parliament established the care commission to maintain those standards and I believe that it is doing a very good job.

Meeting suspended until 14:30.

On resuming—

Before we begin question time today, I ask members to welcome in our usual warm Scottish way the speaker of the Estonian Parliament, Ene Ergma, who is with us today in the gallery. [Applause.]