Plenary, 19 Mar 2009

Meeting date: Thursday, March 19, 2009

Official Report 750KB pdf

---

Question Time

---

SCOTTISH EXECUTIVE

---

General Questions

---

Fishing Quotas and Licences

To ask the Scottish Executive whether it will seek a joint legal opinion with the United Kingdom Government on the Scottish Government's fishing quota and licensing proposals. (S3O-6276)

Our proposals have been warmly welcomed by the fishing industry, and are designed to modernise fishing vessel licensing and quota management to help safeguard the future of our fishing communities. Of course, we firmly believe that our proposals are within the competence of this Parliament.

We have worked very closely with the fishing industry to shape our proposals. The final round of consultation is under way. We will continue to work with the industry and, indeed, the UK Government to take forward our policies. We will continue to discuss with them any concerns that they may have.

I have no doubt that the people of Scotland wish our fishing communities to benefit from the rich fishing grounds that are on our own doorstep and future generations of active fishermen to have similar opportunities to those that are available to the current generation. That is one of the aims of our proposals.

I am sure that the fishing industry will find that all very interesting, but the fact is that the Scottish Fishermen's Federation has made it very clear that it cannot address the important substance of the cabinet secretary's fishing quota and licensing proposals because of the English Government's statement that the proposals are illegal.

Whether that statement is right or wrong, the important matter for Scottish fishermen is their ability to engage in the discussion on these important proposals. What steps is the cabinet secretary taking—with his opposite number—to enable Scottish fishermen and the Scottish Fishermen's Federation to discuss the proposals in the knowledge that they are legal and not contested?

Mr Finnie brings a great deal of knowledge and experience to the issue. I understand that discussions on the subject began when he was in office—indeed, they began as far back as 2004. That illustrates why the time has come for the Scottish Government to act within our powers to address this important issue. We have to do that, given the lack of progress under previous joint agreements.

I reiterate what I said at the outset: we will continue to engage with the Scottish Fishermen's Federation and other organisations in Scotland, most of which widely support the vast majority of our proposals. Indeed, given that the proposals are about protecting the viability of our fishing communities, they have been warmly welcomed by those communities in particular.

In the absence of a UK policy on licensing and quota management, we have taken the view that we need to modernise the current arrangements, under our own powers. We firmly believe that the actions that we are taking are within the competence of the Scottish Parliament. We will continue to engage with fishing organisations to make that point clear.

What legal advice did the cabinet secretary seek on the proposals? Will he publish that legal advice in its entirety?

As the member will be aware, when her party was in government, it never published its legal advice on such issues. Of course, in keeping with convention, that will always be the case with any Scottish Government.

Given that the member represents fishing communities, I will be very surprised if she does not support the proposals that have been put forward, which are within the powers of the Parliament, to protect the long-term future of our fishing communities in Scotland.

Many people believe that we need to modernise the licensing arrangements for fishing vessels and quota management in Scotland so that we can put in place safeguards. Many people believe that it is not right that the current generation of fishermen can sell their quota to the highest bidder—should they choose to do so—and that no safeguard is in place to ensure that the benefit is retained in Scotland. As part of the current consultation process, the industry has given a warm welcome to the wide range of proposals.

Does the cabinet secretary agree that it would be a disaster if the UK Government were to go down the road of effectively privatising fishing quotas—a policy that is apparently supported by Brussels? If that were to happen, fishing quotas could be sold to the highest bidder—most likely a foreign-owned company. Does he share my anger that Labour members who represent fishing communities are supporting the attempts of the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs to prevent the Scottish ministers from putting in place safeguards to ensure the long-term future of our traditional fishing communities?

I am perplexed by the UK Government's stance on what we consider to be a very worthwhile policy intention. I am even more perplexed by the fact that Labour members, who at times come across as DEFRA's spokespeople, tend to oppose everything that the Scottish National Party Government does on fishing policy. That is unfortunate.

The member may be aware of the UK Government's unilateral action on under-10 licences south of the border, as a result of which the fleet south of the border is re-registering its licences in Wales. Is any further evidence needed that the current regime is not working for Scotland or for England? The example shows why the Scottish Government is right to modernise the policy and to make progress.

I accept that any move in the direction of individual transferable quotas at European Union-level has the potential to be hugely damaging and that it requires to be resisted. However, does the cabinet secretary accept that legal uncertainty over aspects of his quota management proposals is not welcome by anyone in the industry? Like Ross Finnie, I urge him to lift that uncertainty as a matter of urgency and to work with not only the industry but the UK Government on the matter.

I am keen to lift any uncertainty and to work with the UK Government towards that end, but there is only so much that the Scottish Government can do when the UK Government will not engage with our policy intentions for north of the border.

As I indicated to the member's party colleague in my earlier answer, the discussions have been going on since 2004. It is now 2009. The UK Government's latest position is that it will sit down and talk to us—but over the next few years. How long does it take to reach a sensible policy conclusion? We have voluntary joint arrangements among the devolved Administrations and the UK Government; we believe that the time has come to move forward to safeguard the future of Scotland's fishing communities.

I hope that the member, as a representative of a fishing community, will support the SNP Government's policy intentions and that we can get some cross-party support for them, rather than having party-political point scoring, which would be to the detriment of fishing communities.

---

Tourism (Ayrshire)

To ask the Scottish Government what steps it is taking to attract tourism business to Ayrshire and in particular southern Ayrshire. (S3O-6257)

As with all areas of Scotland, Ayrshire is marketed by VisitScotland, based on its considerable strengths and its ability to deliver what visitors are looking for on their visit to Scotland. VisitScotland uses a range of channels including websites, direct mail and public relations to reach potential visitors throughout Scotland and the United Kingdom and in international markets.

In addition, Scottish Enterprise is helping tourism businesses with a package of support including capital investment, advice and mentoring, customer feedback workshops and the development of tourism intelligence.

As the minister will know, I believe that key tourism destination status could bring a significant boost to the tourism sector in Ayrshire. I know from our previous discussions that he is keen to explore means to achieve that end. What further consideration has the Government given to the matter? What progress has been made towards awarding Ayrshire key tourism destination status? Is he able to say how soon that status might be granted so that Ayrshire can take full advantage of it?

I recognise the desire to promote individual elements of Scotland with local knowledge and local passion. We are entering a new, industry-led, collaborative era. The Scottish Tourism Forum and the tourism framework for change are coming together to take a lead in offering scope for other organisations—including VisitScotland, Scottish Enterprise, Highlands and Islands Enterprise, EventScotland, local councils and the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities—to evolve and collaborate more closely.

South Ayrshire Council is very much on the front foot in that regard, and we recognise its great brand, its association with Burns and its huge portfolio of attractions. We had meetings with Councillor Hugh Hunter in January, and I am prepared to work directly with him further. I think that, together, we can allow destinations to evolve properly, while focusing on the main destinations at the same time. We are not precluding further development, and we will work with Councillor Hunter—and with John Scott—to ensure that that development happens.

The minister might be aware that the new Burns monument centre opened in Kilmarnock on Monday. It adds significantly to the Burns attractions throughout Ayrshire and provides state-of-the-art family history and local history research facilities. Does he agree that that type of facility can play a vital part in attracting tourists to Ayrshire? Will he ensure that the Scottish Government and its agencies play a full part in developing the potential of the new centre?

I have visited the new Burns monument centre, and it is fabulous. I had my photograph taken there, and it is a photograph that I will cherish. We can contact everybody in Scotland and everyone with a connection with Scotland about it—people will want to go there and have their photographs taken, too. It is a must-visit site that has huge potential for the homecoming and real pulling power. I understand that the First Minister will open it in May.

I certainly agree that it would be excellent if people were to visit any part of Ayrshire. Does the minister agree that one possibility for increasing tourism potential in South Ayrshire lies in walking and outdoor activities? In that context, does he agree that it is rather bizarre that Tory-led South Ayrshire Council has decided to close the majority of public conveniences in the locations throughout South Ayrshire to which walkers are attracted?

The issue is about bringing people together. I look forward to going down to Girvan to join the member and the community there in April. Equally, I am looking forward to further engagements on a tourism and pan-Ayrshire agenda with a view to maximising the assets that are Ayrshire and giving the area every chance to attract people for all purposes.

---

Legal Aid Rules (Mortgage Borrowers)

To ask the Scottish Executive whether it will re-examine the operation of legal aid rules that in practice mean that many mortgage borrowers facing repossession are not eligible for assistance or, where they are eligible, that many lawyers will not assist because they are required to recover fees from clients if successful. (S3O-6290)

The Scottish Legal Aid Board helps hundreds of people to defend repossession actions every year, and the Government is making changes to legal aid rules that will benefit many mortgage borrowers facing repossession, along with thousands of others.

Regulations to increase the financial eligibility limits for civil legal aid were approved by the Justice Committee earlier this week. That increase means that almost 1 million more Scots will be able to receive free or subsidised legal advice. About three quarters of the population should come within the scope of the scheme from this April.

The Government is also taking steps to secure legal assistance where there might be gaps in private sector provision. We have invested an additional £3 million over the next two years to strengthen the provision of legal advice services, particularly for people facing difficulties as a result of the economic downturn. The Legal Aid Board will use that funding, in the first instance, to employ a small number of solicitors to work in areas where the level of provision is currently low.

I acknowledge that the area has been of wide concern to the Government. However, given the scale of the challenge when it comes to repossessions, and given that the burden of many such cases falls disproportionately on Scotland's small number of law centres—it was Paisley Law Centre that drew the matter to my attention—will the cabinet secretary undertake to meet representatives of Scotland's law centres as a matter of urgency to discuss with them how we can ensure that the best possible support is available to families facing the burden and strain of repossession?

As a lawyer of 20 years' standing, I had a great deal of involvement with law centres: I was an agent for them, and I sat on a variety of law centre boards. Therefore, I have a great deal of time and respect for them, although Paisley Law Centre is not one that I know, as it started to operate more recently than my periods of practice.

The Government is happy to engage with all parties, and the Legal Aid Board is involved in discussions. We recognise that we have to tackle the situation and that we have to provide facilities where the private sector cannot. We also have to ensure that in-court advice—which sometimes comes from people who are not legally qualified—is provided. If representatives of the law centres wish to meet me, they should write in the normal manner. I would be more than happy to have discussions with them—many of them will be former practising colleagues of mine.

---

Green Behaviour

To ask the Scottish Executive, in the light of the findings of the Scottish environmental attitudes and behaviours survey 2008 that the main barriers to green behaviour are cost, convenience, a lack of alternative options and practical considerations, how it plans to tackle these barriers. (S3O-6303)

We understand the importance of people's everyday actions for the environment, and we will use the SEABS findings to help inform our work to encourage greener behaviours through education, media campaigns and targeted actions to make greener choices easier in areas such as travel, recycling and energy use in the home.

Attitudinal change is indeed important. However, what was the rationale for not including mini wind turbines in the recently issued regulations? When will the minister answer the question whether the Government will include them?

I was rather hoping for a supplementary about sock darning, and I am sorry that I did not get that.

The recent wind turbine regulations are not a matter for me. Perhaps the member would care to take up the issue directly with the department concerned, rather than bringing it in on the back of a question about the survey. The results of the survey were published only last week, and we hope that they will give a number of departments useful information so that we can begin to address many of the issues that the survey threw up.

---

Clyde Tunnel (Maintenance)

To ask the Scottish Executive what plans it has to contribute towards the maintenance of the Clyde tunnel in Glasgow. (S3O-6319)

I have no plans to contribute to the on-going maintenance of the Clyde tunnel. The tunnel is part of the local road network. Therefore, responsibility for its management and maintenance rests with Glasgow City Council.

Surely the minister must recognise that the Clyde tunnel is an integral part of the road network, not only for Glasgow but for the west of Scotland, and that Glasgow City Council bears the £700,000 operational cost entirely on its own and also provided the £12 million that was recently needed to protect the tunnel from fire and to meet fire regulations.

Does the minister agree that it is about time that Glasgow City Council got some assistance through the creation of a distinct funding mechanism, such as exists for the Tay and Forth bridges? It is not appropriate to treat the Clyde tunnel like any other road. Surely he could at least consider contributing to the costs of the further modernisation that the Clyde tunnel needs, which includes the installation of important emergency communications systems and replacement of the lighting system, at a cost of £5 million.

Glasgow City Council received a 3.4 per cent increase in its funding in the current year and a 4.7 per cent increase in the next year. Those are very substantial increases.

The Clyde tunnel is, of course, part of the road infrastructure in Glasgow, and we are making substantial investments in road infrastructure in Glasgow. At long last, the M74 is progressing—that will affect the traffic flows in Glasgow. I am always happy to discuss matters with the council if it feels that that is appropriate.

---

Scottish Fair Trade Forum

To ask the Scottish Executive whether it will renew funding to the Scottish Fair Trade Forum to support the small grants scheme. (S3O-6316)

The Scottish Government has committed funding from its international development fund to the Scottish Fair Trade Forum until 31 March 2010. Any requests for future funding will be considered in discussion with the forum.

Does the minister agree that the fair trade movement has thrived and expanded in recent years through the work of many individuals and small groups in local communities? Does he further agree that it is therefore vital, if we are to achieve fair trade status as a country, that we continue to build on the work of that grass-roots movement through the provision of easily accessible small sums?

I am happy to agree with the member on that matter.

Leadership on the issue has come from a range of individuals who have been committed to co-ordinated actions that have been brought together within their own communities. I pay tribute to my predecessor, Linda Fabiani, who had a very strong commitment to this area of activity and was keen to ensure that as many organisations as possible participated.

The Scottish Government provides funding of £60,000 a year to the Scottish Fair Trade Forum. Additional funding, of £40,000 in 2007-08 and £20,000 in 2008-09, has been awarded. That money has gone, in great part, towards helping the grass-roots movement. All of us want that work to continue.

---

Postbus Services

To ask the Scottish Executive whether it will make representations to the Royal Mail regarding its decision to withdraw five postbus services from the north and west Highlands. (S3O-6288)

At a recent meeting with Royal Mail Group, the Minister for Enterprise, Energy and Tourism took the opportunity to express the Scottish Government's concerns about the withdrawal of the Highland postbus services. The provision of local bus services is, of course, a matter for commercial bus operators and local authorities. However, the Scottish Government would urge partners to work together to ensure that those vital services continue.

I put on the record my gratitude to Jim Mather for saying what he said to the Royal Mail.

Will the Minister for Transport, Infrastructure and Climate Change instruct his officials to point out to the Royal Mail the absolute undesirability of discontinuing those services and the potential, in respect of tourism, of not only retaining the services but building on them in the future, for tourists and for our pensioners, who desperately need the postbus so that they can access vital services?

I associate myself with Mr Stone's remarks and concur with them.

The whole future of Royal Mail is being debated. I note that 130 Labour members of the United Kingdom Parliament have indicated their opposition to the UK Government's plans. In that context, I hope that the UK Government takes a much more supportive attitude to the Royal Mail that enables it to support, through postbus services and otherwise, the needs of rural and urban Scotland.

I ask Peter Peacock to be brief.

Can the minister confirm that the Scottish Government has powers under transport policies to offer support to the Post Office's network of postbuses? Is he considering doing that in this instance?

I ask the minister to be equally brief, if possible.

We are supporting local authorities by appointing someone from the Scottish Government to work directly with them on bus services. I hope that that will be one means by which we have greater and more effective engagement with local authorities and bus service providers such as the Royal Mail.