SCOTTISH EXECUTIVE
Finance and Sustainable Growth
Before we come to questions, I echo what the Presiding Officer said earlier: in order to get as many people in as possible, we would prefer short and succinct questions, and answers to match.
Lloyds Banking Group (Glasgow Job Losses)
To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on the proposed job losses in the Lloyds Banking Group and in particular the impact on Glasgow. (S3O-8491)
On 10 November, Lloyds Banking Group announced a number of changes, which will affect around 5,000 roles in the group. I understand that they will mean a net reduction of around 2,600 permanent jobs across the United Kingdom by the end of 2010. The company has not announced a breakdown of the locations of the affected jobs.
I thank the cabinet secretary for that concise answer.
The focus of the Scottish Investment Bank is to assist the process of employment creation in Scotland, and it will do that through the various initiatives in which it is involved.
Great concern has been expressed about the role of the Scottish Investment Bank. It is a collection of previously existing money that has been repackaged, and commentators and others have judged its impact to be disappointing. What further steps can the cabinet secretary take in that regard?
I agree with Mr Kerr. It is important that we acknowledge the support that has been given to institutions in Scotland—I make no secret of that. Equally, support has been given to institutions in the rest of the UK and around the world.
The Scottish Investment Bank was unveiled with much fanfare in April this year. When will it start to lend money?
The Scottish Investment Bank is an initiative that gathers together a number of ways in which we can invest in supporting employment creation in Scotland. The concept is designed to ensure that we have a process and pattern of investment that will support employment. As I said in reply to Andy Kerr, the Government will, of course, report fully to Parliament on the work of the Scottish Investment Bank.
Scottish Futures Trust
To ask the Scottish Executive when the Scottish Futures Trust will be able to demonstrate the level of savings it has achieved in procurement costs. (S3O-8458)
The Scottish Futures Trust's corporate plan for 2009 to 2014 will set out how the SFT will maximise value for money for the taxpayer from public infrastructure investment. The SFT's annual reports and accounts for 2009-10 will give details of the savings and benefits being delivered.
The Cabinet Secretary for Education and Lifelong Learning said in a debate on the school buildings programme:
I certainly can confirm to Elizabeth Smith that from the origins of the SFT—this was an implicit part of the business case around the SFT—savings of 3 per cent were envisaged. If savings in excess of 3 per cent can be achieved, nobody will be happier about that than me. Certainly, the focus of SFT is to maximise value for money in all projects, which will be the focus of its work.
The cabinet secretary has condemned public-private partnership/private finance initiative projects on a number of occasions. Indeed, the First Minister did so again today. Can the cabinet secretary therefore explain why the SFT is tendering for a PPP/PFI project called hub company for the reprovision of Gullane surgery and day centre, Blackburn partnership centre, Firrhill partnership centre and Muirhouse joint health and social care centre? The Cabinet Secretary for Health and Wellbeing answered a written question from me on Monday, indicating that the private sector will have a 60 per cent equity shareholding that can gain profit from those projects. What is the benefit for the PPP/PFI of the hub co projects that the cabinet secretary is taking forward?
As Mr Purvis will know, we inherited the hub co proposal from the previous Administration, and we have taken it forward, like a host of other projects, to ensure that the infrastructure that was committed to is delivered. That is exactly the approach that we have taken to hub co and that is why it is part of SFT's work programme.
Car and Van Ownership (Glasgow)
To ask the Scottish Executive what percentage of people in Glasgow owns one car or van only. (S3O-8502)
The Scottish household survey estimates that 38.1 per cent of households in the Glasgow City Council area had access to only one car or van in 2007-08.
The Scottish household survey also said that 50 per cent of households in the 15 per cent most deprived areas do not have a car, whereas the figure is 25 per cent for the rest of Scotland, so people in Glasgow are particularly reliant on public transport for work and leisure. Is it fair to conclude that the decision to cancel the Glasgow airport rail link project will have a disproportionate effect on disadvantaged people, particularly in the east end of Glasgow? In light of that, does the Scottish Government believe that there is a case to reinstate GARL and that reinstating it would address the transport needs of people in the east end?
Perhaps the member should read some previous parliamentary answers with greater care. For example, she will discover that, 20 years after the establishment of GARL, according to the figures provided by Strathclyde Passenger Transport in 2006, the difference in car traffic to the airport on the M8 would be a mere 17 cars per peak hour. In addition, no more than 3 per cent of passengers going to Glasgow airport were expected to use the railway system to the airport.
Concessionary Travel
To ask the Scottish Executive whether it remains committed to the provision of concessionary travel. (S3O-8496)
Yes. We remain committed to the provision of concessionary travel through the Scotland-wide free bus-travel scheme for older and disabled people and the national concessionary travel scheme for young people.
Is the minister aware of concerns in Fife that the SNP-led Fife Council is to end the flat-rate concessionary rail ticket, which is a policy that brings clear health and wellbeing benefits to our more vulnerable constituents? Will he join me and my Labour colleagues in condemning the move? Will he intervene to ensure that a key benefit that is enjoyed by people throughout the region is not taken away?
Everyone is free to respond to the consultation that Fife Council is undertaking. The matter is of course one for the council, which, like councils throughout Scotland, has seen an increased share of the overall public funding that is provided by central Government. It is also important to bear it in mind that, by continuing to support the scheme for older and disabled people and extending it to disabled ex-servicepeople, we are showing substantial support for social travel and travel for people throughout Scotland.
Does the minister recognise the disappointment in my constituency at the Government's decision not to include either community transport or ferries in the concessionary travel scheme? Will he acknowledge that, for many of my constituents, ferries perform the same role as buses in Fife and elsewhere in mainland Scotland?
The member will be aware that free ferry journeys are already provided to island dwellers. Of course, it is the local councils in the northern isles, including the council in the member's constituency, that are responsible for the internal ferry services and, if they wish to offer concessions to the inhabitants of the Orkney islands, they are free to do so.
Waverley Line
To ask the Scottish Executive whether it will update the Parliament on progress on the reopening of the Waverley railway line. (S3O-8498)
Construction will commence in 2010 with the first of the ancillary works, and we expect that a contract for the construction of the railway work will be delivered in autumn 2011. This Administration is committed to delivering a railway service to Midlothian and the Scottish Borders, and commencing the ancillary works will commit the Scottish Government to
Perhaps the minister should be more cautious about how he answers in the future. He should possibly answer with greater care, to quote what he said earlier.
The member is correct: there has been a change. I hope that she welcomes it, as people in the Borders and in her constituency undoubtedly will do. Our drawing forward of capital spending has enabled us to make a start to the project earlier than was previously announced. Our transport ambitions for Glasgow, for the Borders, for the north of Scotland and for roads in the Aberdeen area show that the Government is delivering throughout Scotland. That includes improvements to the railways to Inverness and Aberdeen, and terrific improvements throughout.
Capital Expenditure (Acceleration)
To ask the Scottish Executive what discussions the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Sustainable Growth has had with the UK Government in relation to further acceleration of capital expenditure. (S3O-8472)
I wrote to the Chancellor of the Exchequer on 26 October, in the context of his forthcoming pre-budget report, to request that he provide access to further capital acceleration in 2010-11. Representations were also made by the First Minister at the joint ministerial committee on 16 September.
I know that the cabinet secretary has welcomed the broad political and civic consensus that further acceleration of capital expenditure would be advantageous to Scotland's economy and, indeed, to social housing as a stated priority of the Government. Has he had an indication that the chancellor's pre-budget report will give some comfort to all those who recognise the need for continuation of the accelerated capital expenditure programme?
I have not had a response from the chancellor—and I would not expect one—in advance of the pre-budget report, which is now scheduled for 9 December. I hope that, in the context of recent data from gross domestic product statistics that indicate that the United Kingdom was still in recession in quarter 3 when many had expected it to emerge from recession, the UK Government will recognise that further investment of capital is required to encourage the fragile economic recovery that is now, we hope, under way.
The Scottish Government's track record is not great in using such moneys effectively. We know that the previous accelerated capital was not used wisely, in that the money was used to purchase already-built property and land and only a small part of it was spent on new-build developments that create jobs. If the cabinet secretary is successful in his negotiations with the chancellor, will Glasgow's citizens be able to luxuriate in a new Glasgow airport rail link as a result of accelerated capital expenditure if, and when, that becomes available?
The acceleration of capital expenditure has had a significant effect in bringing forward developments in a whole host of projects, such as road improvements in different parts of the country, expenditure by Scottish Enterprise and Highlands and Islands Enterprise, and investment in higher and further education and in some rural affairs projects. I am somewhat at a loss to understand why Mr Kerr cannot welcome the way in which capital acceleration has been deployed around the country.
European Commissioner for Competition Policy (Bank Divestment Meetings)
To ask the Scottish Government what discussions it has had with the European Commissioner for Competition Policy concerning the proposed divestment of the Royal Bank of Scotland and Lloyds Banking Group. (S3O-8484)
On 3 November, I wrote to Commissioner Neelie Kroes about the proposed divestments by the Royal Bank of Scotland and Lloyds Banking Group to seek three things: information on how the divestment process will be taken forward; assurances that the process will not have a negative impact on the Scottish economy; and assurances that a dialogue will be opened up with the Scottish Government about the issue.
The cabinet secretary will be aware that, as part of its banking inquiry, the Economy, Energy and Tourism Committee heard evidence yesterday from Irmfried Schwimann of the European Commission. Does the cabinet secretary consider that the divestment of jobs, branches and businesses, as agreed by Her Majesty's Treasury and the European Commission, could have an adverse effect on the Scottish economy and limit the potential of the institutions in the future?
Quite clearly, there is the potential for the divestments to have a negative effect on the Scottish economy. Equally, we need to take forward a set of initiatives to ensure that that does not happen. In the Government's mind, the divestment process that takes place should fulfil two objectives: first, it should inject more competition into the banking market, which I think Parliament has agreed is essential; and secondly, it should secure long-term benefits to the strength and comprehensive nature of the financial services sector in Scotland. That is why the Government will be actively involved in encouraging an outcome to the divestment process that is in the economic interests of Scotland.
The cabinet secretary will be aware of the evidence that the Economy, Energy and Tourism Committee received yesterday. I draw his attention to the comments that were made by a senior officer in the European Commission's competition directorate-general. It was said that, if the Scottish Government had made representations on small business lending and the concentration of ownership in that market in only two banks, they would have been taken into account. Does the cabinet secretary regret that he did not make such representations before 3 November? Looking forward, a final decision on Lloyds has not yet been taken. Will the cabinet secretary now make such representations to ensure that choices are available to small businesses in Scotland when they seek lending opportunities in the future?
That is a somewhat odd question. Mr Macdonald knows full well that I have made direct representations for months to the Chancellor of the Exchequer and Her Majesty's Treasury, driven by the research that I commissioned about access to finance for small and medium-sized enterprises in Scotland. As a purported unionist, he knows that the United Kingdom Government is responsible for dialogue with the European Commission about the divestment activities that are under way. I would have thought that a representative of a unionist political party would be surprised that I drew information to the attention of the Chancellor of the Exchequer—who has responsibility for financial services regulation and who is, by chance, an MP who represents the city of Edinburgh, which has significant financial interests—that he might have taken into account in the negotiations that the Treasury was involved in with the European Commission. I was delighted to share information with the chancellor, and it was appropriate that I did so.
Non-domestic Rates (Relief Scheme)
To ask the Scottish Executive whether it intends to introduce a transitional relief scheme for the forthcoming revaluation of non-domestic rates. (S3O-8452)
I am currently considering that issue and will shortly make a statement to Parliament on the revaluation of non-domestic rates.
Given the importance of the issue to many businesses in Scotland, will the cabinet secretary clarify when a final decision on the principle and details of a transitional relief scheme will be agreed? Does he agree with the Scottish Conservatives that our business rates regime should always be as competitive as that in England or, ideally, more competitive than it?
Mr Scott will realise that the business rates approach in Scotland is more competitive because we have such an effective small business bonus scheme, which provides welcome assistance to small businesses throughout the country.
I welcome the cabinet secretary's statement that he is still considering the matter, but he seems to have been considering it for a while. Such a scheme already exists in England. The cabinet secretary has just praised the actions of the chancellor. Perhaps he could try to copy the chancellor and get a bit of a move on in introducing a scheme.
If Mr Whitton was cognisant of statute, he would understand that there is a statutory obligation on the United Kingdom Government to have a transitional relief scheme in England, but there is not a statutory obligation on the Government in Scotland to have such a scheme. That is why the chancellor is so far ahead of the game, according to Mr Whitton. The law requires the chancellor to have such a scheme.
When will a scheme be introduced?
I am sure that Mr Whitton would be happy to have an extended debate on the matter.
Rural Telephone Exchanges
To ask the Scottish Executive when it expects the details of the programme for the upgrading of Exchange Activate rural telephone exchanges to be agreed and made public. (S3O-8541)
The Scottish Government hopes to be in a position to announce the exchanges to be upgraded and indicative timescales by the end of this year. Further information will be posted on our website, in due course, at www.broadbandforscotland.co.uk.
I am pleased that the Government has been able to draw on the funds that were set aside by the previous Executive to continue the roll-out of broadband in rural areas such as my own.
I note the member's scepticism. He should look at the reality of the situation. We have kept a focus on the issue and brought the sector together back in June. We have created an agreement with British Telecom, which is now carrying out the planning work. If the member had listened to my earlier reply, he would have heard that we expect to be in a position to announce the planned upgrades and an indicative timescale by the end of the year.
Flooding (Aberdeenshire)
To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the commitment given by the First Minister in the chamber on 5 November 2009, when it will announce the financial measures it plans to put in place to assist Aberdeenshire Council in dealing with the recent unprecedented flooding, including the outcome of its investigation into the threshold at which local authorities can access Bellwin funds. (S3O-8545)
There are a number of ways in which the Government can assist councils that experience exceptional flooding. We are currently considering what may be appropriate for Aberdeenshire Council in the light of the recent flooding there. A review of the threshold for the Bellwin scheme is separately under way, and we will announce our conclusions on that shortly.
Aberdeenshire Council has asked for help for both Pennan and Bervie braes, in Stonehaven. The cabinet secretary has already made £500,000 available for Pennan in the constituency of his colleague Alex Salmond. So far, he has made absolutely nothing available for Stonehaven's Bervie braes in my constituency, which is suffering in exactly the same way from the threat of landslide. The latest flooding occurred in Stonehaven almost three weeks ago. Never mind his telling us that the Government is studying it; when will the minister take action and provide the resources that Aberdeenshire Council needs to ensure that businesses and homes there are not threatened in that way again? I want action, please.
Mr Rumbles would perhaps be better served by expressing his point of view in the fashion in which Sir Robert Smith expressed his view to me in a helpful letter that I received from him in the past couple of days.
Just answer the question. I want action.
Order.
Perhaps Mr Rumbles might consider his tactics in the light of the exceptionally courteous fashion in which Sir Robert Smith goes about his business.
Can the cabinet secretary give a guarantee regarding the timescale of any funding being made available to Aberdeenshire Council, to ensure that any remedial work that is deemed necessary can be done immediately so as to avoid a recurrence of the events of 1 November?
I call John Swinney.
But he is not giving anything.
Mr Rumbles, please.
He is not giving anything.
Mr Rumbles, I have called the minister to speak.
I assure Mr Johnstone that the Government is looking urgently at issues in connection with Aberdeenshire Council's application. I will take decisions as soon as the full advice is available to me.
The Gathering 2009
To ask the Scottish Executive what discussions the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Sustainable Growth has had with the Minister for Culture, External Affairs and the Constitution regarding lessons that can be learned from the £600,000 loss sustained by the gathering 2009. (S3O-8497)
Ministers will of course continue to assess how we can maximise the benefits of future gathering events, given that independent research has shown that the gathering 2009 generated significant additional revenue for Edinburgh and Scotland and that there is the potential for future gathering events to have a similar positive economic impact. Clearly, it will be important for those delivering future gathering events to take account of the experience gained in the organisation and delivery of this year's event.
I welcome the cabinet secretary's acceptance that lessons need to be learned from the disastrous economic performance of this year's event. I ask him, in particular, to study the perverse economic analysis in the EventScotland report, available on the organisation's website, which suggests that gross expenditure and gross outputs are the same. According to that analysis, if £10,000 were to be flushed down one of the gathering's many portable toilets, it would make a £17,300 contribution to the Scottish economy. It completely misses the concept of value for money or accountability.
Ms Boyack, this is going on a bit too long.
There is a point to this.
It is meant to be a question—
It is.
—not a post-amble to a question.
I have already asked the cabinet secretary a question. I asked him to study—
If you have already asked the minister a question, I ask him to answer it.
Sarah Boyack is quite right to say that certain points need to be raised about the gathering's financial management. Indeed, I said in my first answer that lessons had to be learned.
The cabinet secretary is aware that 73 per cent of the gathering participants interviewed were likely or very likely to make a return visit to Scotland. Is he able to reassure the chamber that VisitScotland and related Government bodies will do everything they can to exploit the potential for return visits to Edinburgh? Moreover, will he join me in congratulating the City of Edinburgh Council on stepping in to protect the interests of small businesses at this difficult economic time when there was the threat of a debt to The Gathering 2009 Ltd?
I assure Shirley-Anne Somerville that, along with the exceptionally successful homecoming activities throughout the year, the activities surrounding the gathering will be used as a positive platform on which to build future tourism and visitor attraction activity in Scotland. The Government certainly welcomes the City of Edinburgh Council's willingness to acknowledge the benefits of and opportunities presented by the gathering proposal and to take it forward in the years to come.
Association of British Insurers(Flood Insurance)
To ask the Scottish Executive what discussions the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Sustainable Growth has had with the Association of British Insurers regarding insurance policies for properties at risk of flooding. (S3O-8461)
When I met Maggie Craig from the Association of British Insurers on 16 October 2009, we discussed flooding issues. In addition, the Minister for Environment met ABI representatives on 10 March 2009 to confirm the Government's continuing commitment to the Scottish statement of principles on flood insurance, which was agreed on 17 December 2008, and to discuss any issues arising.
The joint statement between the Association of British Insurers and the Scottish Government that was published in December last year is subject to annual review. I take on board what the cabinet secretary said about on-going discussions. During that annual review, will he reflect on the experience of the past few months, including the flooding problems in Moray, where 85 families were forced out of their homes? Will he consider how properties will be covered in the future, and ensure that the small-print details—such as a requirement that a house is not situated within 400m of a burn or river—are made clear when someone purchases a policy?
Mary Scanlon makes a fair point. When individuals take up insurance, it is important that they are fully aware of all the details, and financial services regulation will apply that obligation to individuals who sell insurance. If Mary Scanlon has further information that might be of concern, the Minister for Environment or I will be happy to hear about it and to make appropriate representations to the ABI. I might add that the ABI is very helpful in addressing such questions.
Referendum Bill
To ask the Scottish Executive what discussions the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Sustainable Growth has had with the Minister for Culture, External Affairs and the Constitution regarding provisions in the 2010-11 draft budget relating to the proposed referendum bill. (S3O-8512)
As with any matter relating to the draft budget, I have a number of discussions with the relevant portfolio minister during the budget process.
It appears, from studying the Official Report of the Finance Committee of 9 November, that no money has been set aside for the proposed referendum bill, which is estimated to cost £9 million. Will the cabinet secretary initiate discussions with his Cabinet colleagues on dropping the referendum, which is becoming no more than a sideshow? He can then concentrate fully on the priority of promoting jobs and growing the Scottish economy.
As Mr Kelly knows, our purpose is to focus Government and public services activity on increasing sustainable economic growth in Scotland. That is what we do; the First Minister went through some of that during First Minister's questions earlier today.
Town Centre Regeneration Fund
To ask the Scottish Executive what progress the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Sustainable Growth is making in his discussions with the Minister for Housing and Communities regarding the timescale for the completion of projects funded by the second round of the town centre regeneration fund. (S3O-8504)
All applicants to the second round of the town centre regeneration fund were required to provide assurances that grant could be claimed in full from the Scottish Government by the end of March 2010. In order to claim, projects must either complete or have put in place all contracts for delivery of work. However, the actual dates on which second-round projects will complete will vary. There is no set timetable.
The cabinet secretary and I had an exchange on the issue at a recent meeting of the Local Government and Communities Committee. At that time, I said that, given the late announcement of the fund, it would be helpful if such projects were given some leeway at the other end. Obviously the discussions that were to take place have not borne fruit in that respect. Given that projects such as the one in Possilpark in my constituency, and indeed all three projects that Glasgow City Council submitted, have been rejected on this occasion, despite meeting the criteria for the fund, does the Scottish Government accept or agree that the case has now been made for the continuation of the town centre regeneration fund, and that it should be reinstated to the budget?
On the point that Patricia Ferguson made to me at committee, the issues have been discussed by ministers. What I have said to Patricia Ferguson today is that, to claim resources under the second round of the town centre regeneration fund, projects must either complete or have put in place all contracts for delivery of work. There is significant flexibility in that for the relevant organisations.
That concludes question time.
On a point of order, Presiding Officer. In his answer to question 10, I believe that the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Sustainable Growth has misled Parliament. He said that he is carefully considering the application from Aberdeenshire Council for financial help in dealing with the problems at Pennan and at the Bervie braes in Stonehaven. However, according to a letter to me from Mr Swinney, that is not the case. John Swinney has already allocated £500,000 of Scottish Executive money to Pennan, which is in his colleague the First Minister's constituency. In the letter he specifically outlines that nothing is to go elsewhere. The money is to go only to Pennan so, by implication, there is nothing for my constituents in Aberdeenshire. Presiding Officer, will you advise me as to how I should put the record straight on that and to whom I should write to complain about Mr Swinney's actions?
The member perhaps knows the answer to that question. Quite frankly, it is not really a matter for me and it is not a point of order. Really, it is another supplementary question, so I ask the cabinet secretary to respond, briefly.
I am delighted to respond and I will do so briefly. What I said to Mr Rumbles is that the application under the Bellwin formula—
That is not what he said.
Would you just finish, cabinet secretary?
I will simply say that what I thought I said to Parliament was that the application under the Bellwin formula was getting my consideration. If I did not say that, I will of course correct the record and put it straight, but my clear recollection is that I referred to the application under the Bellwin formula that is currently receiving my consideration.