Racial Discrimination
To ask the Scottish Government what steps it is taking to tackle racial discrimination and what is believed to be the underreporting of cases. (S4O-04815)
Any form of racism is unacceptable. The Scottish Government is committed to tackling racial discrimination and all forms of hate crime. We are renewing our approach to promoting race equality by developing a new race equality framework for Scotland, which will run between 2016 and 2030.
It is all very well to say how welcoming we Scots are—this week, Glasgow welcomed the first refugees from Syria—but that does not mean that we Scots are immune from racism or discrimination. In a study on discrimination in Scotland, Dr Nasar Meer from the University of Strathclyde found that around a third of the ethnic minority people who were surveyed said that they had experienced discrimination in the past five years and that 60 per cent of those people did not report it to anyone. It is therefore obvious that what the Government is currently doing is not working.
What practical steps are being taken to address what minority communities are experiencing? I would like the minister to write to me to demonstrate the Scottish National Party Government’s commitment to tackling racial discrimination and to show what is being done to address the issues that are being experienced in the community out there.
I am aware of the research to which the member refers. It also found that 82 per cent of everyone who was surveyed would encourage a friend or family member to make a formal complaint if they had encountered discrimination. Therefore, there is a strong feeling that people will urge one another to report discrimination.
We recognise that the level of reporting is not high enough. Throughout the summer, we engaged widely to ensure that we take on board the views of everyone with an interest in the issue, so that we can develop a really effective strategy. I would be happy to write to the member with the list that I have in front of me of the many concrete steps that we are taking, so that he can be reassured that we are taking action to increase reporting and to ensure that hate crime is tackled.
Whitehill Incinerator (Planning)
To ask the Scottish Government what consideration it has given to calling in the planning application relating to the Whitehill incinerator. (S4O-04816)
The appeal was decided on 14 August 2015 by an independent reporter appointed by the Scottish ministers. I note the concerns that have been raised in the local area, and I recently met local representatives to discuss the process.
I wrote to South Lanarkshire Council on 3 November to invite it to confirm whether it proposes to take steps to revoke the permission by using its powers under section 65 of the Town and Country Planning (Scotland) Act 1997. The council has advised that it does not propose to revoke the consent.
As the cabinet secretary said, he is aware of the local concern, particularly in Blantyre in my constituency. There was anger when, after South Lanarkshire Council turned down the original application, the Scottish Government stepped in and ruled that the application could go ahead. Treating local people with such contempt has really undermined their confidence in the Scottish Government’s handling of the issue. Will the cabinet secretary take responsibility for calling in the application and showing respect for local people’s views?
The decision was taken by an independent reporter, not directly by ministers. I cannot legally call in the application, because it has already been decided. The council and many of the councillors have said that they want the decision to be revoked, so I gave the council the opportunity to say whether it would revoke the consent. It has written back to me to say that it has no intention of revoking the application. I therefore take it that the likes of Councillor Monica Lennon were, in some of their comments on the matter, just paying lip service and playing to the gallery, given that, when the council had the opportunity to do something about the application, it refused to do anything.
Will the cabinet secretary confirm that all future planning decisions regarding incinerators will automatically be referred to the Scottish Government, as I think he has suggested? If that is the case, will he also confirm that using the revocation provisions to overturn the Whitehill application would not set a precedent?
I do not think that one point follows from the other, but I have clearly and publicly stated that I have made it a rule in my department that in the future all such projects will come to me, as the minister responsible for planning, for a final decision.
As far as setting precedents for revocation is concerned, the powers exist under planning legislation, although they have never been used. I gave the council the opportunity, because it would still have required my permission, to decide whether it wanted to revoke the application, but the council has firmly ruled out any possibility of doing so.
Gender Discrimination (Workplace)
To ask the Scottish Government what action it is taking toward ending the gender pay gap and tackling gender discrimination in the workplace. (S4O-04817)
I am greatly encouraged by the figures that the Office for National Statistics published yesterday, as they show that the gender pay gap in Scotland has decreased from 9.1 per cent in 2014 to 7.3 per cent in 2015. That is very welcome news and demonstrates the progress that Scotland is making in closing the gap, particularly in comparison with the rest of the United Kingdom.
We are working with the Equality and Human Rights Commission to tackle pregnancy-related and maternity-related discrimination; we are tackling the underrepresentation of women in senior management roles and in the boardroom; we are strengthening our commitment to pay transparency by reducing the threshold at which public authorities must report on their pay gap; and we continue to promote fair work practices and extend childcare. As the First Minister announced last week, we will if re-elected introduce legislation in the first year of the new session of Parliament to require gender balance on the boards of our public bodies.
I am glad that the cabinet secretary shares my belief in the importance of continuing to tackle gender discrimination in the workplace and ending the gender pay gap. How important does the Scottish Government believe organisations such as Engender are in working to deliver changes on those important issues?
We believe that organisations such as Engender are crucial in helping us to deliver change on issues such as the gender pay gap, both by raising awareness of the issues and by lending us their expertise to enable us to consider how we can make meaningful change, which is of immense value. I am delighted to have an opportunity to thank Engender and our other partners—the close the gap project and Equate Scotland—which also work directly on the issues that are associated with the gender pay gap.
The cabinet secretary may remember how robust the First Minister was last week about some local authorities dragging their feet on long-outstanding equal pay claims. I know that the Government has written to local authorities about that, and I would be interested to know about the responses that have been received.
The Minister for Local Government and Community Empowerment, Marco Biagi, wrote to all 32 Scottish local authorities on 28 October to reiterate the Scottish Government’s desire to see progress. He asked them to respond by tomorrow—20 November. So far, we have heard from 10 councils in response to the letter.
I can confirm to Linda Fabiani that South Lanarkshire Council is one of those that have responded. I advise her that the council has so far resolved and settled 3,035 claims, with a further 3,637 in progress.
Question 4, in the name of Alex Johnstone, has not been lodged. This is the second week in a row that Mr Johnstone has not lodged a question, and the second week in a row that I have had no explanation. I will be seeking a meeting with him to discuss the matter.
Fife College (Halbeath Campus)
To ask the Scottish Government what discussions it has had with Fife College regarding the relocation of its Halbeath campus. (S4O-04819)
Scottish Government officials met senior representatives from Fife College on 4 September to discuss future plans for its estate. I understand that Fife College has also been having regular discussions with the Scottish Further and Higher Education Funding Council on the matter.
Given that we are celebrating Scotland’s towns week—the national campaign to help communities to unite, inspire and support our town centres—and given the Scottish Government’s commitment to the town centre first principle, does the cabinet secretary agree that the proposal to locate the new Fife College campus in Dunfermline town centre is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to create a future-proofed development right in the heart of Dunfermline, and to inject real vibrancy into the town centre, thereby giving a much-needed boost to the High Street, local businesses and the economy in Dunfermline?
I am aware of the campaign for the new campus development to be in the town centre of Dunfermline. The Government is indeed committed to the town centre first principle, and we expect colleges and other stakeholders to pay due regard to that. It is important to bear it in mind that town-centre locations are not always possible, but transparency of process is absolutely crucial. I am sure that the college will continue to give careful thought to the location of the campus as it develops the business case. The business case is important and must be developed and approved before any announcement can be made on decisions with regard to location.
Question 6, in the name of Neil Findlay, has been withdrawn. The member has provided me with a satisfactory explanation.
Tenant Farming Law
To ask the Scottish Government what action it is taking to protect tenant farmers who are affected by the Salvesen v Riddell case and subsequent remedial order. (S4O-04821)
The Scottish Government brought forward the remedial order in 2014 to put right a defect that the Supreme Court had found in section 72(10) of the Agricultural Holdings (Scotland) Act 2003, which of course was introduced by the previous Administration. The remedial order, which sought to balance the respective rights of landlords and tenants under the European convention on human rights, came into force on 3 April 2014.
Since then, in about 300 cases, affected tenants have agreed private arrangements with their respective landlords. However, seven cases remain in which agreement has not been reached, and the tenants are now taking action against the Scottish Government for alleged “loss, injury and damage” sustained as a result of the order. Meanwhile, the Scottish Government has offered to facilitate, fund and participate in mediation to assist those tenants and landlords to reach agreement.
This is less a question and more a last-minute heartfelt plea. The cabinet secretary knows that my constituent Andrew Stoddart, his family and his employees face eviction from their farm without proper compensation in less than 10 days. I simply ask the cabinet secretary, please, even at this 11th hour, to find it in his heart to intervene to prevent that from happening.
As Iain Gray and other members may be aware, I have taken a close interest in that case. I have spoken directly to Andrew Stoddart and communicated directly with the trustees who are involved. The difficulty that we face is that the landlord and tenant at Colstoun Mains farm signed and lodged an agreement with the court in March 2015 to confirm that the tenancy would end on 28 November 2015, and the Government does not have any power to amend that agreement. A further issue is that the Colstoun Trust has now signed a contract for Colstoun Mains to be farmed by somebody else after the end of the current lease.
We share the concerns of Iain Gray and other members about the fate of Mr Stoddart and his family. I have asked, and I ask again today—I hope that I have the support of Parliament in this—for the trustees, Turcan Connell, to extend the current lease at Colstoun Mains farm for at least a short time to allow alternatives to be considered. The Scottish Government has actively been looking for alternative farmland for Mr Stoddart. So far, nothing appropriate has turned up, but we will continue that search. We have also urged the landlord to reach agreement with the tenant on waygo compensation as soon as possible.
The case is very complex—I am sure that Mr Gray, who is aware of local intelligence, knows that—but we will do all that we can to try to ensure that it reaches a satisfactory conclusion.
Type 26 Frigates (Funding)
To ask the Scottish Government what assessment it has made of the potential impact on jobs and Scotland’s economy of the reported Ministry of Defence plan to reduce the number of type 26 frigates being built in order to pay for the replacement of Trident. (S4O-04822)
The Scottish Government and its agencies are working closely with BAE Systems to support investment in the long-term future of shipbuilding capability on the Clyde. BAE was awarded the £860 million demonstration phase contract by the MOD in February 2015, which included provision for ordering of long-lead items for the first three type 26 frigates. We are informed by BAE that negotiations with the MOD in relation to the manufacturing phase contract for the type 26 frigates are scheduled to conclude by the end of March 2016 at the latest. We have further meetings planned with the company in the coming months with a view to supporting the company to maximise the potential of the Clyde operations
Scottish ministers are firmly opposed to the possession, threat and use of nuclear weapons and are committed to securing the safe and complete withdrawal of Trident from Scotland.
I thank the cabinet secretary for that response. I am concerned that, following the claims that the Scotstoun yard in my Glasgow Anniesland constituency and the Govan yard would close should Scotland vote yes in last year’s referendum, the approach of playing fast and loose with shipyard workers’ jobs in order to waste billions of pounds on an expensive weapon of mass destruction seems to fly in the face of that idea.
I agree that the United Kingdom Government has its defence spending priorities all wrong. It is indefensible for the UK Government to contemplate spending £167 billion on a new generation of nuclear weapons; to do so at the expense of planned surface-ship programmes and jobs in Scotland would be doubly wrong.
In the meantime, Scottish Enterprise has been working closely with BAE Systems Surface Ships Ltd to support its SFM—shipbuilding facilities modernisation—programme. The programme would future proof the yards at Govan and Scotstoun and allow BAE to pursue potential international export opportunities as well as further MOD contracts, including the type 26 work. Our support is independent of the precise outcome of BAE’s negotiations with the MOD on the type 26 contract.
I took the opportunity to raise the issue of the type 26 contract with the United Kingdom Minister of State for Defence Procurement when I met him earlier this week. The message from this Parliament should be that we do not want to see Scottish jobs being sold down the river to pay for nuclear weapons in the future.
Tenant Support (Lorne)
To ask the Scottish Government what support it will provide to the tenants in the Lorne area of Leith who are seeking an alternative to eviction by a charitable trust that owns the properties. (S4O-04823)
The community ownership support service, which we fund through our empowering communities fund, has been giving the tenants of Lorne Street in Leith practical advice on community ownership options. I understand that Malcolm Chisholm attended a meeting between COSS and representatives of the tenants on 4 November.
COSS is keeping in touch with the situation and stands ready to offer further advice. The Scottish Government welcomes the recent decision by the Agnes Hunter Trust to impose a moratorium on its plans to sell off its houses to allow tenants the time to explore alternatives to eviction, including some form of community ownership. We hope that the tenants and the Agnes Hunter Trust can agree an approach that will work successfully for it and the Lorne Street community.
The minister will remember that in yesterday’s housebuilding debate I called the Lorne tenants the community of the year because of their magnificent campaign to preserve their community and stay in their homes. What support can the Scottish Government give them—moral support in the first instance, but ideally some sort of financial support—to enable them to stay together as part of a housing association or co-operative?
I accept what Malcolm Chisholm says about the Lorne Street community and the way in which they have got together to try to maintain their tenancies. I am sure that he knows that the Scottish Government’s affordable housing supply is channelled through the City of Edinburgh Council. The council is in discussion with a number of organisations to consider solutions for the tenants. Scottish Government officials are ready to provide all the practical assistance and support that they can to any organisation that comes up with a viable solution for the tenants of Lorne Street. We are talking about real people and families and we are well aware of that.