Prime Minister (Meetings)
To ask the First Minister when he will next meet the Prime Minister and what issues will be discussed. (S2F-1356)
When I next meet the Prime Minister I will be delighted to congratulate him on his role in ensuring that, as we saw again this week, Scotland has the lowest unemployment for 30 years and the highest level of employment of any country in Europe, apart from Denmark.
I bet that Gordon Brown would beg to differ.
As the consultation by the independent local government finance review committee, which I understand will be published this afternoon, will show, we included in the remit of the independent review the relationship between devolved and reserved issues and the financing of any new system of local government. That is the proper way in which to look ahead to any changes in the local government finance system, rather than making up policies on the back of a fag packet as others appear all too ready to do.
I suggest to the First Minister that only ministers can answer the £300 million question. We need an answer to that question now. Cannot the First Minister understand that, without an answer, his inquiry, which will publish its first findings later today, will be inevitably skewed towards the unfair council tax, because to recommend any other system would mean that London would withhold £300 million of Scotland's money? Does the First Minister accept that the only way to avoid the dice being loaded in favour of the council tax is to get an assurance now that our £300 million is safe, come what may?
If the Scottish National Party felt that this was such an important issue, perhaps it should have thought about that before it published its proposals for a new system of local government finance and taxation last February, which stated boldly that the £300 million would be available to the Scottish budget. Clearly, the SNP now understands that its policies were not properly thought through and not properly costed, like so many of its policies. I notice that today Ms Sturgeon is not even prepared to come to First Minister's question time to defend the policy that she announced this morning about putting ridiculous golden handcuffs on medical students from England and other countries who study in Scotland.
If Scotland was independent, we would not be in the ridiculous situation of sending our money to London for the Government in London to decide how much it sees fit to send us back. Does the First Minister agree that, although the £300 million in question might be administered by the Government in London, it is Scotland's money that is paid into the Treasury by Scottish taxpayers? Does he further agree that if this Parliament decides to get rid of the unfair and regressive council tax, that money must be available to help to fund a fairer system and that for London to pocket the cash would be highway robbery? Will the First Minister stand up for Scottish taxpayers and make it clear to his colleagues now that he will not allow such robbery to happen?
Nicola Sturgeon has missed the point. If Scotland was independent, the Westminster Government would be the Government of a foreign country. Not only would we not get £300 million from it, but we would not get anything else from it either. It is ridiculous to assert that because the Westminster Government would be the Government of a foreign country, that would make it easier for it to give us £300 million. As Ms Sturgeon knows, the deficit that we would have to fill through increased taxation or cuts in services in Scotland would be nearer £3,000 million. That is a deficit that she is yet to resolve.
Is it not the First Minister who misses the point that, if Scotland was independent, London would not have the £300 million in the first place and the Parliament would be free to do what is in the best interests of Scottish taxpayers? Is it not bad enough that council tax has risen by 50 per cent under Labour without our now being told that, if the Parliament decides to abolish that unfair system, London will cream off £300 million of our money? When will the First Minister start standing up for Scotland and standing up to London?
When will the SNP stop blaming London and England for everything and start taking responsibility for our own affairs in Scotland? Earlier on, I read out the fantastic unemployment and employment statistics that we now have in Scotland: we have the second-best employment statistics in Europe and the lowest unemployment statistics in Scotland for 30 years. Those facts about modern Scotland would be at risk if Ms Sturgeon's vision of a separate, divorced Scotland was to come into being. We would miss out not only on the £300 million, but on all the other benefits of economic stability—high employment, low unemployment and a financial system that benefits Scotland within the United Kingdom and ensures that it does not have the higher taxes and cuts in services that would come as a result of the SNP's policies.
Cabinet (Meetings)
To ask the First Minister what issues will be discussed at the next meeting of the Scottish Executive's Cabinet. (S2F-1357)
We will discuss issues of interest to the people of Scotland.
I thank the First Minister for that illuminating and enlightening answer. Are he and other members of the Cabinet aware that, in only one year, 71 glossy publications have landed on the doormats of Scotland's primary schools and that those publications have contained 3,500 pages of advice, exhortation and instruction, much of which has emanated from the Scottish Executive? Does the First Minister agree that our primary schools are drowning in a sea of top-down bureaucracy and that they badly need less central interference and more trust in and support for our teachers?
Yes, I agree absolutely. That is precisely why the Minister for Education and Young People announced in November—perhaps Mr McLetchie was on holiday at the time and did not notice—a new three-to-18 curriculum with much more freedom for schools, head teachers and individual teachers in Scotland and for pupils and their parents to make choices about their curriculum, when they choose to sit exams, what exams they choose to sit and the options that they choose for their future, such as whether they choose academic or vocational courses. In our primary schools, where much of the bureaucracy has lain in the past 10 to 15 years, we have seen in recent years the benefits of increased investment, which is now supported by increased freedom, choice and opportunities for teachers to use their professional skills in the classroom in the way that they know best.
I do not go on as many holidays as the First Minister does. The problem—[Interruption.]
Order.
The problem is that the situation that the First Minister describes is not the reality that teachers experience in our schools. The reality about which I spoke in the first supplementary question that I posed to the First Minister is the one that the head teacher of James Gillespie's Primary School—one of the primary schools in Edinburgh—describes in his latest newsletter to parents. He complains not about lack of money in our schools, but about the poor value for money and the disappointing levels of achievement that we get out of our system because of all the shackles, initiatives and bureaucracy that surround the delivery of education in Scotland, whether they come from the Scottish Executive or our local councils. Instead of sending out all those glossy documents to tell people what to do, why does the First Minister not give our head teachers the freedom to do their job and cut out the swathes of bureaucracy that are holding back them and our children's development?
I am sorry to repeat myself; I know that Mr McLetchie had prepared a second question that he felt he had to ask. In November last year, we announced further extensions of the freedoms in our schools. We have ensured that throughout our schools—for children at the age of three in nursery school to those who leave our schools at 18—more choice is available to head teachers, teachers, pupils and parents. More choices are available to use professionalism properly in primary schools and to give pupils in secondary schools the options that will not only allow professionalism to be used properly but will improve discipline in our schools, because pupils will be more motivated and so will like to turn in a good day's work.
On discipline in schools, the First Minister should be aware that a member of school staff is attacked every 12 minutes of the working day in Scotland. His failure to address that in the past few years is one of the disgraces of our education system. The situation is hardly conducive to an environment in which our young people can learn and develop.
That is simply not true. I will meet Lord Laidlaw again tomorrow and we have an excellent working relationship that has in the past year resulted in significant investment by him in some of Scotland's most vulnerable children. He is to be congratulated on that. I have never held against him how he has voted or donated his money in the past. If he wants to donate money to good causes in Scotland today and, in particular, to promoting the welfare of our young people, he will have my full support. We will ensure that he can invest not only in vulnerable youngsters, but in Scotland's schools.
There is one constituency question.
This week, the First Minister announced welcome long-term investment in Scotland's railways and in phase 1 of the vital project at Waverley station. Will he address Haymarket station? Will he assure me that works at Waverley will be co-ordinated with Haymarket station improvements? I am sure that he does not want the disruption that was caused to disabled passengers from throughout central Scotland when Waverley station was shut last year. Will he give me a timescale for improving Haymarket? I understand that we do not yet have an agreed scheme for the works.
As the Minister for Transport said this week, the announcements will allow us to make significant progress with the plans for Haymarket as they are finalised. The timescale is not in place, but I am sure that the minister will be happy to discuss with Ms Boyack how it will be put in place and the final timescale when it is available.
Scottish Executive Priorities
To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Executive's current top priorities are. (S2F-1371)
Our top priority is to improve growth in the Scottish economy to create the wealth and prosperity that can close gaps in opportunity and help to fund our public services.
I wonder where equality and fairness fit into those priorities—I would hope that they are always a priority for the Scottish Executive.
I do not like such attitudes being expressed by professionals any more than Ms Curran does, whether they work in the private sector or the public sector. Once we announce next month our plans to improve oral health in Scotland and to take on the key challenges that exist as a result of difficulties in dental services in some parts of the country, I hope that Ms Curran will participate in the debate.
I will certainly do so. However, is not the real issue the fact that to start with a principle of free health care for all and then introduce charges, such as prescription charges, means abandoning the principle of equality and having inequality? Health service dental charges are now on a par with private charges. When there were still socialists and principles in the Labour Party, it started with a principle and then had the vision to implement it.
The member should ask a question.
Why is the First Minister shamelessly allowing such a policy of inequality in health care under his watch?
I think that Frances Curran was in the Labour Party towards the end of the 1970s. At that time, the Labour Government increased prescription charges at a faster rate than they are increasing now. I can only assume that she agreed with that approach at the time.
Sexual Health Strategy
To ask the First Minister what input interested parties, including parents, schools and faith groups, have had in the drafting of the sexual health strategy. (S2F-1373)
We have heard from parents, schools, faith groups and others in the preparation of the national sexual health strategy, and I am grateful to everyone who has given us their views. We intend to publish the strategy very shortly.
The importance of safeguarding the sexual well-being of the current generation and future generations of Scots should be paramount, and we should appreciate that sexual health is not only about sexually transmitted disease and unwanted pregnancies, but involves a delicate balance of ethnic, cultural and social issues.
I confirm that the Cabinet agreed the strategy yesterday and that it will be published very shortly. I can also confirm the direction of travel for the strategy. It is vital that the debate and the strategy that comes from it are not polarised at one end or the other of the opinion spectrum. There are those who believe that we should not in any way help or provide a lead to youngsters in Scotland so that they can have more respect for themselves and others, take more responsibility and choose to delay sexual activity if that is what they wish for their own life. At the other end of the spectrum, there are those who believe that that is the only solution that we should advocate.
Does the First Minister agree that young people are at the heart of the question and are who the strategy should focus on? Will the First Minister reaffirm the Scottish Executive's previously stated position that all young people in Scotland have the same rights to information and services in relation to sexual health, irrespective of which school they go to?
Absolutely. There was a newspaper report this Sunday that was unrecognisable from the facts, as the Deputy First Minister and I said at our press conference on Tuesday. The reality is that we have guidelines that are appropriate for all our schools. At the core of that is young people's right to basic advice and services. However, that advice and those services should not be provided in a value-free environment. We need to give young people the confidence to say no if they want to and to delay sexual activity if that is their choice and is what is best for them.
Will the First Minister clarify the role of head teachers in matters such as sex education in schools? My understanding is that they can refuse to allow sex education to be taught in their school by those other than teachers—for example, voluntary organisations and faith or other groups that deal with such matters. However, although the guidelines are only that, it is not the case that head teachers can refuse to have the subject taught at all in schools.
We are clear that we expect every Scottish school to teach sex and relationships education. We also have in place in Scotland an education system in which the head teacher approves those who are in charge of the classrooms. Therefore, we seek a proper balance between head teachers' role in directing and leading the school and a consistent approach that ensures that all youngsters in Scotland get access to the right education and advice.
Education (National Priorities)
To ask the First Minister whether the Scottish Executive has any plans to make tackling indiscipline a sixth national priority in education. (S2F-1365)
I do not think that that will be necessary because tackling indiscipline is already the second national priority in Scottish education.
The First Minister should understand that priority 2 in education also includes the continuing professional development of teachers and school buildings. Whether indiscipline is lumped in with those or is a separate, sixth national priority, it is still one of the biggest barriers to teaching and learning in Scotland. That being the case, is it not right and proper that the Parliament should scrutinise the Executive's policies and progress? Why then has the Executive moved from producing an annual survey of indiscipline in Scotland to producing one every three years? What does the First Minister have to hide?
We are determined to have more and better information about indiscipline in schools, but we are also determined to tackle it. If Ms Hyslop is serious about being the education spokesperson for the SNP, she should learn the national priorities and ensure that she understands that tackling indiscipline is our second national priority. Within that national priority, the key indicator of indiscipline will be the level of attendance and therefore truancy in our schools.
Lottery Funding (London Olympic Bid)
To ask the First Minister what effect the London 2012 Olympic bid is likely to have on lottery funding for Scottish sports and community groups. (S2F-1372)
Although forecasts of future lottery income are subject to many uncertainties, latest projections from the Department for Culture, Media and Sport suggest that total income to existing good causes will remain close to projected levels, even if a specific Olympic lottery game is introduced in the event that London's bid to host the 2012 games is successful.
Executive measures such as public-private partnerships and environmental trust funding have provided considerable opportunities for community groups and communities such as Glenrothes and Levenmouth in my constituency to receive enhanced community and sports facilities, which are often used to train potential Olympic athletes, including our successful disabled athletes.
This is not a statement. Can we have a question?
How will the Executive ensure that the possibility of receiving such funding is not jeopardised if London's bid is successful?
I thank Christine May for raising such important constituency issues. The current projections for the distribution of lottery income and the assistance that might be available to London if its bid is successful make it clear that funding for the projects that she has mentioned should not be affected if they are still eligible at the time. In fact, those projects could be central to Scottish success if the Olympics come to London in 2012. Our future Olympic athletes will be created, supported and, ultimately, successful only by increasing the confidence, the participation and the sporting activity of young people in Scotland.
Is the First Minister aware that, contrary to his previous response, the House of Commons Select Committee on Culture, Media and Sport has estimated that if current proposals go ahead, up to 60 per cent of existing lottery funding will be lost to organisations in Scotland, Wales and the English regions? Does he agree that that would be an unacceptable price for us to pay to have the Olympics in London?
Of course it would be, if that were true. However, the member's statement is a ridiculous exaggeration. All the current projections show that lottery income is likely to be enhanced in years to come, which means that it will be possible for such finance to be available to the London Olympic bid without any detriment to Scotland. If Mr Neil and others on the SNP benches spent a little less time complaining about the London bid and a little bit more time trying to secure the future of Scottish sport, they would know that we have agreed with the UK Government that we will retain in Scotland the £25 million or so that might have been diverted to the Olympic bid away from training and preparing our own elite athletes for the games. That has happened as a result of positive pressure and participation from the Executive instead of moaning, greeting and girning from the sidelines.
The First Minister has just affirmed his total support for the exciting British bid for the 2012 Olympics. In order to silence the alarm bells that have been sounded by those in this Parliament who hold parochial views, will he outline further the considerable benefits that will accrue to Scotland and Scottish athletics from a British-based Olympic games?
Well, two things have happened this week. First, we have seen more greeting and girning from SNP members than there has been for a long time on all kinds of issues. For example, this morning, they had the ridiculous idea of locking up English medical students to ensure that they could not go back home. Also, we have seen the Tories' proposal to cut Government budgets drastically throughout the UK if they win the general election that might take place this year.
Whether the money from the lottery goes up or down, will the First Minister ensure that various groups that do good work in the community—national bodies that produce facilities that other groups can use and sporting and community groups, for example—but that miss out because all the money is channelled through the councils or because they do not qualify, receive funding directly from the lottery?
It is important that we organise improvements to facilities on a partnership basis, whatever funding sources are employed. Our strategy to develop new regional and national sport facilities will improve facilities throughout Scotland, using funding from councils and national bodies. That will give young people in Scotland a chance to train, particularly in the indoor facilities that we need so badly if we are to compete internationally and if our young people are to have the best possible chances. We should encourage funds to be directed to where they can best be used.
Meeting suspended until 14:00.
On resuming—