Rural Affairs and the Environment
Marine Special Areas of Conservation
Failure to comply with the habitats directive requirement to designate special areas of conservation can result in the European Commission commencing infraction proceedings. That can lead to a European Court of Justice ruling for failing to comply with the obligations. Not complying with such a ruling can result in a significant fine.
Is the minister aware of my opposition to the proposed marine special area of conservation designation in east Mingulay? What representations will the Scottish Government make to the European Commission about the inadequacy of the consultation process around such designations for which European Union law provides?
I am more than aware of the member’s concerns about the designations. We are under a legal obligation to designate special areas of conservation, and that designation must be based on the scientific evidence alone. There is little prospect of a change in EU law on the matter. Nevertheless, we are committed to working with local stakeholders to minimise any impacts of designation, should it go ahead. It is at that point, when one is working out the management measures, that socioeconomic factors can be brought into play. I am conscious of the fact that the announcement of the designation of special areas of conservation such as the one that the member mentions creates a great deal of concern, especially in rural peripheral communities.
“Low Carbon Scotland: Public Engagement Strategy” (Timetable)
Those actions will be carried out throughout the year, many of them as a continuous process and others via specific events. A number are already under way. The delivery plan will be subject to annual evaluation and updating.
I felt that the public engagement strategy was an important provision of the Climate Change (Scotland) Act 2009; therefore, I was disappointed that the strategy was launched just before the bells. The voluntary sector and Stop Climate Chaos Scotland say that the strategy is very poor and that the Government is failing Scotland. How does the Government expect to reach the ambitious targets that were laid down in the 2009 act unless it wins the hearts and minds of the public, the private sector and the communities in Scotland? Is this yet another delaying tactic?
The member expresses her concern but then quotes other people. I would be interested to know whether the member has actually read the public engagement strategy. The strategy is extremely important, as it is something on which we will base our delivery plans as we work through the process. I look forward to a dynamic discussion about how we can engage the public; I am very concerned about that, because some messages seem to get over more easily than others. It would be helpful if members with bright ideas were to communicate them to us instead of carping on the sidelines.
When we think of the public in terms of public engagement strategies, we usually think of individuals and families, but I presume that it also includes senior business figures and large organisations. How much work will the public engagement process undertake with the business community and how much support does it already have in that group?
The strategy contains strong links with the private sector, which will be vital in helping us to achieve our targets both through its direct actions and through its adaptations. It is extremely important that we keep the private sector on board. Engagement with the business community is a key part of wider public engagement. It is important because that community will be critical in developing and promoting Scotland’s transition to a low-carbon economy—as will every single one of us.
The minister might think about engaging with the public in my constituency and agreeing with the thousands of my constituents who oppose the proposed pyrolysis incinerator in Coatbridge, because such incinerators can undermine efforts to reduce carbon emissions by discouraging recycling and other more innovative green solutions.
I hope that Elaine Smith will communicate further with me with regard to the specific issue that she has raised. Engagement with the public means that we will often have to deal with issues that might, on the surface, appear contradictory but from which we cannot run away. The issue that the member mentions might be one of those issues. I look forward to Elaine Smith contacting me directly on her specific concerns.
Salmon Farming
Yes. Salmon aquaculture is a success story for Scotland and continues to play a key role in our economic recovery, providing high-quality and secure jobs in many rural and coastal communities in Scotland’s Highlands and Islands.
The minister is aware of the comments apparently made recently by the United Kingdom Government’s minister with responsibility for fisheries, Richard Benyon, attacking the farmed salmon industry. Does the minister believe that such comments are deeply unhelpful and does she agree that Mr Benyon should publicly retract his criticism of the industry, especially since there is now huge potential in the Chinese market?
It would be fair to say that we were disappointed with Richard Benyon’s comments, particularly because they were based on some factual mistakes. As we know, the reputation of farmed Scottish salmon is that it is a high-quality healthy product, and that the industry is fully regulated. I suspect that Mr Benyon’s comments were born of a lesser understanding of the issues of aquaculture than we might be accustomed to in Scotland, given that it is an extremely small part of the English economic make-up.
The Highlands’ share of the Scottish salmon farming industry is some £58 million, in terms of rural employment. What is the minister doing to encourage other forms of fish farming in Scotland?
Aquaculture, in the broadest sense, includes far more than simply farmed salmon. We have a healthy and growing shellfish sector, which is important with regard to the areas that Jamie McGrigor is talking about. There are also interesting moves in terms of halibut, which have been successful in the areas in which they have been undertaken. We are keen that the industry should grow into other areas. However, there is no doubt that farmed salmon is by far the largest component of aquaculture in Scotland, which is why it gets such a great amount of publicity.
Sewage Treatment Works (Bothwell Road)
Scottish Water advises me that it has not received any complaints about odours at the sewage treatment works at Bothwell Road in Hamilton and that no odour nuisance was present when the waste water treatment team leader visited earlier this week. I have asked Scottish Water to contact Mr McCabe directly to discuss the situation in more detail and to arrange any further investigations. I understand that that might already have happened.
I appreciate the minister’s offer, and I will take it up. We have already arranged a telephone conference.
I fully appreciate the difficulty—I experienced the same difficulty with a particular area in my constituency and I suspect that similar issues are known to other members. I am pursuing the history of complaints in respect of the matter.
Local Food Producers (Large Retailers)
The Scottish Government engages on an on-going basis with retailers on a host of issues relating to Scotland’s food and drink supply chain through the Scottish grocery retailers forum. Retailers have also signed up to the retailers charter, which commits them to working in partnership with Scotland’s food and drink industry. That is reaping dividends, with major retailers stocking many more Scottish products in their stores and working closely with local suppliers. In fact, this evening, Asda will launch its supplier development programme, which involves Asda working with 10 local suppliers to better understand the supply chain and grow their businesses.
Is the minister satisfied that adequate arrangements are in place to help consumers identify Scottish and more locally produced produce? If not, will she work with the retail sector to ensure that the locality labelling arrangements for Scottish produce are improved, not just in large retailers, but online and in local food stores?
The member will know that the Scottish Government has actively pursued the issue. It is part of what we have tried to do through the national food and drink policy. It is important for niche suppliers to get the kind of designation that the member talks about, but that is not always as easy as it might seem on paper and a lot of work has to be done.
The minister will be aware that progress has been slow in local authorities, prisons and other institutions on the uptake of the use of local food and the initiative that Andy Kerr, the then health minister, launched in 2004. What further progress has been made on the issue, given the obvious benefits to child health and towards meeting climate change targets?
There continue to be procurement issues, of which the member will be well aware. We continue to pursue that aspect because, from the perspective of the food and drink industry and the consumer, it is of great benefit if the big institutional providers can use local produce wherever possible. However, as the member knows, that is not as easy as simply saying it, and we must continue to work hard to try to achieve it.
In response to John Scott, the minister mentioned procurement issues, but East Ayrshire Council and other councils have been exemplars in their sourcing of local food. East Lothian Council sources 100 per cent of its food from the local area. The food budget for local authorities alone is about £58 million per year. Through lodging freedom of information requests, I have found that local authorities spend only 3.5 per cent of their food budget on sourcing food locally. Does the minister agree that we should not hide behind European Union procurement rules, as that is not a real issue, given that it has been addressed by local authorities in Scotland and by countries in the EU such as Italy?
It is a little unfair to talk about hiding behind procurement rules. Every local authority will be considering the issue. Those local authorities that provide exemplars ought to be lauded, and I do not want not to do that. East Ayrshire Council and East Lothian Council—which I have visited, so I know about the work that it has been doing—must be congratulated and the rest of the local authorities in Scotland need to follow their good example. Pressure can be brought to bear on local authorities from many different angles, not just from the top down; pressure from the bottom up is very important, too.
Waste and Recycling (Cold Weather)
The situation was different from local authority to local authority but, in general, those local authorities most affected by the severe weather conditions focused on dealing with the backlog of residual waste collections and advised householders to store recyclate or to take it to recycling centres when it was practical and safe to do so. The Scottish Government issued similar advice through a press release on 27 December.
Is the minister aware that some residents had to wait many weeks for their normal household waste collection and that some recycling centres, including the one in my constituency at Asda’s Bridge of Dee store in Aberdeen, which I witnessed for myself, were so overflowing with uncollected waste that they clearly represented a health hazard?
I am sure that the member will bring forward proposals during the budget process to identify the money that he thinks is required to support such arrangements and to indicate where it will come from.
Public Bodies (Reform) Bill (Forestry)
I have discussed in correspondence with forestry ministers in England and Wales the provisions for forestry in the Public Bodies (Reform) Bill at Westminster, and I will continue to monitor the passage of the bill to ensure that the interests of Scottish forestry are protected.
I congratulate the Scottish Government and the minister, in particular, on joining us in resisting the privatisation of Scottish forests, but will she confirm that if, despite our opposition, the Tory-Liberal Democrat bill is pushed through at Westminster and English forests are privatised, that will threaten jobs at the UK headquarters of the Forestry Commission in Corstorphine in Edinburgh? I thank her for what she has already done on the issue and ask her if she will now join us in cross-party action to protect those jobs.
I am in constant discussion with forestry officials in Scotland, as the member will no doubt be aware. It is the case that the English proposals—I say “English” because that is what they must be—would have an impact on UK forestry as a whole simply as a result of the fact that jobs would be likely to be threatened. It is a matter of some regret to us that the biggest threat hangs over jobs in Scotland—those in Corstorphine—as the member said.
Justice and Law Officers
Question 1 is from Brian Adam. Question 2 is from Karen Gillon. It is a gross discourtesy that neither member is in the chamber. I will move on to question 3 from James Kelly.
Custodial Sentences
Judicial discretion will remain and when a court considers that no other method of dealing with an offender is appropriate because, for example, there is an unacceptable risk to public safety, it will be able to impose a short prison sentence. As they do now, courts will continue to take public safety concerns into account when they decide what sentence it would be appropriate to impose in any particular case.
Yesterday, the Parliament debated the Domestic Abuse (Scotland) Bill at stage 1 and the Government supported the general principles of the bill. I agreed with that. During the debate Fergus Ewing, the Minister for Community Safety, said:
It will not. The reason for judicial discretion is that the Government was lobbied by those who work in domestic violence and by, for example, Sheriff Susan Raeburn of the domestic abuse court in Glasgow. They made it quite clear that they saw merit in the short sentence because it provides respite for the victims of domestic violence and their families. We were persuaded by that, which is why it remains a matter for the court’s discretion. If Sheriff Raeburn or any of her colleagues, in Glasgow or elsewhere, wish to impose a short sentence to provide respite, they will have the full support of this Administration.
Ignoring Labour’s scare stories for a moment, I am delighted that the cabinet secretary has confirmed that sheriffs will still be able to hand down a custodial sentence of three months or less if necessary. However, does he agree that people who are convicted of violent offences and are deemed to be a danger to the public should not be receiving short custodial sentences in the first place?
Absolutely. That is a fundamental point and it is a great tragedy that rather than the Labour Party looking at what Ed Miliband is trying to do south of the border and giving us a coherent penal policy, we get scare stories that are meant to inflame the situation. When someone needs to be sent to prison for a short prison sentence, whether because of domestic abuse or something else, the court will have our full support.
Could the cabinet secretary share with us the Government research that prompted it to introduce the policy initially? Leaving aside the issues that Mr Kelly has raised, the majority of the cases in which short periods of imprisonment were imposed were like those of the three-time disqualified and drunken driver, the shoplifter with 40 previous convictions, the domestic abuser, and people who were a nuisance to their community. Jail sentences are not handed out indiscriminately. Does the cabinet secretary think that he knows better than the sheriffs?
Not at all. I cannot provide the evidence at the moment—it is not in front of me—but anecdotally I can share with Mr Aitken the discussions that I had with the Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice, Ken Clarke. He was telling me about when he was Home Secretary in a Tory Government in the distant past and how, since then, prison numbers have continued to rocket. He persuaded me that the level of crime and anxiety in England have not rocketed to the same extent, and he thought that something was manifestly wrong.
Police and Fire Services (Angus)
In my statement on 12 January, I set out the Government’s ambitions for improving the performance, local accountability and financial sustainability of Scotland’s police and fire and rescue services.
I thank the cabinet secretary for his answer and welcome the news that major reform of our outdated police and fire service structure is to take place. Even if we were not facing unprecedented financial cuts from Westminster, there would still be a strong case for reducing the number of police and fire boards. Given the financial pressures that Westminster is imposing on us, can the cabinet secretary tell us how long it would be before maintaining the status quo started to affect the level of service that people could expect?
That is a valid point. We are clear that the status quo is already untenable and the financial strictures are beginning to hit—we see that in news coming from around the country. That is why we have to change, whether it is in the fire and rescue service or in the police.
Does the cabinet secretary agree that, whatever the future structure of our police service—and particularly if there is to be a single force—it will still be vital for people in Angus in my region and elsewhere that there is local accountability for decisions on police priorities? Given the importance of the issue, will he state prior to the election, as we have done, whether he supports a single police force?
I am entering into a consultation and I have set a direction of travel for the Government. I know that the Labour Party has made its final decision without trying to square the detail.
Scottish Court Service (Weapons)
The term “weapon” has been taken to mean any form of knife—the most prevalent being lock knives, penknives, kitchen knives and Stanley knives—along with scissors, loose blades for Stanley knives, open razors, razor blades and knitting needles. The number of weapons seized by the Scottish Court Service was 311 in 2007, 1,518 in 2008, 1,937 in 2009 and 2,030 last year.
I welcome the initiatives that have been taken to ensure that weapons are confiscated and people are brought to justice as a result. However, we know that, in Aberdeen and Dundee sheriff courts, hundreds of people have had so little regard for the minister’s soft-touch approach to the justice system that they have been prepared to bring weapons to the court and gain entry. Although we welcome the measures to resolve the matter in terms of detection, that behaviour shows a complete lack of respect for the Government’s approach. Will the minister finally see that his approach is not working and that it is time to join the tens of thousands of other Scots who want to see Labour’s plans for a minimum mandatory sentence for knife carriers brought into law?
I practised in the criminal courts in Scotland for 20 years and, during that period, which ended almost 12 years ago, security measures such as metal detectors were introduced. I think that they came in at a time when a Labour Government was in power. The problem is not new. It has been with us for some considerable time. However, it is clear that the actions that the Scottish Government is taking are working. A record police presence, whether in our communities or in our courts, is resulting in people feeling safer and more secure. We have the lowest recorded crime in 32 years and we have also seen a significant drop in violent crime, which is down to its lowest level since 1984.
What would have been the impact on the seizure of knives and other weapons if mandatory sentencing, as proposed by some parties, had been introduced? How would that have affected communities such as Inverclyde, where there has been a dramatic decrease in the number of knife-related incidents since the no knives, better lives initiative was established?
As I said, it is clear that significant progress has been made. The member is correct to point out that significant and substantial progress has been made in his own area of Inverclyde, which has been one of the most blighted areas. Wherever members sit in the chamber, they should recognise that progress.
Short Prison Sentences
As I briefly mentioned in response to Mr Aitken, I met the Secretary of State for Justice on 14 September last year and we discussed a range of issues including the importance of community sentencing. Since then—indeed, last month—the secretary of state published a green paper on reoffending, much of which I think we can welcome. The UK Government is setting out to reduce the use of short prison sentences, make increased use of community sentences and make such sentences more effective in terms of reducing reoffending. Legislation passed by this Parliament to move in the same direction is of course already on the statute book and will, I am glad to say, come into force on 1 February.
As well as noting the opposition of that wise elder statesman, Kenneth Clarke, to the routine imposition of short prison sentences, does the cabinet secretary not also agree with another elder statesman of Mr Clarke’s party, namely Edward Leigh, MP for Gainsborough, who when chairman of the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee drew attention to the fact that the reoffending rate for prisoners with sentences of less than 12 months was extremely high, with 60 per cent being convicted of another offence within a year of release? He therefore considered that short sentences “served little purpose”. Would the cabinet secretary welcome it if members of Mr Clarke’s and Mr Leigh’s party listened to their colleagues’ wisdom and supported the Government in this matter?
I would absolutely welcome that. I was not aware of that particular quotation, but I very much welcome it. Indeed, it follows on from the comments made by Kenneth Clarke to which I have already referred. I have no doubt that Mr Leigh’s statement will also be welcomed by Ed Miliband, even though it will fall on deaf ears up here.
I am sure that, like me, the cabinet secretary has met constituents whose communities have been blighted by individuals causing severe disruption and engaging in antisocial behaviour. Very often, those constituents have sought the help of the police, the antisocial behaviour unit and local housing providers without any success and it is not until cases get to court and the offenders in question are sent to prison, albeit for a very short time, that the constituents in those communities get any respite from that behaviour. What will the cabinet secretary tell his own constituents now that he has taken away the possibility of respite?
We have not taken that away. That is the whole purpose of retaining judicial discretion in such matters. I do not know what relationship the member has with Scottish Borders Council, but I point out that my constituency covers areas such as Craigmillar and Lochend, which have their fair share of trouble—more, perhaps, than some of the areas that he represents—and in my experience the community safety team at council level and the policing at police station level have been outstanding. There are, of course, difficulties and challenges to face and there are certain people who neither work for nor want to and cause great difficulties. However, that is why we have and seek to use antisocial behaviour orders and why those who are beyond such measures and face criminal charges are finding that they are going to prison—and for longer.
Domestic Abuse Courts
The domestic abuse court was established in Glasgow because of specific circumstances, primarily the volume and seriousness of cases being reported, and the lessons learned from that court have been used to develop a domestic abuse toolkit that is designed to help local sheriffdoms to decide how best to arrange domestic abuse cases in their area and recognises that approaches may vary depending on the number and pattern of cases being reported at local level. It will be for local justice partners to decide how to apply the toolkit in each sheriffdom.
I thank the minister for his reply and, indeed, welcome the toolkit. He will be aware that the advocacy provided at the domestic abuse court in Glasgow has been hailed as a great success in its provision of support and information to domestic abuse victims. Will he roll out that facility to other courts to ensure that victims in other areas of Scotland do not face a postcode lottery?
I recognise the member’s interest in this area; indeed, we are working with her to improve the law for all victims of domestic abuse. As she knows, the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service takes such matters very seriously all around Scotland and, as a case in point, the service provides specialist domestic abuse training for all legal staff. That is extremely important and the combination of victim support and effective court proceedings is helping to reduce repeat victimisation.
Previous
First Minister’s Question Time