Engagements
To ask the First Minister what engagements he has planned for the rest of the day. (S3F-376)
Presiding Officer, I am sure that everyone in the chamber will want to join me in expressing condolences to the families of those who were affected by the tragic events of last night on the River Clyde. It is with great regret that I can tell the Parliament that Clyde coastguard has confirmed that, as at an hour ago, the three missing crew have not been found. The search and rescue operation continues. However, it is possible that, given conditions and the limited hope of success, the operation may be scaled down shortly.
I thank the First Minister for his answer. Everyone in the chamber will want to associate themselves with the sentiments that he expressed. [Applause.]
First, on the press conference, Mr John Swinney has today answered in record time the 54 parliamentary questions that were lodged by MSPs. I look forward to Wendy Alexander answering one question on the finances of her leadership campaign. [Interruption.]
Order.
I am sure that, in the interests of this season of good will and the fairness and judiciousness that must come, Wendy Alexander will want to mention the letter from the permanent secretary, which makes it clear, first, that no civil servant has acted with anything other than total propriety and, secondly, that no civil servant has been asked to do anything improper. Does she now accept that ministers and civil servants have acted with total propriety?
Ms Alexander, can we have questions through the chair, please?
I have here the letter from the permanent secretary, in which he makes it crystal clear that
Wendy Alexander quotes the permanent secretary. He wrote that he has had
As others have pointed out, there was no live application at that time. [Interruption.]
Order.
I return to the question whether it is routine for a constituency MSP to bypass the planning directorate, go to the chief planner, and secure a meeting for developers in 12 hours and a call-in within 24 hours. I ask that because I want also to know why Mr Salmond's Government has been refusing since August—a period of more than three months—to meet the developers that are proposing a £1.2 billion development to regenerate the Rosyth naval dockyard.
I am just being told that the chief planner is meeting those developers, as he meets other developers in Scotland, which is also part—
Six months later.
Order.
Wendy Alexander should, just occasionally, check her facts before she asks a question.
The First Minister knows that there is concern in planning circles about the integrity of Scotland's planning system and whether it has been brought into question. It is completely without precedent for the Royal Town Planning Institute to write to ministers to express concern about the manner in which a case has been handled. This is not simply a political issue; it has become a professional issue.
I am sorry that, in this season of good will, Wendy Alexander has taken to casting aspersions on Government officials as well as Government ministers.
Answer the question.
George Foulkes, I ask you to desist.
Wendy Alexander has clearly not read the permanent secretary's letter, so I will read it to her again. The permanent secretary says:
Secretary of State for Scotland (Meetings)
To ask the First Minister when he will next meet the Secretary of State for Scotland. (S3F-377)
I will meet the secretary of state in late January to discuss taking forward the recommendations of the Gould report.
The First Minister, who is not a man to shun publicity, has recently been revelling in his political game with Westminster of anything you can do, I can do better—[Interruption.]
Order.
Bus operators in England were helped with their fuel bills by an increase in their fuel duty rebate last October, and another increase is likely in April. Why has the First Minister refused to give such help to bus operators in Scotland?
As Annabel Goldie well knows, the Government is giving substantial support to the bus industry in Scotland. We must consider extremely carefully the current high fuel prices and what they are doing to the competitive position not just of the bus industry and public transport, but of the haulage industry and rural areas of Scotland. That is why I was delighted to meet the Road Haulage Association yesterday.
Last week, I said that ignorance was not a condition with which I associated the First Minister. However, having listened to the First Minister's answer I realise that I inadvertently misled the Parliament—[Laughter.]
Order.
I was wrong and I apologise.
I am not the First Minister who was criticised for his varieties of kilt wearing, if I remember correctly.
Order.
On top of that, we have the freeze on council tax and yesterday we had John Swinney's magnificent announcement that, after years of prevarication, we will have a new crossing over the Forth, which will secure Scotland's transport infrastructure.
Cabinet (Meetings)
To ask the First Minister what issues will be discussed at the next meeting of the Cabinet. (S3F-378)
The next meeting of Cabinet will discuss issues of importance to the people of Scotland.
In June, the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Wellbeing said that she had a presumption against the centralisation of health services. She said that every proposal from health boards would be subject to rigorous independent scrutiny. Why was there no such scrutiny when she made the decision to end cleft palate surgery in Aberdeen and to centralise the service?
The decision was made in the interests of children across Scotland. Such decisions are always difficult, but the decision in question was made on the recommendation of the best advice available, as ministers do.
Why is it that when health boards want to close something, the health secretary says that there must be independent scrutiny of the proposals, but when she closes something, there is none of that?
Those things will be properly considered and announcements will be made at the time. I do not think that the situation will be helped by scaremongering from Nicol Stephen. [Interruption.]
Order.
I suspect that what Nicol Stephen has been accused of this week in the north-east of Scotland accounts for the change in emphasis of his questioning today. He has been accused—not by me, but by the Aberdeen Evening Express—not just of scaremongering, but of "gutter politics", scoring "cheap political points" and slinging mud. An epic editorial said:
All questions and answers should be referred through the chair at all times.
Will the First Minister give me a categorical assurance that the headquarters of the National Theatre of Scotland will not be moved from Easterhouse? Given that it is Christmas, could he for once give a straight answer to a straight question?
I cannot resist Margaret Curran at Christmas or at any other time of the year, so I give her the answer that the National Theatre of Scotland remains committed to its permanent home base at the Bridge in Easterhouse and to building on its links with the community there. I hope that Margaret Curran is satisfied with that answer at Christmas and that she would be satisfied with it at any other time of the year.
To ask the First Minister what representations the Scottish Government is making to Her Majesty's Government about the price of fuel in rural areas.
My apologies, Mr Allan. I understood that you had pressed your button to ask a supplementary question. I will come to you in a moment.
The First Minister is aware that NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde has completely ignored the recommendations of the independent scrutiny panel's report about the future of health services at the Vale of Leven hospital, much to the anger of local people. I welcome the swift action of the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Wellbeing.
The minister has already instructed the health board to take no action until the matter can be subject to independent scrutiny. I know that Jackie Baillie and the Labour benches will welcome the process of independent scrutiny. After all, that same process saved Monklands and the Ayr accident and emergency unit, which the Labour Party tried to close.
In January 2001, Bill Clinton was given the traditional opportunity that is afforded to American Presidents and asked by George Bush to nominate one project from his time in office that would be guaranteed by the new President. President Clinton nominated AmeriCorps, and today the number of young Americans volunteering full-time has expanded and passed the half million mark. AmeriCorps helped to inspire ProjectScotland, which was launched here with cross-party support in 2005. Among others, it benefited Amanda Munsey from my constituency, who is here in the gallery.
I must ask you to be brief, please.
ProjectScotland has succeeded with less than half the cost per place of its American cousin. The First Minister's decision to stop Government funding for ProjectScotland will deprive thousands of young Scots of an opportunity to change lives. Will the First Minister provide cheer for young Scots? Will he dispel the rumour that he is a Scrooge, and reinstate Government funding for ProjectScotland placements?
Jack McConnell knows that £1.4 million of funding is going into ProjectScotland next year. There is no doubt that the organisation does valuable work. He also knows that funding for voluntary sector projects across Scotland is increasing throughout the comprehensive spending review period. He would accept that the initial estimates of the balance between public money and private money, which looked at a 50:50 split, have not been realised. Although difficult decisions often have to be made about overall voluntary sector support, I accept that Jack McConnell is fully committed to the concept. I know that he will accept that within the increased funding to the voluntary sector, many organisations are doing substantially good work with young people. There are always difficult decisions in resource allocation, to ensure that the public purse gets the best effectiveness in helping young people throughout Scotland.
Fuel Prices (Rural Areas)
We have had the benefit of a dress rehearsal for question 4, which is from Alasdair Allan.
Without reference to my question, I am tempted to say that at this time of year, all pantomimes have dress rehearsals.
The Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Sustainable Growth has written to the Chancellor of the Exchequer asking that he consider reducing the level of fuel duty in certain rural parts of Scotland. Yesterday, the Minister for Transport, Infrastructure and Climate Change and I met the Road Haulage Association to discuss its concerns concerning high fuel prices.
The First Minister is aware from representations by Angus McNeil MP, me and many others that, in parts of my constituency, the price of petrol has reached £1.20 a litre. Does he agree that, particularly in Scotland's island communities, the United Kingdom Government's apparent refusal to consider either a fuel price regulator or any other mechanism to vary the rate of fuel duty in remote areas is hitting people in all income groups hard? Last night, the First Minister spoke at the Sabhal Mòr Ostaig lecture and confirmed the extent of his and the Government's commitment to the island economies. Will the Government impress on Her Majesty's Government that UK policy in that area appears to be working actively against such economic growth in rural areas?
In his letter to the chancellor, the cabinet secretary makes it clear that the single UK rate of fuel duty places an unfair burden on the inhabitants of remote rural areas. For obvious reasons, rural people are more vulnerable to rising fuel prices than people in many other parts of the country are; that is true not just in relation to personal or public transport, but because of their reliance on the Road Haulage Association to transport goods and the price of all goods in every shop.
Climate Change
To ask the First Minister how the agreement that was reached at the United Nations climate change conference in Bali will impact on the policy direction of the Scottish Government. (S3F-389)
The climate change policy direction of the Scottish Government is broadly in line with the agreement that was reached at the United Nations climate change conference in Bali.
Does the First Minister agree that we have an obligation to redouble our efforts to drive down our damaging climate change emissions? To that end, will he ensure that the Scottish Government's budget of around £30 billion in each of the next three years will contribute in each of those three years to delivering the 3 per cent year-on-year reductions that the SNP manifesto promised? Will he ask the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Sustainable Growth to report back to Parliament and itemise the predicted carbon impact up and down across the entire budget before this Parliament approves it?
I am sure that the carbon secretary—or indeed the cabinet secretary—will be delighted to report to Parliament. One of the substantial changes in this Government compared with the previous Executive is that our strategic objectives—for example, for a greener Scotland that encompasses the most ambitious statutory target in the world in the climate change bill—are shared by all Government representatives and all cabinet secretaries. I am absolutely certain—I see Labour members nodding and smiling—that the cabinet secretary will be delighted to come to the Parliament and explain just why this Government has set the most ambitious international target for meeting our climate change obligations.
In the past four years of the Lib Dem coalition Administration, recycling rates increased from 7 to 25 per cent under the ministerial guidance of Ross Finnie. Recently, the Sustainable Development Commission published a report on recycling levels.
Question, please.
The Scottish Government's detailed announcements—
I am sorry, but I must insist on a question. We do not have a lot of time left.
Okay. On the zero waste strategy, will the First Minister advise how his Government will ensure that Scotland meets its waste reduction targets when there are real-term cuts of £26 million in the total waste funding?
The cabinet secretary will make a statement on waste in the new year. I see some question marks on faces across the chamber, but the statement will reflect on the overall approach to climate change at the conference in Bali and to existing obligations. I am sure that the member will welcome the cabinet secretary's statement.
At the climate change conference in Bali, the Independent State of Samoa, population 214,000, the Principality of Liechtenstein, population 34,000, and—
Question, please, Mr Hepburn.
—the Federation of Saint Kitts and Nevis, population 39,000, had their own independent representation. What might the Government of Scotland, population 5 million, have pursued in Bali had it had its own independent representation?
First, we have the most ambitious climate change targets in the world, which will be discussed by this Parliament. Secondly, of course, were it not for the fact that Labour and Conservative members are in an unholy alliance to try to deny free education in Scotland, we would have been able to send a Government minister to Bali to support the UK delegation. Finally, I am certain that when we have international conferences in the future, the whole international community will be delighted to have the representative from an independent Scottish Government debating those issues of huge importance to humanity.
British Transport Police
To ask the First Minister whether it is the policy of the Scottish Executive to seek operational control over the activities of British Transport Police in Scotland. (S3F-391)
We have no intention of taking over operational control of any police force in Scotland. However, it is for ministers to set the framework within which the police in Scotland operate and we want all police in Scotland, including the British Transport Police, to operate in a way that meets the needs of all communities in Scotland. I have the most enormous confidence in the eight police forces of Scotland and the way in which they conduct their operations to ensure our safety as a community.
I share that confidence, but I extend it to all police forces operating in Scotland, including the British Transport Police, whose primary responsibility is the safety of all members of the travelling public in Scotland. The incident at Glasgow airport demonstrates that there is no room for complacency in Scotland when it comes to public safety. Accordingly, is it not the responsibility of the First Minister's Government to give its full support to all police forces working to protect our citizens rather than, as his Cabinet Secretary for Justice has done, carp and undermine them from the sidelines?
It is very interesting. In the days after the attack on Glasgow airport, when the chief constables of Scotland asked for powers of stop and search under section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000, there was a great deal of close questioning in meetings in the Scottish Executive emergency room and elsewhere on whether their powers were adequate to protect public safety in Scotland. Their answer was unambiguous: the use of stop and search would be rationed to that emergency and be fully compatible with what they regarded as their obligations to community solidarity in Scotland.
Previous
Question Time