First Minister’s Question Time
Engagements
1. For the last time in 2012, I ask the First Minister what engagements he has planned for the rest of the day. (S4F-01073)
I am delighted to announce that I will be speaking to the Minister for Energy, Enterprise and Tourism, Fergus Ewing, who is at Nigg to announce that the Scottish company the Global Energy Group is to increase its workforce at the Nigg energy park by 50 per cent, which is 400 new jobs. The applications for those jobs will start today, which makes fantastic news for the re-industrialisation of the Cromarty area and is a great Christmas present for the Highlands of Scotland.
We on this side of the chamber always welcome good news in relation to opportunities for people to work. [Interruption.]
Order.
Over the past year, the First Minister has told us that he had legal advice on the European Union, when he had not; that college funding was going up, when he was cutting it; and that we would have a seat on the monetary policy committee of the Bank of England, when he had not even spoken to it. Which one of those answers was the most exact ever given to any Parliament anywhere? [Laughter.]
That is a bundle of laughs at Christmas, is it not? The ancient Mayan civilisation predicted that the end of the world will come tomorrow; Johann Lamont comes here and predicts it every single week. [Interruption.]
Order.
The First Minister has obviously not been attending the same First Minister’s question time as I have for the past year. [Interruption.]
Order.
I am, of course, ever an optimist about the First Minister’s reflecting at some point on the gap between what he says and what he does.
However, I think that we can all agree that this has been a tough year for everyone—money has been tight almost everywhere. Some of us might ask “What could we do with half a million pounds? Maybe 60 nurses or 40 teachers?” However, in Alex Salmond’s world, half a million pounds gets you five days watching golf in Chicago. What was the First Minister’s preferred foreign investment opportunity visit of the year? Was it his half a million pound trip to the Ryder cup or his trip to the pictures in California?
Promotion of Scotland is of huge importance. [Interruption.]
Order.
If I remember correctly, there were three direct jobs announcements as a result of the Scottish Enterprise and Scottish Government mission to Chicago. I know that Johann Lamont welcomes, as she has just told us, all those new jobs for Scotland.
It is worth reflecting that something that we should be cheered about at Christmas is that an Ernst & Young survey once again shows that Scotland is the top location for inward investment in these islands. Given that, and given that we even exceeded London this year, we must be doing something right in terms of promotion of Scotland abroad. So, perhaps—in the spirit of Christmas and unity that I know Johann Lamont is aspiring to—she will welcome if not the success of the Government, then the success of Scottish Enterprise and Scottish Development International in bringing those valuable new jobs to Scotland.
I am not sure that the First Minister’s half a million pound trip to the Ryder cup was what brought those jobs to Scotland. If we were concerned about bringing jobs, perhaps we would not be attacking the very colleges that create the skills and, therefore, the opportunities for people.
Of course, the First Minister has moved this year—I am not talking about his proposed flit from Bute house to St Andrew’s tower. We may recall that when David Cameron called for talks on the referendum, the First Minister said that it was
“an extraordinary attempt to bully and intimidate Scotland”.
Then he signed the timetable and said that it was an “historic” moment. Who has been the First Minister’s favourite visitor to Edinburgh this year: is it David Cameron, or is it Rupert Murdoch coming round for a Tunnock’s teacake? Does he now regret not getting the Dalai Lama round for a caramel wafer?
I think that what would be a fundamental attack on Scotland’s colleges would be the imposition of tuition fees on the 26,000 students in our colleges who currently do not pay tuition fees.
I think that it was unwise of Johann Lamont to cite David Cameron. I have been looking at Prime Minister’s question time from yesterday. David Cameron attacked Ed Miliband for having
“the same old something-for-nothing culture that got us in this mess in the first place”—[Official Report, House of Commons, 19 December 2012; Vol 555, c 844.]
which directly reflects the “something for nothing” speech of Johann Lamont. After one year in office as the Labour Party leader in Scotland, she receives the ultimate accolade: she is quoted by the Tory Prime Minister, in support, in the House of Commons. What a disgrace.
Of course, the First Minister’s problem is that John Swinney wanted to have that debate. That is why he asked Campbell Christie to commission a report. That report said that we need to deal with competing demands.
The reality is that the price—which the First Minister denied—of his education choices is cuts in college places and our schools having a growing gap between the rich and the poor. He knows that; perhaps in the new year he will want to confront the reality of it.
However, we are now in the Christmas spirit. [Interruption.]
“It says here.”
Order. Mr Swinney!
What I say does not need to be written down, because it is in my very heart. It is in my very heart, First Minister, because we are, of course, approaching Christmas. After such a historic year of success,
“in terms of the debate”—[Laughter.]—
I presume that the First Minister will want to hand out Christmas presents to his successful team. Perhaps there will be a congratulatory abacus and spell-checker for Mike Russell, a talking doll for John Swinney, so that he can learn what “dialogue” actually means, or even a shovel for Nicola Sturgeon so that she is always shovel-ready to clean up the First Minister’s next bit of mess. [Interruption.]
Order.
May I wish everyone in the chamber and everyone in the country a happy Christmas and a peaceful and more prosperous new year. [Interruption.]
Order.
In the First Minister’s case, may I wish him as good a year next year as he has had this year. [Interruption.]
Order.
I notice that Johann Lamont only becomes cheerful and gets in the Christmas spirit when she moves away from Paul Sinclair’s script and speaks from the heart. I advise much more of that over the next year.
Let us, however, celebrate something else today: let us celebrate the Universities and Colleges Admissions Service figures that have been released, which show a 1 per cent increase in students going to Scottish universities, compared with the 26,000 decline in English students going to English universities. Let us consider that both the college and the university funding positions in Scotland are hugely greater than those south of the border.
What part of the argument for imposing tuition fees on university students and on 26,000 college students would actually increase the numbers of students going to university or college? Cannot we look at the catastrophe south of the border and hope that all parties will maintain the commitment that they made in the chamber—by a huge majority—not to have up-front or back-end tuition fees in Scotland?
Just to check—in the Christmas spirit—that my memory was not playing tricks, I consulted the Scottish Labour website this very day. I advise members to consult it quickly, because it might be down by Christmas. It says—there is a picture of Johann Lamont—
“No up-front or back-end tuition fees for Scottish students”.
On the web, there are pictures of Jenny Marra, Lewis Macdonald and Richard Baker all signing the pledge against tuition fees. It bears a remarkable resemblance to the pledge that Nick Clegg signed before his party nosedived.
As we approach the coming year, let us hope that Johann Lamont will not relish the fact that she is cited by David Cameron in the new Tory-Labour alliance in Scotland, and that she will return to not just the roots of the Labour Party and the Scottish National Party but the Scottish tradition of free education, so that we can say with confidence to the students of Scotland—not just next year but for all time—that free education will be part of the Scottish tradition. That way we can pave a future for the people of Scotland—not just for Christmas, but for all time.
Secretary of State for Scotland (Meetings)
2. I wish you, Presiding Officer, and indeed the whole chamber all the compliments of the season.
To ask the First Minister when he will next meet the Secretary of State for Scotland. (S4F-01070)
I reciprocate.
I have no plans to meet the secretary of state in the near future.
The First Minister did not appear to like the pantomime routine—it is just as well that people in the public gallery were not charged. Let us play this one straight.
Yesterday, the Cabinet Secretary for Finance, Employment and Sustainable Growth pledged to spend £205 million of the money he received from the Chancellor of the Exchequer’s autumn statement to start what he called a “building boom” in Scotland. However, last year he pledged to spend up to £350 million this financial year through the non-profit-distributing building fund for schools and hospitals.
How much of that will actually have been spent by the end of this financial year?
The non-profit-distributing system is such a success that it is intended to be copied at Westminster by a chancellor who now declares, in his words, that the private finance initiative has been “discredited”. In the spirit of Christmas, I congratulate the Conservative Party on its realisation that the private finance initiative has now been totally discredited and I hope that its new allies in the Labour Party will soon join the consensus and see the sense in the non-profit-distributing model and the nonsense in PFI.
As the First Minister should know, NPD is “such a success” that, according to the Scottish Parliament information centre, of the £350 million pledged, the princely sum of £20 million will be spent: £330 million less than the finance secretary pledged and has available.
That is on top of the year before, when the finance secretary pledged up to £150 million but spent nothing: zero pounds and zero pence. Up to £480 million was promised to build schools and hospitals, yet was never delivered. If yesterday’s £205 million can be heralded as a “building boom” that will secure 2,000 jobs, surely, by the Government’s own figures, £480 million would have been a building bonanza that could have secured nearly 5,000 jobs.
Millions of pounds have been promised to help the construction industry but next to nothing is being built, which is why it is so important that yesterday’s announcement is not just more seasonal spin. Scotland cannot afford to wait for these shovel-ready projects to be cynically delayed until just before the 2014 referendum.
Will the First Minister tell us what the finance secretary refused to confirm yesterday: in which months in 2013 will the £205 million-worth of projects start and when will the unspent £480 million that was previously promised actually be released?
Regarding the years in planning of capital spending, I point out to Ruth Davidson that if the Conservative Party had not cut the capital budget—even under revisions—by 26 per cent, these funds could have been spent directly over the past two years.
I draw Ruth Davidson’s attention to the most significant non-profit-distributing project in Scotland, the Aberdeen western peripheral route, which might explain her question. I think that the chamber will agree that it is not the Government’s responsibility that the Aberdeen western peripheral route was taken through the Scottish courts, right the way to the Supreme Court. Should the Government have battled its way through to a position in which the route can go ahead and the NPD funding allocated to it can go ahead in that time, or should we—according to Ruth Davidson—have spent the money on something else and therefore not now be able to go ahead with the peripheral route?
I make that point seriously to Ruth Davidson, because folk across the north-east of Scotland are celebrating that at last the shovels are in the ground.
If we had left it to Ruth Davidson—[Interruption.]
Order.
—the money to build the peripheral route would not have been there because she would have spent it on something else that she has not defined—if we had left it to the Tory Party. If the Tory Party had listened to John Swinney two years ago, the money for the projects in line for this financial year, the next and the year after could already have been spent in Scotland.
In terms of public finance, I see that the Morning Star and The Daily Telegraph—[Interruption.]
Order.
All right—I will put them the other way round. The Daily Telegraph and the Morning Star were this week united in agreement with the National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers that the aborted and abandoned bidding process for the west coast route could waste £100 million. Perhaps in the spirit of Christmas the Conservative Party and Ruth Davidson will reflect on what that £100 million, potentially wasted by Tory ministers, could have done if it had been invested in the economy and, as the party of omnishambles, will not at any time in 2013 come across to this chamber and start talking to this Government about economic confidence.
I will now take a number of constituency questions.
I wonder whether the First Minister is aware that Swift Horsman Ltd, a high-quality joinery provider, went into receivership just two days ago, resulting in 40 redundancies in the town of Dalbeattie in my constituency. Coming on top of 12 redundancies at BSW Timber in the same town, this loss of 52 jobs is certainly not a welcome Christmas present to that rural community where alternative employment is far from plentiful.
What will the First Minister’s Government do to ensure that all available support and advice is given to the affected employees, particularly at this time of year, and what assistance can and will the Government give to the receivers, PricewaterhouseCoopers, in searching for a buyer for Swift Horsman’s now-empty premises?
I thank Alex Fergusson for his question. As he knows, the Swift Horsman group has gone into receivership, which puts at risk many jobs across the United Kingdom, including 40 to 50 in his area of Scotland. As soon as the partnership action for continuing employment team became aware of the situation, it contacted the administrators to offer support and I understand that representatives from the local PACE team are visiting the site this morning to speak to individuals and identify what support will be needed. The position is very difficult at any time of year but particularly at this time of year. I know that Alex Fergusson is well aware of the PACE team’s substantial success in redeploying people in similar situations elsewhere and every effort will be made to bring about the same success in his constituency.
On Tuesday morning, staff at the University Marine Biological Station at Millport in my constituency were given the kind of early Christmas present no one wants when they were told that the facility will close next year after the owners, the University of London, decided not to invest in modernising the facility, despite the fact that £1.7 million had already been raised from other sources. This internationally renowned centre supports 40 local jobs on Cumbrae, an island that Highlands and Islands Enterprise already considers to be fragile, and if closure proceeds specialist staff will be unable to find similar employment in Ayrshire—and possibly Scotland—and will have to leave Cumbrae, which will have a huge impact on the island economy.
Is the First Minister able to advise the chamber on what the Scottish Government can and will do to prevent this facility from being asset-stripped of its vital research vessels and hyperbaric chamber and whether ministers and agencies will work to develop a rescue package to ensure that we retain this important educational facility?
This is an extremely difficult situation in what is a fragile island economy. As the member is aware, the station is owned by the University of London; it is not actually used by any Scottish university at present, although the Scottish Further and Higher Education Funding Council contributes some funding to it. Funding has also been offered to the University of London from a variety of sources. The Cabinet Secretary for Education and Lifelong Learning will happily broker meetings between the University of London and other interested parties to ensure that all potential options can be explored.
As with the example in the previous question, the chamber will be well aware that what might seem in global terms a relatively small number of jobs is massive to an island or rural community in terms of the scope and impact on the economy. That is true of the situation in the south-west of Scotland and in Millport, and the member can be assured that the cabinet secretary will explore every possible option to see what can be done to help the local community.
Is the First Minister aware of the fears of NHS Lothian staff, who are reporting tremendous pressure on beds at the Edinburgh royal infirmary and the Western general in what the health board has described as unprecedented demand? Will the First Minister ask his health secretary to engage with the reality of what is happening in our national health service instead of issuing complacent reassurances?
I do not think that that corresponds to anything that the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Wellbeing has said. NHS Lothian’s medical director has reassured patients that beds are available across all hospital sites and that the board at no point has had to—or will have to—stop admitting patients to hospital. As the member will be aware, there are a number of reasons for the real pressure on beds at present, including some of the illnesses that are widespread in the community. However, the member can be assured that Government ministers and particularly the health board are concentrating on the issue to ensure that patient care is maintained at the highest possible standard.
Cabinet (Meetings)
3. To ask the First Minister what issues will be discussed at the next meeting of the Cabinet. (S4F-01079)
The Cabinet will discuss issues of importance to the people of Scotland.
Two months ago, I asked the First Minister to extend nursery education for two-year-olds. He said that he would consider it. Now that he has had time, what decision has he reached?
As Willie Rennie well knows, a range of initiatives have already been announced within the overall ambit of getting it right for every child, such as the offer of 600 hours for three and four-year-olds; the incentives that have been offered to family centres to expand their operations across Scotland; and the incentive for family nurse partnerships, which apply to children younger than two and which can make a real difference to some of the most challenged families in our community. A range of measures are there.
An all-party group is considering those matters and, as the member knows, measures will come forward in legislation. Given the emphasis that has been put on early years development, it cannot seriously be said that the Government does not have a focus and concentration on that. Substantial and important improvements are being made to enhance the life chances of children in Scotland.
All members will welcome the extra provision that the First Minister mentions but, in England, 40 per cent of two-year-olds are to get 15 hours a week of nursery education. The future provision for three and four-year-olds is good but, as the First Minister will know, Professor James Heckman is clear that investment that is made before the age of three gets the best return.
Will the First Minister today commit to—or at least give an indication that he is prepared to consider—extra provision for 40 per cent of two-year-olds? That could be transformational and could help disadvantaged children to get a good start in life. I therefore press the First Minister again. Members from all parties, including his own, agree that we should make such provision. Will he take that important step today?
I will say two things in seriousness to Willie Rennie. First, he is aware that the 600-hour commitment for three and four-year-olds is much greater than what is being allocated in England. Secondly, he should not disregard the importance of family centres and family nurse partnerships in providing targeted support. The task force that is working on the issue is working extremely hard to bring about the best possible position for young people in Scotland.
I could cite a whole variety of sources from English local authorities who are seriously questioning whether aspects of what is said to be on offer in England can actually be delivered. Given the resource position that they face, a range of English local authority leaders and other experts seriously doubt that everything can be delivered. However, we can be confident that what has been announced in Scotland to date—the 600-hour commitment for three and four-year-olds and the expansion of family nurse partnerships and family centres—will actually be delivered. The all-party group that is meeting on the issue keeps the matter under continuing review. The focus of that group will be important in Government decision making, as will the statutory commitment.
That package represents a substantial enhancement of provision in Scotland, and it is fully in line with the shift to early support and early intervention that is the hallmark of this Government, even in times of great financial stringency, which, as Willie Rennie will remember, is being imposed by a Government of which—[Laughter.] Labour members are laughing—I did not know that the alliance on the referendum extended to thinking that we are not in a period of financial stringency that is imposed by a Tory-Liberal Government at Westminster. That is a reality of this year and next. Members should bear it in mind that substantial efforts are being made in Scotland. That sincere commitment will improve and enhance the life chances of younger people in Scotland, including those who are most at risk.
Alcohol (Minimum Unit Pricing)
4. To ask the First Minister what discussions the Scottish Government has had with the United Kingdom Government regarding the Scottish Government’s submission to the European Union on minimum pricing for alcohol. (S4F-01080)
There has been regular contact with the UK Government on minimum pricing. Early in the new year, the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Wellbeing, Alex Neil, will meet the UK Government’s relevant minister of state, Jeremy Browne MP, to discuss the matter further.
In framing the reply to the European Commission, we continue to engage within and outwith Scotland with those who agree that minimum unit pricing should form a key part of the response to alcohol misuse.
The UK Government has shown its willingness to support the measure and has launched its own consultation into minimum pricing—showing once again that where Scotland leads the rest of the UK follows.
Can the First Minister give an assurance that this Government will continue to promote the public health argument on pricing, based on article 36 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union?
Yes, I can. It is worth noting that the public health benefits of minimum pricing, a policy that is now supported substantially across this chamber, are being recognised elsewhere in Europe. Just last week, the Irish Government’s Minister for Health, Dr James Reilly, said:
“I wish to express my full support for the Scottish proposals on minimum unit pricing of alcohol. This is an important policy measure to reduce the harmful consumption of alcohol, and in this regard, the Irish Department of Health is preparing proposals for similar legislation in Ireland.”
It is important to have that degree of support from an international partner at any time, but it is particularly important at a time when—as will be the case from 1 January—Ireland chairs the Council of the European Union.
Homelessness
5. To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government’s position is on Shelter Scotland’s claim that one in four people believe they are “one pay cheque away” from losing their home. (S4F-01084)
Shelter’s new research highlights how unemployment puts families at greater risk of repossession, eviction and homelessness. The Government remains focused on economic growth in order to protect and create jobs and to avoid families being placed in this position in the first place. I was thus pleased by the drop in unemployment in Scotland in the latest quarter.
Importantly, in terms of housing and housing legislation, from 31 December all those in Scotland who are assessed as unintentionally homeless by local authorities will be entitled to settled accommodation. In addition, Scotland has the strongest legislative protection anywhere across these islands for those at risk of repossession.
Many families will spend a period of time in temporary accommodation before being able to be housed, and Shelter has also highlighted that 5,300 homeless children will wake up in temporary housing on Christmas day because their family have no home to call their own. What consideration will the Government give to introducing national guaranteed standards for temporary accommodation for homeless families with children?
We give all measures serious consideration, including that one.
A few weeks ago, I delivered the Edwin Morgan lecture, which was organised by Shelter. There was huge support for legislative improvement in relation to homelessness and a recognition of the sharp fall in homelessness applications since 2005-06, when there were more than 60,000, to 2011-12, when there were more than 45,000. That represents substantial progress, as does the legislative framework that gives all unintentionally homeless people equal rights before the law.
Although there are challenges still to overcome—and all good suggestions will be properly considered—the chamber, like Shelter, should be proud of the legislative framework that this Parliament has put in place and should note that, according to the statistics, as homelessness is falling in Scotland it is rising elsewhere in these islands.
Festive Season Industrial Action
6. To ask the First Minister what action is being taken to minimise disruption from industrial action over the festive season. (S4F-01074)
That is maybe one of those questions that seem like a good idea on Monday.
If a week is a long time in politics, the three days since I lodged that question on Monday have proven to be a very long time in industrial relations.
Will the First Minister join me in welcoming the resolution of the industrial dispute between ScotRail and the National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers and, in the spirit of the season, will he join me in wishing all travellers and those working for them in the sector a safe journey and a very happy Christmas?
Yes, I will. The fact is that the RMT and ScotRail dispute is settled; the RMT and CrossCountry dispute is settled; the Unite and First Aberdeen dispute is settled; the British Medical Association hospital doctors dispute is settled; and in the RMT and Serco dispute over NorthLink Ferries, the strike has been suspended. All of that is welcome news.
Unfortunately, I have to report that the London tube strike on Boxing Day is still going ahead, which is very disappointing given that even the trams in Edinburgh were running yesterday. [Laughter.] The advent of Murdo Fraser’s question clearly focused minds in Scotland to come to a satisfactory conclusion in advance of his asking it. I am certain that, if he puts the same mind and advice to the aid of Boris Johnson down in London, they will get a result there as well.