SCOTTISH EXECUTIVE
Cabinet (Meetings)
To ask the First Minister what issues will be discussed at the next meeting of the Scottish Executive's Cabinet. (S1F-1159)
The Cabinet will next meet on 26 June when it will discuss issues of importance to the people of Scotland.
I am sure that the First Minister will agree that it is a matter of profound regret that 13,000 people die in Scotland each year as a result of smoking-related illness. The Scottish Parliament has asked the Westminster Parliament to legislate for a ban on tobacco advertising in Scotland. No such ban has been approved and, in the Queen's speech yesterday, no such plans were announced. Given that omission, will the First Minister take this opportunity to give a commitment to Parliament that he will introduce legislation to ban tobacco advertising in Scotland?
I am pleased that John Swinney has asked that question, post the Queen's speech, as the issue is one that unites the chamber. We have to move forward on the issue of tobacco advertising in relation to the bill that was discussed. However, it is also right to accept that, when the issue was discussed before, the Westminster Government was moving the item forward.
The First Minister's reply has not taken us much further forward. I draw to his attention comments made by the Deputy Minister for Health and Community Care at a meeting of the Health and Community Care Committee in January. He said:
There is nothing inconsistent in what the Deputy Minister for Health and Community Care said and what I have said. I have said that there are strong arguments for a UK-wide ban. There are significant reasons why an item that was included in a Labour party manifesto should be moved forward. The Queen's speech has not changed that specific commitment. I assure the chamber that, because of the seriousness with which we view the issue, we want to look at the position. Discussions are on-going between the Minister for Health and Community Care in Scotland and Alan Milburn.
There are two problems with the First Minister's answer. There is no bill: it was not in the Queen's speech. The First Minister has said that there is no change as a result of the Queen's speech, but no progress has been made as a result of it.
I repeat that the will exists to ensure that we move on this important item. The Labour party manifesto made a commitment to do so in Scotland; that same commitment was also contained in the United Kingdom manifesto. It is absolutely vital that we work together to have that legislation within the UK as quickly as possible, for all the practical reasons. As I have said, Mr Swinney can politicise the issue, but health and the impact of tobacco are too important to become a political football. A more moderate view of the matter would show that we want to go forward positively. Let us have a commonsense perspective that acknowledges the importance of implementing legislation on a UK-wide basis.
I ask the First Minister to answer one simple question. If there is that will, when will the legislation be enacted in the United Kingdom?
We cannot give a specific commitment on the time scale. That is a commonsense answer to a situation that has arisen since the Queen's speech was published. When we have just reaffirmed the commitment of Labour in Scotland and in the United Kingdom on this matter, it does nothing for the importance of the issue to undermine it with politics. Of course we want to move as quickly as possible. Discussions between the Scottish and United Kingdom health ministers should be allowed to proceed, to see what outcome they produce.
Prime Minister (Meetings)
To ask the First Minister when he will next meet the Prime Minister and what issues he will raise. (S1F-1157)
I last met the Prime Minister on 25 May. I expect that we will meet again soon.
I thank the First Minister for that answer. I am sure that the Prime Minister will be interested to know what the First Minister and the Executive intend to do with the Chancellor of the Exchequer's budget allocation of an additional £200 million to Scotland over the next three years, which—as the First Minister will recall from his press release—was supposed to be for key public services such as health and education. Will the First Minister tell us whether that is still the case or whether that allocation will now be used in part to meet the spiralling costs of the Holyrood project?
The answer to the first part is yes; the answer to the second part is no.
That is an interesting answer, especially as I suspect that later today the First Minister and his colleagues will vote for the blank-cheque motion to provide additional funding for the Holyrood project, which will now cost well in excess of the £195 million that was initially authorised by the Parliament. Given that the Scottish Executive has a fixed block grant of money from the Treasury, if more money is spent on Holyrood, less will be spent on public services in Scotland. Before we decide on the blank-cheque motion this afternoon, will the First Minister, if he intends to vote for the motion on Holyrood, tell us which budgets will be cut to pay for it?
It is complete nonsense—I repeat: complete nonsense—to suggest that the Executive will use money that is allocated for education spending to pay for the Holyrood building project.
Which budget?
Be patient. I knew that the first question was just a teaser. We will get to that point. The Executive has a reserve built into its plans, which enables it to live with additional costs while retaining existing levels of service and investment. Forgive me for being mischievous, Sir David, but the £20,000 million of cuts that we were faced with during the election campaign slightly puts into perspective Mr McLetchie's question and the answer that I have just given.
I have a more specific question for the First Minister. Yesterday, the Daily Record—which, as you know, Presiding Officer, is a reliable and accurate paper—carried a front-page story about existing education budgets, alleging that there would be a £25 million cut. Can the First Minister give an absolute guarantee that there will be no cut in the education budget? Furthermore, will he give a guarantee about the pledge made by the chancellor, Gordon Brown, before the election, that £66 million would be spent on school buildings and equipment in Scotland? Is that money guaranteed—yes or no?
On the latter point, the figure that Mr Neil has quoted is wrong, but we do not want to get too involved in the details. The suggestion that any funds from education will be used for the Holyrood project is simply untrue. Very soon indeed, we shall have a full budget announcement, which will look at the consequentials left by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Gordon Brown, and which will detail significant extra spending on health, education and drugs in line with the consequential issues that Gordon Brown lays down. As I said, that budget will be before the chamber soon, and we shall have a full discussion and debate on the matter.
Transport (Urban Areas)
To ask the First Minister how the Scottish Executive will ensure that the needs of commuters are balanced with the need to reduce traffic congestion in urban areas. (S1F-1163)
Commuters want real travel choices, not congestion. That is why we have substantially increased the public transport fund, set up a new integrated transport fund, given local authorities new powers to introduce congestion charging and, only this week, launched a travel awareness campaign aimed at encouraging motorists to think before they drive into our congested urban areas.
I draw the First Minister's attention to the fact that the number of Scots journeying by bus rose last year by 4 per cent, which is the first time in 13 years that bus use has increased. Is the Executive considering a variety of further steps to promote public transport as a means of curtailing traffic growth and the problems of congestion?
I am pleased to say that the Executive is considering further measures not only to improve public transport but to encourage more people to use it. The 4 per cent figure is encouraging. We are spending £150 million on the public transport fund, £75 million on the integrated transport fund, £200 million on the ScotRail franchise and £55 million on support for the bus industry. From autumn 2002 we will also have a radical new scheme to ensure that the 960,000 pensioners in Scotland can travel free on off-peak services every day of the week. That will reinforce the central message—travel by bus—and ensure that the viability of bus services in Scotland is enhanced. That has to be the way forward.
The First Minister says that commuters want real travel options, but the question that he should be answering is how he intends to ensure that Scotland gets its hands on the serious money to transform Scotland's railway industry and to reduce traffic congestion. How will Scotland secure its appropriate share of the £7 billion rail development fund that the Strategic Rail Authority is holding? How much of that £7 billion has Scotland already secured and what plans does the Executive have to ensure that we get our share?
With the Strategic Rail Authority and the ScotRail franchise, we want to ensure that Scotland gets its share of investment, as it will do. People ask in a pathetic way, "When will Scotland get a hold of serious money?" Is anyone in any doubt that £20 billion of investment in Scotland is serious money? It would be beneficial for Scotland if the substance of the vital issues that have been raised were taken more seriously and the politics were taken less seriously.
Will the First Minister tell us how many new rail routes the Executive is actively considering for development in the near future?
The financial figure is £30 million in the past three years, but Robin Harper raises a fair question. As a detailed answer is required, I would like to respond to his question in correspondence, if that is acceptable to him.
Question 4 is withdrawn.
On a point of order, Presiding Officer. A question that is withdrawn so late prevents you from selecting questions in an appropriate order for First Minister's question time. Would you ask SNP front-bench members to talk to one another and to get their questions right? Some of us had important supplementaries to question 4.
A note was passed to me that said that question 4 was withdrawn and that is the end of the matter.
Research (Nuclear Radiation)
To ask the First Minister whether an inquiry will be carried out into the use of children's bones without parental consent for research into nuclear radiation in the 1960s. (S1F-1161)
I am pleased to announce that the independent review group on the retention of organs at post mortem has agreed to investigate that very disturbing issue.
I appreciate the First Minister's answer. Does the First Minister share my concern that 2,100 femurs and bone samples were taken without parental consent? Does he support the inclusion of that information in Professor McLean's inquiry? Obviously, he does. Is he concerned that Professor McLean was unaware of the issue? Will he guarantee that the practice will not happen again? Will he confirm whether any other human studies have been carried out under the Atomic Energy Act 1954?
The issue is important and I will answer the questions as best I can. The Executive is deeply disturbed by recent press reports that suggest that, between 1959 and 1972, children's bones were removed at post mortem for research without parental consent. I think that the Executive's feelings are shared by all members. The Executive and the Parliament sympathise with all parents who have been distressed by that news. The Minister for Health and Community Care has stated publicly that parents are entitled to find out what happened to their children and that they should contact Yorkhill hospital.
Schools (Disruptive Behaviour)
To ask the First Minister what further progress is being made in reducing disruptive behaviour in schools and creating a school environment where all children can pursue their education. (S1F-1164)
The discipline task group's report was published on Tuesday 19 June. It makes 36 wide-ranging and comprehensive recommendations about ways in which school discipline can be improved. I am sure that the report will make a real difference to the ethos in our schools. Copies of the report are being issued to all schools and MSPs before the end of term. An implementation plan will be drawn up and published in the autumn.
Will the First Minister confirm that, to help children to pursue their education, the provision of modern learning environments is vital? It will cost my local authority, Inverclyde Council, £60 million simply to keep its schools wind and watertight for the next 15 years. Will the First Minister confirm that local authorities throughout Scotland can expect the Executive's support in developing the educational infrastructure that our children deserve?
Yes. There has already been significant investment in the fabric of teaching environments in schools and in school buildings. The Minister for Education, Europe and External Affairs is keen to promote positive educational environments. Over the next three years of the spending round, there will be significant investment in our schools to ensure that. Quality is essential and the Executive will invest in it.
Will the First Minister explain why, since new Labour came to power, the backlog of school repairs throughout Scotland has grown from £1 billion to £1.4 billion? Is he aware that, in evidence to the Local Government Committee, both Falkirk Council and Dundee City Council advised that capital depreciation on assets—including schools—is twice the current level of capital expenditure? Does he agree that the Executive's stinginess has led to the continuing state of chronic disrepair of many of our schools?
Many phrases come to mind, but "No" would be the most suitable start to this answer. It is important to recognise that there is a backlog of work, which we must tackle—no one denies that. After many decades of underinvestment, it is important that we start investing. The second point is that we have a phased programme, which considers the priorities in Scotland and where the first investment should go. We hope that, over the next three years, the three years after that and beyond, the backlog will be tackled and every child in Scotland will have a school environment in which they can work and be successful and of which their parents can be proud.
Previous
Question TimeNext
Holyrood Project