Plenary, 21 Nov 2002

Meeting date: Thursday, November 21, 2002

Official Report 712KB pdf

---

First Minister's Question Time

---

Secretary of State for Scotland (Meetings)

To ask the First Minister when he next plans to meet the Secretary of State for Scotland and what issues he intends to raise. (S1F-2270)

Following the visit of pupils from St Ninian's Primary School to the Parliament this morning, and their exhortation to us to use the Scots language, perhaps I should tell the Secretary of State for Scotland at our next meeting that she should ignore the girning and greeting of the Opposition, admire a Government and a coalition that are hoatching with talent, and be chuffed when we win the elections next year.

Perhaps she should also forget the blethering and the haivering from the Executive's part of the chamber.

I thank the First Minister for his answer, and compliment him on his initiative this morning in relation to the celebration of St Andrew's Day, which will be warmly supported on this side of the chamber. I also congratulate him on surviving a year in office as First Minister.

When the First Minister took office 12 months ago, he said that he wanted to be judged on the integrity of his actions. Is it not clear that the First Minister has failed to convince not only the people of Scotland about that integrity, but his local Labour party? I ask the First Minister what action he plans to take to restore his integrity in office.

I am happy to reflect on the past 12 months and the way in which the Government of Scotland is being run, with a more open and transparent system in everything from briefing our good colleagues in the press to the way in which matters are handled in the chamber.

I am happy to reflect on a new agenda for Scotland that covers issues as diverse as environmental justice, sectarianism and growing our economy. I am also happy to reflect on specific achievements: 20,000 modern apprenticeships; new youth courts and fast-track children's hearings; Scotland's first national park; the biggest school-building programme that Scotland has ever seen; and the purchase of the Health Care International hospital at Clydebank for the national health service.

My question was about the First Minister's integrity in office. Today, the First Minister has been accused by a member of his own party—[Members: "Look behind you."]

Order. Members must listen to the question.

I may have my critics, but none of them accuses me of obstructing inquiries into theft, which is what has been alleged in the newspapers today. The First Minister has been accused of obstructing an inquiry, issuing contradictory answers and misleading Parliament. Does the First Minister not accept that the only way for him to conclude the matter—which he has admitted is preventing him from getting on with his job—would be to make a full disclosure of all the issues and information in the case?

As I have said before, it would be an irresponsible First Minister who would prejudice a police inquiry by providing information that should be provided only to the police. I hope that Mr Swinney will reflect on that.

As I have also said before, it is vital that the position of First Minister is upheld with the utmost integrity, openness and transparency. It is important that First Ministers build trust in their policies as well. The policies that have been implemented over the past 12 months—introducing real action to tackle drugs; to tackle crime; to boost and grow our economy; to tackle the problems in our health service; and to raise educational standards—show the integrity of this office. I am concentrating on the priorities of the people of Scotland and not being deflected by political enemies, whether internal or external.

This has got nothing to do with a police inquiry. Unless I have missed something, the First Minister is not under investigation by the police—or perhaps he has something else to tell Parliament.

The First Minister says that his integrity is built on what he delivers in the public services. Perhaps his integrity should be built on telling the truth to his party and to Parliament. The First Minister says one thing in the Parliament while members of his constituency party say the opposite. Both versions cannot be true. Somebody is not telling the truth. Does the First Minister accept that, without full disclosure on this case, the public might be left with the suspicion that in this saga the First Minister is not telling the truth?

Over the past three and a half years, that is exactly the sort of trivia and obsession with matters that are not the substance of Parliament that have led us to a situation whereby people in Scotland have lost confidence, at times, in the Scottish Parliament. The best way for us to renew that confidence and to ensure that the people of Scotland believe that devolution can make a difference for them is to ensure that our policies are consistently implemented, our promises are delivered and that we have action on key services.

The Scottish National Party wants to talk about trust and consistency, but only today the SNP called for the introduction of drug courts in Scotland for drug dealers. People across Scotland want to see us locking up the dealers in our prisons, taking the dealers' profits and putting them back into the community, and preventing drugs from getting into the country. People in Scotland do not want drug dealers to be sent to drug courts where the maximum sentence might be 28 days. That is nonsense. The SNP's policies are not consistent. Only by consistent policies will we change Scotland.

---

Prime Minister (Meetings)

To ask the First Minister when he will next meet the Prime Minister and what issues he intends to raise. (S1F-2272)

I have no immediate plans to meet the Prime Minister. However, tomorrow I will host the British-Irish summit in New Lanark. It will be the first time that the summit has been held in Scotland. In addition to representatives from the Westminster Government, the Irish Taoiseach and the First Minister of Wales will attend the summit.

I wish the First Minister well in those important discussions. However, when he gets round to meeting the Prime Minister, I am sure that he will be interested to hear the First Minister's views on the rising costs of the new Parliament building at Holyrood. As members will know, at the time of the referendum, £40 million was the all-inclusive cost for a new-build Parliament in Leith. I have a letter from Sir Muir Russell, the permanent secretary, which confirms that and which can be inspected at Labour members' leisure.

The cost of the Holyrood building is now well over £300 million, which is nine times the original estimate. This week the First Minister said in an interview that the Holyrood building has been the

"single biggest disappointment in devolution."

He is right; in fact, it is a national scandal. However, does the First Minister accept that we have arrived at this situation because of the political decisions that were taken by a Labour Government, because of the votes that were cast on four separate occasions in the chamber by Labour and Liberal members, and because of the blank cheques that were signed by successive ministers for finance, including Mr McConnell? Is Holyrood not, in fact, the house that Jack built?

A good try, would be a good response to that. As Mr McLetchie is aware, I share the public concern that has existed for some time about the rising costs of the Holyrood building. However, I have also said consistently, before and since becoming First Minister, that in addition to ensuring that there is maximum control over the Holyrood expenditure and that the building is completed as quickly as possible, we must finish the project. We would be in an even worse situation if the building were left in some hiatus because of political debate.

Therefore, I think that we should all regret and learn some serious lessons from the situation that has arisen; I welcome the Presiding Officer's comments this week when he made that very point on behalf of the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body. I also think that it is important that the finished building is a building that Scotland can be proud of and that all of us, regardless of what we might think of what has taken place over the past four years, should get on with the business of publicising the new Parliament building.

We all know that the First Minister is not very good with money. However, while John Swinney has been asking about a few thousand pounds in Wishaw, I am asking the First Minister about at least £280 million, for which he and his colleagues are most certainly responsible. It is public money—coming out of their budget, for which they are responsible—that should have been spent on schools, hospitals and roads but has instead been wasted on Holyrood. The First Minister says that he regrets the situation, but if he even half-heartedly acknowledges that his Government and his predecessors have been responsible for wasting £280 million in the first four years of this Parliament, how can we have any confidence that they will manage the public finances any better in the next four years?

Each June, when the money that is carried over from one year to the next is allocated in the budget, Mr McLetchie is keen to point out that not enough money is being spent and that the budget is under too much control. He should be consistent in his accusations. The budget of the devolved Scottish Government is well under control. The Executive has never overspent in the three-and-a-half years of devolution and the individual—

It has underspent by far too much.

Even the individual projects—

There was an underspend of £643 million last year.

Mr Sheridan might be keen on chucking public money around willy-nilly, but I am not. Spending public money properly is the key job of this devolved Government and ensuring that money that is not properly spent in one financial year is carried over into the next financial year is another.

In all those areas, the Scottish Executive budget that I am responsible for is well managed. We should all—including the Conservatives, who have a representative on the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body, which is responsible for the Holyrood project—accept our responsibilities, learn lessons and ensure that a similar escalation of costs never happens again.

Does the First Minister accept that BP's decision yesterday to cut 40 per cent of the jobs at the Sullom Voe oil terminal in Shetland is a serious blow to the islands' economy, especially when it is faced with the impending devastation of the fishing cuts? Will he ensure that the enterprise agencies and local council are given adequate resources, through such investments as the fibre optic cable and potential renewable energy projects, to tackle that likely economic downturn?

In the future, those and other measures would be helpful to the economy, not only in Shetland, but in the rest of the Highlands and Islands. Those communities have received bad news, but, in the past year, Shetland and elsewhere have been given the good news that, after decades of decline, the population of the Highlands and Islands is increasing. The Highlands and Islands have witnessed a renaissance of strong and sustainable cultural and economic activity. Also, there is evidence of new opportunities, not just in renewable energy, but through other forms of energy and measures that will give the economy of the Highlands and Islands the boost and opportunities that Parliament would welcome.

---

Drugs Courts

To ask the First Minister what success the introduction of drugs courts has had in reducing crime and drug addiction. (S1F-2281)

The six-month evaluation of the Glasgow drugs court, which was published last week, concluded that the initiative is a success. All those on drugs court orders reported significant reductions in drug use and offending, which is supported by evidence from the drugs court team. The full impact of the drugs court will be known when the evaluation is complete.

Does the First Minister agree that the challenge that we face is not just ensuring that the drugs courts work, but ensuring that local communities see a decline in the activities of drug dealers? Will he accompany me to the Blackthorn Street area of my constituency to meet local people who are affected by the activities of drug dealers?

I would be happy to do that, diary permitting. I am also happy to recognise the importance of both parts of the strategy to tackle drug abuse in Scotland. On the one hand, we need to be very tough on the dealers. We must ensure not only that we lock up more dealers in Scotland, but that we lock up the right dealers and get them at the right time. We must ensure that we lock up the big dealers and that we take their profits from them and put those profits back into the community. On the other hand, we need drugs courts and other measures to ensure that the proper treatments are in place to stop people using drugs and to ensure that the dealers do not have a market for what they want to sell.

Silly proposals about sending drug dealers to drugs courts do not help that debate. I want to ensure that, in Scotland, we get the dealers and get people off drugs too. [Interruption.]

---

Floods (Moray)

To ask the First Minister what financial and practical assistance the Scottish Executive will give to the people of Moray following the flooding in the area at the weekend. (S1F-2273)

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. Before I answer that question, I should answer the accusation that was being shouted at me. I will quote from the Scottish National Party's press release from this morning, which says that the SNP pledges to introduce drugs courts

"to use the full force of the law on those individuals who are profiting from drugs."

In answer to question 4—[Interruption.]

Order.

The First Minister should read the whole paragraph.

Order. Just a minute.

On a point of order, Presiding Officer.

Just a minute. I am dealing with a point of order. Sit down.

Nobody should shout from a sedentary position in the first place. The First Minister should ignore such sedentary interruptions, which are not in order.

Can we come to the answer? We have an important question about the flooding that took place at the weekend. Let us get on with it.

The flooding in Moray has caused significant upheaval and distress for those who live in the areas affected. I am therefore pleased to announce the activation of the Bellwin scheme, to make available financial assistance to Moray Council in dealing with the immediate impact of the flooding, and to confirm that a special ministerial group is looking urgently at the steps we can take to anticipate and address the issues, not only in Moray, but elsewhere in Scotland.

I am pleased that the First Minister has returned to that important issue. Other matters can perhaps be taken up later. I thank him for the response that the Executive has already made and for the useful meetings that I have held with the Minister for Environment and Rural Development and his officials.

Has the Executive made contact with the European Commission? The Commission is sympathetic and ready to afford flexibility in the common agricultural policy and structural funds, as was clearly defined in a letter from President Prodi to my colleague Ian Hudghton MEP in October this year. Will the Executive submit specific recommendations to forthcoming discussions on the European Union solidarity fund, the principle of which was agreed in September?

Margaret Ewing raises important matters. I will be happy to ask Ross Finnie and Allan Wilson to look at them as part of the package of measures that, I am sure, will have to be considered in relation to the situation in Moray. None of us can underestimate the devastation that was caused, not only to people whose homes and lives have been ruined in the past few days, but to businesses in the area and to the future economy of the area. I would be happy to consider those specific ideas and to ensure that Margaret Ewing receives a written response.

Nobody should be under any illusion about the trauma that the disaster caused in Moray and the worries about what may happen in the future. Will the First Minister clear up a point that was raised at the Transport and the Environment Committee, about the Bellwin formula: what exactly is it? Is it a permission to borrow more money or is it a grant to the council?

Perhaps members have mixed two different schemes. The flood prevention support measures that the Executive provides are a borrowing permission for councils to implement flood prevention measures locally. The Executive dramatically increased that budget not only in our previous budget two years ago, but in our budget this year for the next three years. That will help us assist with the 73 schemes throughout Scotland that are currently awaiting applications.

Money that is allocated under the Bellwin scheme is compensation to local authorities to cover the costs of dealing with a flood, or another form of disaster, after it has taken place. That money is cashed to local authorities to spend on that compensation.

That concludes First Minister's question time.

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I seek your guidance on the comments that the First Minister made with regard to the SNP's press statement.

No, I am sorry—

I seek your guidance, Presiding Officer. The press statement—

That is not a point of order.

It is an important point relating to—

Order. I have already ruled on this. Interruptions should not be—[Interruption.] Order. Sedentary interruptions should not be made, and they should certainly not be responded to, by any minister. That is the end of the matter. [Interruption.] The content of answers is not a matter for me.

You do not know what I was going to say, Presiding Officer.

I am sorry, but content is not a matter for me. Please resume your seat. We will move to the debate on the foot-and-mouth disease report.