Justice and the Law Officers
Good afternoon. The first item of business is portfolio questions. If we are to get as many members in as possible, I would be grateful if we could have succinct questions and answers.
Young Offenders (Rehabilitation)
The Scottish Government, in partnership with local authorities, the police, the Scottish Prison Service, the third sector and others, is committed to supporting the implementation of a whole-system approach across Scotland, to improve responses to people under 18 who offend. The aim of the approach is to intervene early with young people to divert them from the criminal justice system, while recognising that, for the minority who receive a custodial sentence, supporting their reintegration back into the community is key. That includes developing a holistic plan for their release and ensuring that appropriate services are in place.
The cabinet secretary will be aware that key events in an offender’s life, including their reintegration into the local community, impact on the person’s motivation not to reoffend. A highly individualised process is required if reintegration is to be effective. Given that, what practical measures is the Government taking—now and for the future—and how will their impact be measured?
The member makes a fair point. It is about the measures that we undertake collectively. That is why tomorrow I will be chairing the cabinet and ministerial sub-committee that includes ministers across the portfolios that deal with offending.
Given the high number of young offenders who are known or estimated to have literacy and numeracy problems, and given the lack of support for such people when they are in prison on short-term sentences, will the Scottish Government introduce mandatory testing for literacy and numeracy skills for all young offenders, with signposting and throughcare for people who have problems, to help young offenders to find employment when they are released into the community, thereby reducing offending?
The member makes a valid and important point. Literacy and numeracy difficulties are an issue not just for young offenders but for many offenders and need to be addressed if we are to get people active in the labour market on their release. That is fundamentally a matter for the Scottish Prison Service, which is doing good work with HM inspectors of education to ensure that Polmont young offenders institution is as good as it can be.
Cross-border Parental Child Abduction
Scottish Government officials regularly meet UK Government officials to discuss international parental child abduction. They last met on 23 October 2013 and expect to meet again in April 2014.
The minister will be aware of a case in which the English courts mistakenly believed that they have jurisdiction. I am not inviting her to discuss that case, of course. However, is she aware of anything that is being done in the English jurisdiction to bring the question of Scottish jurisdiction in such cases to the courts, so that the same mistakes are not made again? Does she believe that if we were independent, the national jurisdictions would be realigned in such a way that abduction cases could be dealt with very differently?
I cannot discuss the specifics of any case. We have suggested to the UK Government that it might be helpful to issue a practice direction in England and Wales on potential Scottish jurisdiction in cross-UK border cases. That has not been issued yet. Any decision to do so is a matter entirely for the authorities in England and Wales, but I will draw Nigel Don’s specific point to the attention of the UK Government.
Prison Population
The Scottish Government has a number of measures in place that are designed to reduce reoffending. Phase 2 of our ambitious reducing reoffending programme is now under way and is focused on making sure that people who have offended make the most of opportunities to fulfil their responsibilities as citizens and move away from offending.
I am aware that the cabinet secretary has been trying to reduce the prison population in Scotland for six years now, but we still seem to have one of the highest incarceration rates in the whole of Europe, coupled with one of the highest reoffending rates—notwithstanding the cabinet secretary’s remarks. Year on year, we seem to send more people to jail. The public would be reassured if those people were all violent and dangerous offenders, but the biggest increase seems to be in the number of women. Given that crime is falling year on year, why is his policy to stop sending people to jail not working?
Ken Macintosh raises the paradox that we face. Crime is at its lowest level in 39 years, yet we face an increase in the prison population. It is clear that there are issues for the judiciary regarding people whom they deal with who have multiple problems, which results in their having difficulty issuing sentences that may be served in the community, and we work with them on that matter.
Question 4, in the name of Dennis Robertson, has not been lodged, for entirely understandable reasons.
White Paper on Independence (Legal Competence)
As Mark Griffin will be aware, there is a long-standing convention that the Government does not disclose whether the law officers have or have not advised on any particular matter. The content of any such legal advice would also be confidential. That convention is recognised in paragraph 2.35 of the Scottish ministerial code and has been applied by all Scottish Governments. It is also applied by the United Kingdom Government and is recognised in paragraph 2.13 of the UK Government’s ministerial code.
Among others, Paul Beaumont, professor of European law at the University of Aberdeen, Niamh Nic Shuibhne, professor of European law at the University of Edinburgh, Professor Susan Shaw and Ján Figel, a former deputy prime minister of Slovakia and European Commission education commissioner, have questioned the Scottish Government’s assertion that an independent Scotland would be able to charge tuition fees to students from the rest of the UK. Given the exceptional nature of the debate, will the Lord Advocate disclose whether legal advice exists on that topic and what that legal advice is to allow members of the public to assess with confidence what they are voting for in September?
I remind the member that there are very good reasons for the convention. Successive Governments have taken the view that a breach of it would risk seriously undermining the processes by which the Government obtains legal advice. That would harm the public interest in good governance and the maintenance of the rule of law within Government, which the convention against disclosure is designed to protect. This very important convention is recognised by the UK Government, as I have already stated. In fact, the UK Government successfully defended the convention in 2009.
Rendition Flights
As Rob Gibson will be aware, in June 2013 I instructed Police Scotland to reopen the investigation into rendition flights in Scotland, following publication of material from the rendition project that was conducted by researchers from the University of Kent and Kingston University London. The investigation is still live, therefore it would be inappropriate for me to comment at this time.
My constituency is served by two airports—Wick and Inverness—that are managed by Highlands and Islands Airports Ltd on behalf of the Scottish Government. We have particular concerns that those airports may have been used. As the issue is live, will the Lord Advocate report back to us as soon as possible with news about the potential use by rendition flights of those airports?
The continuing investigation by Police Scotland relates to all evidence of any alleged rendition flights involving Scotland, including at Wick and Inverness airports. As the investigation has yet to conclude, no outcomes can be provided at this stage. However, when it is completed and a decision has been taken, I will make that decision public.
European Arrest Warrants
I very much regret that the UK Government saw fit, with no pretence of consultation, to put our participation in the European arrest warrant system at risk. The Lord Advocate and I gave evidence on its usefulness to the Westminster Parliament, and we were supported by practitioners including the police and the Law Society of Scotland.
Does the cabinet secretary agree that the way that UK Government handled the matter could have meant that Europe would, had the UK withdrawn from the European arrest warrant system, have been a haven against prosecution in this country?
I certainly agree. For that reason, there was uniform concern across organisations in Scotland, including the Crown, defence lawyers—the Faculty of Advocates as well as the Law Society—and Police Scotland.
Question 8, in the name of Annabel Goldie, has not been lodged for entirely understandable reasons.
Police Firearms Officers
That is a matter for Police Scotland, but I understand that there are currently 440 authorised police firearms officers in Scotland.
I thank the cabinet secretary for that reply. Her Majesty’s inspectorate of constabulary’s 2009 report said that the Police Scotland aligns itself with the Home Office forces and complies “voluntarily with these standards”. The standards that are referred to are those that are laid out in the Home Office’s 2003 “Code of Practice on Police use of Firearms and Less Lethal Weapons”. Can the cabinet secretary advise—either now, or later in writing—whether that is still the case? In particular, with regard to the Independent Police Complaints Commission’s advice to Scotland Yard on the “hard stop” tactic, has the advice been acted on in Scotland? Also, will the cabinet secretary join me in calling for a review of police firearms tactics and of the number of officers who are deployed carrying Taser guns but are not authorised firearms officers?
Fundamentally, those are matters for the Scottish Police Authority, but I am happy to try to drill down to ensure that John Finnie’s comments are raised and answers are provided, either by the chief constable himself or by HM inspector of constabulary.
Police Scotland (National Confidential Alert Line)
Police Scotland already operates a national confidential reporting system for employees, called safecall. The system is run by an independent company and callers can remain anonymous if they wish.
I thank the cabinet secretary for that. Notwithstanding what he has just reported, there have obviously been concerns from MSPs right across the chamber about a number of police officers who have wanted to come forward privately to raise issues about recent changes in policing and the effect on morale. What efforts are being made to ensure that that is happening and that there is effective monitoring of the process?
I think that I detailed fully what is happening in my first answer. The position of the police is fully supported by the Scottish Police Authority. If Liz Smith has concerns, she should speak either to the chief constable, to his head of human resources—John Gillies—or to Vic Emery. The systems are there; those who have concerns can raise them individually. They can raise them anonymously or they can raise them through organisations such as the Scottish Police Federation or the Association of Scottish Police Superintendents. No doubt there will be issues that will correctly be raised in that manner, although it seems to me that Police Scotland is operating remarkably well, given the regularly improving statistics and the evidence that shows that Scotland is safer.
Rural Affairs and the Environment
Forestry Grants (Scotland Rural Development Programme 2007 to 2013)
The number of woods that have been planted using forestry grants under the SRDP for 2007-13 is 1,564. In practice, woodlands that benefit from SRDP funding vary in size, but I can inform Mary Fee that the area that is covered by the woods is 26,900 hectares, with the average area of the woods being 17.2 hectares. We estimate that some 53.8 million trees have been planted via the projects.
I thank the minister for that answer. Can he tell me what the targets are for new forests over the next 10 years, in particular in my region, which is West Scotland?
Mary Fee may be aware that the Scottish Government is committed to planting a total of 100,000 hectares between 2012 and 2022. We do not have regional targets as such, but the split in planting under the Scotland rural development programme is as follows: approximately 38 per cent has taken place in Highland, and 10 per cent has been in each of Argyll and Bute, the Borders, Dumfries and Galloway and Grampian council areas. The balance of planting has taken place in the Clyde valley, Ayrshire and Forth regions, where planting is less significant. However, we are progressing the woods in and around towns project to bring planting to urban areas and to encourage greater use of our woodlands.
An increasing number of people in the sector are warning that unless planting of commercial timber is increased, the critical mass that the sector requires to maintain investment in the industry may be lost. Is the Scottish Government taking those warnings seriously? If so, what can it do to address that situation?
I am happy to confirm that we are taking those concerns very seriously, and I have met regularly the Confederation of Forest Industries and other concerns in the commercial planting sector.
Common Agricultural Policy (Budget Allocation)
Mike MacKenzie will be aware that Scotland has been united in its pursuit of a fairer deal from the common agricultural policy budget allocation, particularly in respect of the full €223 million convergence uplift that was given to the United Kingdom from Europe, given Scotland’s low level of payments.
Does the cabinet secretary agree that the convergence decision is not just damaging to Scotland’s farmers but deeply harmful to the economy of many of our most fragile rural communities?
Mike MacKenzie sums up very well the seriousness of the budgetary decision that the UK Government has taken. It is not just the livelihoods of our farmers and crofters that will be damaged by the decision to deny Scotland the Scottish share of the EU budget, but the wider rural economy. That money would have been invested in the rural economy by our crofters and farmers, who tend to spend their public support in their local communities, so the decision is therefore a blow to the whole of rural Scotland.
I am pleased that the cabinet secretary acknowledges the cross-party campaign in calling for Scotland to receive the uplift. What representations has he made to the UK Government on the terms of the review of the budget allocations within the United Kingdom? Does he accept the importance of Scotland moving from historic payments to area-based payments in order to achieve that and move forward with the review?
I had a conversation about the convergence uplift several weeks ago with the secretary of state, Owen Paterson. It was made clear to me at that time, and in subsequent comments to the media by Owen Paterson and the industry, that, despite the apparent pledge for a review in 2016 or thereabouts—however long it may take, and despite the fact that there is a UK election in 2015 and an in-out European Union referendum in 2017—any outcome of such a review would not be implemented until the next common agricultural policy post 2020.
Despite what the cabinet secretary has just said, does he not agree that the proposed review of the allocation deal is a real opportunity? Will he work on a cross-party basis to meet the UK Government on that review?
The review that the UK Government promises is a dead end and a red herring, for the reasons that I have just outlined in my answer to Claire Baker, and in particular the timescale. We are promised a review in 2016, which may be concluded after the in-out EU referendum and will not begin until after the UK elections in 2015. We do not know who the secretary of state will be at that point, given that there have been so many changes in the past few years.
I reiterate that brief questions and answers would help us to progress.
Flood Risk
Flood risk management is a priority for the Scottish Government. We work closely with the Scottish Environment Protection Agency and other resilience parties to prepare communities that face flood risk. In the current spending review period, with the agreement of the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities, we have specifically identified £126 million—or £42 million per year—within the capital settlement for flood protection projects that cost in excess of £2 million. Local authorities are also free to allocate additional resources to flood prevention, such as smaller capital projects that are under £2 million in cost, from within the overall funding that the Scottish Government provides to them, and from within their own resources.
The minister will be aware of the flooding in Aberdeen and Stonehaven in recent years and the plans that the local authorities have put in place to reduce the risks of flooding in future. Given the high capital cost of flood prevention in Stonehaven in particular, does the minister agree that, despite the fact that the changes that he is introducing in the way that the Scottish Government funds such schemes are broadly supported, Aberdeenshire Council should not be disadvantaged as a result? Will he ensure that, in spite of those changes, the Stonehaven scheme receives the financial support that it needs and deserves from next year onwards?
I remind Lewis Macdonald that we are not actually changing the mechanism by which the flood funding is allocated, so the process is stable. I welcome the fact that the stability has been continued by COSLA.
What discussions has the minister or the Scottish Government had with the United Kingdom Government regarding flood insurance, given that the statement of principles has come to an end, although an interim arrangement has been made?
As the member might be aware, the Scottish Government was not formally consulted on the development of the flood re scheme. We were aware of what was happening and made representations to the UK Government, as one would expect, but we were not formal consultees. We made a submission to the consultation and we are supportive of the general approach that is being taken, although we have not necessarily signed up to all the details.
I would be grateful if the minister would say which local authorities in West Scotland he has met recently along with SEPA and Scottish Water to discuss flooding matters.
The only local authority that I have met recently in the west regional resilience partnership area is Dumfries and Galloway Council—when I visited Whitesands to witness the floods there, I had a conversation with the leader and chief executive of the council. I have not yet met personally with any other local authority in the west RRP area to discuss its proposals. However, discussions between those authorities and officials in the Scottish Government are on-going. I can assure the member that there is on-going dialogue with all the local authorities in the area on their requirements as they bring forward proposals to the Scottish Government. I am happy to write to the member with details of the conversations that have taken place.
Common Agricultural Policy (Reform)
I met the president and chief executive of NFU Scotland last night at a meeting near Lauder, along with around 70 farmers, and we discussed the implementation of the new common agriculture policy. It was, of course, a lively discussion, and it was good to hear at first hand the farmers’ views on the new CAP.
I am sure that that meeting brought out many of the uncertainties that currently exist around the implementation of the reforms. One of the certainties that exist is that substantial amounts of support funding will be transferred from the comparatively productive livestock units in the south and the east of the country to less productive units in the north and the west. What is being done to ensure that the levels of farming activity that will enable farmers to access, post reform, the single farm policy are as meaningful as possible and therefore to minimise the amount of support that is available to, essentially, unproductive units?
As Alex Fergusson points out, that is a key concern for anyone who is interested in the future of vibrant Scottish agriculture, particularly the livestock sector and the beef sector within that, given that many intensive beef units face substantial reductions in their single farm payment as Scotland moves from the historic basis of payments to an area basis. Of course, the key is to find a solution that, on one hand, mitigates the impact on genuinely active livestock units but, on the other hand, does not continue the historic payments for other units whose activity has declined. That is the key to trying to find a solution to the complex problem that we have been handed by the new CAP. Although the policy has taken some steps forward, there are still some big challenges, given Scotland’s circumstances and the rules that we have to abide by.
The cabinet secretary has already decided to abolish the crofting counties agricultural grants scheme and replace it with a new scheme. Would he be so good as to tell Parliament, and therefore crofters, what the eligibility rules will be for that new scheme, when crofters will know about it and when they can, therefore, plan their businesses in light of a change that he has already announced?
I am looking carefully at pillars 1 and 2 of the new common agricultural policy in respect of crofters in Tavish Scott’s constituency and elsewhere in Scotland. I can say only that, because we are in the middle of the consultation on the rural development programme, which closes at the end of February, it is difficult to give a precise answer to his question. All that I can do at this point is give an assurance that I am paying close attention to that scheme and the overall impact on crofting of the new common agricultural policy.
Areas of Natural Constraint
The European Union rural development regulation states that the new areas facing natural constraint designation is to be implemented by 2018, and we will review the current less favoured areas scheme in line with the regulation. In the meantime I am committed to continuing vital funding at current levels for the current scheme, to ensure that farming and crofting businesses remain sustainable.
What guidance has the Scottish Government received from Europe regarding the criteria that are to be used to define areas of natural constraint?
The debate on this matter has been going on for some time, and a set of criteria has been initially debated. However, because there has been a postponement of the decision to move to a new system, there will, no doubt, be further debate over the next couple of years about the exact criteria that will be used to define areas of natural constraint.
NFU Scotland (Meetings)
As I explained in response to Alex Fergusson’s earlier question, to which I am sure the member listened closely, I met with NFU Scotland and around 70 very vocal farmers last night near Lauder to discuss the implementation of the new common agricultural policy.
I did indeed listen closely to that answer, cabinet secretary.
I am sure that Jackson Carlaw recognises the fantastic tourism boost that there has been in certain parts of Scotland due to the reintroduction of sea eagles. However, I recognise that there are also some genuine concerns among livestock farmers, particularly on the west coast of Scotland and elsewhere. In the past few days, I have been approached by some sheep associations who have asked to meet me on the subject. Of course, I will be happy to do so and to explore the issues that Jackson Carlaw has raised.
European Union Farm Payments
Scotland currently receives the third lowest average per hectare rate in the EU for direct payments, known as pillar 1, at around €130 per hectare, but we are set to become bottom of the EU league table once EU convergence sees Estonia and Latvia overtake us. Those countries will, of course, benefit from the EU rule that all member states will achieve at least an average of €196 per hectare by 2019. Scotland would also have benefited from that if we had been independent already.
As the cabinet secretary will know, Scottish farmers are losing €1 billion a year that would have boosted the economies of our rural farms, villages and towns. Does the cabinet secretary agree that we need the powers of independence, with direct representation in Europe, to empower our rural and island communities and to grow their place in our society and economy?
It is true that there is a heavy cost for our farmers, crofters and wider rural communities to pay, and that the fact that we are not a member state in our own right means that we do not qualify for those funding uplifts. To clarify the point, according to the formula adopted by Brussels and Europe, because it is not an independent member state, Scotland has lost out on investment of €1 billion between now and 2019. We estimate that that would have created an extra 2,500 jobs in Scotland and added £0.5 billion to Scottish gross domestic product.
National Litter Strategy
We had a good response to our consultation on Scotland’s first national litter strategy and are in the process of analysing the responses. Thereafter, we aim to publish the strategy in early summer. In the meantime, we are pressing ahead with important early actions. From 1 April, fixed penalties for litter will increase from £50 to £80, and for fly tipping from £50 to £200. We are also finalising plans for the national litter prevention campaign, which will start in May and will seek to influence people’s behaviour towards litter.
The cabinet secretary will be aware of the problem of the dumping of waste such as cooking fats and unsold foods by some takeaway establishments. It has been reported that some offenders in Glasgow have come into the city for that purpose and the council has named and shamed some of those establishments. Will the cabinet secretary indicate whether the national strategy will be able to provide for a link between the enforcement of fines against those polluters, which he mentioned in respect of fly tipping, and the licensing system? Does he agree that businesses that behave in that way should know that they stand a chance of being fined if they are caught and risk losing their licence or being refused a future licence?
The Government has been discussing that issue. I am not aware of the detail of the responses to the strategy that are currently being analysed, so I will make a point of looking into the issue that Drew Smith has raised and I will get back to him. If Drew Smith, or anyone else, has specific ideas that they wish us to consider as part of the strategy, they should feel free to write to me.
Flooding
Scotland’s response to severe weather over the festive period highlighted the returns that we are seeing on our investments in flood risk management.
The minister has stated previously that more targeted support may be required for those likely to be most vulnerable to the impacts of climate change. How is that concern being addressed? When will he be in a position to report any actions that the Scottish Government will take to support vulnerable communities and households?
We have a number of strategies and I am happy to write to the member to set those out in detail. For example, we are progressing a national adaptation programme that will not only look at how we can become more resilient as a society but drill down to communities. The updated flood risk and hazard maps give more detailed information about the depth and velocity of water at a local level, which will inform our investment strategy. We are also looking at how we take forward the evaluation of the potential impact of property-level protection schemes for individuals.