Prime Minister (Meetings)
To ask the First Minister when he next plans to meet the Prime Minister and what issues he intends to raise. (S2F-806)
I have no immediate plans to meet the Prime Minister.
On 21 January 2002, the Deputy First Minister—the then Minister for Justice—announced plans to privatise the escorting of prisoners. He said:
No, I do not accept that the assurances that were given by ministers have been put to one side in this instance. The Government has a clear policy to ensure that the 300 police officers who can go back out on operational duty are delivered in our police service and that those police officers are doing the job that they are signed up to do, which they chose as a career path, and are not transporting or supervising in waiting rooms prisoners who can be transported or supervised by others.
I have here a statement from Jim Wallace, from January 2002, in which he says beyond any question, in the context of escorting prisoners to be contracted out:
The contract will not fail. Reliance will—as it properly should—be forced to deliver on that contract. That is the proper job of the Minister for Justice and those who are responsible for the service.
I do not know whether the First Minister has noticed, but many police officers in Scotland today are chasing a convicted murderer who has escaped because of the reforms. That is not putting more police on the beat; it is putting police out to pursue murderers who should properly be in the jails of Scotland.
Public safety has been jeopardised in the case of that individual not by the contract, but by the implementation of the contract. That is why the company will rightly face penalties for not implementing the contract properly. That is exactly the right procedure.
Cabinet (Meetings)
To ask the First Minister what issues will be discussed at the next meeting of the Scottish Executive's Cabinet. (S2F-813)
The next meeting of Cabinet will, as ever, discuss our progress towards implementing the partnership agreement to build a better Scotland.
I thank the First Minister for that answer, but I am sure that the Cabinet will want to discuss further the implications of the Minister for Justice's statement to Parliament yesterday and the fact that a brutal killer is still on the loose in Scotland.
One of the reasons why I have so much faith in the Minister for Justice is that it was she who set up the Sentencing Commission, which will deal with the very problem that Mr McLetchie outlines. There is a clear need to deal with the issue of early release on licence and there is a clear need to consider what happens when potential prisoners are out on bail when sometimes they perhaps should not be. We established the Sentencing Commission to consider those issues properly with the judiciary and with those in the system whom I believe we must have on side to make the policy work.
The First Minister talks about tackling issues quickly, but the establishment of the Sentencing Commission is a recipe for delay and inaction on the part of the Executive and the Parliament in dealing with the scandal of early release. As the First Minister is well aware, I have said in the Parliament on numerous occasions that one simple way of restoring confidence in the justice system in Scotland would be to end the scandal of early release and to give women such as Pauline Dunnery the protection that they deserve. Pauline Dunnery was a victim of a crime that would never have happened had her attacker still been in prison serving the sentence that was handed down to him in court. That is the fact of the matter. Will the First Minister tell us when his Sentencing Commission will report, when some action will be taken and when the Minister for Justice will take steps to restore a reputation that has been so badly battered this week?
We have made clear in the past the timetable to which the Sentencing Commission is operating. The important thing is to ensure that we have a system that works in practice for witnesses and victims in Scotland's courts. It is fundamental to the operation of that system that we do not just, through knee-jerk reactions in the chamber, adjust laws in relation to sentencing. In the tradition of the Scottish system, we should ensure that the changes are applicable in practice. That is why we gave a commitment this time last year to establish the Sentencing Commission and why we ensured that within six months of the election the Sentencing Commission was up and running. That is why the Sentencing Commission has been given clear priorities for decisions and action, including dealing with the issues of people who are released on bail and people who are released early on licence. That is why when we get the recommendations—if they are tough enough—we will implement them and do it quickly.
Local Taxation
To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Executive's response will be to the march to be held in Glasgow on 24 April 2004 in support of the abolition of the council tax in favour of an income-based alternative. (S2F-831)
We live in a democracy where, I am happy to say, people are free to march to express their views. I hope that all those who are on Mr Sheridan's march on Saturday are fully aware of what they would pay under any Government that he ever led.
A number of nursery nurses will be on the demonstration on Saturday. Given that they have had to strike against their pathetically low pay, I can give them an absolutely cast-iron assurance that they will pay less under any Government led by me or any other Scottish Socialist Party representative. Does the First Minister think it fair that a nursery nurse or a pensioner on a low income in Scotland is paying a higher proportion of their income on council tax than he is, when he is on a very good income of £123,000? Is it fair that he pays a lower proportion than them, despite the large difference in income?
I find it astonishing that Tommy Sheridan wants to confirm in the chamber today that he assumes that, under any Government in Scotland run by the Scottish Socialist Party, nursery nurses would always be low paid. My ambition is that Scotland's nursery nurses will be better paid and have better status. That is why we have given them a firm commitment that, if the current dispute is resolved quickly, we will establish a national review of their position.
In a friendly manner, I suggest that the First Minister might want to go to the doctor to get his ears tested. I gave a cast-iron assurance that nursery nurses would pay less under a Scottish Socialist Party Government; I did not say that they would continue to be scandalously low paid, as they have been for the past seven years under the Labour Government at Westminster and the Government in Scotland.
I have said to Mr Sheridan before that there is a case for property-based taxation in our society, although that is not necessarily a universal view in the partnership parties. Such a tax is easy to collect and is on one element of an individual's wealth and status in society. It is right that such a tax should be applied locally. I believe strongly that all of us should make a contribution to the cost of local services, which we do through income tax and other taxes that we pay nationally. In Scotland, nationally collected taxation contributes 80 per cent of funding for local services. The system is economically justifiable, although it needs to be reviewed, which will happen through the independent review of local government finance.
Draft European Constitution
To ask the First Minister how the responsibilities of the devolved regions and nations are reflected in the draft European constitution. (S2F-827)
The draft European constitution improves the position of nations and regions at European level. It recognises our role as legislators and sits alongside improvements in consultation on, and assessment of, European decisions.
Does the First Minister agree that our membership of the European Union has brought incalculable benefits to Scotland, particularly to the Highlands and Islands, which I represent? Does he agree that one great benefit that the EU brings to Scotland is the close co-operation between member states in tackling crime and justice issues and that that aspect of our membership should be better appreciated?
I believe strongly that there is a case for Europe-wide decision making not just on matters of environmental and economic importance, but, at times, to ensure that we tackle international crime and terrorism effectively. The new European constitution will help us to achieve that. I look forward to the debate on the constitution in relation to any referendum that might take place. The debate will be between those of us who believe in a progressive Europe that secures peace and delivers jobs for Scotland and those in the very strange alliance that may campaign in the no camp.
Has the First Minister made representations to the Prime Minister to ensure that the Scottish result in the referendum on the EU constitution will be counted and announced separately? Once the constitution has been finalised by the heads of Government, will the First Minister consider undertaking a fundamental assessment of its impact on the economic and social life of Scotland?
The first part of Mr Neil's question is a matter for the Prime Minister. On the second part of his question, which raises an issue on which we have had exchanges in the past, we regularly assess the impact of such matters on Scotland's economy.
Given the First Minister's response to Maureen Macmillan, will he explain to me what elements of this Parliament's devolved responsibilities are protected from EU interference at Commission level by article 17 under title III of the constitution?
It is interesting that a number of members of the Opposition are prepared to come out and campaign against the EU constitution because the constitution will develop the rights and the responsibilities of this Parliament and other devolved Administrations.
Will the First Minister outline what he believes are the red-line issues for Scotland, given the on-going negotiations over the draft constitution, especially as there are major concerns in Scotland about the references to fishing and energy? Does he agree with many in the chamber that the referendum strengthens Scotland's hand because Tony Blair will require the support of Scotland to get a yes vote?
The Scottish National Party and others have been guilty of gross misrepresentation of the constitution's position on both fishing and energy. Exactly as the Prime Minister said on Tuesday that he relished the opportunity that the referendum campaign offers to expose the myths and misrepresentations of the Tories, I am willing to take on those arguments in Scotland.
Prison Escort Services
To ask the First Minister what penalties will be paid by Reliance Secure Task Management Ltd in respect of any breach of its contract to escort prisoners. (S2F-807)
The contract provides for penalties for failure to meet agreed performance standards. The Scottish Prison Service will calculate penalties on a monthly basis following the investigation of all alleged incidents.
Does the First Minister accept that, whatever additional penalties Reliance might have to pay in relation to the delays and general incompetence that it has been responsible for during the past two weeks, the public want and have a right to know the specific price that the company will pay for allowing a convicted murderer to saunter out of a courtroom and disappear into thin air? Will he tell the Parliament today the value of the fine that Reliance will have to pay for letting James McCormick go? If he will not do so, will he outline what possible reason there can be for keeping such information under wraps?
The Minister for Justice made it clear yesterday that, subject to important provisions in relation to public safety and some provisions that are inevitable in relation to commercial confidentiality, we will publish the contract. We will also publish performance information that will not only allow the Parliament to criticise, rightly, the way in which the contract has been implemented in the past three weeks, but ensure that we can guarantee that performance is improving and monitor that against the contract. That information will be agreed between the Scottish Prison Service and Reliance during the coming weeks. It will be published and it will give the Government and the Parliament an indication of whether performance is improving before we get to the stage of extending Reliance's responsibilities elsewhere in Scotland.
It is common knowledge that the negotiation and placing of the contract were accompanied by ministerial detachment. In so far as the Minister for Justice has alluded to the contract, she has sought to hide behind issues of commercial and operational sensitivity. I listened to the First Minister's response, but does he accept that, if public confidence is to be restored not just in our justice system but in the political process in Scotland, ministerial disclosure to the Parliament of how the penalty provisions of the contract operate is critical? Does he accept that it is not enough for the contract to be published and that it is essential that we have manifest ministerial acceptance of responsibility and appropriate and regular statements in the chamber about how the penalty provisions are applied?
I do not think that Annabel Goldie can say that responsibility has been shirked in any way. The first thing that happened when the Parliament returned to a full plenary meeting yesterday was that the Minister for Justice gave a parliamentary statement accepting her responsibility for sorting out the situation. During the past three weeks, the minister has been pursuing not just the Scottish Prison Service, the Scottish Court Service and the police service, but Reliance, to ensure that this debacle is sorted out. That is exactly the right thing for her to do and that is why she is in her position. She is the kind of person who takes such tough decisions and is prepared to knock heads together to ensure that the service works in the interests of victims and witnesses. She is not the kind of person who sits on the Tory or nationalist benches, shirks reform and is not prepared to put victims and witnesses first in the system.
No doubt the contract includes details of vetting and licensing. Guards who escort prisoners in England and Wales face the tough licensing and vetting procedures of the Security Industry Authority, which was set up under legislation that was passed in 2001. The Executive has stated its intention to extend that protection to Scotland. Will the First Minister confirm whether the Executive is still seeking a legislative slot at Westminster to do just that?
That is one of the issues that the Minister for Justice dealt with yesterday. She said quite clearly—I hope that everyone in the chamber heard her comment and I hope that some members of the media heard it, too, because unfortunately the position has been misrepresented to the public—that the people who work for Reliance in the service have been subject to additional security checks under the supervision of the Scottish Prison Service, which makes sure that those checks are in place. That is a reassurance for members of the public. Although Reliance has been unable to operate the contract successfully during the past three weeks, the individuals who are involved have had the appropriate checks, which have been applied under the supervision of the Scottish Prison Service. That is part of the agreement. We wanted to make sure that those who are involved in the service are able, properly trained and—
Seals
To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Executive's position is in respect of whether a cull in seal numbers is necessary. (S2F-825)
Our independent scientific advice suggests that a general seal cull is not an appropriate or effective way in which to protect fisheries. We therefore have no plans to authorise a seal cull in Scottish waters.
Many people throughout Scotland are concerned about an unnecessary cull of seals. Will the First Minister confirm that, before any change is made to current policy, the Executive will undertake a rigorous scientific analysis of the situation and consider the potential damage to Scotland's image abroad and the knock-on impact on tourism and other related businesses?
I can confirm that we would consider the suggestion only if it was backed up by a considerable amount of reliable scientific evidence that such a cull was necessary and appropriate. No evidence would justify such a change at the moment, which is why we have no plans for a seal cull in Scotland.
Does the First Minister agree that culls such as the Government-sponsored ones of hedgehogs, mink and deer have a role in nature conservation? Does he also agree that we must be vigilant about what is happening in the waters around our islands by constantly assessing the impact that fishermen and seals have on the viability of all fisheries?
Of course it is appropriate for us to monitor those situations, but our position on the seal cull is quite clear. We are also aware that, apart from the fishing industry and the fishing communities, the greatest impact on fish stocks comes from other species in that habitat, which have a much more considerable effect on fish stocks than seals do. Part of the monitoring of fish stocks must include an analysis of why fish stocks in Scottish waters might be declining.
Previous
Mental Health