SCOTTISH EXECUTIVE
Finance and Sustainable Growth
Council Tax Freeze
To ask the Scottish Executive whether it will commission an independent study on the cost of freezing council tax over the next three financial years while maintaining current levels of service provision for each local authority. (S3O-1293)
Engaging with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities and individual local authorities was a constructive way of determining the cost of the additional spending pressures that local government will face over the next three years. I see no benefit, therefore, in commissioning a further independent study.
I am disappointed in that answer. The cabinet secretary may well have been able to con COSLA into a concordat for the purpose of his budget statement last week, but subsequent events have demonstrated that not all our councillors are patsies.
The only thing that I have to fear is more alliteration from Mr McLetchie. He should reflect on the concordat that we have reached with COSLA, after a lot of discussion and debate between me, individual local authorities and the COSLA leadership over the past six months. It brings together a number of key elements that strengthen the relationship between central and local government, notable among which is a move away from the endless monitoring, scrutiny and second-guessing that Mr McLetchie has complained about on many occasions in the past.
I heard everything that the cabinet secretary said, but the word "accountability" did not enter into it. One of the Labour Party's grave concerns is that, in freeing everything up and in the absence of ring fencing, accountability will go.
Dr Simpson talks about a lack of accountability. First, if he had read the concordat he would have seen that implicit in the agreement is a move to single-outcome agreements for every local authority. That is a productive channel of accountability for every local authority to deliver on the expectations of national Government and the local electorate.
Scottish Enterprise<br />(Small Businesses Support)
To ask the Scottish Executive what support Scottish Enterprise will provide to small businesses. (S3O-1315)
Scottish Enterprise will have responsibility for providing support to regionally and nationally significant companies and to those with significant growth potential, regardless of size, including those that emerge from the business gateway. That support will include specialist services and advice on issues such as innovation, internationalisation, investment support and sustainability. Responsibility for local delivery of the business gateway, which provides advice to new-start and smaller firms, will, with effect from 2008-09, transfer from Scottish Enterprise to local government.
The Borders receives special mention in the Government's economic strategy, and rightly so. Does the minister recognise the real concerns that were expressed to me last week by members of the Federation of Small Businesses in the Borders and by existing members of the board of Scottish Enterprise Borders—dedicated businesspeople who have committed considerable time for the benefit of the local economy—about the lack of clarity on the state of staff contracts, the funding that will be made available to local government and the exact timeframe for when support will be provided in an area that needs additional support for small businesses, not reduced support?
The clarity is being firmed up all the time. That started way back when we talked to the local enterprise company chairs, who were keen to be involved with us in driving forward, and made the key point that the status quo was not an acceptable solution. Now, we have the galvanising force of increasing support in the chamber for small business rates relief, which is likely to transform towns, villages and rural businesses throughout the Borders and other parts of Scotland. I look forward to that with great anticipation.
The minister will be aware that many of our small businesses are classified as social enterprises. I welcome the £63 million development programme that was announced last week for the third sector, which will support social enterprise. Will Scottish Enterprise be involved in growing small businesses in the social enterprise sector, and the third sector in general, which the Scottish Social Enterprise Coalition estimates is worth £1.25 billion to the Scottish economy?
I refer back to Dr Simpson's mention of the session that we are having in January, when we will pull together the third sector, local government, the enterprise entities and private sector businesses to look at how we can drive forward in the new climate, in which the previous social enterprise budget of £15 million is ramped to £23 million, to £32 million and then to £38 million. As we saw here in the Parliament the day after the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Sustainable Growth announced the spending review, the Scottish Social Enterprise Coalition has lots of good examples that can be pushed out and emulated throughout Scotland.
Spending Review (Manifesto Commitments)
To ask the Scottish Executive what proportion of the resources allocated in the recent spending review will be ring fenced to deliver the Scottish National Party's manifesto commitments. (S3O-1373)
I set out our spending plans to deliver on the Government's purpose, its five strategic objectives and our manifesto commitments on 14 November. The detail is contained in the spending review document.
The concordat that was signed with local government states:
In many circumstances in relation to education provision, local authorities will have to fulfil statutory responsibilities within the context of the financial envelope. The Government has ensured that local authorities will be able to operate more flexibly at a local level through the arrangements that we have put in place. Frankly, I have seen far too many examples of ring-fencing arrangements acting as a barrier to the effective and efficient delivery of local services. We want to remove those obstacles and ensure that local authorities can deliver the services that local people and communities require. I am determined to ensure, through the framework of outcome agreements that we will introduce, that an obligation is placed on local authorities to deliver what local people expect of them. That is an implicit part of the concordat that has been agreed.
Does the cabinet secretary agree that local authorities should be given responsibility and the power to decide how the money that they have at their disposal is spent? Does he, like me, trust councillors—even, in some instances, Labour councillors—to take the most appropriate decisions for their areas? Does he think that the recent deal that was signed between the Scottish Government and the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities is as good a deal as COSLA thinks it is?
We have an opportunity, and this is the moment to seize it. The change to the local authority electoral system that the previous Government introduced and the Parliament approved means that local authorities are now broadly representative of their communities. As a consequence, local authorities have an opportunity to focus on key priorities that matter to a broad range of individuals locally.
I welcome the opportunity to ask a question, because at First Minister's question time the First Minister misunderstood my position, which is that all councils should consider a council tax freeze, as long as it is properly and appropriately funded by the Government. I look forward to that being confirmed as the budgets are rolled out in the next few months.
I say respectfully to Mr Kerr that that shows, in part, a misunderstanding of where most local authorities are. All local authorities in Scotland want to deliver an effective range of services to their communities, whether they are services for the vulnerable individuals whom Karen Whitefield asked about or the wider services in different parts of the country. We are creating the opportunity to take a much more effective and efficient approach to service delivery, with accountability and a monitoring structure through single-outcome agreements.
Waverley Line (Costs)
To ask the Scottish Government what the current estimated building costs are for the Waverley railway line to Galashiels. (S3O-1294)
The costs are under review as part of the due diligence process that Transport Scotland is undertaking, which will be completed shortly.
The minister will be aware that Scottish Borders Council is to fund part of the railway project's cost and that it is doing what it can, through developers' funds, to put arrangements in place to provide that funding. However, will he give me and the council a guarantee that he will not allow council tax levels to increase or front-line services to be cut to fund the railway project?
The member will have heard by now of the exceptionally good relations between the Government and local councils. Scottish Borders Council is part of that developing relationship. I am confident that the commitments that the previous Administration made and which the current Administration has continued stand fast. I hope that that is also true of the council.
Given that the Borders railway business case is partly predicated on house building in the travel catchment area, what progress has been made on housing development?
I have spoken to Scottish Borders Council and the other councils that are involved in the Waverley railway partnership about the important role that housing development plays in the business case for the Scottish Borders rail line. Scottish Borders Council has had useful and encouraging discussions with major house developers that give weight to the claims that developers will contribute and will create a significant uplift in housing in the Borders that will justify continuing to look at this important project.
The minister is aware of the critical importance of the line into the heart of my constituency. Will he confirm that the due diligence and the review—yet another—of the railway's business case are showing that the case is sound and better than expected when the Waverley Railway (Scotland) Bill was considered by committee? When will he reach a view on the business case review? Will he confirm that the project will not be delayed by investigations into alternative types of funding for capital projects?
We expect to reach a view on the due diligence when the report is presented to us later this year. As the member knows, funding of £115 million at 2002 prices is in place. We should judge the way forward for the project by the three tests that the previous Administration required to be met and which we continue to consider to be the proper tests.
I am intrigued to know how the Borders railway line impinges on Rutherglen, so I call James Kelly.
Because the question involves transport, and as the budget has just been announced, I would like to ask about the bus route development grant, which provides much-needed support to bus routes in my constituency—
I am sorry, Mr Kelly, but the question was about the Borders railway. That was a good try.
Swimming Pool (Aberdeen)
To ask the Scottish Executive what assessment its enterprise department has made of the potential economic benefit to the north-east of the establishment of a 50m swimming pool in Aberdeen. (S3O-1313)
It is normal for an economic assessment to take place at the appropriate time, when a firm plan on which it can be based is available. Should Scottish Enterprise and Aberdeen City Council identify the need for an economic assessment, it will be commissioned by those bodies, using their considerable expertise in such matters.
Given the full support of the First Minister, Alex Salmond, for the pool, as reported in the Aberdeen Evening Express last Friday, will the Scottish Executive provide the £7 million contribution for which it has been asked, to complement the £8 million from Aberdeen City Council and the £8 million from the University of Aberdeen? After all, £7 million is not a huge amount of money from the record £30 billion that is available to the Executive each year.
It is premature to talk about money. The Minister for Communities and Sport, Stewart Maxwell, has made clear his firm support for a 50m pool in Aberdeen, but he has called on the Aberdeen partners to discuss with sportscotland and Scottish Government officials a realistic and affordable project before examining possible funding sources.
I am sure that every MSP is delighted that Glasgow is to host the 2014 Commonwealth games. Given the resulting major investment programme for Scotland, what assurances can the minister give that significant projects such as the 50m swimming pool in Aberdeen will go ahead? Does he agree that, to produce Scotland's future medal winners, Aberdeen must have the appropriate facilities to train our promising young swimmers?
I am afraid that I cannot go any further than what I have already said regarding Stewart Maxwell's clear support for the project. The key is to recognise the legacy for Scotland in 2007. After many years of unionist Administrations, we have a mere four 50m pools in Scotland: in Stirling, East Kilbride and Tollcross, and the Commonwealth pool. Our aspirations go further than that, and we look forward to a situation in which the fine swimmers of Aberdeen and Grampian have better facilities.
Does Mr Mather recognise that the opportunity to gain benefit not only from the Commonwealth games but from the Olympics in London in 2012 will be lost unless matters are resolved quickly? Will he or his colleague Mr Maxwell now take the initiative and bring together sportscotland and local partners in order to ensure that the new pool is built in time?
We have had six months to take over—now members want me to do my colleague's jobs as well. There will be an economic assessment when a realistic affordable project is put on the table, and Stewart Maxwell will consider it.
Justice and Law Officers
New Year's Day Trading
To ask the Scottish Executive, in respect of the Christmas Day and New Year's Day Trading (Scotland) Act 2007, whether it will reconsider its recent decision not to proceed with the proposed study into the impact of a ban on large retailers trading on new year's day. (S3O-1337)
The Scottish Government does not intend to reconsider its decision not to commission costly research into the impact of trading by large stores in Scotland on new year's day.
I thank the minister for his answer, but it is unsatisfactory. Does he understand the disappointment and anger of the members of the Union of Shop, Distributive and Allied Workers and the thousands of Scottish shop workers who backed the union's campaign to keep Christmas day and new year's day special? Will he explain why, in March this year, he—along with all his Scottish National Party colleagues—voted in favour of carrying out the much-needed further research into the impact of the ban, given that, only six months later, he did not when in office hesitate to renege on the commitment that was given by the Parliament to the retail staff of Scotland?
I assure the member that I have met the Scottish Trades Union Congress and I have made our position clear. Those of us in the Government would have more sympathy with Mr Butler if he was accurate when he waxed lyrical about great savings that were to be made. In fact, the study was to address only large stores, not small stores. It would not have affected those who, for example, were preparing for work on 2 January, and it would not have prevented those who were prepared to go in and do back-office work from doing so. If the study had been about delivering, I would have some sympathy. However, there seems to be almost rank hypocrisy, because the study was not about delivering what Bill Butler seemed to suggest. As was often the case with the previous Labour Administration, it was about pandering to a position and seeming to do something, but achieving nothing.
Is the minister prepared to see new year's day as a normal day—for example, in Edinburgh—with all the attendant services that will be brought into play if large stores are open?
As a resident of the city of Edinburgh, I think that what is available to visitors and residents in the city is excellent. The matter is one to be discussed between employers and employees. That has always been the situation, and we do not seek to impose unnecessary Government regulations on people who may choose to open—or not.
As one of the MSPs who voted for the bill in its original form, does the minister agree that a member in charge of a bill should stand by their commitment and vote for their bill regardless of what their party says? The minister will be aware that a large consultation has already been carried out. Does he agree that, if the member in charge of the Christmas Day and New Year's Day Trading (Scotland) Bill had wanted it to be passed, they would have voted for it in its original form?
I am grateful to Sandra White for those comments, which I endorse. Frankly, £110,000 for a study that was going to advise us of nothing of which we were not already aware did not seem to be a particularly good use of public money. The previous Administration may not have worried about such sums, but if we can use that money to protect workers' rights more expeditiously in a variety of ways, we will do so. To fritter it away on consultants' fees does not appear to us to be of benefit either to the Scottish economy or to the workers whom Mr Butler seeks to protect.
Does the Cabinet Secretary for Justice agree that the only person in Scotland who Scotland's shop workers agree could be guilty of rank hypocrisy is the cabinet secretary himself? He voted for the proposal in March 2007 but, when in government, he turned his back on the thousands of Scotland's shop workers who were guaranteed protection by the 2007 act. Can he tell me when he developed his scepticism, which was not apparent in his voting decisions in the Parliament in March? Can he tell us on what he will spend the £110,000 that he will save by not conducting the consultation, which Scotland's shop workers and their trade union believed would offer them protection and a guarantee that they would not be forced to work on new year's day without their consent?
The Government will use the £110,000 to plug the gap from the £500 million that shop workers who reside in Edinburgh would have benefited from had that money not been forced into a tram scheme from which they will not benefit and which they do not want. If Karen Whitefield listened, she would know that the SNP's position on the Christmas Day and New Year's Day Trading (Scotland) Bill was that—as Mr Mather and Mr Maxwell pointed out—it was an Elastoplast that would not have to be used if the Parliament had powers over the wider economic framework to create a fairer and more prosperous Scotland.
I repeat my previous cautions against members using the second person.
I commend Mr MacAskill for seeing sense on the issue. However, if the study was such a bad idea, why on earth did he vote for it?
We have taken time to reflect. We have also seen the state of the books and the situation that we have inherited.
On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I seek your guidance. Is it in order for the minister, when replying to a question about the Christmas Day and New Year's Day Trading (Scotland) Bill, to bring in extraneous matters regarding the Edinburgh tram scheme?
As I am sure the member is aware, that is not a point of order for the chair. I am not responsible for the content of ministerial answers.
Child Abuse (Internet)
To ask the Scottish Government whether it is in dialogue with foreign agencies with regard to controlling child abuse on the internet. (S3O-1327)
Regulation of the internet is a reserved matter. The Scottish Government has had no direct contact with foreign agencies with regard to controlling child abuse on the internet. There is, however, co-operation between police forces in relation to those who access child pornography on the internet and who produce the images for internet distribution.
At present, the United Kingdom and Scotland have a particularly good record on monitoring and evaluating such coverage on the internet and on ensuring that sites that are inappropriate or which publish materials relating to child abuse are taken down quickly.
I thank Gil Paterson for making those important points. The only way to combat this evil trade is through international co-operation and action. However, I point out again that regulation of the internet is a reserved matter.
Police (Retired Officers)
To ask the Scottish Executive how many police officers will be brought out of retirement as part of its strategy to retain more police in active service. (S3O-1352)
We are seeking not to re-recruit police officers who have already retired but to engage proactively with those who are about to retire in order to retain their valued skills and experience.
That was an interesting answer. I suppose that I was expecting the minister to reply, "It was the trams what done it." However, that is another matter entirely.
The fact is that the 30-plus scheme is not working. There might be a role for it—some officers in Scotland have signed up to it—but it is clearly not as attractive as we wish it to be. That is accepted by ACPOS and the Scottish Police Federation. There are difficulties with how it operates. It is a UK scheme, and we are happy for it to be retained.
At this week's Justice Committee meeting, the chief constable of Lothian and Borders Police said that retaining officers would have no impact on providing extra officers, because an officer retained is not in and of itself an increase in numbers. Therefore, how does retention lead to an increase in the number of police officers under the cabinet secretary's plans?
Quite simply, we are operating what is known as the three Rs. The three Rs have their own place in academia, but in relation to the police, we are talking about, first, the recruitment of 500 new officers. Given that Ms Smith asked me about that at the Justice Committee meeting, she knows that we have inherited the lowest number of officers being recruited since devolution. Thankfully, we have committed to recruiting 500 additional officers. We are also going to retain some of the 2,300 officers who are due to retire and we are seeking to redeploy officers who are currently not able to get out and serve their communities by being visible and proactive because they are stuck behind desks doing bureaucratic jobs that could be dealt with in other ways, whether through new technology or through civilianisation. Through recruitment, retention and redeployment, we will deliver 1,000 additional officers into our communities. That is what we promised and that is what our communities will get.
Police (North-east Deployment)
To ask the Scottish Executive what plans it has to redeploy existing police officers in north-east communities. (S3O-1324)
The deployment of police officers is an operational matter for chief constables. We shall work closely to support police officers across Scotland to build on their impressive track record in delivering efficiencies by redoubling their efforts to tackle bureaucracy, drive out inefficiency, exploit the opportunities of new technology and free up officer time to be redeployed into strengthening operational policing in our communities.
The cabinet secretary and, indeed, every member will be well aware of the large number of police who are deployed on our city streets on Friday and Saturday nights. Is he seeking to explore the opportunities to recover the costs of policing of late-night, city-centre, alcohol-induced behaviour from those who benefit from it?
I am grateful for that appropriate question. One of the huge pressures on our police is the problems caused by alcohol on Friday and Saturday nights in particular. Police officers have to be drafted into many urban areas and most certainly our city centres to deal with the consequences of the abuse of alcohol. There is a cost to that, which we believe should be met by those who profit through the till or over the bar. Those officers should be out in our communities, but people who have paid council tax find that the officers are out in our city centres. I believe that the cost of additional policing in city centres should be met on a polluter-pays basis. That is the position to which this Government commits.
Open Prisons
To ask the Scottish Executive what plans there are for expansion of the open prison estate. (S3O-1295)
The Scottish Prison Service has no current plans for expansion of the open prison estate.
I thank the First Minister—I apologise, I am promoting Mr MacAskill already. I thank the cabinet secretary for his reply. He might be aware that there is some concern among the community around Castle Huntly prison about the possible expansion of that prison. Does he agree that if there is to be an expansion of the open prison estate, we should be looking to expand Noranside prison in rural Angus, where there is ample scope for expansion of the buildings and where the local community would be relaxed about the prospect, rather than expanding further at Castle Huntly?
The member raises a valid point. There is clearly a great deal of concern in the Castle Huntly area—a sheriff in a fatal accident inquiry recently commented on that. The matter has obviously been taken on board by both the Government and, more important, the Scottish Prison Service. I assure the member that there are no plans to expand the current open prison estate, whether at Castle Huntly or Noranside.
Previous
First Minister's Question TimeNext
Pandemic Flu