Plenary, 23 Jan 2003

Meeting date: Thursday, January 23, 2003

Official Report 982KB pdf

---

First Minister's Question Time

---

Cabinet (Meetings)

To ask the First Minister what issues will be discussed at the next meeting of the Scottish Executive's Cabinet. (S1F-2421)

The agenda for next week's meeting of Cabinet has not yet been decided.

Yet more indecision. Almost 12 months ago to the day, I asked the First Minister about deaths from hospital-acquired infection. In his answer, the First Minister promised that he would publish statistics that would allow the Executive to monitor the problem. Given that promise, can the First Minister tell the Parliament how many patients suffered from infections last year as a result of hospital treatment, and how many have died?

No—I cannot give Mr Swinney the figure for last year, but I can tell him that the report that was published this morning is the next step in a process. The right way to tackle the issue is to set up the right body to deal with it, set the right standards, insist on inspections and then insist on action.

The report that was published today rightly identifies that hospital-acquired infection is a major issue for hospitals and every trust in Scotland. I hope that each and every trust's management takes the report seriously in order to ensure that the risk of infection in our hospitals is dramatically reduced and that it is reduced quickly.

We are 12 months on from 24 January 2002, which is the date on which the First Minister gave me that commitment in the chamber. I assume from his answer today that the statistics are not available. Perhaps the reason why they are not available is the terribly slow pace of progress on the matter.

In January last year, a report on HAI from the Clinical Standards Board for Scotland was promised by March. The report arrived late—in April—and an interim report was promised. The interim report was published in May, following which the Minister for Health and Community Care said that more needed to be done. In June, he set up a convention, which led to a plan. The plan, which was published in October, led to a task force.

After all those reports and plans, the report that was published this morning describes all of that activity as—I quote—a "starting point". Is not the reason why the statistics are not available and why progress has not been made that the past 12 months amount to another wasted year by the Executive?

It will be blatantly obvious to anybody who has thought about the issues seriously that it is neither possible to have inspections without the standards, nor to have standards without a body—independent of the Executive—to agree them. The right process is to set up the body, establish the standards, undertake the inspections and then publish them openly and honestly.

Members will note that that independent comment was made by the very senior figure who is in charge of the process. The right way to deal with the issue is to deal with it independent of politicians, but thereafter to assist with implementation of the new standards that are laid out by the independent body. The new standards are very important—they are as fundamental as doctors and nurses washing their hands properly. Action is required and it is required quickly.

The coalition Government has been in office for nearly four years and the Labour Government in Westminster has been in office for nearly six years. Despite that, the situation today is: half of trusts have done no surveillance of infection; only one trust has produced an statement of assurance that patients are unlikely to contract an infection in hospital; and 27 out of 31 trusts could not demonstrate that they complied with basic standards of hand washing. We all understand the need for proper attention to hand washing, but what we do not need is a First Minister who, when faced with a problem, washes his hands of it and blames somebody else.

I want to reiterate the crucial point that we have the right process that will get to the right action. We have the body, the standards, the inspections and the action that will make a difference in our hospitals and so reduce infection. That process mixes record levels of investment in our health service with appropriate reforms to ensure that the money that is invested buys better health.

Last Tuesday, I made a speech in which I discussed independent inspection in our public services. The SNP accused me of bullying public sector workers rather than trying to solve some of the problems in the public services. Last Tuesday night, an SNP member said on "Newsnight Scotland":

"I don't think we need to be overly concerned about the poor performance in the public service."

I am not simply concerned with increasing the health budget by 50 per cent in the next four years or with setting up bodies, setting standards and having inspections; rather, I am determined that there will be reforms and improvements in our health service and that our actions will deliver those.

---

Prime Minister (Meetings)

To ask the First Minister when he will next meet the Prime Minister and what issues he intends to raise. (S1F-2425)

I expect to meet the Prime Minister in February and I am sure that we will discuss issues of importance to Scotland.

I, too, am sure that the First Minister will discuss such issues. If it is not too distant a memory, perhaps the First Minister and the Prime Minister will discuss the First Minister's interview on GMTV yesterday—I am sure that the Prime Minister is a big fan of the programme on which the First Minister appeared. In November, the First Minister said that the Holyrood project had been

"the single biggest disappointment of devolution".

Yesterday, he said that it was

"one of the great disappointments of devolution".

At least the First Minister recognises that there have been other disappointments. However, the First Minister's refreshing dose of realism is rather undermined by his later assertion that public services in Scotland are better since devolution. In that regard, will the First Minister confirm that the £300 million overspend on the Holyrood project could have been far better spent on 100 new primary schools, 30 new secondary schools, three state-of-the-art hospitals—such as the Forth valley hospital—or on much-needed transport projects, such as a relief road for Aberdeen or a rail link to the Borders? Would not any of those projects have represented far better expenditure of that money?

There are 100 new schools, three new hospitals, new transport projects and this week, the biggest-ever commitment to the central Scotland transport network was announced. Next Tuesday, there will be meetings in Aberdeen with the body that is responsible for drawing up the projects for the Aberdeen road and the rest of the network. Investment will follow and we will ensure that reforms will be made that are required not only in transport, schools and hospitals, but in other parts of the public sector in Scotland. There will be the level of investment that is required to turn around the years of decline that Mr McLetchie knows about all too well.

The First Minister's answer is truly unbelievable—[Interruption.] His answer was unbelievable and incredible. Whatever amount is spent on public services, it can never justify the waste of £300 million on the Holyrood project and any person who thinks that one justifies the other takes a remarkably cavalier attitude to the spending of public money in this country.

Instead of talking about "disappointments", when will the First Minister acknowledge that we are in this situation because of the political decisions that were taken by the Labour Government, the votes that were cast on four separate occasions in the chamber by Labour and Liberal Democrat MSPs and the blank cheques that successive finance ministers—including Mr McConnell—have signed? Is not it true that all the crocodile tears that the First Minister shed on the sofa yesterday are simply part of an effort to shift the blame for the whole sorry saga on to his predecessors, Mr Dewar and Mr McLeish? If the defence of "It wisnae me" did not work for his predecessor, why does the First Minister think it will work for him?

I have only one appropriate comment to make about that, which I have made before and will make again: ultimately, all members—including me—share some responsibility for where we are with the Holyrood building project. I believe that the Conservative group in the Parliament shares at least as much of that responsibility as anybody else. The Conservatives have refused to serve on the group that controls the costs and manages the timetable of the project. If the Conservatives took their responsibilities in the Parliament more seriously, perhaps Scotland would take the Conservatives more seriously.

Will the First Minister take the opportunity to raise with the Prime Minister the benefits of European interregional co-operation? Will he join me in welcoming the Minister of Education, Culture and Sport from the autonomous community of the Balearic Islands, who is visiting Parliament today? Does the First Minister agree that our young people can benefit greatly from language, cultural and educational exchanges with the regions of Europe?

Yes. I agree.

---

Non-Scotland-domiciled Students

To ask the First Minister whether the Scottish Executive has any plans to place a cap on the number of non-Scotland-domiciled students studying at Scottish higher education institutions. (S1F-2433)

There are no plans to place a cap based on place of domicile on the number of students coming to study in Scottish higher education institutions.

If there is an increase in the number of students from the traditional routes seeking entry to Scottish universities—currently, 11,000 students who live in Scotland study in England, and 4,000 students who live in England study in Scotland—what steps will the Executive take to ensure that students who matriculate from non-traditional backgrounds, such as from further education institutions, and those who come from poorer backgrounds, will not be adversely affected?

The policy of this Executive and of the Parliament—

Order. The member has asked the question.

Presiding Officer, I wanted to make an important point.

Question time is not for making points. It is for asking questions.

First, we should be careful about predicting too far in advance the impact of any proposals that might be implemented from the consultation that is currently taking place in England.

Secondly, it is critical that, while we ensure that Scottish students have the maximum opportunities that they need and deserve, we also ensure that our universities attract students not only from England, but from all over the world. We have some of the best universities in the world and they deserve the best students in the world. If we in Scotland have the best students in the world, we could also have some of the best businesses in the world and the best economic growth. What we need to do is to grow our population and use our universities as part of that base. I hope that we can do that in the years to come.

Although it might be in the future, the predictable consequence that the Westminster Labour Government's higher education proposals will have on Scotland will undoubtedly be increased interest of non-Scotland-domiciled students in seeking university education in Scotland. I am comforted to hear the First Minister's assurance that there is no intention to place a cap on the number of applications from non-Scotland-domiciled students, but will the First Minister confirm how he intends to address what is undoubtedly a potential challenge to our universities?

Our review will consider that matter, along with any other matters that might arise from any decisions that might yet be taken. I must stress that the proposals are currently the subject of a consultation and are not final decisions.

The Scottish Parliament has a good record on the subject. One of my proudest moments as a member of the Parliament was to vote to abolish tuition fees in Scotland. I believe that that was one of the proudest moments of this Parliament. Scotland has a proud educational tradition that we should cherish and build on by ensuring that there is equality of access to our universities. That is a fundamental principle to which I have adhered all my adult life and to which I intend to adhere as long as I am involved in this Parliament or in politics.

I draw the First Minister's attention to the comments of Andrew Cubie, who said that the danger of introducing top-up fees south of the border is that they will deny access to higher education for poorer kids, both north and south of the border, because of the additional pressures that such fees will create. Will the First Minister consider the proposal—which has been widely accepted among the principals and students of Scotland's universities and by Universities Scotland—to recall the Cubie committee to give independent consideration to the long-term future of both student funding and institutional funding? Would not that committee be able to use the period between now and 2006 to ensure that Scotland's university sector gets the additional funding that it so badly needs?

I have three points to make on that. First, the recall of the Cubie committee is totally unnecessary. The minister with responsibility for higher education announced this morning that the higher education review will undertake a second phase to consider issues around university and higher education and related finance that the first phase did not consider. That will be done in tandem with any changes that take place in England.

Secondly, it is important to correct the very wrong impression that has been given this morning that higher education funding in Scotland's universities is rising by only a small amount in comparison to the rise that was announced yesterday in England. That is not true; the figures are not comparable and the Scottish figure is significantly higher than the figure that was being reported this morning in a variety of media outlets.

Thirdly, it is important that we establish the right principles here in Scotland. We should be proud that Parliament abolished tuition fees—I am. We should also be clear that top-up tuition fees are not the right solution for Scotland, because we face different challenges in Scotland. The Confederation of British Industry said yesterday that it believes that the real challenge in Scotland is not to have more university graduates, but to provide better training and skills development at other levels in the population. That is a challenge for us, and we are meeting it through modern apprenticeships, educational maintenance allowances and improvements in further education. If we get that right in the years to come, Scotland's economy will grow much faster than it has in the past.

Will the First Minister ensure that, in the review that his colleague will carry out, the implications for research work and for staffing levels at Scottish universities will be carefully considered? Will he ensure that the Scottish Executive will have a clear view before the end of that consultation, and that it will hold discussions with the UK Government so that the UK Government is fully aware of the views of the Scottish Executive on the matter?

I would not want to put a time scale on a review that has clearly been announced to respond to yesterday's announcements in England. We will clarify the time scale and nature of the review in due course, but the matters that I have mentioned are the important issues that the review must tackle. I want to make it absolutely clear to the Parliament that we have world-class universities in Scotland and that we need to keep world-class universities in Scotland. That means teaching and research at the very highest level and it means ensuring that our universities and other institutions of higher education are well supported in the years to come.

---

Police (Resources)

To ask the First Minister what resources the Scottish Executive is making available to police forces to investigate child pornography on the internet. (S1F-2424)

Police funding is at a record level and will continue to rise by more than 6 per cent a year until 2006. In addition, the Deputy First Minister will soon reveal details of extra funding to tackle internet crime.

Given the high profile of child pornography at the moment, and the fact that many people are concerned by the perceived availability of such material, can the First Minister assure me that our police forces are co-ordinated and are working closely with police forces in other countries to stamp out that vile and utterly abhorrent industry?

There is considerable co-operation across the Atlantic between police forces in North America and police forces here. There is also considerable co-operation across Europe. Most significantly, a lot of co-operation takes place inside the United Kingdom. That co-operation is absolutely vital.

The Prime Minister and I discussed the matter with the chief constable of Lothian and Borders police last Thursday night. The amount of work that our police forces now have to pursue, not just in relation to internet crime—child pornography in particular—but in relation to the threat of terrorism, is using significant resources. We need to keep an eye on that to ensure that our forces are well resourced and are co-ordinating their activities in order to make the maximum impact and provide the greatest level of security.

I welcome the First Minister's acknowledgement of the superb work that is being done by Lothian and Borders police. I ask him to acknowledge the fact that they are dealing with the serious issue of child pornography, to acknowledge the investigative work that they are doing on terrorism and to acknowledge the increasing pressures that they have to face as the capital's police force. Will he give a commitment that, when there is a future review of police funding throughout Scotland, he will focus on the specific pressures in the Lothian and Borders police area?

I took on board the points that were made last Thursday night by the chief constable and the local MSP, Miss Boyack. I praise Lothian and Borders police, which has during the past few weeks been through a period in which a less professional force would have struggled to cope. I am referring not just to the challenges that it has faced, but to the atmosphere that has been created around it. Some of the stories that we heard about people sounding false alarms during Hogmanay celebrations, wasting police time and scaring the public were, to be frank, abhorrent. We need to ensure that all of us in Scotland—not only politicians and police officers, but citizens—do all that we can to combat such menaces.