Engagements
To ask the First Minister what engagements he has planned for the rest of the day. (S4F-01832)
Engagements to take forward the Government’s programme for Scotland.
We have just voted on a budget of scarce resources. Every pound and every penny should be accounted for and explained. The First Minister’s trip to the Ryder cup cost in excess of £468,000. VisitScotland has accounted for how it spent £414,000 of the total figure but, despite a series of freedom of information requests and missed deadlines, the Scottish Government has failed to account for £54,000 of that total. Will the First Minister please account for that spending now?
Johann Lamont has partially answered her own question. The Scottish Government spend was not £460,000 but £50,000. The freedom of information request will be answered as soon as possible. [Interruption.] It will and why should it not be? In my mind, the spending on the trip to Chicago was about the investment decisions that have brought jobs to Scotland, the variety of activities that promoted our country and the huge importance of the estimated £100 million benefit from having the Ryder cup in our country—all that justifies our substantial effort to promote this country.
As we go into this year of the Commonwealth games, homecoming and the Ryder cup—as the attention of the world is centred on Scotland—can we not just agree that it is the duty and obligation of the Scottish Government and every public authority to maximise the benefit from those events?
The Scottish Government has spent £1 million of taxpayers’ cash on a record 14 special advisers and still the First Minister cannot come up with an answer to a simple question.
My mother used to say that every penny should be a prisoner because it came from the sweat of your father’s brow. The First Minister should be as cautious with public spending and the public purse. It is entirely reasonable to ask what has happened to that £54,000. VisitScotland has admitted to spending almost £1,000 on a pianist, more than £1,100 on flying in chefs from Gleneagles and more than £1,700 on ties.
It has been reported that the First Minister chose not to stay in the hotel where the rest of the delegation stayed, but in the more exclusive Peninsula hotel, further away from the course. Suites at that hotel cost more than $2,000 a night. Will the First Minister confirm that he stayed in that hotel, explain why he wanted to stay in a more upmarket hotel than the rest of the delegation and what that cost?
From memory, 17 people were in the Scottish Government delegation, including a range of officials from Scottish Enterprise and the Scottish Government’s industry department. I correct Johann Lamont: the visit was not just about the two days of the Ryder cup; rather, it stretched over the range of events in Chicago to attract investment to Scotland. The investment to Scotland that was announced on that trip was worth tens of millions of pounds and brought jobs to many areas of Scotland.
On special advisers, Johann Lamont mentioned the figure of £1 million. Our spending record on special advisers is incomparably better than that of the previous Labour-Liberal Administration. From memory—I am open to correction—the number of special advisers for the whole of the Scottish Government is also, I think, less than the number of individual special advisers to the Deputy Prime Minister.
The figure of £1 million sticks in my memory because I think that that was the expenditure by Jack McConnell’s Administration during Scotland week. That spending could well have been justified. However, it is so interesting that we have managed to bring as many jobs by rightfully promoting Scotland in the United States without ever hitting that £1 million figure, spent by an Administration of which Johann Lamont was a minister.
Why do we not focus on how we promote this country, get the advantage of promoting Scotland on the world stage, embrace 2014 as a great year for Scotland and say that that promotion—whether it is by VisitScotland or the Scottish Government—is of immense value in bringing jobs and livelihoods to the people of Scotland? [Applause.]
Order.
It is possible to do all that this year and answer simple questions about the money that the First Minister has spent.
I have to say that that answer plumbs the depths in finding anything to talk about except a simple question about a hotel bill. That £54,000 is more than twice what the average person earns in a year, but the First Minister cannot account for how he spent that much money in just a week.
When The Daily Telegraph asked the Scottish Government to account—[Interruption.]
Order. [Interruption.] Mr Wheelhouse—order!
I am not sure whether we have quite got to the point of journalists not being allowed to ask questions but, if we have, we are in a very serious place.
When The Daily Telegraph asked the Scottish Government to account for the whole half a million pounds spent on the Ryder cup, the Government said at first that it could not. Then it said that it could. Then VisitScotland accounted for what it spent. Then the Government told The Daily Telegraph that it would give details on 10 January. Now, two weeks after that deadline and two months after VisitScotland responded, the First Minister still cannot give an answer. I ask him again: how did he spend his cut of the half a million pounds spent on a trip to the golf? [Interruption.]
Order.
And Johann Lamont talked about plumbing the depths. I know that The Daily Telegraph is becoming the house journal of the Labour Party in Scotland, but—
For the third time, let us correct a few things. On the half a million pounds thing, it is obviously not the case because, as Johann Lamont rightly says, VisitScotland did not admit but spelled out what it had spent on promoting Scotland. The promotion of Scotland at the Ryder cup was an important aspect of what we have to do to realise the estimated £100 million of benefit.
In terms of defending VisitScotland, one aspect of what was done was that, at the Ryder cup, a film promoting Scotland as a tourist destination was shown to a live television audience of many hundreds of millions. Johann Lamont should consider what would have happened if VisitScotland had had to buy that sort of publicity.
When it comes to the Scottish Government spend, I have also pointed out that it ain’t me who spent it, but 17 people in the Scottish Government delegation.
A range of investments, generating jobs and investment, was announced while we were in Chicago. Incidentally, that is one of the reasons why foreign direct investment—FDI—projects into Scotland are up 49 per cent in the most recent figures, just as the better together campaign was predicting a collapse.
Why do we not keep our eye on how we can promote our country and celebrate the opportunities that we have this year and how many jobs we can generate for the people of Scotland?
As I have put the emphasis on jobs and employment, perhaps for once in First Minister’s questions—though perhaps not in light of the job figures yesterday—Johann Lamont will get round to asking me about the economy, unemployment and generating jobs for the people of Scotland. [Applause.]
Order.
I welcome the unemployment figures—I genuinely do. I just want an explanation of the figures that I have given and of how the Government spent £54,000. The First Minister has still not explained it.
The First Minister talks about VisitScotland. It has done its job: it has explained how it spent its money. We ask him to follow its example. We know that he went to extraordinary lengths to stop the public finding out that he spent £250 of their money on a pair of Chinese checked trousers when he forgot his tartan trews, but this is more serious.
What do we know? We know that the First Minister spent half a million pounds on a trip to the Ryder cup and that he reportedly upgraded himself—at our expense—to stay in a hotel that is frequented by Beyoncé, Brad Pitt and Justin Bieber.
This is First Minister’s question time.
This is the question.
For those who do not know the Peninsula Chicago, it is
“for those who love to spoil themselves with a luxurious five-star experience, without losing that comfortable home-away-from-home feel.”
The First Minister has to explain how he spent the money. He should understand that, in the real world, the people of Scotland will be disgusted at how he treats himself at their expense. Will he now at least have the decency to explain to them how he spent, in just one week, the £54,000 of taxpayers’ money that he still has not accounted for?
There were—if my memory serves me—17 people in the Scottish Government delegation. The expenditure of £50,000 was on that delegation—flights and accommodation for 17 people.
This is an improvement, because the last time Johann Lamont mentioned the issue, she had me spending the entire £500,000, so I should be eternally grateful that we have now boiled that down to £50,000. I ask her to go one step further and to accept that there were 17 people in the Scottish Government delegation. More important, I ask her to accept that key announcements were made for jobs across Scotland, that key promotion was carried out for many Scottish companies—including the oil and gas round-table discussion, which has also resulted in jobs coming to Scotland—and that there was great promotion of our country. I am talking not just about the Scottish Government’s efforts over that week, but VisitScotland’s efforts at the Ryder cup itself. I was proud to note on the television coverage that the saltire flew so prominently at the Ryder cup in Chicago. That is an essential part of preparing for the great success that we are going to have at Gleneagles.
I am proud of the work that VisitScotland does in increasing tourism, the results of which we are now seeing, and I am proud of the work that Scottish Development International does in bringing jobs to Scotland. That is one of the reasons why we have had a record increase in employment in Scotland and why unemployment in Scotland is 6.4 per cent. This Government is in office because we focus on the things that matter to the people of Scotland—that is, jobs and growth—not the ridiculous frippery that we get from Johann Lamont. [Interruption.]
Order.
Prime Minister (Meetings)
To ask the First Minister when he will next meet the Prime Minister. (S4F-01830)
No plans in the near future.
A new report from the Scottish Further and Higher Education Funding Council has revealed that the number of students who are studying in Scotland’s colleges has plummeted by 140,000 over the past five years. That is a cut of more than a third in college places since the Scottish National Party came to power. How many women have been affected?
I dispute the figures that Ruth Davidson uses. The correct way to look at teaching in Scottish colleges is to concentrate on full-time equivalent places. That is important because it tells us the level of teaching that is taking place in the colleges. If we do not do that, we equate what could be a course of two or three hours with a higher national certificate or a higher national diploma, which would clearly be ridiculous.
The Scottish Government has kept to its commitment to maintain full-time equivalent places at the level that we spelled out in our manifesto. In 2012-13, there were 116,399 full-time equivalents—the funded places—which shows that we have kept to that manifesto commitment.
Scotland’s colleges are being renewed and invested in throughout the country. Let us remember that although the budget for Scotland’s colleges has come under pressure, the deal and the budget for Scotland’s colleges are incomparably better than what is happening south of the border. Before Ruth Davidson says that that is irrelevant, let us remember that—as even she knows—our budget is governed by consequentials. I can demonstrate—I will if she asks me again—that although the funding position for Scotland’s colleges is under pressure, it is incomparably better than the position south of the border. Unless she can detail where exactly we will get Scotland’s funding from, her question is nullified by practice south of the border.
Of course, Ruth Davidson could change her mind on independence and redraw her line in the sand. With independence we could use Scotland’s resources to get even more success from our colleges and universities.
The most telling thing about that answer was that, although I asked the First Minister about women, he ignored them. I can tell him that the number of women who are studying part-time courses has been slashed. There are now 80,000 fewer women studying part time in Scotland’s colleges than there were on the day he took office.
The First Minister says that he wants more women in Scotland back in the workplace; I agree with him. However, childcare is only part of the issue. For a woman who has had a family and has had a career break and who wants to get back into the workplace, a part-time course allows her to juggle childcare and find a route back into work. Mike Russell has, in the chamber, flippantly dismissed part-time courses as “hobby” courses. What does the First Minister have to say to the 80,000 women who cannot get college places?
I answered Ruth Davidson in the way I did in order to correct the premise of her question. The key measure is the number of full-time equivalent places, which is crucial.
Ruth Davidson asks how we will get women back into the workplace. That is hugely important and is a concern of the Government. Has she not noticed the unemployment and employment figures that were issued yesterday? The employment figures show a rise in the year to November of 62,000 of women coming back into the workplace.
We are talking not just about what we will do in the future—which will produce an even greater rise—but about what has happened in the past year. I heard Iain Gray say that many of the jobs are part time, but we know from the statistics that the positions are full time. The figure is 62,000—a 3 per cent rise in the number of women in the workforce.
We know from statistics that women are doing better than men on school qualifications and that they are going to better destinations from school. We also know from statistics that the number of women in the workforce is rising quickly—the increase was 62,000. Given that, the Government can claim not only that it is offering the prospect of free and comprehensive childcare in an independent Scotland, but that it is already succeeding in bringing women back into the workforce. That is partly because colleges are concentrating on courses that equip people and give them the required training and skills to get into the workforce successfully.
I will make a final point. I know that Ruth Davidson will—through her acute interest in such things—have noticed the rising number of women in modern apprenticeships, as part of the 60 per cent increase in the number of apprenticeships. All round, that is not a bad position, given the restraints from her colleagues in London and the Westminster straitjacket that this Government has been in.
Cabinet (Meetings)
To ask the First Minister what issues will be discussed at the next meeting of the Cabinet. (S4F-01831)
Issues of importance to the people of Scotland.
Police stop and search rates in Scotland have increased fourfold since the First Minister came to power. In the past year alone, 750,000 people were stopped and searched—most without there being any suspicion of a crime. The vast majority were young people, and 500 were under the age of 10. It is difficult to understand how children under 10 are in any position to give the police consent to search. Is he comfortable with very young children being treated that way?
I am comfortable with the fact that 70 per cent of stop and searches were consensual under the regulations. I am comfortable that, as Police Scotland has indicated, many of the stop and searches achieved their required result—for example, finding potentially offensive weapons and addressing other aspects of behaviour.
The thing that I am most satisfied with—which Willie Rennie should dwell on for a minute—is the sharp reduction in offensive-weapon carrying and in crimes against the person, including knife crime and other serious crime.
Willie Rennie should look at the results that we are achieving in respect of violent crime in Scotland. One of the things that the Government encountered and had to square up to when we took office was the serious problem of knife crime, with victims throughout Scotland calling for action. Considering the successful action that the police have initiated, the Liberal Democrats should at some point acknowledge that there is some sense and logic in how the police forces of Scotland—now Police Scotland—are carrying our their responsibilities.
If that is so clear, I presume that the First Minister will plan a further fourfold increase in stop and searches. I am genuinely disappointed that the First Minister is so blasé about use of that encroaching police tactic without checks and balances. Scotland’s Commissioner for Children and Young People has said that there is a need for appropriate safeguards. The Scottish human rights commission has said that stop and search is “largely unregulated and unaccountable”.
The First Minister should be concerned about the fact that in 750,000 cases of people being stopped and searched 80 per cent had no result, and that so many young children are being targeted. He risks the alienation of a generation. Is it not time that the First Minister sanctioned an overhaul of police stop and search?
Willie Rennie talks about the alienation of the public. He should look at the figures, which show that people’s fear of crime in Scotland is not just reducing but is substantially lower than it is elsewhere in these islands. I do not accept for a second that we are complacent or blasé about these matters.
Willie Rennie will know that at its board meeting last August, the Scottish Police Authority discussed a report from Police Scotland entitled “Keeping People Safe through Stop and Search”. The board instructed the SPA’s performance and working group to undertake detailed scrutiny of the issue and to report back. That was long before Willie Rennie asked his question.
Chief Constable Sir Stephen House, speaking to the Parliament’s Justice Sub-Committee on Policing last October, said:
“We stress to our officers that, first, they must do stop and search with integrity, fairness and respect. They have to have a reason for doing it, and they have to treat people fairly while they do it.”—[Official Report, Justice Sub-Committee on Policing, 31 October 2013; c 265.]
The issue is being examined by the Parliament and the Scottish Police Authority and there is no indication that there is any complacency whatever.
However, we should reflect on the fact that crime in Scotland is at a 39-year low, violent crime is down by almost a half since 2006-07 and homicide is at its lowest level since records began. That is because of two things: first, we trust our police officers to carry out their responsibilities effectively and secondly, we have 1,000 more police officers on the streets and communities of Scotland, carrying out that work of behalf of the Scottish people.
Renewable Energy (Pentland Firth)
To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government’s response is to findings from the universities of Edinburgh and Oxford that the Pentland Firth could provide enough renewable energy to power approximately half of Scotland’s homes. (S4F-01840)
I welcome the work by the universities of Edinburgh, Oxford and Western Australia, which builds on last year’s research and provides a valuable insight into how best to exploit that tremendous resource to meet Scotland’s electricity needs.
In September last year, we consented the first tidal array in the Pentland Firth—the largest of its kind to be awarded consent in Europe. That initial array, by the developer MeyGen, will provide valuable learning for the research community and the wider tidal energy industry, as well as being a substantial development of tidal power.
Will the First Minister join me in paying tribute to the contribution made by the engineers at the universities of Edinburgh and Oxford? They have produced the most detailed study yet of how much tidal power could be generated by turbines placed in the Pentland Firth between mainland Scotland and Orkney. What more can be done to overcome the barriers to investment, created by the United Kingdom Government’s handling of electricity market reform, in order to create jobs in manufacturing and throughout the supply chain so that we can power our economy and allow Scotland to realise its potential as a world leader in renewable and tidal energy?
I congratulate the researchers. Their estimate of 1.9GW is an informed insight and has provided expertise in the location of tidal turbines.
Scotland leads the world in wave and tidal technologies, which is why we established the saltire prize. The European Marine Energy Centre in Orkney was the first and only centre of its kind in the world to provide wave and tidal developers with accredited and grid-connected testing facilities.
There is no doubt that electricity market reform and the uncertainties that the UK Government has created have dealt severe blows to offshore renewable prospects in Scotland. It is estimated that, between offshore wind, tidal and wave power and onshore power, the islands of Scotland—Orkney, Shetland and the Western Isles—have the potential to contribute 5 per cent of Great Britain’s electricity by 2030. We should not lose sight of that amazing potential clean green opportunity that Scotland’s geography offers us. In the Scottish Government’s opinion, wave and tidal power are very much part of that picture.
The estimated 1.9GW of potential in the Pentland Firth is impressive enough, although the technological challenges remain significant. However, in 2008, the First Minister confidently told the world of the Pentland Firth:
“The sort of power that potentially could come from this area is not some hundreds of megawatts, it’s not just like one conventional power station, it’s 20 gigawatts and more than that, that’s like 20 conventional power stations.”
When will the First Minister realise that Scotland’s renewables potential will in the end be delivered by serious science and not by hysterical hyperbole?
The estimate by Edinburgh and Oxford universities is of 1.9GW from tidal arrays, whereas the estimate that we had in 2008 from a Welsh university was of the total potential of offshore power in Scotland. The Pentland Firth is one of the foremost locations for tidal power. We are already looking at a tidal project deploying there that will produce many megawatts of power. That is important research.
Iain Gray should just get on board and accept that the biggest current obstacle to the development of marine resources in Scotland is the uncertainty that is being generated by the UK Government, and that the biggest assets in developing the undoubted potential are the enthusiasm and expertise of our scientists and the solid, consistent and enthusiastic support of the Scottish Government. O, that the Labour Party would get on board rather than try to undermine the industry in terms of Iain Gray’s normal performance.
Community Land Purchases
To ask the First Minister what action the Scottish Government is taking to strengthen the powers that local authorities and communities have to purchase land. (S4F-01848)
The Scottish Government wants 1 million acres of land to be in community ownership by 2020. I was delighted recently that a 10-year campaign on Lewis was successful after a funding package was put in place to allow local residents to buy a 26,775-acre estate. In support of that ambition, the forthcoming community empowerment (Scotland) bill will include a range of measures to support increased community ownership. Local authorities already have extensive powers to compulsorily purchase land in the public interest but, as part of our town centre action plan, we will continue to encourage local authorities to use compulsory purchase powers to bring neglected or abandoned land back into productive use.
Last week, we debated town centres. In bringing about the required transformation, the key issues are to do with funding and the powers that local authorities need. Will the First Minister commit to examining the powers in the community empowerment bill to ensure that local authorities have the power to compulsorily purchase land to transform our town centres, particularly in communities where market forces have failed?
Indeed, that is what the consultation on the bill is about, and that is our proposal and our objective. We look forward to Sarah Boyack’s participation in that process and to the information that she will provide. As she knows, we have a commission that will report on land ownership in Scotland.
We need to remember the practicalities. As Sarah Boyack will remember, when we came into office, we found that the Labour Party had scrapped the land fund in 2005 and transferred responsibility to the Big Lottery Fund’s growing community assets scheme. However, we then found that the Big Lottery could not be used to buy out public land. There was perhaps the enthusiasm to do it, but we had no means to support communities in exercising a buy-out. Luckily, the current Administration has restored the land fund and, as a result, we are seeing once again a flow of purchases back into community ownership, as we go towards that million acre target. We will look at the legislation and at the consultation on the proposed bill to see if the powers are there, but a commitment is also required from Government to put up the money to ensure that communities can take land into community ownership.
Economic Strategy (Inequality)
To ask the First Minister what assessment the Scottish Government has made of recent reports on how the United Kingdom Government’s economic strategy is impacting on inequality in Scotland. (S4F-01843)
The United Kingdom is one of the most unequal societies in the world. It is ranked 28th out of 34 Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development nations on income inequalities.
That trend is intensifying under the Tory-Liberal Government, which has delivered a double-dip recession and taken grossly unfair decisions, such as the decision to remove disability living allowance from some of our most vulnerable citizens.
The report from the University of Stirling is extremely welcome, because it makes it clear that the powers that are currently available to the Scottish Government are not enough to substantially reduce inequality. That is why many of us—a growing number—believe that only with independence would Scotland have the control and the full range of policy levers necessary to tackle inequality in our country.
I am sure that the First Minister is aware that Professor Tony Travers, of the London School of Economics and Political Science, said in the Financial Times this week:
“London is the dark star of the economy”.
That followed similar comments from the UK Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, Vince Cable. Does the First Minister agree that independence is, as he said, the only way that we will be able to rebalance the economy to achieve a fairer country?
I do think that what the secretary of state, Vince Cable, had to say should be of some importance. It should be of some importance to the Liberal Democrats, since he is a Liberal Democrat, of some importance to the Tories, because he is in coalition with the Conservatives at the moment, and of some importance to Johann Lamont, who seemed, in a speech last night, to think that the reverse was the truth.
If Vince Cable and, indeed, Tony Travers of the LSE point to the difficulties in terms of the gravitational pull that London exercises in the UK economy, I think that people in the Scottish Parliament should pay some attention to their views.
Fiona McLeod is absolutely correct. One of the great arguments for independence for Scotland is to get the levers—economic, fiscal and in terms of social security—that are required to ensure that 100,000 additional children are not placed back into family and child poverty, as is estimated by the third sector in Scotland. That is one of the key ambitions of this country. I can see that it gathers no support from the Tory benches, but it will gather support from the people of Scotland.
Those who take the time to read the report that the University of Stirling published this week will see that it completely undermines the Scottish National Party argument that leaving the UK would automatically reduce inequality. After all, the Institute for Fiscal Studies made it clear that a separate Scotland would need to make spending cuts that are twice as deep as those in the rest of the UK. Is it not the case that it is the poorest and pensioners in our country who would be hardest hit by the SNP’s plans for an independent Scotland?
Only Jackie Baillie, when faced with the bedroom tax and the inequity being placed on Scotland by the Tory Government, would come to the conclusion that social security policy is better run from Westminster.
Jackie Baillie is telling people to read the report. Yes, I have read the report, and I have read—
No you haven’t.
Order.
Well, I will quote directly, for the benefit of Jackie Baillie. Quote:
“An independent Scotland would have access to fiscal powers with which it could influence inequality more directly than it can at the moment.”
That is a direct quotation from the report. Perhaps that is the page that Jackie Baillie skipped over in her anxiety to make her point.