SCOTTISH EXECUTIVE
General Questions
Local Government Elections 2007
To ask the Scottish Executive when it will publish the regulations on the operation of next year's local government elections. (S2O-11190)
It is important that the local government election rules reflect accurately all the changes that are being introduced. A substantial amount of work has been done to ensure that that happens. We intend to publish them in time to allow effective preparation for and implementation of the changes.
Is the minister aware that there is great concern among returning officers and other interested parties at the delay in publishing the regulations? Is he satisfied that sufficient time will be available for the administrative tasks that must be performed? Is it too much to hope that the delays mean that common sense has finally prevailed in the Executive and that he is really paving the way for an announcement that the local government and Scottish Parliament elections will not take place on the same day? If so, he will have my total support.
The answer to the member's last question is no. Representatives of returning officers and electoral administrators have been heavily involved in the drafting of the rules, which are required to be subject to the affirmative procedure and must be laid 40 days before they are due to come into force. We believe that sufficient time is available for the Parliament to debate them in full and for full preparation to be made in time for the elections.
Animal Welfare (EC Regulation 1/2005)
To ask the Scottish Executive whether it will seek any derogation for the Highlands from European regulation 1/2005 on the welfare of farm animals during transport. (S2O-11179)
The Executive will seek to take advantage of the limited scope to derogate from the provisions in EC regulation 1/2005 for vehicles on road journeys of between eight and 12 hours. We will derogate from the following requirements: to have water constantly available to pigs; to install insulated roofs on existing vehicles; to maintain a vehicle temperature of 0°C or above when animals are being loaded; and to install forced ventilation, temperature monitoring and warning and satellite navigation systems.
I thank the minister for his reply, which does not answer the question, as the form of transport about which he was talking is different from the one that concerns me. I am sure that he is aware that the stock trailers that crofters and farmers have used for many years to transport livestock will be made illegal from January 2007, unless a derogation is obtained from the rule that sets a maximum ramp slope for such trailers.
The new regulation makes no changes to journey time or length. My previous answer related to the same vehicles, simply a different part of them. There is no scope in the regulation for an absolute derogation and all new vehicles will have to be compliant when the law comes into force on 1 January. We are still in discussion with the Commission, but we believe that it will be possible to phase in the new ramp provisions. There is the possibility of allowing there to be no change over a five-year period, so that people in the relevant areas can phase in the provisions. I hope that that will be helpful to farmers in John Farquhar Munro's constituency.
The minister will have seen motion S2M-4916, in the name of my colleague, Murray Tosh, which welcomes the Scottish Executive's recognition of the cost of at least £42 million that farmers and hauliers may incur because of the new regulation and the need to balance correctly animal welfare benefits and the costs of compliance.
First, I clarify the reference to costs of £42 million in the motion to which the member referred. In the Executive's regulatory impact assessment on compliance with EC regulation 1/2005, we set out four options that could be pursued. I regret to say that although we subsequently made it clear that our preferred option was option 4, the £42 million figure refers to option 1. Therefore I make it clear that in the derogations to which I referred in answer to John Farquhar Munro, and in our attempts to use the distance regulations as specified, we are referring to option 4, which we believe would have a maximum cost of nearer to £4 million than £40 million, which is a significant and material difference.
Building (Scotland) Regulations 2004
To ask the Scottish Executive when amendments to the Building (Scotland) Regulations 2004 will be laid before the Parliament. (S2O-11183)
The Building (Scotland) Amendment Regulations 2006 were laid on 3 November.
I welcome the amended regulations' aim of reducing CO2 emissions from buildings. Is the minister aware of recent studies that show that nearly half of new buildings do not comply with existing energy efficiency regulations? Is he also aware that research found that none of a small sample of new houses in Aberdeen complied with existing building standards on energy efficiency? What is the point of setting tough standards on energy efficiency—which we welcome—if they are not properly enforced?
I am glad that Mark Ballard acknowledges the tough new standards that will apply from next year, which will result in CO2 reductions of about 25 per cent and the best levels of thermal insulation in the United Kingdom.
Does the minister agree that the building regulations should provide for adequate sanctions and penalties for builders who do not install the required insulation, pipe lagging and energy efficient boilers, for example? Does he agree that there should be recompense for house owners, such as the owners of the homes in the north-east that were included in the study, who find that their houses breach the regulations?
Strict standards and sanctions must be part of any regime. We are all conscious of the importance of the area and we must intensify our efforts in relation to insulation and energy efficiency. New building standards are a key part of that. As I said, I am actively pursuing and investigating the matter, to ensure that inadequacies and loopholes are dealt with.
Anorexia
To ask the Scottish Executive what action is being taken to address the level of anorexia among young people. (S2O-11221)
In October 2005, we published our framework on the mental health needs of children and young people, which highlighted the importance of sensitive, integrated care for people who have complex needs at a challenging stage of life and focused on promotion, prevention and care. This year we carried out a national and regional analysis of specialist service needs, including the needs of people who have eating disorders.
The minister is well aware of the report, "Eating Disorders in Scotland", which NHS Quality Improvement Scotland published last week, in which it is acknowledged that eating disorders are a significant problem that affects at least 80,000 Scottish citizens. The report made a number of important recommendations, but I draw the minister's attention to the recommendation on in-patient treatment, particularly for patients who have anorexia nervosa. Does he think that it is important that in-patient treatment should be available throughout Scotland, particularly to patients whose conditions are life threatening? How will he respond to the recommendation?
I agree with the points that the member made. The recommendations that NHS QIS published last week on the management and treatment of people with eating disorders will help NHS boards and their partners to plan provision.
Members might remember that when I raised the issue years ago I was given a commitment from the then Minister for Health and Community Care that action would be taken.
Ask a question, Mr Davidson.
We were told that money would be provided. Will the minister confirm that and tell us how much money will be provided and when?
I do not recognise David Davidson's characterisation of the position of the project that Dr Harry Millar is taking forward in Aberdeen; indeed, the contrary is the case. The regional planning group developed proposals and it is clearly for NHS Grampian to make the final decision on how it commissions and delivers services to patients. Nothing that we do centrally will impede the board in doing that. It is for NHS Grampian to resolve the issues to which the member refers in relation to other boards in the north of Scotland, as Harry Millar fully acknowledged when he and I discussed the matter on Friday. I am sure that Harry Millar will continue to devote his energies to developing and promoting his proposals for NHS in-patient treatment in Aberdeen to serve the north of Scotland. His proposals are welcome and are part of a range of measures that are being taken throughout Scotland. We require boards to identify the best way of delivering services for their patients on a regional basis and in the most efficient way possible.
School-building Programme
To ask the Scottish Executive what plans it has to continue the new school-building programme. (S2O-11226)
Under current plans, schools will continue to be built and refurbished until the end of the decade. Substantial funding is in place to support the programme, but we acknowledge that there is more to be done. Further financial support for school-building projects would be a matter for the next spending review.
I am grateful to the minister for his response and particularly for his acknowledgement that more remains to be done. He might be aware that in the past few months seven new schools have opened in my constituency and that a further three schools will open early in the new year. Will he give a commitment to providing further funding to North Lanarkshire Council, so that all parts of Airdrie and Shotts can benefit from similar educational, sporting and recreational facilities?
I am grateful to Ms Whitefield for her acknowledgment of the scale of the Executive's investment in this area. As I have said before in this chamber, public-private partnership projects to the tune of £2.3 billion have been supported in the recent past. The sum of £131.25 million has gone into the schools fund this year, including—I think—£9.452 million to North Lanarkshire Council in particular.
Is the minister familiar with the Audit Scotland report into PPP school funding, which found that PPP projects cost between 2.5 per cent and 4 per cent more than they would if they were financed by traditional borrowing? To apply that to Ms Whitefield's constituency, that would mean a minimum saving of £15 million for Airdrie academy, £3.6 million for Clarkston primary and £5.7 million for Chapelhall and St Aloysius primary. Is he aware that, in that case, traditional funding methods and not-for-profit schemes, as proposed by the Scottish National Party, would save enough money to fund an extra secondary school in Airdrie and Shotts?
As has been said before, one of the myths in the SNP's spending programme is that there is a sort of magic wand, whether it is independence or some revised version of public sector funding. The bottom line is that PPP provides a method of building that has produced the most substantial school-building programme in Scotland's history. The SNP's programme simply does not add up, as Peter Peacock has said previously in response to questions from Fiona Hyslop. Quite simply, unless the SNP is able to get around the problem of having to have the Scottish Executive guarantee the form of spend that it wants, its proposal will remain flawed and unworkable.
Does the minister agree that it is unfortunate that some parents in Coatbridge are not as thrilled as they could be about the fabulous new-build St Andrews high school because their children have to walk along an unsafe route in inclement weather? Could he intervene to persuade North Lanarkshire Council that, because of the unusual circumstances, it should relax its rigid bus rules, which mean that, in some cases, a child in one street gets on the bus while a child in a neighbouring street does not?
I did not entirely catch the whole of the question because of the noise in the chamber. However, I think that what Elaine Smith was saying relates to issues that are the responsibility of the local authority, which makes decisions relating to provision of appropriate services in the local area. In broad terms, I do not think that it is appropriate for the Scottish Executive to interfere in that. If, however, I have misunderstood her question, I am more than happy to hear from her further on the matter.
What requirement, if any, does the Scottish Executive place on local authorities as regards the provision of sporting facilities and ground for play? There are disturbing reports of a reduction in the amount of space for sport in PPP schools.
I share Margo MacDonald's desire that there should be adequate and modern facilities for sport and play across the new schools that are being provided in Scotland. There is no particular difference between PPP projects and projects that are funded by other means in that regard. There is a considerable amount of guidance in the Scottish schools standard PPP contract and in other places, such as the school estate strategy, to support the objective of delivering better facilities. Quite often, school playing fields have been modernised. However, ultimately, it is for local authorities to decide the priorities in their area.
Education (Discipline)
To ask the Scottish Executive what measures it has put in place to support the right of teachers to teach, and young people to learn, in a safe and disciplined environment. (S2O-11199)
The Scottish Executive put a range of measures in place following the launch of the 2001 report "Better Behaviour, Better Learning", which set out recommendations for the Scottish Executive, education authorities and schools on tackling indiscipline in schools.
Given that any pupil behaviour that disrupts the learning of other pupils and the maintenance of health, safety and discipline in the school community is unacceptable, will the minister reaffirm head teachers' right to exclude, when appropriate? Will the Executive provide resources for additional staffing for in-school behaviour bases and units and support the provision of additional off-site behaviour facilities when necessary?
I am well aware of Bill Butler's expertise in the matter from his professional career. The Executive has always supported head teachers' right to take action, including exclusion when necessary, to deal with problems in schools. However, it is important to recognise that exclusion is a temporary remedy. Bill Butler was right to touch on longer-term issues such as appropriate support for teachers and how to deal with pupils who cause difficulties.