SCOTTISH EXECUTIVE
Sectarianism
To ask the Scottish Executive what response it will make to the Church of Scotland's church and nation committee's report on sectarianism. (S1O-5048)
The Scottish Executive is opposed to religious intolerance and prejudice in any form. We therefore welcome the general thrust of the report. Detailed consideration of the report's recommendations is a matter for the Church of Scotland's General Assembly, but we will study the report closely.
Would the Executive consider accepting an amendment to the Criminal Justice (Scotland) Bill to introduce stronger penalties for offences that the court decides are caused by sectarian or religious hatred, in the same way as they do for racial hatred? I ask the question because the existence of the group that Dr Simpson chairs prevents any progress on my member's bill on the subject in the meantime.
I understand the member's frustration that the working group appears to be impeding the progress of his bill. However, it is important that the group takes the issue forward step by step. As Mr Gorrie will know—being a member of the working group—we are examining evidence of cases where sectarianism or religious hatred has been referred to in the sentencing of individuals before the court. When we have taken that evidence and held discussions with several groups, we will decide how to proceed. Clearly, the member's proposal is one of several alternatives, should the working group decide that a change in the law is necessary. We have not yet reached that point in our discussions.
Do ministers also recognise that not only changes in legislation but changes in attitude and culture are required? The confession of the Church of Scotland on words uttered in this very chamber many years ago, in relation to forebears of mine and others in the chamber, is to be welcomed as part of the programme of work that is being undertaken to create mutual respect and make progress on community relations.
I thank Mr Fitzpatrick for making that point. I agree that it is important that groups such as the Church of Scotland seek to examine their own practice and history, as well as that of the wider culture, in order to begin to address negative attitudes. Courtesy of Mr Canavan, recently I met Mr Ian McLeod of Celtic Football Club and heard about some of the work that Celtic is doing. Celtic and Rangers have been considering sectarian issues in the clubs in a positive way. Such steps are to be welcomed in changing the culture and attitude.
Why is no representative of any church of any denomination on the Scottish Executive's working group on sectarianism? Will the minister consider widening representation on the group to include representatives of churches of different denominations and both clubs in the old firm, who have made a positive contribution following a meeting with the cross-party sports group last year?
It is crucial that we engage all the parties that Mr Canavan has mentioned. The working group will receive presentations involving several faiths. However, it would be impossible to have a committee composed of all the different religious groups in Scotland. We will take evidence from both old firm clubs, from Nil by Mouth—a programme funded by the millennium fund—and from various religious groups. We are working hard to engage everyone in the process, but I want to keep the cross-party group small and focused so that we can achieve results within a reasonable time.
Economy (Public Sector)
To ask the Scottish Executive what the public sector share of the Scottish economy is and whether it wishes this share to change. (S1O-5051)
There are a number of possible ways of defining the share of the public sector in the Scottish economy. Estimates from the Office for National Statistics show that output in the public services sectors amounted to about 20 per cent of total gross domestic product in Scotland in 1998, which is the latest year for which figures are available.
I appreciate the minister's answer. However, he will recognise that it has been generally accepted that the wealth gap per head between Scotland and the rest of the United Kingdom is widening. Given the minister's comments about the overwhelming dominance of the public sector in Scotland's economy—and given the impact of the widely accepted Barnett squeeze in reducing Scotland's share of overall UK spending—will he name one measure in last week's UK budget that will reduce that wealth gap?
Pound for pound, Scotland receives the same as everywhere else in the UK. The Executive's focus remains not on narrow definitions provided by statistics, but on delivery of high-quality public services.
Given that the Communication Workers Union is lobbying the Scottish Parliament today about the regulator Postcomm's proposal to privatise the Post Office, will the minister take this opportunity to say that that would be one unacceptable reduction of the role of the public sector in the Scottish and UK economies? Will he send a clear, unified message from this Parliament that the privatisation of the Post Office is not on?
No. This minister will say that that matter is reserved and that he will not comment on it.
I was puzzled by the minister's great pride when he mentioned high-quality public services, which the people of Scotland expect to get anyway. He has made no comment whatever about what share of the GDP should be spent on building up our infrastructure to improve the economy and provide people with sustainable employment, which will give us the tax to pay for the good things in life. What does the minister have to say about that?
As I was not asked that question to begin with, it did not form part of my earlier answer. However, the Executive has provided the largest-ever budget for transport in Scotland. Furthermore, the spending review is under way, and I am sure that transport will feature largely in the process.
Renewable Energy Guidance (Photovoltaics)
To ask the Scottish Executive what plans it has to update national planning policy guideline NPPG6 on renewable energy to include guidance on photovoltaics. (S1O-5045)
The Executive intends to issue advice on photovoltaics later this year. It is proposed that that will be done as an annexe to "Planning advice note 45: Renewable Energy Technologies".
I thank the minister for her reply. Such advice will allow us to begin to make progress on the issue in Scotland.
I am very interested in Sarah Boyack's suggestion. We want the planning system to play its full part by recognising renewable energy's vital contribution and making positive provision for it. Although we will take action on that issue, there are other matters that we should attend to. I also point out that through our fuel poverty strategy and our commitment to housing regeneration, we have integrated those requirements into the housing stock transfer and other policies. As a result, this issue will become an important priority for the Executive.
Will the Crown Estate or the local authorities be responsible for the planning roles in the development of tidal energy in areas such as the Pentland firth? Moreover, has the minister considered drawing up an offshore NPPG to address those matters?
I am not sure about that, but I am happy to discuss the matter with John Scott and with planning officials.
With regard to renewable energy, and particularly offshore wind power, the minister will be aware that the planning authority for offshore waters is the Crown Estate. Is she aware that, in return for giving consent for a wind farm, the Crown Estate intends to impose on the companies involved a 2 per cent levy on any income derived from the operation of their wind farms? Does the minister think that it is just that the Crown Estate's coffers will be filled by revenue raised from Scotland's wind power? Would not she prefer that income to come direct to the Scottish Parliament for the benefit of Scotland and its people?
I am, of course, interested in those representations and have had correspondence on those matters recently. The Executive is concerned to ensure that we maximise the opportunities for renewable energy. I can assure Mr Crawford that we will give the matter serious consideration.
New Deal
To ask the Scottish Executive why participants in the new deal for young people programme in Scotland are more likely to experience two or three periods of unemployment than their counterparts in England and Wales. (S1O-5040)
More than 40,000 young people have found work through the new deal. The best measure of success is the fact that 56 per cent of all new deal clients in Scotland, compared with only 54 per cent in the rest of Great Britain, have been able to find work. The number of spells that people spend on the programme does not suggest that there are significant differences between Scotland and the rest of the United Kingdom.
I would like to quote from a wondrously entitled document from the Scottish Executive central research unit called "Evaluation of New Deal for Young People in Scotland: Phase 2", which states:
We have truly shifted the terms of political debate when the Conservatives are lecturing us about mass youth unemployment, but I welcome converts to the full employment agenda at any stage. There are 40,000 young people who have gone back to work in Scotland, and I note that a mere 84—although that is 84 too many—have three spells of unemployment. We will certainly work closely with them, and I am sure that the creation of Careers Scotland will help, but the central message must be that 40,000 have found work through the new deal in Scotland.
Does the minister recognise and regard as a problem the fact that less than a third of the young people who left the unemployment register in the past year are in work?
I make the same point to Andrew Wilson as I made to Annabel Goldie. None of the parties that are not in the coalition were even in favour of the windfall tax, which is how we managed to get people back into work. We continue to get people back to work, to be committed to full employment and to deliver for young people. I do not recall any proposal from the SNP to do that.
Nursery Places
To ask the Scottish Executive whether it has identified any benefits from the provision of a grant-funded nursery place for all three and four-year-olds whose parents want one. (S1O-5069)
The Executive's pre-school programme is designed to benefit children's educational and social development and to give all children the best possible start in life. We believe that that is a key part of our wider social inclusion programme, and is essential to our aim of closing the gap.
Does the minister agree that, if we are to allow more women—especially those who cannot afford expensive child care—the choice of returning to work, we must ensure that there is adequate after-school provision throughout the country?
I assure Marilyn Livingstone that we recognise the importance of child care provision for parents who want to be in the work force. We are committed, through the child care strategy, to helping families to balance work and family life. In addition to the provision of pre-school education, we have allocated £16.75 million of child care strategy funding to local authorities in this financial year. The new opportunities fund also provides out-of-school care places. We will continue to work to improve the situation.
Does the minister accept that the current provision of nursery education follows on from the success of the previous Conservative Government's introduction of nursery vouchers and that, as the voucher system provides greater flexibility and more parental choice, it is a preferable method for delivering nursery education?
The very short answer is no.
Prescription Drugs
To ask the Scottish Executive what steps are being taken to prevent unused prescription drugs from being unnecessarily destroyed. (S1O-5050)
Unused medicines can pose a danger to public health and must be disposed of safely. Patients are encouraged to take unused medicines to a community pharmacy for safe disposal.
I thank the minister for his reply. Is he aware that, prior to the publication of a strategy for pharmaceutical care in Scotland, a four-week survey was conducted in Ayrshire that reported that 3,148 items, which had a value of £530,000, were returned? Will the minister undertake to pursue further opportunities, through pilot schemes, to reduce the level of waste and reinvest the consequent significant financial savings in patient care?
I commend Ayrshire and Arran for the work that was undertaken. Margaret Jamieson will be aware that there are significant concerns about public safety. The advice is that unused medicines should be destroyed. The pharmacists' professional code of ethics, which forms part 2 of the Royal Pharmaceutical Society's publication "Medicines, Ethics, and Practice" says:
Can the minister put a value on the number of aid appliances, such as wheelchairs, crutches and zimmers, that are given to patients and which are not returned after the patient's needs have been satisfied? Does he intend to give advice on ways of bringing those aid appliances back in for central use?
I cannot answer that question off the top of my head. However, if information is readily available, I undertake to provide the member with the information. I know that local authorities and hospitals try to reuse equipment. It is in the public interest to do so. We encourage all organisations to take that matter seriously.
Can we not be a bit more imaginative about the matter? Can we not ship surplus drugs—some of which are not beyond their use-by date—to Russia, for example, which is only three hours away by plane from Scotland? Russian street children and prisoners—I have visited Russian prisons—do not even get treatment for tuberculosis, as there are not enough drugs. Cannot we consult an international aid group and assess whether we can bring hope to other parts of the world by sending them our surplus drugs?
I acknowledge Dorothy-Grace Elder's serious point about other societies' difficulties in accessing medicines. However, I caution against a policy that says that drugs that are not safe or fit for consumption in our country can be shipped to Russia or elsewhere. That would not necessarily go down well. Public safety is of the essence here and in Russia.
Private Housing (Local Authority Powers)
To ask the Scottish Executive whether it proposes to review local authority powers for tackling poor-quality private housing. (S1O-5053)
The housing improvement task force is reviewing options for modifying the powers that are available to local authorities for tackling poor-quality private housing. The Scottish Executive will look carefully at the task force's recommendations.
I thank the minister for her reply. One recommendation is to review those procedures. I trust that we will not have to wait another year before action is taken. Is not it true that in six years of Labour rule we have seen only consultation and a worsening of a deplorable situation?
Only last week the Parliament debated the issues in our debate on the housing improvement task force. I share with the chamber the fact that one of the Tory members, Mr Phil Gallie, intervened during the debate. With all due respect to Mr Gallie, I had to laugh. He seemed to imply that somehow the Tories had made some significant contribution to housing in Scotland over the past years. He should try telling that to the tenants in Glasgow. Perhaps some conclusions can be drawn from the level of support that they have given to the Tories.
On a point of order, Presiding Officer. [Members: "Oh."]
I hope that it is genuine.
I will leave that to your judgment, Presiding Officer.
You certainly will.
The minister herself referred to the golden days of the 1980s, when the Tories improved the housing situation.
My suspicions were correct.
Given that the minister will not agree with Phil Gallie, will she agree that, during the passage of the Housing (Scotland) Bill, if the Executive had accepted the SNP amendments on the minimum tolerable standard, on improvement grants and on the powers of local authorities, the local authorities would now be in a far better position to improve the condition of private sector dwellings in Scotland?
I remember well the debates that we had at that time, but I thought that we had persuaded some Opposition colleagues that those issues should be dealt with, not in a piecemeal fashion by tacking things on to the end of that bill, but by having a comprehensive overhaul of the private sector. We need to consider the key issues and deliver a comprehensive response. I point out to Linda Fabiani that she should recognise that our approach is supported by many housing agencies. The housing agencies are saying "At long last", and they have congratulated the Executive on our comprehensive approach and on our determination to deal with the facts.
I commend the Executive on not forgetting the private sector in its housing policy. Does the minister agree that it is essential to put in place measures to ensure that those on low incomes who were encouraged to buy their homes in the 1980s—such as my constituents in Anderston—are given proper support for essential repairs, which many of them cannot afford?
That very issue forms a key part of the work of the housing improvement task force and detailed discussions are taking place at the moment. We will consider the task force's recommendations in depth. The matter of how one would introduce a package of measures to deal with that issue is complex. However, there is no doubt that we are well aware both of the concerns of low-income families, as they try to maintain their houses, and of the broader consequences of the decline and disrepair of the housing stock. We in Scotland now face a very serious situation because of the Tories' neglect.
The minister will recognise that, in many parts of the Highlands, many people live on low incomes. One reason that private houses are not being done up is that grants—both those that are administered by local authorities and grants for crofters—have remained at the same level for many years. Will the minister undertake to look at the levels and consider reviewing them upwards?
We are on record as saying that we are concerned about the level of grant that the local authorities give. We are concerned about the impact that that has on housing stock. That is one reason why we are moving forward so assertively on this agenda. We view the issue seriously. The way in which investment in housing stock is delivered in rural areas is often quite different, but the housing improvement task force is considering rural issues. We take the matter seriously.
Scottish School Board Association (Meetings)
To ask the Scottish Executive when it last met representatives of the Scottish School Board Association and what issues were discussed. (S1O-5052)
I last met representatives of the Scottish School Board Association on Saturday 16 March 2002. There are also regular meetings with education department officials, the most recent of which took place last week, on Wednesday 17 April.
The minister will no doubt be aware that the Scottish School Board Association recently published a survey that showed growing dissatisfaction with the management of education by local authorities. Does the minister agree with the Conservatives—and indeed many head teachers—that any new funding for education in future should be paid directly to schools?
No, although we encourage more devolved school management. A recent review of devolved school management indicated that performance among local authorities varied. The Scottish Executive wants there to be high-quality devolved school management, with head teachers playing a key role in the management of schools in future. We also want a review of the Scottish School Board Association to be carried out. We want greater parental involvement not only in the running of schools but in all aspects of education in Scotland.
Trunk Roads (A75 Mouchel Study)
To ask the Scottish Executive when it will announce the findings of the Mouchel study on the A75 trunk road. (S1O-5064)
The results of the phase 1 port approach study carried out by Mouchel were shared with members of the North channel partnership and South Ayrshire Council in November 2001. We expect a report on phase 2 of the study later this year.
The £30 million that has been earmarked for the route action plan has yet to be detailed; the demand from Stena Sealink for an Executive commitment to improvements has yet to be addressed; and the Executive has still to reply to a letter on the issue sent in December by Dumfries and Galloway Council. Given those facts, will the minister at least clarify that any funding that is required to implement the findings of the Mouchel study will be new funding, rather than funds diverted from the costs of already proposed improvement schemes?
The purpose of that study is to assess the schemes that are under consideration against the Scottish transport appraisal guidelines in order to measure their effectiveness in delivering value for money. Once we have the results of phase 2 of the report, we will consider them with the members of the North channel partnership and we will proceed from the report's conclusions. Questions of funding will have to be considered first, on the basis of the report's findings and secondly, on the basis of consideration of other priorities identified within the Scottish transport programme.
Given that the Mouchel study is concerned with fairly small schemes, does the minister agree that it is important that we do not set our sights too low? Does he agree that the dualling of the A55 in north Wales along its entire length has brought tremendous benefits to the economy of north Wales, many of whose areas are almost identical to areas of Dumfries and Galloway? Will he therefore commit himself to a long-term objective of funding similar improvements to the A75? Do the people of Scotland not deserve a similar quality of infrastructure to that which is enjoyed by the people of Wales?
I am not yet responsible for the spending programme for roads in north Wales, but I recognise the force of Mr Morgan's point. Eight overtaking schemes are currently in place on the A75 and A77, and Mr Morgan will recognise that that is one of the largest commitments among the schemes available in any part of Scotland. We will continue to address the issues arising from the Mouchel study in a constructive fashion.
Advertising
To ask the Scottish Executive what criteria govern its use of advertising. (S1O-5044)
The criteria that govern the Scottish Executive's use of advertising are that it should explain policies, inform the public about the Government services available to them and about their rights and liabilities, and that it should influence the social behaviour of individuals, organisations and businesses.
I thank the minister for his reply, but it is a pity that good sense and sensitivity to public opinion are not among those criteria. Does the minister honestly believe that extensive radio and billboard advertising for the Executive's great debate on education can be justified, given that the number of places for teachers and budgets for books are being cut?
I do not agree. What Mr Russell says is not true. The Parliament might want to listen to Mr Russell now and again, but we want to listen to the voice of the Scottish people in regard to this matter. To engage with the Scottish people, we are advertising the national debate.
Will the minister consider evaluating—[Interruption.]
Order. I want to hear the question. [Interruption.] Order. You have asked your question, Mr Russell, but another member wishes to ask a supplementary.
Thank you, Presiding Officer.
I share the member's views about the use of local media and radio. In terms of penetration, they are a successful route.
School Buildings (Funding)
To ask the Scottish Executive which first-round funding bids to improve school buildings have been successful. (S1O-5042)
As yet, none.
Well, at least the answer was precise.
This is an extremely important issue. There have been 14 first-round bids. We indicated in the circular calling for bids that we expected to reach a decision around 8 April. The level of bids—about £1.8 billion—has far outstripped the resources that we indicated were available at that time, which were about £500 million. Due to the importance of this issue, over the past week and a half, Peter Peacock and I have met all the bidders from the 14 councils and are aware of the high expectation among councils and communities. We hope to reach a final decision after the Cabinet considers the issue in May.
Would the minister agree that our top priority must be to replace with permanent new buildings all classroom huts and pre-fabricated buildings? Some of them date back to the late 1940s and early 1950s, as at Bell Baxter High School in Cupar, and all of them are unhealthy by nature—too cold and damp in winter and too hot in summer.
I agree that it is important that we not only improve our school building stock but, where appropriate, increase the pace of repair and maintenance. In many cases, schools have been left more or less untouched since the day that they were built. We need to do more, through public-private partnership agreements, capital consents and the other funding that the Executive makes available for repairs and maintenance, to get rid of some of those problems.
Does the minister agree that the fact that there have been bids totalling £1.8 billion demonstrates how much of a backlog there is in Scotland in relation to updating and refurbishing our school buildings? Does the minister agree that, instead of using expensive private finance initiatives to refurbish our schools, it would be more sensible for the windfall tax revenue from North sea oil to be allocated to the Scottish Parliament for expenditure on education rather than going down the plug hole in the Treasury in London?
I agree with the first part of Alex Neil's question, but I point out that almost everyone in the chamber, except the SNP, wants us to get on with tackling this issue and does not want us to be held back by dogma. The approach that Mr Neil and his party would take would mean that none of the bids would be approved and that improvements to our school buildings would stagnate.
National Health Service (Bedblocking)
To ask the Scottish Executive how many national health service beds are currently blocked. (S1O-5066)
The latest validated figures are contained in the information and statistics division's "Patients Ready for Discharge in NHSScotland: figures from 15 January 2002 census". The figures show that, at the census date, 2,075 people were delayed in hospital beyond the accepted six-week discharge planning period.
Is the minister aware that Lothian NHS Board alone has 527 blocked beds? How can that situation be alleviated, given that so many care homes have closed due to lack of funding? Will the minister ensure that, as we move towards the introduction of free personal care on 1 July, all the patients affected and their carers are made fully aware of, and are offered, direct payments to allow them the freedom and choice to purchase care from the independent and voluntary sectors as well as from councils?
There is no question of those patients not going to the independent sector, because all nursing homes are in the independent sector at present. A question exists on the number of care home places. We have taken action to deal with that by making a major cash injection into care home fees. We have put about £50 million into that over the past three or four months.
Will the minister turn his attention to a specific type of bedblocking, which occurs when there is a lack of beds in mental health hospitals, and which results in individuals being detained in the state hospital at Carstairs far beyond the length of time that is considered to be acceptable? In Perth, we are experiencing that situation with the Murray royal hospital. I am sure that that is not the only hospital for which that is the case. Does the minister have any solutions specifically for that problem?
I am aware of the issue because I visited Carstairs recently. There is an issue with the Murray royal hospital. However, the bigger issue is to make progress on local forensic units as quickly as possible, particularly in the west of Scotland and in Glasgow. Two such units are at the planning stage. Full consultation must take place and that has been happening in relation to Stobhill general hospital for a long time. That is the key development that will unlock the problem.
Further Education (Access)
To ask the Scottish Executive what progress has been made in improving access to further education. (S1O-5076)
Significant progress has been made in widening access to further education. The latest data show a 12 per cent increase in enrolments. That represents an additional 50,000 students on the previous year, which is a real vindication of our science and skills strategy.
Is the minister aware of the potential difficulties in maintaining participation rates in colleges such as Jewel and Esk Valley College in my constituency at a time of population growth coupled with a cap on student numbers? Is she also aware of the low rates of entry into higher education in Midlothian? Does she acknowledge the vital role that further education plays in developing access to higher education?
The routes of progress through further education into higher education have been one of the successes of the Scottish education system in recent years. I confess that I was not aware of a particularly low rate of participation in further education in Midlothian. I would be happy to talk to Rhona Brankin about that. The fact that the Parliament has delivered a 50 per cent increase in resources for further education and 50,000 additional students into further education shows that we are starting to move in the right direction.
The minister is no doubt aware of the huge opportunities that are opening up for further education in the building trade as a result of the housing stock transfer in Glasgow and for gas plumbers as a result of the Executive's central heating projects. Is the minister aware of the apparent shortage of people seeking entry into such careers and of the suggestion that there may be 600 too few gas engineers to deal with the central heating programme in the immediate future? If so, is she taking action to tackle that considerable problem?
One of the most encouraging aspects of the increase of 50,000 in the number of students enrolled in further education is that 88 per cent of them are taking vocational courses. That will go some way towards dealing with the problem to which the member refers.
Previous
Business Motion