Skip to main content

Language: English / Gàidhlig

Loading…
Chamber and committees

Plenary, 26 Feb 2004

Meeting date: Thursday, February 26, 2004


Contents


First Minister's Question Time


Prime Minister (Meetings)

To ask the First Minister when he next plans to meet the Prime Minister and what issues he intends to raise. (S2F-656)

I am looking forward to seeing the Prime Minister this evening and I am sure that we will have a lot to discuss.

Mr Swinney:

I hope that the First Minister can get there on time.

Two weeks ago, the First Minister said that council tax was related to the ability to pay. If that is the case, why do the poorest families pay four times as much of their income in council tax as the richest families?

The First Minister:

Council tax is broadly related to the ability to pay, but it is also a supplement to the national Government's funding of local authorities, contributions towards which come from income tax and other forms of national taxation. One of the express reasons why we have decided to have an independent review of local government finance is not only to consider alternatives to the council tax but to consider the range of council tax bands that were introduced by the Conservatives when the council tax was brought in and to decide whether those bands should still apply. I think that improvements can be made to the system and I hope that the independent review will consider such options.

Mr Swinney:

The First Minister has not in any way tackled the problem of the burden of council tax on the poorest families. Over the past few years, the burden on richer families has remained almost static as a proportion of their income, but there has been a threefold increase in the burden on people on lower incomes. That is an enormous burden on lower-income households, even if council tax benefit is taken into account. It is a fact that council tax hits the poorest hardest. The First Minister has reiterated that there will be a review. What form of local taxation will he argue for in that independent review? Will he argue for the abolition, retention or amendment of the council tax system in Scotland?

The First Minister:

I am glad that Mr Swinney has acknowledged that council tax benefit is available. Council tax benefit is used by a higher proportion of pensioners than other people in Scotland. Such a benefit system exists to help those who have problems with making their payments. That does not mean that the council tax is perfect and should not be reviewed. I hope that the independent review of local government finance will consider alternative ways of constructing council tax payments as well as alternative systems.

In the past, I have said that property taxation has a place in this country's system of taxation. Property taxation is easy to collect and is broadly related to people's wealth, which is an important factor. However, other issues in the local government finance system also require to be tackled. If an independent review of local government finance is established, I have a duty as First Minister not to prejudice its outcome and I have no intention of doing so.

Mr Swinney:

I am interested in what the First Minister will argue for in the independent review. The Deputy First Minister's party has said:

"In Scotland, the Partnership Agreement with Labour commits the Executive to establishing an Independent Review of Local Government Finance, and Scottish Lib Dems will put the case for LIT to that review."

That is welcome. We will argue for a local income tax and I am sure that the socialists will argue for a service tax and the Greens will argue for a land value tax. However, I am interested in what the First Minister will argue for. It is clear that the council tax attacks the poorest in our society most. Is he going to defend a system that punishes the poorest in our society, or will he join the consensus in Scotland and support a system that is based on the ability to pay?

The First Minister:

In last year's election campaign, Mr Swinney said throughout the country that he would magic up tax decreases for everybody from his equations. I did not hear him say then that he would put up taxes for all income tax payers, as his proposals would allow. That is an honourable position, but let us be honest about it, as the Liberal Democrats are. They argue their case openly at election time, as well as when they are making those kinds of points. The Labour Party's position was very clear in the election last year: we advocated a reformed council tax that would spread the bands more fairly so that people who could afford to pay more would do so and those who are currently in the lower bands would not pay as much as they do now. That was our view in last year's election campaign: that there should be a sensible reform of the council tax. However, we won 35 per cent of the vote last year, not 50 per cent. We work in a Parliament where power is shared with other parties and we are prepared to put our ideas into an independent review of local government finance. Let us all wait to see the outcome of that review.


Cabinet (Meetings)

To ask the First Minister what issues will be discussed at the next meeting of the Scottish Executive's Cabinet. (S2F-660)

The next meeting of the Cabinet will, as usual, discuss our progress towards implementing the partnership agreement, but I might also let the Cabinet know what I discuss with Mr Blair this evening.

David McLetchie:

I am sure that that will be a riveting conversation and perhaps we can look forward to exploring it at First Minister's question time next week.

Will the Cabinet have an opportunity next week to consider the Scottish Executive's long-awaited review of higher education funding? The First Minister will recall that Mr Wallace previously said that the review would be with the Executive before the end of February. Will it be published this week, before the end of February, or next week—a little later—or the week after that? What exactly is the timetable for the publication of the review? When will the Executive's conclusions on the review be made known to the public and to the Parliament?

The review will be published in the first half of March and the Deputy First Minister will make a public statement on our initial reaction to it before the end of March.

David McLetchie:

I thank the First Minister for his answer, which is a little different from what the Scottish Executive's spokesman said to journalists, which was that the review would definitely be published next week.

No doubt there are issues that are still to be resolved and I raise one of those with the First Minister. He will have noticed this week that the new minister for kite flying, Mike Watson, suggested that the graduate endowment should be raised significantly to cover even more of the £70 million cost of student support, which would, in turn, allow the Executive to increase direct funding for universities. When I questioned the First Minister about the matter last month, he refused to rule out such an increase, so I ask again: will the First Minister rule out increasing the graduate endowment by more than the rate of inflation?

The First Minister:

I hope that Mr McLetchie was not accusing Mr Watson of being a devious backstabber or anything like that. I think that Mr Watson deserves congratulations from the chamber on his recent marriage to Clare. [Applause.]

I welcome Mike Watson's contributions—and the many other contributions from members—to the current debate on higher education funding. We have made no decisions on higher education funding, save for the important and principled decision that we will not introduce tuition fees or top-up fees for Scottish students in Scotland's universities. We will need to consider the higher education review that we receive from the working group that we established last year. We will assess the review and its implications and the Deputy First Minister will make an initial statement in March.

We have an urgent constituency question.

Mr Jamie Stone (Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross) (LD):

I am sure that the First Minister was as alarmed as I was to hear the shock news last week of the closure of Caithness Glass, which produces the epitome of a quality product, which is recognised all over the world. Every single job in Wick is vital. The news came completely out of the blue—indeed, I understand that the enterprise network was not even warned of it. Will the First Minister give me an assurance that the Scottish Executive will do everything in its power to work with the enterprise network—and whomsoever—to identify a new buyer and to resuscitate that vital, quality firm in my constituency?

The First Minister:

I think that we would all agree that Caithness Glass produces a quality product of which all Scotland can be proud. I would certainly be keen to give Jamie Stone the assurance that not only the enterprise networks but the Enterprise, Transport and Lifelong Learning Department will give every assistance to the local community to secure either alternative employment or an alternative owner to ensure continued production in the Wick area.


Young Offenders (Rehabilitation)

To ask the First Minister how the Scottish Executive ensures that projects that specialise in the rehabilitation of young offenders are effective and represent good use of taxpayers' money. (S2F-674)

The First Minister (Mr Jack McConnell):

Almost all projects for young offenders are the responsibility of local authorities in Scotland. Local authorities are also responsible for the on-going monitoring and evaluation of all locally based young offender programmes, including full consideration of the effectiveness of the programmes and, which is important, their value for money.

Karen Gillon:

The First Minister will be aware of the debate that surrounds the Executive's decision to withdraw funding from the Airborne Initiative in my constituency. I would be grateful if the First Minister could outline the reasons behind the decision. I ask the First Minister to ensure that the positive aspects of the Airborne Initiative can be passed on and used by others who operate in the field of alternatives to custody.

The First Minister:

I am very keen to do that. The decision on the Airborne Initiative's latest application for funding was made on the grounds of effectiveness and value for money and on the basis of comparisons with other programmes. It was not to do with the amount of money that is being spent on offender programmes or in other parts of the Executive's budget. Every single penny of the money that would have been spent on Airborne in the next financial year will be spent on other offender programmes that we believe are more effective in tackling offending outwith custody.

I believe that alternatives to custody are vital in Scotland. Our prison population is far too high. We need to have effective alternatives to custodial prison sentences. In particular, we need to ensure that alternatives are in place for the most serious young offenders, who are the people who go on to offend again and again in a life of crime.

The Airborne Initiative will have given us some important lessons that can be taken into other projects in the years to come. I welcome the scrutiny that will take place if one of our parliamentary committees decides to look at the issue of reoffending and at the contribution that these programmes make to tackling reoffending.

Let us go forward with the commitment not only to achieving value for money but to doing something about a problem that has plagued Scotland for too long. The number of custodial sentences is far too high. Programmes in the community that tackle the reasons that lie behind why young people get themselves into the situation of offending are worth our support. I hope that we can further improve them in the years to come.

Nicola Sturgeon (Glasgow) (SNP):

Given that a distinguished and expert group of individuals including a former High Court judge, the ex-chief inspectors of prisons for Scotland and England and the chair of the Scottish Civic Forum believe that the Airborne Initiative is worth supporting, has the First Minister considered the possibility that the Executive, perhaps with the best of intentions, has got it wrong? Will he consider, as a possible compromise solution, guaranteeing the funding of the Airborne Initiative pending an inquiry into the effectiveness and value for money of the project by one of the Parliament's committees?

The First Minister:

I understand that the initiative has been the subject of some debate in the chamber this morning. I want to be very clear that the suggestion that Nicola Sturgeon made would be a wrong step precisely because the money will be better used in the other offender programmes that will receive it in the next financial year. If the assessment was that those programmes are more effective than Airborne in dealing with the same group of young offenders, it would be wrong of us to take the money from those more effective programmes and return it to Airborne.

I believe that good lessons are to be learned from some aspects of the Airborne Initiative. That is why the Executive will not only take those lessons on board but welcome any scrutiny by a parliamentary committee. The better informed we are about the best solutions to the problem, the better will be the decisions that all of us make. Frankly, the less party political those decisions are in the period ahead, the better they will be.

The area is one that requires serious national debate in Scotland. Next month, we will launch a very open consultation on tackling reoffending. The consultation will look at all the alternatives and at the best way ahead for Scotland. International comparisons will be made as will comparisons between individual schemes in Scotland. That is the way ahead for us to tackle the issue. Ultimately, our objective has to be to reduce reoffending and to ensure that those young people get a better start to their adult lives than it is clear they had as youngsters.


Affordable Housing (Rural Areas)

To ask the First Minister whether any new measures are planned to help rural communities to access land for affordable housing. (S2F-666)

The First Minister (Mr Jack McConnell):

Our partnership agreement commits us to increasing the availability of affordable housing in rural areas and that is exactly what we are doing. This year, we are investing £59 million through Communities Scotland and, last October, at the convention of the Highlands and Islands, we announced an extra £10 million for rural housing. However, because sites and services are also an issue, we are working with the Forestry Commission Scotland and Scottish Water, for example, to increase the supply of good-quality serviced sites in rural Scotland so that, when the funds are available, they can be properly used to put houses on the ground.

Richard Lochhead:

Is the First Minister aware that the lifeblood of many of our rural communities is being lost as local people—particularly young people—are unable to afford to live in their own homes and communities where they were born and bred? Many communities are spending years trying to get round the obstacles to access land and build affordable housing. It is the duty of the Government and the Parliament to demolish those obstacles. Given that access to cheap land is the crux of the problem, will the First Minister bring forward specific radical measures to ensure that communities and people can access cheap land, which is a huge element of the cost of building a new house in rural Scotland? Will he give powers to our rural communities to compulsorily purchase local land?

The First Minister:

Land is being examined as part of the review of affordable housing—into which yesterday we added possible changes to Scotland's population projections. That is part of the reason why we have been looking at the role of the Forestry Commission and its land in releasing capacity for housing developments. In the Highlands in particular, we have also looked at the potential for some of the larger estates to release land. I have had a number of discussions about that with Highland Council, which is interested in the subject. The Minister for Communities goes to the Highlands on 15 March to conduct further discussions.

We will continue to look at possible solutions, but we should not take away from the fact that there has been a shift in recent years. Thousands of new homes are being built in rural Scotland. I will open a new development on the Isle of Arran—my homeland—at the end of March. New housing developments are being built, but there are not yet enough of them, which is why we have to do more.

John Farquhar Munro (Ross, Skye and Inverness West) (LD):

Will the First Minister welcome with me the work of housing trusts such as the Highlands Small Communities Housing Trust that are trying to deliver low-cost private housing in high-pressure areas? In view of the First Minister's announcement yesterday about encouraging the immigration of skilled workers to Scotland, how does the Executive plan to address the consequential increase in housing demand in rural areas?

The First Minister:

As I said yesterday in my statement, we have asked Margaret Curran, the Minister for Communities, to examine the potential consequences of a positive shift in Scotland's population projections as part of the review of affordable housing. She is going to take that matter forward.

The Highlands Small Communities Housing Trust does a very good job. It is precisely such local organisations that can provide some of the solutions to ensure that appropriate affordable housing is available in small communities. Where small communities feel a sense of ownership of and loyalty towards housing developments, we find a stronger community at the end of the day.


Random Drug Testing (Schools)

To ask the First Minister whether the Scottish Executive intends introducing random drug testing in schools. (S2F-672)

The First Minister (Mr Jack McConnell):

Scottish teachers are already aware of the need to be alert to signs of drug misuse in schools. The guidance that we issued in June 2000 sets out the action that should be taken by schools if a young person is found in possession of drugs, is suspected of intending to supply drugs, or is suspected of being under the influence of drugs. However, this week, Peter Peacock has written to the head teachers' associations to ask for their views on random drug testing, and we would listen to those views carefully before we took any further action or had any further discussions.

Mr Raffan:

When the First Minister meets the Prime Minister this evening, will he tell him of some of the highly effective ways that we have in Scotland of tackling drug problems in schools, from which Mr Blair can learn? Will he tell him of Kirkcaldy's schools, where when teachers detect a problem—and they do not need a sniffer dog or a blood test to do so—they call in an excellent organisation called Clued Up to help with drugs education? Will he accept an invitation from the local member Marilyn Livingstone and me to visit Clued Up, to see at first hand the great work that it does, and to visit a school with it? He can bring the Prime Minister along with him.

The First Minister:

If it is possible for me to do so, I will be happy to visit Clued Up in Kirkcaldy. I had the informative experience—I will not say pleasure—of visiting the Phoenix House project in Aberdeen towards the end of last year. Although the stories that one hears in those situations from the people who have been struggling with a drug addiction can be chilling, their determination to recover their lives and get off drugs and the assistance that they are getting from their peers and professionals in the field are inspiring. We should support those projects, of which there are not enough throughout Scotland.

It is important in our review of rehabilitation services, which is under way, that we have a positive outcome and ensure that we not only remain hard on those who sell drugs in Scotland but give every support to those who want to get off drugs and recover their lives.

Ms Rosemary Byrne (South of Scotland) (SSP):

I welcome the First Minister's comments and I am pleased to hear that he will consult the head teachers. The existence of drug testing might lead some vulnerable young people to switch to more exotic drugs and I hope that he will take that on board. I ask him to ensure that all our schools have dedicated drugs workers, because at the moment the service is patchy and is not provided across the board. Many of the drugs workers have been taken off duty in schools because of the shortage of social workers. I ask the First Minister to ensure that we have dedicated drugs workers in schools who know what they are talking about and know how to support children and help teachers to identify problems.

The First Minister:

I am happy to ensure that that issue is considered properly in the current review of rehabilitation services. It is vital that services are available to school communities as well as to communities, parents and families. There has been nothing more heartbreaking for me in the past two years in which I have been First Minister than meeting families who have been told that they have to wait for rehabilitation services. We have to tackle the issue and we will do so and publish our proposals in the near future.

Does the First Minister accept that random drug testing in the absence of authorisation from parents is likely to encounter extremely strong opposition?

The First Minister:

I am conscious of the views that have been expressed this week about random drug testing, which is why Peter Peacock has written to the head teachers' associations; head teachers are the people who can give us the best assessment of their current powers and the way in which they handle matters.

I do not imagine that there is a parent in Scotland who would be unco-operative if there were a serious suspicion that their youngster was involved in drugs. I hope that parents throughout Scotland take their responsibilities seriously. When they do, we can give them every support to get their youngsters back on the straight and narrow.

Fiona Hyslop (Lothians) (SNP):

Does the First Minister agree that Scottish education policy must not be made on the hoof in reaction to domestic headline-grabbing initiatives by the Prime Minister? The drugs issue in Scotland is too important to be dealt with in that way. Does the First Minister understand that neither parents nor teachers have asked for random drug testing in schools? If the head teachers reject the invitation that the First Minister has given them to implement such powers, will he apologise for wasting their time?

The First Minister:

I have to say to Ms Hyslop that if she ever gets the chance to meet parents who are in that situation, she might regret the sort of statements that she has just made in trying to score party-political points on the issue.

Drug taking among teenagers—and sometimes those who are not even teenagers—not just in schools but in communities throughout Scotland is a deadly serious issue for the parents of the children involved and for the parents of children who might be in contact with children who have taken drugs or are selling drugs. It is a serious issue, because dealers exploit young children more effectively than they can exploit adults. Any solution to that problem is worth considering properly and carefully. That is precisely why Peter Peacock has written to the head teachers' associations and why in England and Wales guidelines are being circulated, which I hope are effective.

We in Scotland have a way of dealing with the matter. We issued guidelines in 2000. We might have to update them and if we do we will consider that seriously and debate it openly. At the forefront of our minds should be tackling the problem, supporting parents and helping children out of drugs situations. Making excuses for that sort of nonsense does not wash.


Genetically Modified Crops

To ask the First Minister who will make the final decision about whether genetically modified crops are grown commercially in Scotland. (S2F-655)

The First Minister (Mr Jack McConnell):

There are a number of hurdles that anyone wishing to commercialise a GM crop must overcome. First, European directive 2001/18/EC provides the legal framework regulating the importing and cultivation of GM crops. Decisions are taken by the member states and the European Commission on a collective basis. The Scottish Executive is fully involved in decisions to determine the UK position.

Secondly, it is necessary for a plant variety to be added to the national seeds list in the UK. That is a collective decision of the UK Government and the devolved Administrations. It is a reassurance measure for farmers—it is not a safety assessment. The crop must already have passed a rigorous assessment that it presents no increased risk to human health or the environment, under directive 2001/18/EC.

Thirdly, if, and only if, GM crops were proceeding to commercial growing, we would wish to have in place a co-existence regime that provided reassurance to both organic and conventional farmers and to the public. This is a devolved matter, but one where we might wish to take a common approach across the UK.

Alex Johnstone:

The First Minister might be aware that I am not personally opposed to this technology but have expressed grave concerns about the way in which public opinion was left behind long ago. Will he undertake that, if there is to be a separate Scottish decision, there will be a separate and comprehensive Scottish consultation in advance of that decision?

The First Minister:

I have tried to explain to Alex Johnstone the complex network of decision making and the various legal layers at which decisions will be made. It is important that we actively participate in the process and take on board the outcome of the consultation processes that we have already had which, like almost every survey, demonstrate that there is genuine public concern about the consumption of foods containing GM ingredients and the release of those organisms into the wild. I believe that it is the job of Government and the industry to respond to those concerns and have regard to them. I give the member an absolute assurance that, if science shows that there would be harm to individuals or the environment, GM crops will not be grown in Scotland.

Mr Mark Ruskell (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Green):

Is the First Minister aware that there have been no long-term studies of the effects of genetically modified organisms on human and animal health and that there is mounting evidence that GM maize causes increased mortality in the livestock that eat it? Who is liable for the harmful effects that might occur in Scotland once Chardon LL maize is commercialised? Does he agree that it is time that the Executive came off the fence, defended the precautionary principle in its partnership agreement and used its existing powers to block the addition of Chardon LL maize to the UK seeds list?

The First Minister:

That decision is currently being discussed among all the devolved and national Governments in the UK. There are no current proposals, as far as I am aware, for GM maize to be grown in Scotland, but we have an interest in the decision and are involved in discussions.

Ultimately, we must have regard to the scientific evidence. If the scientific evidence shows that there will be harm to humans or the environment, we will not allow the crops to be grown in Scotland. If the scientific evidence shows otherwise, we will have to take that on board.

I am pleased to hear the First Minister's assurances. Does he agree that Scotland should focus on producing premium crops in a GM-free environment?

The First Minister:

One way in which we should do that is by supporting the organic sector in Scotland and our recent increases in funding for the sector and our strategy for organics are doing just that. That strategy has my full support and I am sure that, when Ross Finnie returns, he will be desperate to get on with it.

Meeting suspended until 14:30.

On resuming—