Plenary,

Meeting date: Thursday, May 26, 2005

Official Report 679KB pdf

---

First Minister's Question Time

Questions to the First Minister will be taken by the Deputy First Minister.

---

Cabinet (Meetings)

I welcome the Deputy First Minister to the hot seat, for what will probably be his last time.

To ask the First Minister what issues will be discussed at the next meeting of the Scottish Executive's Cabinet. (S2F-1661)

I am grateful to Nicola Sturgeon for her welcome. I do not want to disappoint her, but it is possible that I might make another appearance before I demit office in four weeks' time—all will be revealed.

At our next meeting of the Scottish Cabinet we will discuss our progress towards building a better Scotland. In addition, I fully expect that the First Minister will brief the Cabinet on his current visit to Malawi.

I know that the Cabinet would want to express its thanks to the hard-working staff of the national health service for the encouraging waiting times figures that were published today. I hope that Ms Sturgeon joins us in that.

The chamber is buzzing with anticipation at the news of the Deputy First Minister's next appearance.

I refer the Deputy First Minister to the latest waiting times figures, which in fact show yet another dramatic increase in median waiting times for in-patients, and an even bigger increase for out-patients. Does he agree that far from being good news, as the Executive tries to claim, the figures are further evidence that Scottish patients are still getting a raw deal?

I appreciate that as the First Minister is a former maths teacher he might be better equipped to give a maths lesson in statistics to Ms Sturgeon, but I have a certificate of sixth-year studies in statistics, so perhaps I can do so.

At a press briefing earlier today, it was shown how the median could go up, stay the same or go down—it could be reduced to zero—depending on how the statistics are presented. The median figure is not one that matters to individual patients. If Nicola Sturgeon understood the figure, she would understand that the more we focus on tackling the length of time for which people who have been on the waiting list longest have been waiting and deal with that issue, the likelier it is that the median will continue to rise. What matters is people: what matters is trying to get the people who have been waiting longest off the waiting list. That is why we have met our guarantee of nine months. We have also met our guarantee of 12 months and we are well on the way to meeting our guarantee of six months for in-patient treatment. One of the figures that struck me most is that 60,000 fewer people are waiting for an out-patient appointment than was the case six months ago. That is a staggering achievement.

I remind the Deputy First Minister that his own statistics department describes the median waiting time as

"the most robust measurement of performance."

I offer the Deputy First Minister a reality check. I remind him that in the previous quarter the median wait for in-patients was 42 days, but it is now 47 days. For out-patients the median wait was 56 days, but it is now 62 days. In the previous quarter, only 16 per cent of out-patients had to wait more than six months for an appointment: the figure is now 20 per cent. One in five of all out-patients have to wait more than six months for an appointment. Is not it the case that to try to paint that record as a success is an insult to the intelligence of thousands of patients all over Scotland, and that it is not the fault of hard-working NHS staff, but the fault of this Scottish Executive?

When I was preparing for First Minister's Question time, I came across a quotation from Jim Mather. He said that the SNP would

"promote Scotland … in every speech"—[Official Report, 16 September 2004; c 10230.]

All that we ever hear from Nicola Sturgeon are things that try to run Scotland down. The issue of the patients who have been waiting longest is being addressed very effectively: there has been a 72 per cent reduction in in-patient waiting.

Nicola Sturgeon referred to out-patient waiting performance and I have already indicated that there has been a 60,000 reduction overall. The number of people who are waiting more than 26 weeks for a first out-patient appointment in Scotland has reduced by 58 per cent since September 2004—that is a 58 per cent drop in six months. I can give Nicola Sturgeon figures for the different health boards if she wants them, but will she for once acknowledge that the statistics are very encouraging indeed and that they are a tribute to NHS staff?

I suggest that the Deputy First Minister study the figures that the information and statistics division of the NHS produced this morning, rather than the ones that Andy Kerr made up some time after that. The Deputy First Minister says that he wants to talk about the longest waits; let us do that. I draw to his attention detailed figures that were released to me earlier this week. The figures are broken up by specialty and they demonstrate that, for example, the number of people who waited more than six months to see a heart specialist increased from 56 in 1999 to 750 at the most recent count, although heart disease is supposed to be a top priority. I suggest that instead of parroting Labour lines, the Deputy First Minister repeat what he said a month ago in his capacity as leader of the Liberals. He said that we need more

"action … to reduce the wait and reduce the worry."

More action is what we are getting. The figures on in-patient and day-case waiting of more than six months for the period from March 2004 to March 2005 are as follows: waits are down 87 per cent for ear, nose and throat services; down 87 per cent for general surgery; down 80 per cent for gynaecology; down 78 per cent for ophthalmology; down 49 per cent for orthopaedics; down 93 per cent for plastic surgery; down 76 per cent for urology; down 81 per cent for the category "other"; and down 72 per cent for all specialties.

The figures that were published today by the information and statistics division—they are not Andy Kerr's figures—show that we have achieved our guarantee of a wait of no longer than nine months; that we will end waits of more than six months by the end of the year; that the lowest-ever number of in-patients are waiting more than six months for treatment; that the lowest-ever number of patients are waiting more than six months for new out-patient appointments; and that we have achieved a maximum eight-week wait for heart investigation. We are doing everything we said we would do. Will Nicola Sturgeon acknowledge that, for once?

I have with me the statistics from the ISD, which show that in the last quarter, 83.8 per cent of out-patients were seen within six months, whereas the figure is now down to just 80.9 per cent. Patients want honesty. They do not want spin or to be told that black is white; they want an admission that much more needs to be done and they want to know when waiting times will come down, not just for some patients but for all patients in Scotland.

Patients who are waiting must have the accurate picture, but they will not get that from Nicola Sturgeon. The figures on out-patients waiting more than 26 weeks show a 58 per cent drop from 53,500 to 22,400 in the period September 2004 to March 2005. For the record, I will give figures for individual NHS boards: the figure for Dumfries and Galloway NHS Board is down 95 per cent; in Forth Valley NHS Board it is down 92 per cent; in Lanarkshire NHS Board it is down 62 per cent; and in Tayside NHS Board it is down 71 per cent. I could go on: the figure for Shetland NHS Board is down 100 per cent. Those are the facts, which ought to be known outside Parliament. Indeed, they are known, because all Nicola Sturgeon's scaremongering on health waiting times over many months and question times did not do her much good when it came to the election.

---

Prime Minister (Meetings)

I will say something nice about Mr Wallace when he finally retires from the dispatch box, but in the meantime I ask him when the First Minister will next meet the Prime Minister and what issues will be discussed. (S2F-1662)

I await the member's comments with interest.

The First Minister has no immediate plans for a meeting with the Prime Minister. However, last week I met the Deputy Prime Minister at a meeting of the British-Irish Council.

The bruises do not show.

At the risk of incurring the wrath of the assembled ranks, it is important that I address the discussion that the Deputy First Minister has just had with Nicola Sturgeon. It is a fact that today's health figures show that waiting times for both in-patients and out-patients are at an all-time high. Waiting times are much longer than they were in 1997 under the Conservatives—[Interruption.] That is not rubbish. The median wait in 1997 was 34 days; today it is 62 days. For in-patients, the median wait was 34 days under the Conservatives, but it is 47 days under Labour and the Liberal Democrats and there are 22,000 more people languishing on our waiting lists. Those are the facts. I put it to the Deputy First Minister that that is a record of which he can hardly be proud. Does he accept that he and his Liberal Democrat colleagues are as much to blame as Labour for that lamentable state of affairs?

It is clear that I am going to have to try to teach Mr McLetchie something about statistics and medians. Of course the median goes up as we crack the longest waiting list. We have made no apology for cracking the longest waiting lists, because on them are the people who have the greatest need. We need to tackle those lists first. No patient with a guarantee is waiting more than nine months; at first no patient with a guarantee waited more than 12 months, but we brought that down to nine months. We are well on target to achieve the six-month guarantee by the end of the year. It is a statistical reality that the median figure tells us about people who have had treatment. If we treat the people who have been waiting the longest, it is inevitable that the figure goes up. If we counted all the people who are treated in our hospitals, not just those who came off the waiting list, the figure would be down to zero, but then Mr McLetchie would probably accuse us of showing a statistical blip.

Perhaps Mr McLetchie's point of view is that we should not be treating the people who have been waiting longest. That is not our view. I am happy, as a Liberal Democrat, along with my party, the Labour Party and the First Minister, to stand by a record that shows today that we have the lowest-ever number of in-patients waiting for more than six months, and the lowest-ever number of patients waiting more than six months for a new out-patient appointment, and that we have achieved our targets on the maximum eight-week wait for heart investigation and 18-week wait for heart treatment. I, along with Andy Kerr, Jack McConnell and the two partnership parties, am happy to take responsibility for those things.

I am delighted that the Deputy First Minister is taking responsibility for that. He asked what I am in favour of. I am in favour of all patients in Scotland being treated promptly for the conditions from which they are suffering. In 1997, under the Conservatives, 74 per cent of out-patients were seen within nine weeks; the figure is barely 50 per cent under Labour and the Liberal Democrats. In March 1997, 81 per cent of in-patients were seen within three months; the figure has fallen to 68 per cent under Labour and the Liberal Democrats. I am afraid that those are the facts; they are there for all to see.

Let us look to the future. Let us consider how we can tidy up the shambles that has been created by this Administration. Can the Deputy First Minister confirm that the Scottish Executive is now planning to adopt Tory solutions to treat patients faster—such as greater use of independent treatment centres for NHS-funded patients—in a belated attempt to reverse the damaging failures of the past six years? Can he tell me when the contract for the first of those independent treatment centres for Scottish patients will be signed and how many more of them are in the pipeline?

Mr McLetchie will know that since the Golden Jubilee national hospital was brought within the national health service, the throughput of patients in the national health service who are receiving life-saving heart operations and getting their quality of life back through hip or knee-joint replacements has increased markedly. Mr McLetchie seems to think that we have recently introduced something new. Ministers in the past have made it clear that as long as the principle of free care for the patient is maintained within the national health service—which it is—so be it if that treatment is provided by the private sector and if it helps us to reduce waiting times.

Today NHS Tayside is considering proposals for a project that is worth £15 million over three years and which will involve the private sector in a new treatment and diagnostic centre at Stracathro hospital, which will work in partnership with the existing NHS treatment and diagnostic facilities and will help provide additional capacity for patients in Tayside, Grampian and Fife.

In the past, Mr McLetchie has begged us to copy England. However, his United Kingdom leader says that too many patients in England have to wait, so this might be another example of the leader of the Scottish Conservatives not talking to the leader of his party south of the border. It might be that Murdo Fraser's day is coming.

We are all aware of the fact that the Scottish Executive spent millions on the bricks and mortar of the Golden Jubilee hospital although, for years, it refused to commission operations there, which meant that we were in the absurd situation in which English patients from Liverpool were being treated for heart conditions in Clydebank when Scottish patients in Glasgow were waiting months and months. That is to the shame of the Executive.

The Deputy First Minister should acknowledge that his colleague and would-be successor, Mr Rumbles, has told us that he opposes the use of a pricing system for national health service funded treatments to improve standards of care in Scotland because that is not part of the coalition agreement and it is not supported by the Liberal Democrats. Does Mr Wallace agree with Mr Rumbles? If he does, can we take it that it is the Liberal Democrats who are the major roadblock to the reform of our service?

The position that Andy Kerr set out on that issue in December 2004—although it has only now suddenly come to prominence in the press—was not at odds with the position of any member of the Liberal Democrat parliamentary group. However, I look forward with interest to the arguments that leadership contenders will have about our next manifesto.

Mr McLetchie described us buying bricks and mortar at the Golden Jubilee hospital. In fact, the NHS got the building for pretty much a bargain price. However, we are interested not in bricks and mortar but in people. The number of treatments has risen from 2,500 to 18,000 and is set to rise further to 27,000. That improvement in people's quality of life is being achieved under this Liberal Democrat-Labour Executive.

---

Secretary of State for Scotland (Meetings)

To ask the First Minister when he will next meet the Secretary of State for Scotland and what issues he intends to discuss. (S2F-1665)

The First Minister has no immediate plans to meet formally the Secretary of State for Scotland.

Could the Deputy First Minister explain why the Scottish Pelamis wave energy converter is going to be installed in Portugal but not in Scotland?

Ocean Power Delivery has, in Pelamis, a groundbreaking prototype for wave power. One of the reasons why the prototype can be sold in Portugal is that the Scottish Executive has made a multi-million pound investment in the European Marine Energy Centre testing facility, which allowed the Pelamis device to be tested in Orkney. I am surprised to hear comments that seem to suggest that there is something wrong about a Scottish company exporting to Portugal. I want more companies to export to Portugal and other parts of the European Union.

The question is not about the device's being exported to Portugal. The question is: why is it not being installed in Scotland?

Three years ago, the director of Ocean Power Delivery said that if wave power did not get sufficient renewables obligation certificates payments from the Executive, Pelamis would not be installed in Scotland but would go to Portugal. The Executive was warned but did not provide that support. Consequently, Pelamis has gone. Why did the Executive not double the ROCs payment for wave power?

Pelamis has not gone. The Pelamis device that will be installed in Portugal is being made in Scotland. That is good news for Scotland and for the companies that are involved in making the device. The Executive has invested a considerable amount of money in marine energy. I have already mentioned the European Marine Energy Centre in Orkney, which can establish itself as a world centre for developments in wave power; only this week, I confirmed that funding is now in place for that centre to take on development of tidal power. No one can gainsay the efforts that the Executive has made to develop marine power. I only wish that, when certain people saw a Scottish success story, they could celebrate it and not whinge about it.

---

Housing (Shared Ownership)

To ask the First Minister whether the Scottish Executive's homestake scheme is helping enough people on to the housing ladder or whether Scotland should consider joining the recently announced United Kingdom initiative. (S2F-1667)

We are already involved, along with the United Kingdom Government, in the discussions with mortgage lenders to secure additional private funding for low-cost home ownership that were the subject of media coverage earlier this week. That would enable us to deliver even more low-cost homes in Scotland through the homestake scheme.

I thank the Deputy First Minister for his confirmation that the Scottish Executive is working with the UK Government on the initiative. Is he aware that affordability in housing—in both the rented sector and the privately owned sector—is a major issue in my constituency and throughout the Lothians? Will he outline the range of initiatives that are being undertaken to make housing affordable for low and middle-income earners in constituencies such as Livingston?

I am delighted to do so. I confirm that the Minister for Communities recently met the Council of Mortgage Lenders to see how much further we can take the homestake scheme. In last year's spending review, we expanded our low-cost home ownership programme by 80 per cent to help thousands of first-time buyers and other people on modest incomes to enter the property market. Our housing policy has a number of elements that provide choice for hard-working families and support for low-cost affordable housing throughout Scotland.

We are investing £1.2 billion during the period of the spending review to provide 21,500 new and improved homes for social rent and low-cost home ownership. That represents a 34 per cent increase. We are also bringing the social rented housing stock up to the new Scottish housing quality standard and we are working with councils to transfer an additional 70,000 homes into community ownership, subject to the views of tenants. There is no shortage of schemes; we recognise the problem that Mr Muldoon identifies and I am sure that he would agree that we are making a concerted effort to address it through a range of measures.

Is there a national home-ownership percentage target? Will the Deputy First Minister ensure that provision of high-quality social rented housing remains paramount so that providers can meet the needs of people on waiting lists, so that householders can have real choice, and so that our communities, urban and rural, can be properly maintained and supported?

There is no specific target for home ownership, but I reassure Linda Fabiani that we take seriously the quality of housing stock in the social rented sector. That is why, as I said in my answer to Bristow Muldoon, we are setting out proposals to bring stock up to the new Scottish housing quality standard by 2015. There is a concerted effort to do that, and in addition we are giving people in rented accommodation security of tenure through the Scottish secure tenancy. I endorse the importance of the quality of the housing stock and I underline again the fact that we have a range of measures to improve it.

---

BBC Scotland (Staff Reductions)

To ask the First Minister what impact the proposed staff reductions at BBC Scotland will have on Scottish democracy and cultural identity. (S2F-1672)

The BBC is a unique institution and we recognise its important contribution to our quality of life in Scotland and the United Kingdom through its on-going commitment to producing and broadcasting informative and entertaining regional programming. I am pleased to note that the BBC and the unions are meeting today at the Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service to discuss their differences. It would be inappropriate for me to comment further until we hear the outcome of those talks.

I, too, am glad that the unions and the BBC are meeting at ACAS, but I am afraid that the Deputy First Minister did not answer my question. Is he aware of the comments that have been made by the Scottish Trades Union Congress and others about the serious implications that the cuts will have in Scotland? In particular, is he aware of one official's comments that

"London determines how much production Scotland gets",

and that

"The cultural identity of Scotland will suffer, without a doubt"?

Does the Deputy First Minister agree that now is the time for powers over broadcasting to be brought under the auspices of the Scottish Parliament?

No, I do not agree that that change should be made. Although I would certainly welcome a greater role for BBC Scotland in the BBC's decision-making processes, I do not accept that Scottish viewers would benefit from what Sandra White proposes.

Patricia Ferguson met Ken MacQuarrie earlier this week, and the BBC has indicated that network production in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland will increase by 50 per cent, with drama production outside London increasing from 30 per cent to 50 per cent. I certainly hope—we will work to ensure it—that BBC Scotland benefits from those developments. The creative industries in Scotland are important and we are well placed to ensure that we get some of that work.

The Deputy First Minister is aware of my key concern about the 195 proposed job cuts at BBC Scotland, the effect that those cuts will have on the quality of output and the move to local news at the expense of national news, which would be a retrograde step. Earlier this year, I asked him whether he would raise the issue at Cabinet level. Will he confirm that there has been, or that there will be, a discussion at Cabinet level or with the Department for Culture, Media and Sport on the impact of the cuts on the devolution settlement? Such a discussion would be a more realistic and desirable way forward and should include consideration of the impact on culture and training.

I agree with Pauline McNeill that that would be a more desirable way forward and I confirm that I recall her question, which was specifically about ensuring that we maintain a good skills base. Following the undertaking that I gave to Pauline McNeill at question time some four or five weeks ago, I took the matter to the Cabinet. I also confirm that I have written to Ken MacQuarrie to emphasise the importance that ministers attach to skills development in Scotland in the context of the proposed redundancies in the BBC.

I welcome some of what the Deputy First Minister says. However, does he share or regret the First Minister's view that the BBC's draconian job cuts and sell-off programme are

"a great boost for the creative industries in Scotland"?

Will he follow the example of the many members who will join the National Union of Journalists, the Broadcasting Entertainment Cinematograph and Theatre Union and Amicus on the picket lines next week? Will he also encourage the First Minister to join the picket lines if the BBC does not reach an agreement with the unions?

I will not comment on sensitive negotiations that are taking place, which I hope will avoid the need for picket lines or industrial action next week.

What the First Minister said has been grossly misrepresented. He said what I have just said when he talked about the importance of the creative industries in Scotland. The BBC has highlighted opportunities, and we want to ensure that, as part of our strategy for the creative industries, we take the opportunities that will be presented by the relocation of work when production is taken out of London to Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.

Mr Gorbachev was temporarily imprisoned during the Russian peaceful revolution, but he knew exactly what was happening because he was able to listen to the BBC. Will the Deputy First Minister bear it in mind that the BBC has admirers in high places abroad and that the baby must not be thrown out with the bath water?

I pay tribute to the reputation and work of the BBC. However, I recall that, when I was a member of Parliament at Westminster, I had to campaign to help to save the BBC world service mostly when the Conservative party was in power.

I want to take the argument from the global to the local and highlight the apprehensions of people in the north-east who think that the north-east suffered a disproportionate impact with previous cuts. Will the Deputy First Minister give an assurance that he will continue to recognise the importance of maintaining regional broadcasting throughout as well as in Scotland?

I certainly give that assurance. Those of us who represent places that are even further away from the central belt than the north-east know about the importance of BBC Scotland's being an organisation for the whole of Scotland.

---

Football-related Hooliganism

To ask the Deputy First Minister what steps the Scottish Executive and the police will be taking to control football-related hooliganism following their recent discussions. (S2F-1675)

The Executive supports the work of the police in tackling football hooliganism. We have consulted on football banning orders and welcome the strong support that they have received from the police, clubs, associations and others. We will now consider legislating on them in the near future.

I am pleased to note that the police are preparing for an evidence-gathering exercise for next season, which will be essential for effective implementation of banning orders.

That was an encouraging answer.

In the light of the clear connection between alcohol abuse and football hooliganism, will the Deputy First Minister assure us that the Licensing (Scotland) Bill will help the police to deal with that problem and that it will, for example, speed up the ability of the police and the courts to deal with offences that arise from drunkenness that is related to football matches?

Donald Gorrie is well aware that the approach towards alcohol-fuelled football hooliganism is already covered by the Criminal Justice (Scotland) Act 1980. Ministers decided last May to retain controls on the ground that the current arrangements have worked well and continue to play an essential part in reducing the incidence of drink-related disorder. I can also confirm to Donald Gorrie that the Licensing (Scotland) Bill, which is currently before Parliament, will formalise the police's powers to close immediately a pub where disorder is taking place, and will allow the police to continue to close licensed premises in and around stadiums on match days.

Meeting suspended.

On resuming—