Engagements
To ask the First Minister what engagements she has planned for the rest of the day. (S4F-03080)
Later today I will reply to the email that Jeremy Corbyn sent me yesterday, asking what he should ask at Prime Minister’s question time next week. In the email, he said that in
“just over two months ... already we’ve achieved so much together.”
I think that Jeremy Corbyn is being modest. He and Chairman Mao are doing much more to destroy the Labour Party than even I have managed.
Alongside the Chancellor of the Exchequer’s misguided budget statement yesterday, the impartial and independent Office for Budget Responsibility published updated oil revenue figures. To say that they make grim reading is not to talk Scotland down.
Yesterday was a significant day, and so is today—it is an important anniversary. Two years ago today the First Minister published a white paper on independence. In that document, the First Minister promised a future free from Tory austerity, based on oil revenues of £8 billion a year at the point of independence. Will the First Minister say how much oil revenues are expected to be this year?
On the day after Labour’s partners in the better together campaign—otherwise known as the Tories—announced plans to cut the Scottish revenue budget in real terms by £1.5 billion by the end of this decade, for Kezia Dugdale to stand up and talk about cuts, or anything like that, is breathtaking hypocrisy.
This is a challenging time for the oil and gas sector, which is why the task force that I established earlier this year is working hard to support the industry at this time.
Every time people hear Labour gleefully crowing about the challenges in the oil and gas sector, they realise how little Labour actually cares about people’s jobs and livelihoods. They realise that for Labour, this is all about getting one over on the Scottish National Party.
If Kezia Dugdale wants to cast her mind back to the pre-referendum period, I will give her something else on which to ruminate—[Interruption.]
Order.
Does Kezia Dugdale remember when the better together parties told us before the referendum that the only way to protect jobs in HM Revenue and Customs was to vote no? Can she explain why it is that after the referendum the United Kingdom Government has announced plans to slash those jobs? Perhaps she might want to reflect on that.
I was born in Aberdeen and I grew up in the north-east, so I know the damage that decline in the oil and gas industry will cause to communities. I ask the First Minister, please, not to question my motivation when I bring the subject to Parliament.
I asked a specific question about oil revenues. The problem for the First Minister is that she was not just a wee bit wrong. She did not tell a half-truth or even a quarter-truth. She was not out by a factor of 10, 20 or 30. The SNP’s oil figures were wrong by a factor of more than 60, because according to the OBR, oil and gas revenues this year are expected to be just £130 million. The Weirs won more than that on the lottery.
We know from today’s “Oil & Gas UK Activity Survey 2015” that things are not going to get much better any time soon. Will the First Minister tell us where the SNP’s failure on oil lies? Does it lie in the SNP’s ability to do the numbers or in its ability to tell the truth? [Interruption.]
Order.
The hypocrisy is breathtaking, because—[Interruption.]
Order!
Back in the period that Kezia Dugdale is talking about, she was in a campaign with the Conservatives, and the Conservative Government at that time was forecasting oil prices even higher than the forecasts of the Scottish Government.
I have to say to Kezia Dugdale—I am sorry to have to say it—that I question the motivation of a party whose members were happy to tell Scotland to leave its finances in the hands of George Osborne, but who now have the cheek to stand up in the Scottish Parliament and complain about cuts.
The fact of the matter is that the choice that is facing Scotland today is the same as the choice has always been: do we allow the Tories to control our finances or do we take control of our destiny into our own hands? I know which choice I prefer.
The First Minister accuses me of hypocrisy; she is the one who promised a second oil boom. It would be bad enough if the Government that is responsible for collecting an increasingly large share of our taxes had been out by 10 per cent or 20 per cent, but the First Minister was out by 6,000 per cent—6,000 per cent, Presiding Officer—on the money that is needed to fund our schools, our hospitals and our pensions. The Government’s ability to get those things right—[Interruption.]
Order.
The Government’s ability to get those things right really matters to our future, because this Parliament will be responsible for more tax and spending than ever before. We will have a chance to make different choices and to take a break from Tory austerity, so we cannot ever again be in a position in which our Government’s numbers are wrong on such a grand scale. [Interruption.]
Order.
What we need is a real financial watchdog with teeth—not the pup that John Swinney is proposing. Will the First Minister back our plan for a Scottish office for budget responsibility?
As Kezia Dugdale would know if she had bothered to read the draft legislation, the Scottish Fiscal Commission will have a veto over the projections that John Swinney brings to Parliament.
However, I think that what Kezia Dugdale does says everything that Scotland needs to know about the priorities of the Scottish Labour Party. On the day after George Osborne’s budget—a budget that announced plans to reduce the revenue budget of this Parliament by £1.5 billion in real terms over the remainder of this decade—what does she come to the chamber and do? Does she criticise the Conservatives? No. She wants to play politics with the SNP instead. [Applause.]
Order.
While this party stands up for Scotland, it is that approach—being arm in arm with the Conservatives—that has left Labour in the doldrums. [Interruption.]
Order.
If Kezia Dugdale wants to know some real facts about the oil and gas sector, I know that she will not take my word, so let us hear what Oil & Gas UK’s economics director had to say just yesterday about the OBR figures. He said:
“Oil & Gas UK believes there is room for greater optimism, given the fact that production from the industry is likely to increase this year—for the first time in more than a decade—and is set to continue throughout the remainder of this decade.”
We in this Government will get on with the job of supporting the industry, supporting the Scottish economy, and standing up for Scotland against the Conservatives, and we will leave the Labour Party to the slow and painful death that it is currently experiencing. [Applause.]
Order.
If I wanted real facts about the oil and gas industry, the First Minister is the last person whom I would be going to.
“The idea that you could have a Scotland with”—
[Interruption.]
Order.
Again,
“The idea that you could have a Scotland with high public spending, low taxes, a stable economy and reasonable government debt was wishful a year ago—now it is deluded.”
Those are not my words. They are the words of Alex Bell, the man who drafted the white paper. [Interruption.]
Order. Let us hear Ms Dugdale.
We are on the cusp of major change. With new powers heading our way, Scottish politics will never be the same again. This Parliament needs impartial and independent oversight of Government finances. Scots cannot be let down like that ever again.
The question for the First Minister is this—with all her power, with her majority in Parliament and after eight years in power, is she humble enough to change her ways?
I think we will recall—[Interruption.]
Order. Let us hear the First Minister.
I think we will recall that it was at the recent Labour Party conference in Scotland that “CHANGE” was emblazoned across the backdrop. The only party in Scotland, apart from the Conservatives, that badly needs to change its ways is the Scottish Labour Party. [Interruption.] I am being heckled by Conservative members to say that the Lib Dems need to change their ways. I am happy to concede that that, too, is correct. [Laughter.]
Kezia Dugdale quoted a former adviser to the Scottish Government. I often enjoy quotations from former advisers to political parties. I particularly enjoyed this one, from a former adviser to Kezia Dugdale—a Mr John McTernan:
“If Scottish Labour were a football team it would be in Division 3, struggling to avoid relegation.”
That was just before he talked about the stupidity of the Scottish Labour Party under Kezia Dugdale. I will tell you what, Presiding Officer—I and the Scottish National Party in this Scottish Government will continue to stand up for Scotland. We will continue to fight Scotland’s corner against the Conservatives and we will leave the Labour Party wherever it is that it has ended up in Scottish politics.
Prime Minister (Meetings)
To ask the First Minister when she will next meet the Prime Minister. (S4F-03084)
I will next meet the Prime Minister on 14 December.
Yesterday, the chancellor unveiled the biggest home building programme since the 1970s. Responding, the trade body for house builders, Homes for Scotland, said that the sentiment of the announcement was clear:
“to back those who aspire to buy their own home.”
The chancellor also announced that he would be pushing forward with his commitment to help to buy—supporting first-time buyers on to the property ladder. Homes for Scotland says that that is
“in marked contrast to the position here where the announced successor to the Scottish Government’s scheme faces budget reductions of up to 50% and will likely be less accessible to buyers.”
Will the First Minister today reverse those cuts and give a decent leg-up to those aspiring to own their own home?
What an utter cheek for a Scottish Conservative to stand in this chamber the day after George Osborne’s cuts to this Parliament’s budget were announced and utter the word “cuts”. It is absolutely unbelievable.
This Government has consistently supported the help-to-buy scheme. We have done that in partnership with Homes for Scotland and we will continue to do so. John Swinney will outline our budget plans in the chamber in three weeks’ time.
I have already said that, in the next session of Parliament, it will be the aim of this Government, if we are re-elected, to build 50,000 affordable homes. We had a target of 30,000 in this session of Parliament, which we are more than on track to meet.
I take issue with the plans that were announced by the United Kingdom Government yesterday. Yes, they are about building homes—I welcome that, in as far as it goes—but there is no commitment whatsoever on the part of the UK Government to build new social homes for people who need to rent. That says everything about the Tories. They are not interested in helping the poorest and the vulnerable in our society; all they are interested in doing is harming them even further.
Only the Scottish National Party could find grievance in a 14 per cent increase in the Scottish capital budget. Of course, if we had listened to the First Minister’s fiscal autonomy plans, we would be sitting here with a £20 billion black hole in Scotland’s finances right now.
Getting back to housing, the truth of the matter is this: the number of new homes built each year is down 40 per cent from when the SNP took office—10,000 fewer homes built in Scotland. Furthermore, we know now that ministers are about to halve the help-to-buy scheme in Scotland, ripping £65 million-worth of help away from first-time buyers. In short, this SNP Government is slashing support for home building and slashing support for home buying.
The First Minister wants to make plenty of political points today about George Osborne, but there are thousands of people out there who are trying their best to get on the housing ladder. Why is she cutting their support?
Let me pick up Ruth Davidson on the point that she made about the capital budget. She will be well aware of this, but I know that she will not want the people of Scotland to hear it. Despite the chancellor yesterday claiming to be increasing capital spending, the fact is that, based on the plans that were announced yesterday, Scotland’s capital budget in 2019-20 will be £600 million—17 per cent—lower than Scotland’s capital budget was in the year that David Cameron became the Prime Minister. That is the reality of the Conservative Government’s spending plans.
On housing, we have helped thousands of people into home ownership through our help-to-buy scheme and our shared equity scheme, and we will continue to provide that help. The Government will also continue to have a commitment that the UK Government no longer has—a commitment to build social and affordable housing as well. That balanced housing policy, which will help people across our country, is the right one and the Government will continue to pursue it.
Stewart Stevenson has a constituency question.
Yesterday, the chancellor made the disgraceful decision to pull £1,000 million in funding from the development of carbon capture and storage technology in the UK, which could have created the world’s first commercial-scale gas-powered CCS plant in Peterhead. Has the First Minister been in touch with the UK Government about that? Does she have any observations as to the effect of that on the negotiating position that the UK might have at the upcoming Paris talks on climate change?
Stewart Stevenson is correct in describing that as a disgraceful decision. It is a shocking example of how the Conservative UK Government is treating businesses. We have two FTSE 100 companies entering a £1 billion capital funding competition in good faith, committing resource, time and money to a bid that was due at the end of the year, only to be told at the very last minute that the money is no longer available. We were not consulted on the matter before the decision was announced and, as everybody will have realised, the chancellor actually neglected to mention it in his autumn statement—we were only told afterwards.
Fergus Ewing has made clear to the UK Government our opposition to the decision, which is the latest in a long list of UK Government energy decisions that harm energy generation in Scotland and that, as Stewart Stevenson rightly says, ahead of the Paris talks, undermine our efforts to tackle climate change. I call on the UK Government to reverse its decision, because it is utter folly, it is unfair to businesses and it is downright wrong.
Cabinet (Meetings)
To ask the First Minister what issues will be discussed at the next meeting of the Cabinet. (S4F-03081)
Matters of importance to the people of Scotland.
I agree with what the First Minister just said about the carbon capture and storage project up in Peterhead, and I know that she agrees with me about the chancellor abandoning his plans for tax credit cuts. Will she agree with me on something else? A cross-party campaign led by my Liberal Democrat colleague Norman Lamb has persuaded the chancellor to add £600 million to mental health spending in England. Bearing in mind the news that we have heard this week about child and adolescent mental health services in Grampian and Tayside, will the First Minister guarantee that she will use the new national health service money for mental health services here?
I thank Willie Rennie for raising this important issue. John Swinney is due to announce his budget in three weeks’ time. Parliament will hear the Government’s spending plans in that budget and will have a chance to scrutinise and debate those plans.
Willie Rennie is right to point to the importance of mental health. He will be aware that we are already committed to investing an additional £100 million, over the next five years, to equip the health service to provide the support and treatment that are needed. That funding will deliver a three-year programme to support the child and adolescent mental health services workforce, including through further training and more specialised supervisors. It will invest money to improve mental health support in primary care and will also support the development of innovative approaches to the delivery of mental health services, including the provision of support for people who need mental health care in community settings. In addition, we are developing a new improvement programme, which is working with all NHS boards to identify how their performance can be improved and to plan for that.
We are doing all that, but I recognise the need for us always to look to do more. The fact is that more people today are accessing mental health services. That is a good thing, because we should encourage people to come forward. Nevertheless, when they do, we must ensure that the NHS provides the services and treatments that they need.
I look forward to the budget, but I gently say to the First Minister that we have heard an awful lot of that before and it simply is not enough. We asked the Minister for Sport, Health Improvement and Mental Health in June about the shocking waiting times back then. He said that he had a recovery plan. However, since then, the problem has worsened. In Grampian, 50 per cent of young people are not seen on time. That figure rises to a staggering 70 per cent in Tayside. Hundreds of teenagers are waiting for months to get help that they need urgently.
Does the First Minister accept—I hope that she does—that matters cannot carry on in that way? Will she give an early commitment that the new NHS money will be committed to mental health?
As I said, we will bring forward our spending plans in our budget—I think that that is a reasonable thing to say. Willie Rennie will have the opportunity to ask questions about those spending plans when John Swinney outlines them to Parliament in three weeks’ time.
I am trying to be consensual, because the issue is important. I am determined that the plans that we have set out and will set out will be commensurate to the scale of the challenge that we face. Willie Rennie talked—rightly—about a number of health boards that are facing significant challenges. We are establishing an improvement team to work with them to address those challenges.
I will not repeat what I said in my previous answer about the money that we have committed over the next five years, but we are seeing progress towards what we need to achieve. In the past year, for example, we have seen a 4.5 per cent increase in CAMHS clinical staff and, since 2009, the CAMHS workforce has increased by more than a quarter.
Those are the steps that we need to take. We must ensure that we continue to have the capacity in place in our health boards to meet the increase in demand for mental health services.
Autumn Statement and Comprehensive Spending Review (Impact)
To ask the First Minister what the impact on Scotland will be of the combined autumn statement and comprehensive spending review. (S4F-03079)
The spending review represents a continuation of the United Kingdom Government’s failed austerity programme. As a result of its cuts, funding for day-to-day public services in Scotland will be cut by almost 6 per cent over the next four years, representing a real-terms cut of more than £1.5 billion. Those further cuts are damaging and needless, and they will continue to hit the poorest hardest.
What is to be welcomed from yesterday’s statement is the Chancellor of the Exchequer’s U-turn over tax credits. We have repeatedly called for that change—a few weeks ago in the chamber, I called on people to unite to persuade the chancellor to change his mind. However, notwithstanding the U-turn, the welfare budget cuts are set to continue, and we will want to scrutinise carefully where the axe will fall.
The First Minister will know that, last May, the Tories obtained their lowest share of the vote in Scotland since 1865. Does she agree that it not only makes no economic sense for the Tories to impose further austerity cuts on an unwilling Scotland that will only damage this Parliament’s ability to grow our economy and deliver services, but shows their contempt for Scottish democracy?
I saw a flicker of memory on Jackson Carlaw’s face there at the mention of 1865. I think that he is probably the only member on the Tory benches that still remembers the heyday of the Scottish Conservatives. [Laughter.] Actually, I think I just woke Mr Carlaw up, if the look on his face—
Our heyday is coming again!
The Tories are going back to 1865—that is what Jackson Carlaw has just shouted out at me across the chamber. Some of us think that they went there rather a long time ago.
Back to the question, the member raises an important point. Rather than supporting economic growth and prosperity, the chancellor’s cuts will undermine this Government’s measures to support households and businesses. We will continue to do everything in our power to protect the most vulnerable from the austerity measures. That will very much be our focus as we draw up spending plans ahead of next month’s Scottish budget.
I welcome the chancellor’s tax credits U-turn. The First Minister has said that the Scottish Government will mitigate the UK Government’s austerity measures. Of course, new powers are coming to this Parliament. Will she tells us, as George Kerevan was unable to do so today, of any specific measure that she will take to combat Tory austerity?
We will first bring forward proposals in our budget, and then we will bring forward proposals in our manifesto—I hope that Labour will do the same—but let me tell Jackie Baillie what this Government is already doing to mitigate Tory welfare cuts. We are spending £104 million this year to make sure that no one has to pay the bedroom tax. Interestingly, Labour in Wales is not making sure that no one has to pay the bedroom tax. [Interruption.]
Order.
We set up the Scottish welfare fund. We are supporting advice agencies to give people the advice that they need.
The Scottish Government will continue to do everything that we can to help the most vulnerable in the face of further cuts from the Conservatives. We will leave Jackie Baillie over the next few months to continue to argue that, instead of investing in our public services, our economy and support for the vulnerable, we should spend £167 billion on Trident nuclear weapons. She seems to be in a minority of one on her own benches these days, which says everything about the stupidity of the position that she takes.
Will the First Minister tell us what level of budget cuts we would now be facing had we followed the Scottish National Party’s policy of full fiscal autonomy?
What can you say to the—[Interruption.] Hypocrisy really knows no bounds. I just remind—[Interruption.]
Order.
I remind the chamber of what Murdo Fraser and all his Tory and Labour colleagues said before the referendum. We had to vote no to protect welfare; now, £12 billion has been cut from the welfare budget. We had to vote no to protect Scotland’s budget; yesterday, 6 per cent real-terms cuts were announced to the Scottish revenue budget over the remainder of the decade.
I will continue to make the case that it is better to control our own resources with independence than it ever will be to leave them in the hands of Murdo Fraser and his colleagues.
Undercover Police Operations
To ask the First Minister whether the Scottish Government will hold an inquiry into undercover police operations in Scotland. (S4F-03086)
The Office of Surveillance Commissioners, which carries out annual inspections of Police Scotland undercover activities, has never raised an issue with the Scottish ministers. The Scottish Government takes all allegations of police impropriety seriously, and I assure the chamber that, should there be evidence of such activity, appropriate action will be taken. Of course, the Government has already taken a range of actions to ensure that strong safeguards are in place regarding undercover activity.
The Home Secretary, Theresa May, has established the Pitchford inquiry to examine the role of undercover policing in England and Wales since 1968. As policing is devolved, Scotland is not included in the inquiry. Given yesterday’s revelations about Police Scotland’s monitoring of journalists and their sources and the Sunday Herald’s weekend exposé of Mark Kennedy, an undercover officer who monitored environmental activists at the G8 summit at Gleneagles, there is growing concern about the past and present role of undercover police. Is the First Minister seriously telling us that, under a Tory Home Secretary, there will be an inquiry in England but, under her leadership, truth and justice will not be offered to victims in Scotland?
The difference, which I am pretty sure that Neil Findlay knows, is that Her Majesty’s inspector of constabulary for England and Wales produced a report in 2013 that recommended actions to ensure that strong safeguards are in place regarding undercover activity but the Office of Surveillance Commissioners carries out annual inspections of Police Scotland’s activity in relation to undercover investigation and has never raised an issue either directly with the Scottish ministers or through its annual report about Police Scotland—or, indeed, about the legacy forces—in relation to undercover activity.
If such concerns are raised with us, of course we will act appropriately. We will, of course, carefully consider the Pitchford inquiry’s conclusions and, if there are measures that could sensibly be taken in Scotland, we will discuss with Police Scotland and other interested stakeholders how they might best be implemented.
Care Homes (Abuse of Patients)
To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government is doing to eradicate abuse of patients in care homes. (S4F-03088)
No care home resident should ever be subject to any form of harm or abuse, and it should be remembered that the vast majority of care homes provide high-quality care to their residents. The Care Inspectorate investigates complaints against registered care homes and carries out a rigorous inspection programme. Complaints about registered social service workers are investigated by the Scottish Social Services Council.
Through the Health (Tobacco, Nicotine etc and Care) (Scotland) Bill, we are legislating to introduce a new offence of wilful neglect. That will improve current powers and complaints procedures, and it will ensure that effective legal action can be taken against a care worker or care provider whenever necessary.
Ranald Mair, the chief executive of Scottish Care, is reported to have said that the rise in abuse allegations that was referred to in an article in the Sunday Post
“might be down to a greater awareness of how to report issues.”
Notwithstanding that, does the First Minister agree that abuse in any circumstances cannot be tolerated and that the increased frailty and demands of care home residents demands a workforce that is better trained, better skilled and better paid?
Hear, hear.
I absolutely agree with that. I completely agree that abuse in any circumstances cannot and will not be tolerated—
Pay staff the living wage.
Dr Simpson, stop shouting across the chamber.
I have made it clear and will continue to make it clear that, should abuse occur, we expect employers, the Care Inspectorate and the Scottish Social Services Council to take a very firm approach. Improving workforce skills and recruiting and retaining the right people are absolutely essential to that. Those are key areas for action in the vision and strategy for social services in Scotland. We are also working with the SSSC and a range of partners to achieve the full roll-out of regulation of care workers and to further progress fair work practices across the care sector.
Thank you. That ends First Minister’s questions. We now move to members’ business. Members who are leaving the chamber should do so quickly and quietly.
Previous
General Question Time