Plenary, 27 Sep 2007

Meeting date: Thursday, September 27, 2007

Official Report 768KB pdf

---

Question Time

---

SCOTTISH EXECUTIVE

---

Finance and Sustainable Growth

---

Wind Farms

To ask the Scottish Executive what its position is on whether local communities and stakeholders should be consulted on wind farm applications in their area. (S3O-716)

Our position on the matter is made clear in "Scottish Planning Policy 6: Renewable Energy", which states that

"representations received from the public, based on relevant planning matters, will be one of a number of material considerations that should be taken into account when considering proposals."

Is the minister aware of the two planning applications for wind farms that Energiekontor has lodged for sites only a few miles apart in north-east Fife? Both applications have attracted significant local opposition and the developers have already taken the Auchtermuchty application to the Scottish Government. Now it appears that Energiekontor also plans to take the second application—for Gathercauld, near Ceres—to the Scottish Government. Does the minister believe that that is a proper use of the planning process, especially given the high costs that local campaigners will have to meet to fight the applications, which relate to almost adjacent sites, at public inquiries?

The member will understand that I cannot comment on individual cases. However, I commend him for so eloquently putting this case on the record.

Earlier this month, the Scottish ministers announced their determination of three planning applications for wind turbine developments on which there had been considerable consultation with and comment from local communities and stakeholders. The applications were for Clashindarroch near Huntly, which is in the First Minister's constituency, Calliacher near Aberfeldy, which is in Mr Swinney's constituency, and Harestanes, which is in my constituency. Can the minister explain why the first two applications were turned down whereas permission was given for the Harestanes development to go ahead?

I am happy to do that. We adjudicated on the basis of clear-cut recommendations that were made by reporters.

---

Futures Trust

To ask the Scottish Executive what discussions it has had with HM Treasury ministers regarding its proposals for a futures trust. (S3O-770)

There have been discussions between officials, and I have raised the issue of the Scottish futures trust with the Chief Secretary to the Treasury, who gave a clear indication of the Treasury's willingness to engage co-operatively on the matter. Members may like to know that the Government is undertaking extensive work on the futures trust and other ways in which we can provide better value for our capital investment.

The minister may be aware that South Lanarkshire Council has embarked on an ambitious school-building programme. In answers that I received from Maureen Watt regarding the impact of the Scottish futures trust on that programme, she states correctly that it is

"a matter for South Lanarkshire Council".—[Official Report, Written Answers, 24 September 2007; S3W-4284.]

She says that the trust will have no impact on the secondary programme as a public-private partnership contract for it has already been signed, but she fails to give the same assurance for the primary programme. Will the minister reflect on those answers and assure my constituents that pupils in schools across South Lanarkshire will not be disadvantaged by the advent of the Scottish futures trust?

Karen Gillon is right to say that the Government has taken a pragmatic decision on a number of PPP contracts that have come forward since the election campaign was concluded and the new Government was elected. Nothing in our approach to capital investment will interrupt progress towards improving the school estate or any other aspect of public infrastructure. We will take pragmatic decisions on individual projects, based on the stage they have reached and the condition they are in, when determining what investment mechanism should be used to pay for them. The Government has demonstrated pragmatism on the issue and will continue to do so. As I said in my answer to Karen Gillon's initial question, we are working effectively on the development of the Scottish futures trust. I look forward to its being an effective vehicle for public investment in the period ahead.

I look forward to seeing the detail of the futures trust when it is ready. Given the pragmatism to which the cabinet secretary referred, will he confirm that, when and if the futures trust is available for use by local authorities and other public bodies, PPP will remain an option, should they choose to go down that road?

One of the points that we made before the election campaign, before the Government was formed, was that PPP could remain a vehicle for investment if public organisations wished. Of course, such an approach would beg questions if it did not represent value for money, which is a fundamental consideration in the approach that we are taking to the Scottish futures trust.

One of the many benefits of the Scottish futures trust is the opportunity that it will provide for us to cut out the enormous amount of inefficiency in how decisions on projects were made in the past, when significant costs were incurred by local authorities and other public bodies. If we had considered such projects on a basis whereby they were grouped together more efficiently, it is more than likely that we could have delivered benefits in value for money for citizens throughout Scotland.

---

Confederation of British Industry Scotland

To ask the Scottish Government when the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Sustainable Growth last met CBI Scotland. (S3O-766)

I last met representatives of CBI Scotland on 18 September. We discussed a range of issues aimed at the Government's purpose of delivering faster and more sustainable economic growth.

I am sure that regulation was discussed with business leaders in Scotland—at previous meetings if not at that meeting. Does the cabinet secretary acknowledge that some regulation serves a purpose in Scotland, a key part of which is to protect the rights of the many people who face discrimination? Will he say what regulation in Scotland requires to be kept and what protection he can offer to disabled groups in particular, to ensure that their rights will continue to be protected?

Margaret Curran asked a fair question. The approach that the Government has taken, as the First Minister said at First Minister's question time today, is to consider elements of regulation that present a barrier to the development of prosperity in businesses in Scotland. However, that is not an unquestioned approach. People with disabilities have statutory rights under legislation on the protection of disabled people. The Government will try to consider elements of regulation that can be removed, to improve the competitiveness of the economy, but we will in no way undermine the existing rights of individuals under the protection that they legitimately have in our society.

The issue must be considered on a case-by-case basis; it cannot be considered as a generality. We must take great care with all regulation that we remove to ensure that removal has no unintended consequences. I suspect that Margaret Curran is cautioning us on that.

On page 21 of its manifesto, the Scottish National Party made a clear commitment to adopting the "one in one out" approach to regulation. Where does the Scottish Government stand on that now?

Quite understandably, the Government has been engaged in substantial discussions with the regulatory review group, which is led by Professor Russell Griggs—the discussions have been taken forward by Mr Mather. The group has encouraged the Government not to take as simplistic an approach, if I could suggest that—[Interruption.] Conservative members are laughing, and of course they have a lot to laugh about these days.

If we take a simplistic view of "one in one out" we could easily replace minor regulations with larger regulations, so the Government is listening carefully to the views of the regulatory review group and taking forward an ordered process of reducing regulations, for the benefit of all businesses. I would have thought that that would bring a smile to the faces of Conservative members.

---

East Coast Main Line (Reston)

To ask the Scottish Executive what plans it has to improve the east coast main line and, in particular, to reopen a station at Reston. (S3O-714)

The reopening of a railway station at Reston and other possible train service changes are being considered as part of the wider options for making best use of capacity on the east coast rail route and are included in the consultation on the east coast main line route utilisation strategy.

As the minister knows, the reopening of a station at Reston is of particular importance to Berwickshire. I am concerned that there appears to be doubt about who should progress the issue. Scottish Borders Council believes that it is a matter for the Scottish Government, but the Government thinks that it is a matter for the council. I would be grateful if he could clear that up for us.

My understanding is that Scottish Borders Council has the primary responsibility for the development of the feasibility study, which includes the proposal to reopen Reston station. I am informed that it has not yet fully completed its appraisal as it is awaiting comment on the stage 1 Scottish transport appraisal guidance report from Transport Scotland. The matter is with a Government agency, but Scottish Borders Council will shortly be in a position to progress its responsibilities.

---

Oil and Gas Revenues

To ask the Scottish Executive what representations it has made regarding Scotland receiving a share of oil and gas revenues. (S3O-801)

We will continue to pursue with the United Kingdom Government the options for the transfer of responsibility for oil and gas resources to the Scottish Government. Mr Hutton, the Secretary of State for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform, has agreed to a meeting to discuss not only carbon capture but the oil and gas industry more generally. In those discussions, we will take into account views that are expressed in the national conversation that we have instigated.

I draw the minister's attention to findings from the Norwegian statistics bureau that were recently reported in the Norwegian press, which show that Norway's oilfield economic growth has outpaced that of all other western countries during the past four years. Experts believe that that growth will continue in the long term. The bureau cites good growth in export markets, high wage growth and a decline in unemployment. Does the minister agree that that makes for depressing reading for Scotland because it is yet more evidence and a prime example of the kind of country that we could be if we had more control over our oil and gas rights and were able to use our resources to benefit the people of Scotland?

Yes would do, minister.

Although I agree with my colleague, I sense no depression but optimism based on the belief that more people in Scotland will realise the benefit of controlling their own oil and gas and more people will recollect Gavin McCrone's comments of 1975 about Scotland having a currency as strong as the krone, embarrassing surpluses to a chronic degree and good reasons for repealing the act of union. It is all fuel.

The minister will be aware that oilfields in the northern and central sectors of the North Sea, such as Brent, Forties and Ninian, have produced substantial petroleum tax and royalty revenues in the past. I hope that he is also aware that, when those fields come to be decommissioned, they will expose the UK Government to liabilities amounting to perhaps tens of millions of pounds per field. In his discussions with Mr Hutton, will Mr Mather ask that the Scottish Government take over those liabilities on the same basis as he will ask to take over the revenues?

Lewis Macdonald can expect us to negotiate pretty sensibly on that, given that the benefit of the earlier oil revenues has gone to Westminster. Equally, we look forward to having the control that would enable us to make the decision to use the funds to facilitate the further development of oil on the west coast. That would allow us to achieve the objective about which Brian Wilson told us on "Newsnight" two years ago, when he said that there were probably 50 years' more valuable revenue resources available to be capitalised in the North Sea. We look forward to those next 50 years for the Scottish exchequer.

---

Council Tax

To ask the Scottish Executive what calculations it has made of the cost of freezing council tax for the next three years. (S3O-785)

The cost of freezing council tax is part of on-going work that is being taken forward as part of the current spending review. It would be premature to discuss individual cost estimates at this stage.

I am disappointed to hear that we approach the forthcoming local government settlement with such uncertainty. What assurances can the minister give residents of East Renfrewshire that the settlement will not lead to job cuts, cuts in services or costs being passed on to the voluntary sector? What assurances can he give residents of Barrhead that vital programmes such as the £100 million investment in the town's regeneration will not be directly affected?

I am as concerned about the lack of information available to the public about the spending review as anybody would be, but I await the financial settlement that we receive from the United Kingdom Government, which is about 15 months later than we would have reasonably expected it to be.

As Mr Macintosh may know—and as I am sure the distinguished convener of the Finance Committee, Mr Welsh, knows—I have discussed how to take forward the budget process in Parliament bearing in mind the fact that there will be a shorter timescale for consideration. Indeed, I have proposed a timetable to Parliament that protects the committees' two-month scrutiny period of the Scottish budget and commits the Scottish Government to producing its strategic spending review in one month rather than the significant other periods used by previous Administrations, ranging from three to 15 months, to develop that information.

That is the effort that I am making to ensure an ordered settlement for all public authorities, including local authorities and other bodies whose spending programmes have an impact on the voluntary sector. In answers on other occasions, I have made it clear that I want to ensure stability in voluntary sector funding in the period ahead.

In relation to the specific regeneration project in Barrhead that Mr Macintosh mentioned, I cannot imagine that there will be any impact on commitments that have already been undertaken and plans that have been well formulated in the past.

---

Class Sizes

To ask the Scottish Executive how much additional capital will be allocated under the local government finance settlement for 2007 to 2011 to support the reduction in class sizes to 18 in primary 1 to primary 3. (S3O-765)

In July, the Government allocated an additional £40 million of schools fund grant for the current financial year, linked specifically to the capital implications of reducing class sizes in P1 to P3. Funding allocations for future years for investment in the school estate have yet to be announced, as the issues are captured in the strategic spending review.

It is my understanding that Glasgow City Council believes that implementing the Scottish National Party pledge will cost about £47 million. In North Lanarkshire, it is estimated that capital costs alone will be £15.1 million. As the cabinet secretary said, the Executive has so far allocated £40 million, which is well short of the sums needed by those two local authorities alone.

Given the fact that, earlier this year, Gordon Brown increased the Scottish budget over the next three years by £1.85 billion, and given the fact that Labour said in the run-up to the election that we would spend those funds on education, how will the cabinet secretary ensure that North Lanarkshire Council in particular is properly funded to meet the SNP pledge and guidance?

In the very short time that we have been in office, we have allocated £40 million more than the Labour Party was going to allocate to investment in the school estate. It is a mystery to me where Cathie Craigie's confidence is coming from when she says that Gordon Brown has distributed such largesse for the next three years. We do not yet have the strategic spending review conclusions for the next three years. Perhaps Cathie Craigie has a hotline to the Prime Minister—we would obviously be interested in that.

I am glad that Cathie Craigie has reminded the Parliament that, if Labour had won the election, all the above-inflation consequentials for the Scottish Government would have been allocated to education. It will be significant news to all the other aspects of the public services of Scotland—be they in transport, health, local government or the criminal justice system—that they would not have got a penny from the Labour Party if it had been elected. I suspect that they will receive a lot of good news from the Scottish National Party Government.

---

Scottish Borders (Productivity)

To ask the Scottish Executive, following the recent Experian report showing that economic growth in the Scottish Borders was twice the national average, what additional investment is planned to improve productivity in the region. (S3O-729)

The Scottish Government is committed to raising the sustainable rate of economic growth in every part of Scotland. Our Government economic strategy, to be published in the autumn, will set out our principles and priorities for achieving that. In addition, we are committed to ensuring that the benefits of economic growth will reach the Scottish Borders and that the gap in wealth between our richest and poorest areas will be narrowed.

What the Experian report says about economic growth is welcome, but it also highlights the continuing difficulty in the Borders of attracting growth industries such as financial and business services and communications. That is reflected in the low wages for Borderers, which are still well below the Scottish and United Kingdom averages. Will the cabinet secretary consider reviewing the level of provision to support the development of those growth industries, to help match the outstanding economic growth record of the Borders with an improving financial and business foundation for the region?

As I said, the Government is determined to ensure that the measures that we take have an impact on every part of Scotland. I appreciate the points that Christine Grahame makes about the Borders; she has made such points assiduously in the Parliament over many years.

When I was in the Borders in the summer, I saw at first hand some of the exciting projects on economic development there and many of the challenges that are faced. I assure Christine Grahame that the Government will do everything in its power to address, as part of its economic strategy, the issues that she has raised.

---

Justice and Law Officers

---

Underage Smoking and Drinking

To ask the Scottish Executive what steps the Cabinet Secretary for Justice is taking to tackle underage smoking and drinking. (S3O-760)

Tackling underage drinking is a key Government priority. On Monday, I met licensing board conveners and police representatives to establish what more the Government can do to assist them in taking tough, swift action against those who make underage sales.

The Scottish Government will raise the age for tobacco sales to 18 from 1 October to make buying tobacco more difficult for young people, but we must couple that with tougher enforcement measures, such as test purchasing and smoking prevention work to prevent young people from taking up the habit in the first place.

I acknowledge the cabinet secretary's commitment to addressing the issue. I will ask a bit more about enforcement. Like many areas, Fife has its fair share of antisocial behaviour linked to underage drinking. The cabinet secretary will be aware of the success of the 12-month alcohol test purchasing pilot that was run in Fife. Following the publication of the interim report, what progress is being made on developing common procedures that all Scottish forces can use by 2009?

As the cabinet secretary said, the minimum age for making cigarette purchases will rise from 16 to 18 from Monday. What plans does he have to enforce that age restriction? Will he consider positive and negative licensing? What resources will be committed to that?

Finally—

Very briefly, please.

Sorry. Now that 18 will be the age restriction for purchasing alcohol and cigarettes, what plans does the cabinet secretary have for joint enforcement initiatives, such as encouraging better use of proof-of-age cards?

Claire Baker raises a variety of matters, and I thank her for her questions. I have had the pleasure of meeting Chief Superintendent Laing from Fife, who was responsible for instigating the test purchasing scheme. The member will be aware that the Government is committed to the polluter-pays principle. The industry must deal with many of the issues. The ability to sell alcohol or cigarettes is not a God-given or inalienable right. People who are given that right have consequent responsibilities and must meet some of the social and economic costs.

We have received the final evaluation report of the Fife alcohol test purchase pilot, which we will publish. As for rolling out that pilot, the Licensing (Scotland) Act 2005 was used to enable the test purchasing of alcohol to take place throughout Scotland from 1 May 2007. The Association of Chief Police Officers in Scotland has worked closely with trading standards officers to finalise a common operational procedure for Scotland. A phased approach to the roll-out will be taken; forces will undertake the relevant training and recruit young volunteers between now and the beginning of next year. However, I assure the member that there will be a roll-out, because the scheme was effective in Fife. We welcomed it and we will ensure that the benefits that Fife received are experienced elsewhere.

I hope that the cabinet secretary is aware that Perth city centre experiences antisocial behaviour problems in the same way as do city centres throughout Scotland. Much of that is the result of excessive underage drinking, but such problems result not only from landlords selling alcohol to underage drinkers, but from their continuing to sell alcohol to drinkers who are clearly well inebriated. Is the cabinet secretary confident that the licensing enforcement measures are sufficiently robust to ensure that pub landlords who behave in that way are dealt with adequately?

Roseanna Cunningham makes a valid point. The problems of alcohol do not just exist in our major urban areas of Edinburgh and Glasgow; they are experienced in other cities, such as Perth, and in smaller communities. I reiterate that the polluter must pay. We expect those people who are given the right to sell alcohol to take the consequent responsibility. The member is right to point out that the licensed trade has responsibility for what happens after a sale, for ensuring that the consequent costs of policing and taxi marshals are picked up, and for how its members sell alcohol to individuals in their premises.

I believe that the ethos of the Licensing (Scotland) Act 2005 is appropriate. It should make the trade much more of a profession. We expect those who are given a licence to sell alcohol to do so while exercising suitable care. We will give every support to licensing boards to ensure that they are effective in getting those who have the right to sell alcohol to accept the consequent responsibilities.

There have been tragic cases where people who clearly should not have been given further drinks continued to be provided with alcohol. That must cease. That is not what a professional licensee should do. That said, the licensed trade in Scotland has made considerable progress and it is co-operating in relation to the provisions of the 2005 act. Together, the trade, the licensing boards and the Government can make Scotland a safer and stronger place.

Implicit in the cabinet secretary's first answer to Ms Baker was an acceptance of the fact that the main problem surrounds not public houses and clubs but off-sales. Some licensees clearly and in the most cavalier manner sell drink to people who are obviously underage. Is the cabinet secretary satisfied that the approach that has been taken by licensing boards throughout Scotland has been sufficiently robust to deter the irresponsible minority of licensees from carrying on with that objectionable practice?

I had the opportunity to meet representatives of the Scottish Grocers Federation and other representatives of the retail sector earlier today. The 2005 act will empower licensing boards to act in a more hands-on way. Licensing boards were previously subject to a great deal of constraint; for example, they could not impose immediate suspensions. We seek to work with licensing boards so that they have the appropriate powers and can take immediate action if necessary.

As I said in response to Ms Baker, the purpose of our meeting with licensing boards and the police was to recognise that the arrangements are tripartite. The Government must ensure that the appropriate powers are available. The police must do all that they can to ensure that the law is implemented and that those who transgress it are apprehended. Licensing boards have an obligation to protect their communities. When the new regulations kick in, we expect that the licensing boards will act swiftly, and that those who breach their responsibilities will forfeit their rights immediately.

How will the cabinet secretary ensure that the polluter pays? I lodged an amendment at stage 2 of the Licensing (Scotland) Bill to ensure that the polluter paid. Fergus Ewing, the cabinet secretary's deputy minister, opposed that amendment. In fact, he successfully deleted the very provisions that would have made the polluter pay. How will the cabinet secretary ensure that the polluter pays, and what legislation will he introduce to ensure that that happens?

We will make regulations to ensure, through licensing boards, that the polluter pays. That will not be imposed by central Government; rather, we will provide a framework of regulations that will allow licensing boards that see a problem to take action. That might be done in the city of Glasgow; I certainly hope that it will be done in the city of Edinburgh; it might even be done in the fair city of Perth. We expect action to be taken, because huge costs arise as a result of the sale of alcohol. It must be borne in mind that people make significant profits at the till and over the bar.

Rather than being so begrudging, perhaps Mr Martin could recognise that we are seeking to work with his and other licensing boards to deliver policies that will make Scotland safer and stronger.

---

Antisocial Behaviour (Dumfries and Galloway)

To ask the Scottish Executive how it will support local initiatives to address antisocial behaviour in Dumfries and Galloway. (S3O-791)

Dumfries and Galloway Council has been allocated £880,000 for antisocial behaviour services in 2007-08. It is for each local authority to decide, with its community safety partners, on how best to use that funding. Future funding arrangements will be determined following the forthcoming spending review.

I thank the minister for that reply and for his written answer to my question S3W-3748, in which he revealed that a total of £3.07 million in core antisocial behaviour funding was allocated between 2004-05 and the current financial year. That funding has financed, among other things, the extremely popular community wardens scheme that originally began in the north-west of Dumfries and Stranraer and has been expanded into other parts of Dumfries and Annan.

Does the minister acknowledge the value of the work of community wardens in tackling antisocial behaviour, promoting alternative activities for young people and working with the police to improve safety in local communities? Will the Scottish Government provide funding after the current financial year to enable that highly acclaimed local initiative to continue?

The current four-year funding package for antisocial behaviour runs until the end of March next year. Funding is not directed towards particular types of services: that is for partners to decide locally. The amount of spending for future years will, as the member knows, depend on the spending review.

I have been made aware of the work of community wardens. I visited Glasgow fairly recently and spoke to community wardens there, and I recognise that the public increasingly understand and appreciate the role that they play. In implementing our plans, we will carefully consider the important role that community wardens have played and might continue to play.

I ask members to bear it in mind that the question is about Dumfries and Galloway.

As the minister will recognise, local initiatives such as those that exist in Dumfries and Galloway can easily be undermined when local authorities fail to follow them through, in particular those initiatives relating to the antisocial behaviour that is caused by alcohol. What action does the minister intend to take to ensure that the licensing boards of local authorities—just like in Dumfries and Galloway—take robust action against those who are involved in selling alcohol irresponsibly and engage more effectively with the communities that are affected by irresponsible sales of alcohol?

That showed commendable initiative, Mr Matheson.

I commend the member on his ingenuity. He managed somehow to bring his constituency into the confines of the question, which did not—as the Presiding Officer said—concern his part of the country.

The member is right that we are extremely concerned about tackling antisocial behaviour, which is why we plan to review the strategy to see where it can be strengthened and improved. This Government is committed not only to tackling bad behaviour but to promoting good behaviour. We want to take a different approach from that of the previous Executive. That is why we want to use proceeds obtained under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 to promote choices and chances for young people. We want them to have the choices and chances in the poorest parts of Scotland that they have in Milngavie, Bearsden and Morningside. That is what this Government wishes to do.

---

Low Moss Prison

To ask the Scottish Executive when it last considered the procurement issues in respect of Low Moss prison. (S3O-800)

I did that on 24 August 2007, when I made a statement to the Justice Committee about the procurement process for HM prison Bishopbriggs and the future operation of prisons in Scotland, although I consider the issue on an almost daily basis, and I discussed it last night with the chief executive of the Scottish Prison Service at the Prison Reform Trust meeting that I hosted in the Parliament.

I suppose that the minister had that discussion because he knew that he was going to have to answer my question today—one never knows.

As the minister knows, Low Moss prison is in my constituency of Strathkelvin and Bearsden, where there is a lot of local disquiet at the delay caused by his decision to cancel the previous design and procurement process. The minister has ruled out the public sector tendering for the contract. Will he enlighten my constituents today about when private companies will be invited to tender for the construction of the new prison? What date has he given his officials for when he wants the new prison to be opened? Will it be before or after the Scottish elections in 2011? Given that the reason for building a new Low Moss prison was to ease overcrowding at other jails, particularly Barlinnie in Glasgow, what is he doing to deal with the overcrowding caused by not having 700 places available at Low Moss? What is the extra cost of his decision to go for a privately built, publicly run Low Moss instead of the original concept of a privately built and privately run jail similar to Kilmarnock prison and Addiewell prison?

It appears that Mr Whitton takes a different view from his party leader, who supported the Government when we cancelled the proposed procurement process that would have been undertaken as part of plans to build a privately run replacement prison. If the new prison were privately run, 24 per cent of our prison population would be in private prisons, which would be the highest percentage anywhere in the world. Even Governor Schwarzenegger in California does not aspire to have as many prisoners incarcerated in private prisons in California as the Labour Party sought to have in Scotland. Thankfully, Wendy Alexander realised the error of those ways.

There has been a delay of several years in the construction of HM prison Bishopbriggs, which has come about because of the previous Labour-Liberal Democrat Administration's nonsensical scheme to have a public-private bid, with the Scottish Prison Service tendering. What is worse, that mistake cost £2 million before this Government could cancel the process and head towards restoring faith in a prison service that is a service, not a private agency.

Question 4 was not lodged.

---

Domestic Abuse (Legal Aid)

To ask the Scottish Government whether it has any plans to increase the number of solicitors working in legal aid who assist women in taking forward cases against alleged abusers. (S3O-734)

This week, we laid regulations to improve payments for undefended civil actions to more accurately reflect the work that can be involved in such cases. That should make actions such as seeking a protection order more financially viable for solicitors who provide a legal aid service. The regulations also make changes that might permit solicitors to claim an additional uplift fee in cases involving vulnerable witnesses, and increase the current uplift in specified circumstances. Those changes reflect the commencement of new legislation but also take on board concerns that were expressed by the Family Law Association.

In addition, we have agreed to expand the Inverness-based legal service that is provided by a solicitor who is employed by the Scottish Legal Aid Board. Women who are experiencing domestic violence will be a key client group for the new service. We are also reviewing the block fees that are payable for civil legal aid, to ensure that they provide appropriate remuneration.

I welcome that answer. Some time ago, it was predicted that, because of the block fee payment scheme, solicitors would withdraw from civil legal aid work. It seems that those predictions were correct. Women and women's aid groups are now facing a diminishing supply of family law lawyers who offer civil legal aid services.

Although I welcome the minister's answer, I did not catch when the changes will come into effect. Could the minister clarify that for me?

I appreciate Gil Paterson's long-standing commitment in this area. The regulations have been laid, but I do not know the precise date when they will come into force. We are dealing with the issue as a matter of urgency, having received representations from the Family Law Association.

We face a difficulty, because we have inherited a situation in which—as one newspaper has mentioned—it is possible that, in some areas of the country, legal aid services will go the same way as national health service dentistry has gone. That situation needs to be addressed, and we will do it in part by making changes to the Scottish Legal Aid Board. In addition, some aspects will be addressed by the work of Lord Gill, who is reviewing how legal services are structured. However, I assure the member that this Government recognises his commitment and the requirement for the Government to protect those who are vulnerable and who suffer the scourge of domestic abuse and violence in the home.

---

Children of Substance-misusing Parents (Assessment)

To ask the Scottish Executive what progress is being made towards working with the Association of Chief Police Officers in Scotland to take forward a model of integrated assessment to ensure that the needs of children of substance-misusing parents are identified at the earliest opportunity, as stipulated in "Hidden Harm—Next Steps". (S3O-787)

Getting children the right help at the right time in the most effective way is a key priority for this Government. Consequently, we are working with all agencies, including the police, on the most effective means of meeting the needs of children, including those with substance-misusing parents.

I am pleased to hear that the minister recognises the need for an integrated agency approach.

The minister will be aware of yesterday's damning report by Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Education on Edinburgh's failing child protection services, of the latest increases in the number of children on the child protection register and of the letters of assurance scandal. In his closing speech in the drugs misuse debate on 6 September, the minister assured me that the points that I raised about child protection would be discussed with his colleague, the Cabinet Secretary for Education and Lifelong Learning, adding:

"we have to ensure a holistic and joined-up approach."—[Official Report, 6 September 2007; c 1483.]

What has been discussed to date and what action has been agreed?

I am assured by my colleagues that discussions have been taking place. As for the issue in Edinburgh to which the member referred—which, as a constituency representative, I know well—the report in question shows that, just as we as a Government have inherited huge difficulties, my colleagues on the Scottish National Party council have also inherited a difficult situation. The member can rest assured that my SNP colleagues in the City of Edinburgh Council will do exactly the same as my SNP colleagues in the Government of Scotland and set those matters right.