Plenary, 27 Oct 2005

Meeting date: Thursday, October 27, 2005

Official Report 742KB pdf

---

First Minister's Question Time

---

Prime Minister (Meetings)

This week's questions to the First Minister will be answered by the Deputy First Minister.

To ask the First Minister when he will next meet the Prime Minister and what issues will be discussed. (S2F-1869)

I would also like to congratulate Andy Murray on his fantastic victory yesterday.

I add my congratulations to those of Ms Sturgeon. The First Minister has no immediate plans for a formal meeting with the Prime Minister and neither do I.

Does the Deputy First Minister think that there are enough police officers in Scotland?

The number of police officers in Scotland has gone up significantly since 1999. We now have more than 16,000 police officers in Scotland. In the first years of the Parliament, that figure was significantly less, and somewhere around 600 new officers were recruited. Since the election in 2003, more than 700 additional officers have been recruited. The Scottish Executive has a positive story to tell about the number of police officers in Scotland.

I remind the Deputy First Minister that I asked him not how many police officers there are but whether he thinks there are enough. I am surprised that his answer was not a bit more specific. Has he forgotten that his party's Scottish manifesto, which was produced in May, said that we need 1,000 more police officers than we currently have, or is that just another policy principle that he leaves outside the Cabinet room? Yesterday, the Association of Chief Police Officers in Scotland told the justice committees that the police in Scotland are underresourced. Does the Deputy First Minister think that that is having any impact on the administration of justice in Scotland?

As Nicola Sturgeon knows, we carried out a review of the funding of the police in Scotland and discovered that there was underfunding. It was identified that £15 million more needed to be invested in our police forces.

We had two options: redistribute resources across the police forces or increase the general funding for the police. We decided to increase the funding and have already found £11.5 million of the £15 million and the results can be seen on the ground. We now have additional police officers, record numbers of police officers in training and record numbers of additional civilian staff, who will release police officers to work on the beat and in our communities. That is a positive story.

The situation is clear. In 1999, the funding for justice and the police was £1.6 billion; today, it is £2.2 billion and it will rise to £2.6 billion by the end of the spending review period. The average increase across those years is 7 per cent a year, which is way ahead of the rate of inflation. In terms of justice and police numbers, the situation has never been stronger. However, we still face a challenge in terms of crime and justice.

I asked the Deputy First Minister about the impact on the administration of justice. I draw his attention to new figures that were published by the Crown Office this week showing that, last year, the number of crimes that were reported to the Crown Office but which were never taken to court because of delays by the police was 7,759. That is a 30 per cent increase on the previous year, even though, two years ago—as we can read in the Official Report—the First Minister promised that those police delays would "consistently reduce". If everything in the garden is rosy, will the Deputy First Minister explain, in nice, simple terms, why police delays are resulting in an average of 20 crimes a day going unprosecuted and unpunished?

I will not stand here and defend delays, difficulties and problems. However, the overall no proceedings rate, as Nicola Sturgeon knows, has gone down by 2 per cent. There have been improvements: we have record numbers of police and we have record investment. However, if there are difficulties, we want to tackle them. We want to make our communities safer and we want to take practical steps to tackle crime.

When the Scottish National Party gets the opportunity to do so, it fails to support measures against crime. It did not support the Scottish measures in three criminal justice bills and it did not support the Crime (International Co-operation) Bill, the Fireworks Bill or the Serious Organised Crime and Police Bill. Let us see the nationalists take practical steps to do more for justice.

I remind the Deputy First Minister that the overall no proceedings rate is up from 13.4 per cent to 18.5 per cent—that is the reality. I remind him of a few facts: the police say that they are stretched, the devastating figures from the Crown Office prove that they are stretched, and the Deputy First Minister's own party says—outside the chamber—that we need 1,000 more police officers. Therefore why does he stand in the chamber—where, if he wanted, he could make a real difference—and parrot the tired, old Labour lines?

We are being more open and more accurate about crime statistics and are taking a different approach from the past. I cannot imagine the SNP team meeting to decide whether it should create a new system that would show worse crime statistics in year but provide a more honest approach that would help victims more. Would Nicola Sturgeon have backed such an approach? I doubt it very much. We are taking a more open, positive approach and we are determined to tackle those figures.

In this week, of all weeks, when we have been doing good things on free eye tests, when there have been good gross domestic product figures, and when we have progressed free bus travel for the elderly, I might have hoped that Nicola Sturgeon would concentrate on the positive. She could have concentrated on the record investment and on our additional police officers, although even her own back benchers laugh at that prospect, because she is negative all the time.

---

Cabinet (Meetings)

To ask the First Minister what issues will be discussed at the next meeting of the Scottish Executive's Cabinet. (S2F-1870)

At the next meeting of the Cabinet we will discuss our progress in delivering the commitments that were given in the second partnership agreement.

Welcome back.

Thank you. As the Minister for Enterprise and Lifelong Learning has been in post for almost three years, can he tell me how many local authority special schools have been closed in Scotland since 1997?

I do not have the accurate figure, but I know that a number have closed. We have taken steps to invest significant amounts of money in building schools and developing and improving provision for children with special educational needs. We have tried to take a more inclusive approach. That has involved creating and investing in units in which special schools are now part of a larger primary or secondary school. In almost all cases, that has worked exceedingly well.

However, I suspect that the member is asking whether it is important that we still have special schools and that children should have a choice. I would say that it is. That is why we defended our national special schools and why we will continue to ensure that, at the local level, children who need to attend special schools have the opportunity to do so.

For the Deputy First Minister's information, I point out that 33 special schools have been closed since 1997 and that in some local authority areas there is no separate special school provision at all.

I wish to explore the policy approach of mainstreaming and inclusion that has given rise to that situation. As the Deputy First Minister will be aware, many of the closures have come about because of a presumption in favour of mainstream schooling that does not serve the interests and needs of some of our most vulnerable young people. Their parents believe that their children are being treated as pawns in a game because of a dogmatic obsession with a mainstreaming policy. Does the Deputy First Minister agree that there should be no presumption—statutory or otherwise—in favour of or against mainstreaming and that parents should be able to make a genuine informed choice between mainstream schools and special school provision, so that they can decide on the educational provision that is best suited to the needs of their child?

I agree that there should be choice and opportunity for these children. I see some very good work going on in the special schools around Scotland. However, I also see some tremendous, transformational work going on in mainstream schools throughout Scotland. The level of support that can now be available in those schools, through classroom assistants, special units and additional support in the classroom, is helping dramatically to change the lives of a number of young people who would otherwise have been set aside and placed in a special school and who would not have realised their potential as they are now doing in our schools. It is not only about teaching staff but about the physical environment, which is why our investment in modernising our schools, through the public-private partnership programme, to introduce access for the disabled to schools, is important too.

This is a big issue. The number of young people in Scotland's special schools has been broadly static over the period to which David McLetchie refers, but we have dramatically increased the level of support in our mainstream schools. That is a good thing and many parents very much value the opportunity for their child to attend a mainstream school and to get the level of support that they need. Like care in the community, for example, it is not a simple or a cheap solution; it must be done well, it must be done sensitively and it must have the right resources behind it.

The Deputy First Minister will find that the number is not static but has fallen by about 10 per cent in the period that we are discussing. I refer him to the remarks that were made by Baroness Warnock, who is seen by many as the architect of the special needs mainstreaming policy, when she spoke to the General Teaching Council for Scotland earlier this month. She expressed serious misgivings about the mainstreaming policy and the presumptions that underpin it and said that, for some children, it was tantamount to being "little short of cruelty". Does the Deputy First Minister agree with that, and will the Executive put in place a moratorium on the closure of special schools until the series of assumptions behind the mainstreaming policy are reviewed?

I feel uncomfortable with the line of questioning from David McLetchie because it seeks to make a political issue out of a sensitive and important issue for the families and children involved. It is important that resources are allocated properly. It is important, when we are going for a more inclusive approach, that that is done carefully and sensitively. However, we should not look back to the halcyon days of the Conservatives in education, when special needs pupils were treated in some particularly excellent way, and try to contrast that with today. That would not ring true for many parents who, over those years, were frustrated by the quality and the level of provision for their children.

David McLetchie must remember that we are investing in record numbers of teachers and classroom assistants. At the moment, 3,300 teachers are in training—new teachers who are coming through into the system. Mr McLetchie's solution is often to centralise and nationalise our education system—an approach in which ministers decide how much should go to individual schools and to individual special schools. That is the wrong approach. We should try to open up our system, put the teachers in control and take advice from the educationalists. If we took David McLetchie's approach, we would have 3,000 more bureaucrats in our schools; we want 3,000 extra teachers.

Will the Deputy First Minister or the Minister for Environment and Rural Development meet a delegation from Scottish Borders Council and local community councils to discuss how to ensure the implementation of effective flood prevention measures for Hawick and Newcastleton in my constituency, in light of the emerging cost—running into millions of pounds—of repairing the damage that was caused when the Liddel and Teviot rivers burst their banks in the early hours of Wednesday 12 October?

There has been considerable concern about that issue locally, and I understand that the Deputy Minister for Environment and Rural Development visited the area two weeks ago, immediately after the flooding. I am pleased that that visit took place. Funding is available; I believe that the Executive has about £89 million available for flood-prevention measures. I would be happy to arrange a meeting—involving either myself or the appropriate minister—to ensure that the communities in Newcastleton and Hawick and the Borders generally are aware of the support that is available from the Executive. Support is also required from the local council, so it would be excellent if it, too, could be involved in the meeting.

---

Asylum Seekers (Forced Removal)

To ask the First Minister what the details are of the proposed protocol between education and social work services in Scotland and the Home Office immigration service in respect of the forced removal of asylum seekers. (S2F-1883)

Discussions on the proposed protocol are being taken forward as a matter of urgency.

It appears that there is still not a protocol in place. It is six weeks since the First Minister first flagged up the prospect and raised false and ultimately cruel hopes for one community in Drumchapel. Is it not the case that any protocol is merely a fig leaf for the Scottish Executive to hide behind as it watches more harrowing cases like the Vucaj case occur week after week? Is it not the reality that nothing will change? No protocol will make a blind bit of difference to an asylum policy that leads to 13-year-old girls being dragged from their beds in the dead of night in their pyjamas and 15-year-old boys being handcuffed and slammed into the back of a waiting van.

Perhaps with the exception of the Scottish Socialists, an excellent approach was taken across political parties when the Parliament debated the issue. Our shared values across the chamber were clear. We all oppose unnecessarily heavy-handed tactics. We want asylum seekers in this country—particularly in cases in which children are involved—to be treated with dignity, respect and fairness when they require to be removed from the United Kingdom. We seek to inject those principles into the removal process. We want to make certain that education and social work services, which are the responsibility of the Executive, are properly considered in close consultation, co-operation and partnership with the Home Office.

The First Minister and the Home Secretary have reached an agreement in principle on the issue and a further meeting will be held next week to move the matter forward. The issue has not been delayed or forgotten about. We are making quick progress and will report back to the Parliament as soon as the discussions are concluded.

I am proud that the Scottish Socialist Party has exceptional values compared with those that were illustrated by the eviction and deportation of the Vucaj family in Drumchapel. Will the Deputy First Minister tell the Parliament what the Scottish Executive will do to help bring the Vucaj family back to their adopted homeland and away from the grave and obvious dangers that they now face in northern Albania? Will he support the growing demand that families who have been waiting for more than 12 months to have their case considered be automatically allowed to stay here in Scotland in the communities into which they have been assimilated? Will he accept that the best small country in the world always welcomes with open arms refugees who are escaping persecution?

Yes, of course. That is why we have an asylum seeker system, but it is wrong to pretend that this Parliament has powers in this area. This is a reserved issue. As members will know, I have been concerned about the issue and I have kept in touch with events, but I will not get into a detailed debate this afternoon about one family, no matter how much sympathy members have for that family. I want to see action that will change the system and make a fundamental difference to the approach that is taken. We will work closely with the Home Office and have an approach that introduces dignity, respect and fairness.

One simple political point to make at the end of the discussion is that perhaps if the Scottish Socialists had not got themselves banned from the chamber, they could have made a better contribution on the issue during September.

In a negotiation between two Governments—the one that sits in front of us today and the one in London—this Parliament has a responsibility to hold the Deputy First Minister to account for this Government's part in the negotiations. Even if we accept the good will of the Executive on the issue, three important questions remain to be answered following the recent comments in the media by Tony McNulty, a UK minister, who almost rubbished the idea of a protocol. Is it the Executive's intention that the protocol will alter current practice or merely describe it? Does the Home Secretary, Charles Clarke, share that intention for the protocol? If so and Mr Clarke is not holding Mr McNulty's leash, who is?

I agree with Patrick Harvie that it is important that I and other ministers are held to account in relation to the devolved aspects of the matter—that is not disputed. The proposed protocol is not intended to ingrain or maintain the current system but intended to introduce change and ensure that the social work and education or school aspects are handled sensitively and appropriately, particularly when children are involved. The important discussions with the Home Office are on-going, so it would be wrong to talk openly about the negotiations, but as soon as we have a result, we will report back to the Parliament.

---

Avian Flu

To ask the First Minister how the Scottish Executive is responding to the latest developments in respect of avian flu. (S2F-1879)

Avian flu is an animal disease that can be caught by birds and poultry and which rarely affects humans. Although it represents a significant global challenge, the latest assessment identifies the risk to Scotland as low. The Executive is working closely with farmers, the European Union and the rest of the United Kingdom. In the event that the disease should occur, we will be ready to respond quickly and effectively.

Does the Deputy First Minister agree that we must have not only the right supplies of drugs but the right delivery mechanisms to deal with any possible pandemic? Does he agree that the public should be reassured that our investment in and reforms of the national health service mean that we are better able to deal with such an emergency?

There are two separate issues, which are constantly being brought together. One is avian flu, which affects birds and, very rarely, humans. In the past few years, 60 humans worldwide, mainly in Asia, have caught avian flu and they have not transmitted it to other adults. That is 60 people out of literally billions of people in Asia. The second issue is the potential pandemic flu—at some time in the future, the avian flu could mutate into a virus that might become a pandemic flu that could affect the whole world. That has not yet happened, but we are preparing for it, too.

Next week, the Minister for Health and Community Care and the Minister for Environment and Rural Development will give a statement to Parliament and answer questions on those two separate issues to ensure that the Parliament is brought up to date with action.

As members will know, yesterday the UK Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs took measures to prevent bird markets or fairs in Scotland and the rest of the UK. Measures have also been taken to ensure that there is no import of live birds into the country. Those are appropriate measures at this stage but, if further measures are required, they will be introduced in the next few days and weeks. The measures are focused on poultry and birds, as there is no current risk to human health in Scotland, or, at least, the risk is minimal.

---

Asian Earthquake

To ask the First Minister what action the Scottish Executive plans to take to support the relief efforts that are required as a consequence of the Asian earthquake. (S2F-1875)

I am sure that all members want to extend their sympathies to the individuals who have been affected by the Asian earthquake. I have passed on those sympathies to the consulate of Pakistan. I am also sure that members are proud of the response to the earthquake appeal from Scotland and the rest of the United Kingdom.

As with the tsunami last December, we have offered staff to the Disasters Emergency Committee to help out and we stand ready to respond to requests over the weeks and months ahead, as the disaster will clearly be on-going. I hope that Mr Adam and other members will join me in supporting those efforts and the work of the aid agencies in the afflicted areas.

I am happy to do so, but will the Deputy First Minister join me in congratulating the Asian community in Scotland on its efforts, particularly the curries for Kashmir initiative, in association with Islamic Relief? Will he also associate himself with the recent remarks of Kofi Annan, who has condemned national Governments for delivering only a small portion of the finance that has been requested to relieve the desperate situation in which hundreds of thousands of survivors find themselves?

I join Brian Adam in congratulating those communities, many families in which have been affected by the disaster. I congratulate, too, the teams from the International Rescue Corps at Grangemouth and Grampian fire and rescue service that travelled out to Pakistan; I understand that they recovered more than 50 per cent of the individuals who were pulled out of earthquake-affected buildings in the area to which they went.

Although some excellent work has been done, there is a lot still to do. The international community and international Governments must respond quickly. The UK has done well in that regard and we have made a significant contribution. Individuals in Scotland have raised more than £2 million, which represents an outstanding effort. However, globally we are way short of the United Nations target. That is why yesterday's meeting in Geneva was so important. The follow-up meeting in Pakistan in mid-November will be vital, too. We need action now from the Governments that have failed to provide the funding that is required.

---

Social Work (Death of Anne-Marie McGarrity)

To ask the First Minister whether the Scottish Executive will organise round-table discussions with all appropriate agencies in respect of the operational challenges faced by social work departments following the anticipated report into the death of Anne-Marie McGarrity. (S2F-1885)

This is a tragic and traumatic case. At this early stage, it is quite right that inquiries are being carried out by the health board concerned, the local authority and the police. Until that work is complete, it would be inappropriate to anticipate the outcome. I am sure that members will welcome the fact that three-year-old Michael McGarrity responded well to the care that he received in hospital and has now left hospital.

Although I agree that it would be precipitate to take fundamental decisions on how the up to 50,000 children in Scotland with drug-abusing parents should be looked after and supported, in view of the criticisms that have been made, especially of the City of Edinburgh Council's social work department—which my investigations lead me to believe are unfounded in this instance—it might be a good idea if the minister and the Executive encouraged local authorities to take the lead in organising such round-table discussions. That is what the Executive did when it responded to the report "Hidden Harm: Responding to the needs of children of problem drug users", which was produced by the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs. The ensuing discussions gave an idea of where co-operation might be possible and how seamless the support for children such as Michael McGarrity should be.

Of course lessons need to be learned by the agencies involved. When people first heard about that shocking incident, they must all have reflected on their own communities, on communities around Scotland and on the sort of society that we live in today, and they must have wondered about the support that neighbours and friends can give one another. In spite of the professionalism of the agencies involved, it is perhaps inevitable that they will not be able to cover every situation. However, if there are professional problems or gaps, it is extremely important that we learn the lessons and plug those gaps.

It is hard to define community spirit, but we all know it when we see it. As we develop policy and go about our business, members of all the political parties that are represented in the Parliament and, beyond politics, people throughout Scotland must seek to build a sense of neighbourliness and to foster communities in which people look out for one another and work together. That is another important aspect of the tragic incident to which the member refers.

We are told by the Executive that one in 50 babies born in Scotland is born to a drug-misusing parent. Not all of those children will be on the at-risk register. Even if they were, not all of them would have an allocated social worker. Is the Deputy First Minister aware of the sheer scale of the issue and the extent of people's concern? Is he aware that an emphasis on criminal justice can sometimes hamper child protection and that the Education Committee is monitoring child protection on a six-monthly basis because some of the Executive's recommendations in that area are taking far too long to implement?

I fully agree that an integrated approach is vital. At different stages in a young person's life, different bodies take lead responsibility. At one stage, the health board might be the responsible body but, at another stage, it might be the council's education department and the school. When a social worker is involved in a child's life or when there is criminal justice involvement, agencies such as the police can have a role to play, too.

It is vital that information is shared and that all agencies and services co-operate and work together in a transparent and consistent way. Everything that the Executive is doing is aimed at ensuring that that happens and that it happens better. Clearly, not only in relation to this tragic incident but in respect of the other examples to which Fiona Hyslop has drawn attention, it is vital that we strive to do better on the ground, at grass-roots level. We need to ensure that the good policies and strategies are implemented and delivered.

Will the Deputy First Minister give an assurance that the Scottish Executive will work with councils to try to find the best possible way in which councils can work with health boards on the wider issues of child protection? Does he agree that we all have a duty of protection and that that duty is not only to children on at-risk registers but to all children?

Of course we do, which is why these individual cases are very important. However, a new approach is also important and we are working to deliver it. That is what Peter Peacock, Cathy Jamieson, Andy Kerr and the other ministers who are involved in this area want to see. All of us want to see better joined-up working and for policies and procedures to be implemented at the grass-roots, community level. It is very difficult for us always to achieve that consistently across all the local authorities, given the different urban, island and rural parts of Scotland that they cover.

This issue is a big challenge for us and these incidents remind us how important it is to get it right. I believe that we are making progress and that not only the legislation that we pass over the next few years but the practical measures that are taken on the ground and the additional funding that we are injecting into this work will make a significant difference.

Arising out of this enormously distressing case, will the Deputy First Minister confirm and clarify how, given that patient confidentiality remains an issue, the guidance that is contained in the Executive's "Sharing Information About Children at Risk: A Guide to Good Practice" document of September 2004 is being implemented?

I appreciate Lord James's deep interest in these issues and the role that he played in progressing this agenda while he was a minister at Westminster. As he knows, many difficulties and issues are involved. That is why we are considering the issue carefully and why further legislation may be needed in this area.

We are determined to ensure that there is the co-operation and openness to which I have referred. Clearly, proper issues of sensitivity arise for the British Medical Association in respect of patient confidentiality. However, the interests of the child should come first. From the problems that we are seeing, it is clear that we have to change the system; we have to get a more co-operative approach. I am determined to deliver on that, as are my fellow ministers.

Meeting suspended until 14:15.

On resuming—