If anybody wishes to ask a supplementary to question 2 of topical questions, I ask them to send a wee note to me as soon as possible so that I can allocate as much time between the two questions as I can. Because so many members wish to ask a supplementary to question 1, in the name of Alison McInnes, I intend to take Alison McInnes, followed by members from the north-east, followed by members from the south, followed by members from Edinburgh and Fife. All the questions will be fairly close together.
If everybody understood that—probably better than I explained it—I call Alison McInnes to ask question 1.
Fire and Police Control Rooms (Closure)
To ask the Scottish Government what its position is on the closure of fire and police control rooms and service centres. (S4T-00586)
The Police Scotland and Scottish Fire and Rescue Service proposals, which will enhance the service that is offered to the public, are subject to approval by the respective boards this week. New jobs will be created as the Inverness control room is expanded to become the new national control centre for Scotland. In Aberdeen, Police Scotland will strengthen the offshore resource and establish a multi-agency facility, and the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service has established a fire investigation unit and will invest in the Portlethen training and development centre.
It is right for the services to consider the issue at this time. Our budgets are being squeezed by the Westminster Government, and it is crucial that the services ensure that resources are used in the most effective and efficient way. Scotland is safer now than it was, and the proposals will help to sustain the hard-fought gains that we have delivered since 2007.
We have a policy of no compulsory redundancies, so staff who are affected will be offered alternative posts or retrained to help them to find suitable employment.
Five out of eight fire control rooms are to close, and six out of 10 police control rooms and service centres are to shut. Hundreds of staff are shell-shocked and I fear that many people will have no option but to accept so-called voluntary redundancy, because many of them cannot afford to move up to 200 miles, uprooting their families or leaving their homes and lives behind. People tell me that to all intents and purposes, despite the cabinet secretary’s protestations, their discharge will be compulsory.
Yesterday the cabinet secretary visited police facilities in Dumfries and said that he regrets the job losses. Will he also travel to Aberdeen, to Glasgow, to Glenrothes, to Inverness and to Stirling and personally apologise to the hundreds of staff whose job losses his policy—his centralisation agenda—has caused?
I think that everyone accepts such things with a heavy heart when they come around, whether they come from the board or the chief. Such matters affect people’s livelihoods. That is why this Government has always had a commitment to no compulsory redundancies, which we expect the boards and agencies that operate with us to maintain. That stands in stark contrast to the action of the United Kingdom Government, in which the member’s party is in coalition.
Yes, I have a heavy heart. I will meet other representatives as I meet Unison—something that I think has occurred only since I came into office.
We are acting to ensure that we are able to protect local services and provide the best technology that is available, to keep our communities as safe as possible as we face the challenges of the 21st century, allied with the challenges that the coalition Government down in Westminster has imposed on us.
The cabinet secretary wants to dodge his responsibility, of course. However, he set up the single force, he hand-picked members of the authority, he took democracy out of the system and he took away any avenue of appeal against such decisions. Community planning partners such as local authorities, which were once integral to decision making, have told me that they were left in the dark. They were left to find out about the closures on the news.
The Local Government in Scotland Act 2003 places a duty on the police and fire services—and on ministers—
“to participate in community planning.”
Does the cabinet secretary regret that his new national police force pays no heed to those duties? Will he urgently take steps to ensure that he fulfils his duty as a minister by ruling the process out of order and sending the services back to the drawing board?
Absolutely not. The new Police Service of Scotland is doing a remarkably good job. I accept that individuals are having to suffer pain as jobs are lost. However, when I was down in Dumfries and Galloway I met armed response officers. Prior to the Police Service of Scotland’s establishment, Dumfries and Galloway did not have mobile armed response vehicles; it now has two, which attended an armed robbery in Dumfries on Sunday night. I was told that the helicopter that is part of the Police Service of Scotland would come to the area today to search for someone who is missing. I met officers from the rape investigation unit, who welcomed the national rape investigation unit and the additional expertise that will be available to help them to deal with major incidents. We are seeing the enhancement of and improvement on what was an outstanding service from the legacy force.
I point out that Ms McInnes has asked me to stay out of directing and becoming involved with the chief or with the Scottish Police Authority board. In a press release on 1 December 2012, she said:
“We urgently need a resolution that protects the independence of the Chief Constable and Scotland’s police.”
Her colleague Willie Rennie, who is sitting next to her, said:
“People want police and fire services to be laser focussed on local needs, not subject to political control from ministerial offices.”
We are seeing the delivery on the ground of an outstanding police service. We are adhering to the need to ensure that the police are not politicised or subject to direction, whether by me or by any future Cabinet Secretary for Justice.
The Aberdeen fire and police control room staff in my constituency have provided a high-quality service for many years. I am dismayed at the proposals by the fire board and the Police Authority to close those facilities, and I have let them know my opinion. Does the cabinet secretary know whether the fire board and the Police Authority have considered pooling their resources to share control rooms? If not, should they consider doing so? I would, of course, propose Aberdeen as an ideal location for hosting a joint control room.
The member makes many valid points. First, I, too, have visited Bucksburn and Queen Street over the years and I agree with Kevin Stewart that the staff there have provided an outstanding service. He mentioned the pooling and sharing of resources. That matter has been raised with the boards. Indeed, Vic Emery, the chair of the Scottish Police Authority, is seeking to pursue it. The Government thinks that the idea has a lot of merit, so we are encouraging the boards and the services to do that. As I say, it is not simply a matter for the police and fire services; there are other-blue light services that should work together more.
We see some elements of good practice, but we concur with Kevin Stewart’s point. As I say, I am aware that Vic Emery has raised the matter and that he will be pursuing it over forthcoming months and years.
As the cabinet secretary will be aware, the Bucksburn service centre is located in my constituency. A number of my constituents are employed at that facility and at the Aberdeen control rooms. As Kevin Stewart has mentioned, those facilities have a reputation for excellence and are highly regarded. Does the cabinet secretary agree that the quality of service provided must be an important factor in any decision that the boards take?
Absolutely—I concur fully. I echo the points that I made to Kevin Stewart. The service given has been exemplary and the work is outstanding, as is the case for all the legacy forces. The quality of service provided has be a criterion that the board must take into account.
I am not sure that the cabinet secretary is aware just how much anger there is in the north-east about Friday’s decisions, which were made without, according to many people, proper consultation. Increasingly, questions are being asked about whether the important decisions have been taken based on facts and what is needed on the ground. It is not acceptable for Government ministers to hide behind operational matters. Will the cabinet secretary have the decision stalled and instruct Police Scotland and the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service to carry out a credible consultation on the proposals?
If the member is asking me to give a direction to the police and fire boards and their chiefs, then the answer is no. I repeat the points that I made to Alison McInnes. We accept the desire of the chamber, enshrined in the legislation that we introduced, to ensure that there be no political interference by the current or any future Cabinet Secretary for Justice in what are important operational matters. The situation is one for them.
What Nanette Milne says is a bit rich. I accept the pain and the doubtless and understandable anger that some people will have, but when we contrast the position with the situation south of the border, where the fire and rescue service is on strike and the relationship between the Tory Government and the police is one that none of us would have ever imagined would get to such an appalling state, this Government does not need any lectures from the Conservative Party.
Will the cabinet secretary agree that relocating some services from Aberdeen to Dundee is the opposite of centralisation for the people Nanette Milne, Alison McInnes and I represent across the North East?
I am happy to discuss matters with the member and with Alison McInnes. As I say, I will visit Aberdeen and Inverness very shortly. I recognise the on-going outstanding work. Work will need to be carried out by the Scottish Police Authority and the board of the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service to decide on the new landscape not only with regard to command and control centres but with regard to other aspects of the national services to ensure that there is a fair dispersal around the country. However, the whole ethos behind moving to single services was to ensure that we maintain delivery locally, with the bobby on the beat and the fire station in the community, at the same time as providing access to national resources such as helicopter support, armed response or significant investigative units.
We move to questions from members from the south of Scotland.
The cabinet secretary will be well aware of the anger over the announcement in Dumfries, where 34 civilians will lose their jobs or be relocated to Glasgow. Does the cabinet secretary not agree that that is compulsory redundancy in all but name? Does he not also agree with many people in the area that the closure should not take place without full consultation? Does he agree that Police Scotland and the Scottish Police Authority ought to defer their decision until they have undertaken a full consultation with the public, members of the police force and members of civilian staff?
I discussed the matter with the local commander, Kate Thomson, yesterday. There will, of course, be the opportunity for staff to relocate to other remaining control rooms, and those in Glasgow and Motherwell are the closest. However, this is not simply about transferring to other control rooms. Retraining will be offered so that those whose jobs are going have the opportunity to consider working in other areas of the police service and the police family, which is not simply those who operate in uniform or in civilian clothes with a warrant card. Other opportunities are available locally, whether in Dumfries or Stranraer, and retraining will be offered.
To the eternal credit of the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service, prior to advertising locally the next round of recruitment for firefighters, it prioritised giving those whose jobs are going the opportunity to become firefighters. Several people who were civilian staff have taken up that opportunity and are currently training to become firefighters, and that opportunity will remain available. That is to the credit of the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service in Dumfries and Galloway as in other areas of the country.
Concerns are being expressed by my constituents across Dumfries and Galloway, particularly about the fact that the proposal will be considered by the SPA board in such a short time—it will consider it this Thursday. Does the cabinet secretary consider that six days’ notice of a change that has significant consequences for Dumfries and Galloway is a sufficient level of engagement or in the spirit of partnership working?
I heard from the deputy leader of the council and the SNP group as well as from the council leader, and I know their position. I was also grateful that Detective Chief Constable Rose Fitzpatrick went down there and engaged. There will be on-going discussions between the trade union, staff representatives and the board, and the member would require to address the matter to the police.
These matters have been subject to review for some time and have been discussed in my continuing discussions with Unison. It would also be fair to say that we currently have in the region of 200 to 300 members of civilian support staff in the police who have made an application for voluntary redundancy but whom we are unable to release until such decisions are made.
I understand that the staff who are affected by this abysmal proposal, members of the public, unions and politicians have the right to submit a counterproposal in which they can argue the case for an alternative outcome. Can the cabinet secretary tell me how that can possibly be done within the two-week window of opportunity that exists for them to do so?
The member can raise that with the board, whose representatives will be in discussion directly with the union and representatives. As I said to Aileen McLeod, this has been a matter of on-going discussion between me and Unison, the major representative union, although I also meet Unite and the Scottish Police Federation. Discussions between unions and staff have been on-going for some considerable time, and matters have also been open for some time with regard to the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service. If the member has counterproposals to make, he should speak to Mr Emery and the Scottish Police Authority.
Will the cabinet secretary explain in more detail the consultation process and what plans there are for local policing in the area going forward?
The plans for local policing going forward are to build on the outstanding legacy service in Dumfries and Galloway. As I said in an earlier answer, we have seen the addition of two mobile armed response vehicles, which I think are beneficial and long overdue given the difficulties and challenges that are faced, as was evident on Sunday night. There is also the ability to access the helicopter and the new road traffic unit, of which I have met the inspector and his crew.
As I said, the management and the Scottish Police Authority will continue to consult with the unions. There have been discussions—albeit truncated—between the SPA and police.
We will maintain what I believe the people of Dumfries and Galloway want, which is a visible police presence in their community. We are maintaining bobbies north of the border, while the numbers are haemorrhaging south of the border.
At the same time, we are, as a result of moving to the single service, getting access to the specialist resources that are necessary in every part of Scotland in the 21st century. No area in Scotland can work on the basis that it will not require to address gun crime, access the helicopter, or deal with specialist investigations into rape, sexual offences and so on. Local areas get the best of both worlds: local police are maintained, and access to all those specialist resources will be available when it is required.
Members will note that we have arrived at 20 minutes past 2. I intend to continue with topical questions until all the supplementary questions to question 1 have been asked. We will then move to question 2.
Can the cabinet secretary add anything on the nature of the consultation process that will take place on the proposals?
That will be a matter for the boards of both authorities, the chief fire officer and the police to discuss with the unions. Given the nature of the issues, it is important that the unions and the staff representatives are the primary people involved in articulation and engagement.
I will do all that I can—as I have done in the past months and years—to encourage those discussions. That will ensure that the relationships between Unison and the Scottish Police Authority, and between the Fire Brigades Union Scotland and the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service board, continue and that those who require retraining or who wish to take the benefit of voluntary redundancy have their position represented.
Is the cabinet secretary aware that the proposed closure of Tollcross fire control room in Edinburgh, where significant expertise has been built up over many years, has caused real concern to the public and to my constituents who work there? They feared that public safety in the capital, and Scotland’s resilience to emergency, would be hindered and undermined. Does he recognise the huge relief that will be felt by MSPs and the public throughout the city if Tollcross’s future is now to be secured?
Absolutely. I am very grateful for the service that is provided in Edinburgh and elsewhere in Scotland, whether by full-time or retained firefighters. I engage with my own fire service at local stations in Newcraighall and Marionville in my constituency, and I have no doubt that the news will come as a relief there. Clearly, it will be tinged with the sadness that is felt elsewhere, but we are trying to provide the best service for the whole of Scotland, wherever people are.
Another couple of members wish to ask questions; I ask them to be very brief.
What consideration, if any, was given to keeping the current system and using the new information technology system more effectively in existing control rooms?
That is just not possible. There is not one single IT system, but a multiplicity of systems across the board. The reason that we require to move is that in some instances the technology is very aged, and in other instances it is simply unable to locate and speak to other areas. The change is about addressing that.
As a member of the Justice Committee, Ms Mitchell will know that one of the major priorities—if not the major priority—for the chief is to ensure that the police computer systems are brought up to date for the 21st century, in the control rooms as well as for operational policing.
The cabinet secretary indicated that support staff in the fire service are being retrained. Is he not struck by the fact that so many staff have been kept in the dark right until the last minute, and have been offered no counselling on alternative retraining? The controversy that has been created is so passionate that it is time that the cabinet secretary spoke to Mr Emery and asked for some consideration of staff needs.
I meet Mr Emery regularly, and I did so a matter of days—or a week—ago. To be fair to Mr Emery, he has considered applications for voluntary redundancy from between 200 and 300 individuals whom he has been unable to allow to go. Discussions have been on-going and will continue to be so—that is the commitment that I can make on Mr Emery’s behalf.
Air Pollution Monitoring
To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to the air pollution monitoring results for 2013. (S4T-00582)
The Scottish Government is committed to working with partner agencies such as local authorities to tackle air quality in areas where it is a problem. Although we have seen nationally a 65 per cent decrease in nitrogen oxide against a European Union target of 41 per cent, a 78 per cent decrease in sulphur dioxide against a target of 63 per cent, and a 58 per cent decrease in particulates against a target of 30 per cent between 1990 and 2011, we recognise that more can be done. That is why we recently consulted on proposals for further action to improve air quality, and we expect to set out the next steps later this year.
The outcome of that work will help to support local authorities and other partners to take action, given their responsibility to declare air quality management areas where air quality falls below standard. The Scottish Government, working with local partners, will target its efforts to deliver real improvements in those areas where air quality improvements are still required.
It is estimated that nearly 1,600 people die prematurely each year in Scotland as a direct result of exposure to poor-quality air, with air pollution contributing to heart attacks and lung disease. It is clear that it is a serious issue. However, although local authorities have the lead responsibility they do not necessarily have the levers to ensure that they can deliver. We need greater leadership from the Scottish Government and a firm commitment from it on when communities will be able to be confident that the air that they breathe is not harmful to their health. As the minister will know, we are currently breaking the legal limits in a number of areas. When will that be reversed? Will the low-emissions strategy commit to a timescale to improve Scotland’s air quality?
There were a number of questions there. The first thing to say to Claire Baker and other members is that, for the reasons that she set out, we certainly recognise the severity of the risk to people of poor air quality. The Scottish Government is at an early stage in developing the low-emissions strategy, but I assure the member that it is being taken forward. We recently had a consultation on local air quality management and received about 160 responses, which we are in the process of looking through and are developing proposals to deal with the issues that have been raised.
I certainly recognise that local authorities and local agencies are the lead bodies in this respect, but the Scottish Government is playing a strong partnership role in a number of areas, particularly on transport emissions through the Scottish transport emissions partnership, or STEP. We are working with local partners to try to address some of the pinch points.
I am sure that the member will already know that Glasgow is the one location where we suspect that there will still be a problem beyond 2015 because of the missing link on the M8. However, we have programmed expenditure to address that and it should be dealt with by about 2017-18 on current projections. Scotland is in a comparatively strong position compared to the rest of the United Kingdom in terms of our achievements on air quality standards, which are a high priority for the Scottish Government.
In his first reply the minister said that emissions have fallen since 1990, but that is largely attributed to the closure of steel plants rather than a reduction in poor air quality in urban areas. In 2010, transport emissions accounted for 24 per cent of Scotland’s total emissions but in 2011 for over 25 per cent. Overall, transport emissions have increased since 1990. There is also worrying research that shows that deprived areas have the highest levels of poor air quality. Does the minister share my concern that the active travel campaign is helpful as far as it goes but that there needs to be greater emphasis on reducing traffic congestion in urban areas and on ensuring that we have the right levers in place to make that happen? Does he think that that should include a clear commitment to addressing air quality in the final national planning framework 3 and Scottish planning policy?
I think that I have already made it clear that the Government has a clear commitment to reducing the problems of poor air quality in Glasgow and other urban areas, and in some isolated locations in rural Scotland. We have a challenge in terms of transport emissions in that, despite improvements in fuel quality and the energy efficiency of engines, because of growth in car use transport-related emissions are not impacted on to the degree that we would like.
We have regulation of vehicles in Europe and, indeed, at UK level but not in Scotland. However, we are working hard to ensure that through STEP and other initiatives we tackle transport. The Minister for Transport and Veterans, Keith Brown, is working very hard with a number of bodies to try to tackle active travel. I have taken part in a number of joint meetings with Keith Brown, Stop Climate Chaos Scotland and Transport Scotland to try to address some of the needs in relation to active travel.
I assure the member that the matter remains a high priority for us, for the reasons that she rightly set out. The health and wellbeing of the people of Scotland is a key priority for the Government. I assure her that we are taking active steps to try to address what is a lingering problem but, I hope, one that will be addressed by about 2015 in the vast majority of Scotland and 2017-18 at the remaining site that I mentioned on the M8.
As an MSP for Mid Scotland and Fife, I am concerned to note the inclusion of Crieff High Street in the monitoring analysis report. Will the minister advise me what steps can be taken initially and as a matter of urgency to seek to tackle the problem? Will he also undertake to seek discussions with Perth and Kinross Council to see what joint working can be undertaken to move matters forward as quickly as possible?
Annabelle Ewing raises a good point, because, as I said, the issue is not just about urban Scotland. There are pockets of poor air quality in our rural communities as well.
Local authorities have a range of tools available to them to deal with air quality issues, including the ability to declare air quality management areas, and financial support is available from the Scottish Government to help to implement actions that will lead to improvements in air quality in those situations. We are providing financial and practical assistance to Perth and Kinross Council to develop an air quality action plan for Crieff. I am happy to meet the member if she requires any further information on that.
Will the minister declare whether the Scottish Government is using economic instruments to incentivise the reduction of air pollution? If it is not, will it consider doing that? Has the minister considered different options for how the general public can also be involved in the reduction of air pollution?
Jamie McGrigor makes a good point. As he will know, we made it clear through the report on proposals and policies 2 process that about half of what we need to do on emissions relating to climate change is down to behavioural change among members of the public, ourselves included. That clearly has a knock-on impact on air quality as well.
A number of local authorities are actively taking steps to increase the amount of tree planting in their areas. The City of Edinburgh Council is a good example of that, and Glasgow City Council and Fife Council are doing similar things. There are a number of measures that we can take as individuals, communities and local authorities to tackle poor air quality. However, the fiscal levers that there might be to try to influence the use of private vehicles is clearly a matter that is reserved to the UK Government, and there are some European targets in relation to the regulation of vehicles. It is therefore not entirely within our gift to tackle the issues.
However, I assure the member that we are doing everything that we can, within our powers, to try to change behaviours and ensure that we reduce the problem of air pollution in our urban areas.
That ends topical question time.