Plenary, 28 Feb 2008

Meeting date: Thursday, February 28, 2008

Official Report 828KB pdf

---

First Minister's Question Time

---

Engagements

To ask the First Minister what engagements he has planned for the rest of the day. (S3F-540)

Later today I will have meetings to take forward the Government's programme for Scotland.

I think that all members will want to join me in thanking the emergency services for the quick and effective way in which they dealt with the radiation scare in Edinburgh yesterday. [Applause.]

I associate myself with the First Minister's comments.

As ever, the First Minister has a lot on his plate. He is making sure that we can see the footie on television—we are all for that—and he is currying favour with the people of Berwick, although perhaps Lockerbie needed some extra tender loving care this week. Amid all that activity, can he tell the Parliament when he will publish his plans for a local income tax?

Very soon indeed. In relation to the consultation paper, we have been waiting for every local authority to set its council tax for this year so that we can compare the amount that would be raised by local income tax with the amount raised by council tax. I am delighted that it looks like every local authority in Scotland bar one will freeze council tax, in contrast with the 3.9 per cent average increase south of the border.

The council that is not going to freeze council tax is Labour-led Stirling Council, which, thanks to the generosity of the local government settlement in Scotland, is able to maintain and expand vital services and cut its council tax. The local income tax document will be released in that context.

As ever, the First Minister talks a good game—[Interruption.]

That is enough. Order.

When it comes to local income tax, it is time that the First Minister started doing his talking on the pitch, because we are already into extra time. First we were promised plans within 100 days in government, but that did not happen. Then, in November, John Swinney promised that the document would be ready in a few weeks' time, but Christmas came and went. Until 10.23 this morning, the Government's website said that the document would be published today, but at 10.24 the website changed. By tomorrow we will have been waiting 300 days for a 100-days promise. Why is it taking the First Minister so long?

I refer the member to my answer to her earlier question. It would probably have been better if she had listened to it before she repeated Simon Pia's carefully crafted words. I must say that I thank him for saying that the First Minister talks a good game.

Simon Pia's praise for this First Minister is nothing compared with that of the other remaining spin doctor, Gavin Yates, who said of me that it is great to see a politician at the top of his game. According to Wendy Alexander's spin doctors, this Government does not just talk a good game, it plays a good game.

Before the First Minister offers further praise for Simon Pia, he might reflect that Simon suggested in his column that the First Minister could be described as Mussolini, Fat Boab from Oor Wullie and the great pudding of the chieftain race, which proves that in politics we all need a thick skin.

The country wants to know whether the Scottish National Party's election promise of a local income tax, fixed at 3p in the pound, still stands—yes or no?

That is what the consultation document will show us. It compares the council tax that is raised with the local income tax proposals—of course it does.

Wendy Alexander is a bit confused. Her spin doctors are meant to criticise me; they are not meant to criticise her. I assure her that I will never describe her as a gruppenführer, as Simon Pia once did, nor will I ever write, because it would be disparaging:

"Spotted in the executive lounge at Heathrow waiting for the shuttle were a senior Labour MP and his researcher. Huddled over their papers they were attracting attention with the odd guffaw. Could it have been another one of Wendy Alexander's policy papers they were reading?"

When we publish our paper on local income tax, it will not cause any guffaws, unlike, as Simon Pia thinks, her policy papers do in the Labour Party.

The question was: does the SNP's election promise of a local income tax fixed at 3p in the pound still stand—yes or no?

The truth, of course—[Laughter.]

Order.

The First Minister has his knickerbockers in a twist when it comes to his local income tax because, as we have just seen, he is never shy about quoting others when he thinks that they agree with him. When it comes to local income tax, what does he have to say to the Confederation of British Industry, which says that it is misguided, to the Institute of Directors, which says that it would be anti-business, or to the Federation of Small Businesses, which condemned its huge financial cost for business? Even his own Minister for Enterprise, Energy and Tourism, Jim Mather, admitted:

"raising income tax rates would be naive in a knowledge economy".

When the SNP finally gets round to publishing its plans, will not Scotland see that the next item on the menu from Mr Takeaway is a huge chunk out of the pay packet of every hard-working Scot?

I say to Wendy Alexander that the form is that, when a member demands a yes-or-no answer to a question, they are meant to stop and allow the person to answer.

Yes, of course we will publish our consultation document on local income tax. Of course we will cite the Parliament's support this session for the principle of such a tax and put forward why the general public believe that it is much fairer than the council tax or any other available system.

On people commenting on the Government's performance, I am content to leave the final arbitration to Lord George Foulkes, who said this week on "Scotland at Ten":

"The SNP are on a very dangerous tack at the moment. What they are doing is trying to build up a situation in Scotland where the services are manifestly better than south of the border in a number of areas."

Colin MacKay intervened to say:

"Is that a bad thing?"

Lord George said:

"No, but they are doing it deliberately".

This Government is content to rest on the final arbiter of its performance: Lord George Foulkes.

---

Prime Minister (Meetings)

To ask the First Minister when he will next meet the Prime Minister. (S3F-541)

I have no plans at present to meet the Prime Minister.

In the past seven days, the First Minister's gloss has tarnished visibly. Last week, I gave him a chance to distance himself from his party's hostility to the private sector. Instead, he reaffirmed his undiminished affection, not only for himself but for state control.

This week, we had the unwelcome and unsavoury comments by the First Minister's official parliamentary liaison officer—the formerly anonymous but now notorious Christopher Harvie. Mr Harvie, who is forever consigned to history as Mr Knickerbocker Glory, unbelievably kicked Lockerbie, of all places—a town that we should support, not denigrate. Then we had Christine Grahame's disgraceful and repugnant comments about the George medal, which were a slur on the heroism and courage of all those who have been honoured with it.

The truth is that the SNP is a rag bag of publicity-seeking individuals with only cheap popularity and a desire to break up the United Kingdom in common. The more intelligent members on its benches will know when to keep quiet. The truth is that good government is about taking hard decisions and facing up to real challenges, such as the perilous future that now confronts our universities. Will the First Minister put aside the populist gestures and the easy headlines, and take the hard but correct decision to back the independent review of further and higher education for which the Scottish Conservatives have been calling?

We have a working party that is addressing the matter, which is what the universities have been calling for, as opposed to kicking it into the long grass, like the Conservatives would.

I do not know where Annabel Goldie has been this week, but I have heard a great welcome for the SNP Government and for the report from the expert group on retaining neurosurgery across the four centres, including Aberdeen. I have noticed that waiting lists are at an all-time record low in Scotland, and that the hidden waiting lists of the previous Administration have been abolished. I have noticed celebrations in Monklands and Ayr, as their accident and emergency services have now been saved.

I am also getting an increasing amount of representations to stop Annabel Goldie combining with Wendy Alexander in an alliance to stop the reimplementation of free education in Scotland. Is it not wonderful that there are demonstrations outside this Parliament supporting the Government, whereas in London there are demonstrations by policemen opposing the Government?

Unfortunately for the First Minister, the headlines that have prevailed are those borne out of cheap publicity stunts. Let me make it clear that if our amendment is agreed to, we shall support the Graduate Endowment Abolition (Scotland) Bill at 5 o'clock tonight. However, the question remains: why should the future of our universities rest on an internal Government discussion, rather than on a robust, evidence-based, independent commission? Such an independent commission is supported not just by Andrew Cubie but by Brian Lang, principal of the University of St Andrews, by student leaders and, just this morning, by the University and College Union Scotland, which represents the people who actually deliver the learning and research. If that is their view, why is the First Minister right and all of them are wrong?

The universities and their representatives have welcomed the review group that has been established by the Cabinet Secretary for Education and Lifelong Learning, in quote after quote, just as they welcomed the £100 million of capital expenditure that was announced this financial year, over and above previous commitments, and the extra £10 million that the education secretary announced two weeks ago for this financial year. The concordat with the higher education sector and the universities offers great possibilities for the future of higher education in Scotland. Kicking matters into the long grass and coming back to them some years later would be totally inadequate for the university sector in Scotland. This Government takes action.

I welcome the fact that Annabel Goldie seems to be bending on her previous determination to keep the imposition of the graduate endowment and tuition fees in Scotland. I detect from her question a little bit of movement towards the Government's position to re-establish the historic right of every Scot to free education in this country.

---

Cabinet (Meetings)

To ask the First Minister what issues will be discussed at the next meeting of the Cabinet. (S3F-542)

The next meeting of Cabinet will discuss issues of importance to the people of Scotland.

How much of this year's £40 million for class size reduction has so far been spent on reducing class sizes?

There has been substantial progress in local authorities throughout Scotland. Nicol Stephen should reflect on the fact that, had it not been for this Government inputting additional money over and above the inadequate budget that he left us when he was Deputy First Minister, there would be no money at all for that crucial investment in the young people of Scotland.

The First Minister knows that it was the £100 million extra that was provided by the previous Government that led to the class size reductions that were published this week. The promise that the First Minister made was that the money that was announced last year would be delivered promptly to address class size issues. However, documents released by councils under freedom of information legislation show where that money has been spent. One council spent it on a new boiler, one council spent it on a long-wheelbase minibus, one spent it on a new chemical store, two spent it on staff toilets and one spent it on car parking spaces. Those might be worthwhile investments, but they do not match the claims of the Government.

Is this the future of the First Minister's class size policy? Does he intend to stop counting children if they are packed off in the school minibus or locked in the new staff toilets when the inspectors arrive? Will the same tactics be used to magic up the extra teachers who are needed genuinely to cut class sizes in Scotland, even though not a single extra penny is being provided by his Government?

Oh dear, oh dear. Nicol Stephen seems to have forgotten the £9 million for 300 additional teachers in this financial year, over and above what was left by his Government.

I would have thought that, in this week of all weeks, Nicol Stephen might take the opportunity to apologise for his scaremongering on 20 December, when he announced to the chamber that neurosurgery was about to be withdrawn from Aberdeen because of a review instigated by his Government. I would have thought that, now that neurosurgery has been saved, he would welcome the process. [Interruption.]

Order.

While Nicol Stephen was at it, he might have explained why the Liberal Democrats in Westminster sat on their hands on Tuesday night instead of supporting the Scottish fishing industry in resisting exclusive competence for the European Union over that vital industry throughout Scotland.

As for Nicol Stephen's general slur on Scottish local government, we will see—[Interruption.]

Order. The chamber will come to order.

We will see in the outcome agreements council after council investing in a quality of education for our young people that is far and above that provided by the broken commitments of and the partnership agreement signed by Nicol Stephen.

We will take a constituency question from Elaine Smith.

Is the First Minister aware of the situation at Coatbridge College, where the provision of general education is under threat, with redundancy packages being offered to lecturers this week? Does he agree that highers, intermediate and access courses provide crucial learning opportunities, particularly for people who, for a variety of reasons, missed out at school? Is he in a position to support my proposal, which has cross-party backing, to shelve the process in order to allow proper community consultation and debate on that vital provision?

I am aware of Elaine Smith's motion and I know that it has cross-party support. I am happy to consider the issue, and I shall write to her.

---

Rendition Flights

To ask the First Minister what information the Scottish Government has concerning the possible use of Scottish airports as staging posts for rendition flights. (S3F-547)

The information that we have was supplied by civil liberty groups and it has been passed to Strathclyde Police. The Scottish Government is strongly opposed to rendition flights, and the people of Scotland are entitled to know whether a Scottish airport has ever been used for such activities.

The announcement last week by the Foreign Secretary relates only to Diego Garcia, and the information held by the United Kingdom Government does not indicate that any rendition flights have used Scottish airports. Obviously, we are now deeply concerned about the reliability of the assurances that previously were received from the United States authorities.

It is a matter of regret that the UK Government did not see fit to forewarn the Scottish Government prior to the Foreign Secretary's statement in the House of Commons. Accordingly, the Cabinet Secretary for Justice has written to the Foreign Secretary to express our concerns and to seek confirmation that Scotland will be covered by the further assurances that are to be sought from the US authorities about past practice and, even more important, a guarantee from the Government that it will be made crystal clear that Scottish airports should not and cannot be used for rendition flights.

I am sure that the First Minister will agree that there are strong bonds of friendship and respect between the United States of America and Scotland. Indeed, almost half the signatories to the declaration of independence were of Scottish ancestry and two were graduates of Edinburgh medical school. However, does the First Minister agree that the statement by UK Foreign Secretary David Miliband in the House of Commons on 21 February that, contrary to earlier assurances, the US has used British territory for rendition flights is of deep concern? Aviation policy is a reserved matter, but justice is not.

Briefly please, Dr McKee.

Rendition is illegal under international law. Will the First Minister take firm measures to follow the issue up?

There can be no country in the world that has a warmer relationship with the United States than Ireland, but the Irish Government has banned rendition flights from using any Irish airport. I suggest that we have the same, correct attitude in Scotland.

Civil aviation is a reserved matter, as is the information that United States authorities give to the Foreign Secretary. However, if an individual was unlawfully transitted through Scotland to facilitate torture, that would constitute a crime under Scots law. It would be for the police to investigate any such allegations and to report the results of their investigation to the procurator fiscal.

I hope that the First Minister has been furnished by Amnesty International with the details of three aircraft that are known to be possibly associated with the Central Intelligence Agency and which between them have made 87 stops in Scottish airports. Will the First Minister seek specific assurances that those three aircraft have not been and will not be used for rendition flights?

The Cabinet Secretary for Justice is seeking such assurances from the Foreign Secretary. The cabinet secretary met civil liberties groups, including Amnesty International, in August 2007. Following that, information from the groups was submitted to the Crown Office for consideration of whether there was sufficient evidence to justify criminal proceedings. The information was subsequently passed to Strathclyde Police, where it is still under consideration. All members should have confidence in the criminal authorities in Scotland when they have the opportunity to investigate cases.

Does the First Minister agree that the possible use of Scottish airports for rendition flights has caused considerable disquiet and outrage across Scotland? Given the highly political nature of the issue, the independence of the Scottish prosecution system and, indeed, the operational independence of chief constables, is the First Minister in a position to raise with the Lord Advocate the possibility of her appointing an independent investigator—perhaps a senior or retired procurator fiscal—to examine the allegations, the information that is available and the evidence of the possible use of Prestwick or other airports for illegal purposes in connection with rendition flights, and to report back to her? Does the First Minister agree that the extraordinary background to the matter might require extraordinary measures to be taken to address the public's concern?

I agree about the general public concern.

There is a missing link in this matter, which is that we need to have positive and comprehensive assurances in response to the various allegations that have been made. That is why the Cabinet Secretary for Justice has written to the Foreign Secretary, following on from the fact that the Foreign Secretary had to accept that information that he had given to the House of Commons was not correct.

On the provision of strong information to show that the allegations are not substantiated, we should have confidence in the processes of the Scottish judicial system. Following the meeting in August 2007, exactly the right thing was done. The information that was supplied by the various groups was submitted to the Crown Office and passed to Strathclyde Police, where it is still under consideration. We should have confidence in the processes of Scottish law and Scottish justice.

The First Minister will be aware of my interest in Prestwick airport. Can he assure Parliament that the Government will take all necessary steps to ensure that, whatever might or might not have happened in the past, Prestwick is not used for rendition flights in future? Further, will he outline what specific measures he can take to ensure that that happens?

I refer John Scott to the answer that I gave to Ian McKee. In the information that we are seeking from the Foreign Secretary, we are dealing with the past, in terms of looking for information and explicit denials from the United States Government, but even more important we are also asking that it be made crystal clear that Scottish airports, including Prestwick, cannot be used for this illegal activity.

---

DNA Retention

To ask the First Minister whether the Scottish Government intends to extend the categories of suspects whose DNA is retained after arrest. (S3F-563)

Scotland's police can take and retain the DNA of anyone they arrest for an imprisonable offence. We have no plans for fundamental change, but we have asked Professor James Fraser to examine the current law on how long the DNA of people who are accused of a sexual or violent offence should be retained. In our view, that approach strikes the right balance between individual rights and the safety of our communities.

Will the First Minister acknowledge that recent figures in England and Wales this year show that DNA retention was crucial in solving 452 murders, 644 rapes and 1,800 violent crimes? Does he consider there to be a compelling case for Scotland to at least consider expanding the use of DNA to tackle violent crime? Notwithstanding public concerns, does he consider DNA to be an extraordinary tool in fighting violent crime? The First Minister has a duty to act on that evidence, and give police forces access to a key tool in fighting violent crime.

There is no division among members in the chamber in accepting that DNA evidence is vital in tackling violent crime—everyone accepts that. I point out to Pauline McNeill that it is only a year since Cathy Jamieson described the present arrangements—never mind the review that we are carrying out specifically into crimes, or suspected crimes, of a sexual nature—as a "sensible balance".

As I understand it, no one—certainly not the United Kingdom Government—is proposing a compulsory DNA register. The question then becomes one of how extensive the information that is collected should be and, in particular, whether the DNA of people who are proven innocent should be held indefinitely by the authorities—the very question of which will be examined and judged shortly in the European courts.

We have asked Professor Fraser to consider specifically the question of how long the DNA of those who are accused of sexual and violent offences should be kept. Pauline McNeill should accept that we are all trying to find the sensible balance to which Cathy Jamieson referred, between civil liberties on the one hand and protecting the public on the other.

---

Planning System

To ask the First Minister what action the Scottish Government is taking to improve the operation of the planning system. (S3F-553)

Every member will be aware of the need for urgent change in relation to our planning system. That is why all parties in the chamber supported the passage of the Planning etc (Scotland) Act 2006. It is also why the Government is determined to push ahead with implementing the key aspects of that legislation over the course of the next year. I hope that by next year we can arrive at a situation in which planning and planning timescales in Scotland are a comparative advantage, as opposed to a disadvantage, for our country.

The First Minister will be aware of Iain McMillan's comment earlier this week that Scotland will fail to meet its 2011 target of equalling the United Kingdom's growth rate if it does not accelerate the planning process. Fewer than half of major planning applications are decided within a four-month deadline, and delays are more common now than they were two years ago.

Why has the First Minister's Government not yet brought forward the secondary legislation that will help to give effect to the much-needed reforms that were agreed, as he said, under the Planning etc (Scotland) Act 2006? Why, despite repeated calls from business, councils and all those with an interest in the creation of an efficient and effective planning system, is no firm timetable in place to ensure the delivery of those reforms? Will the First Minister undertake to provide local authorities with sufficient resources and support so that they can meet their planning targets?

I point out to Liam McArthur, in case he did not look at them himself, that the statistics that caused a stushie this week were actually statistics from the time period of the previous Administration, of which he was a fervent supporter. The legislation and the requirements that are needed to expedite the legislation will be brought forward to the Parliament. I hope that we can carry all-party support for them, because they are vital for the future economy of Scotland, which is precisely why the Council of Economic Advisers has focused on exactly that question at its first two meetings.

The member can rest assured that those measures will be brought forward expeditiously, and I look forward to having the same enthusiastic support as he gave the previous Government—which, unfortunately, was responsible for the delay in the planning timetable on which he commented in his question.

I thank the First Minister for his reply regarding the speed with which the planning laws will come into force. Will he comment on the use of good neighbour agreements, which I know he is very aware of? Does he agree that, when we consider development, we must also consider consultation with local communities? Does he agree that—

Briefly, please.

Does he agree that good neighbour agreements are the best way for local communities to put forward their ideas and work in partnership with developers?

The consultation document on good neighbour agreements will be brought forward as expeditiously as the planning agreements, to implement what is a very necessary reform of the Scottish planning system.

Meeting suspended until 14:15.

On resuming—