SCOTTISH EXECUTIVE
General Questions
Employment (Equality)
To ask the Scottish Executive what steps its directorate for enterprise, energy and tourism is taking to promote equality in employment. (S3O-7112)
The business, enterprise and energy directorate, which was formerly the enterprise, energy and tourism directorate, fulfils its statutory requirements on promoting equality in employment through the actions in the Scottish Government's gender, race and disability action plans for 2008 to 2011.
The minister will be aware of the recession's differential impact on various groups. What discussions have there been with the equality unit and other departments in the Scottish Government on job segregation and on how the Government has addressed that issue in proposals to tackle unemployment among women?
We have a comprehensive review going on in the department. John Brown is focusing on those issues. We believe that we need a fairer society that mainstreams equality, particularly for women, and we are determined to achieve that. We will continue to work on that basis.
Judiciary (Support for Victims)
To ask the Scottish Executive what support is available from the Scottish judiciary for victims who give evidence in court. (S3O-7100)
A range of measures can be used at the discretion of the judiciary to assist victims to give their evidence in court. Those include the granting of applications for special measures, under the Vulnerable Witnesses (Scotland) Act 2004, and the protection of victims of sexual offences from unnecessary questioning, under the Sexual Offences (Procedure and Evidence) (Scotland) Act 2002. Judges can also clear the court, arrange for frequent breaks, ask the prosecution and defence to modify questions and remove an accused who misbehaves in court.
I assume that the cabinet secretary is aware of the deep frustration of many victims who, despite the reforms that he mentions, believe that, fundamentally, the court system does not work in their interests. In light of that, will the Scottish Government support my colleague David Stewart's proposal for the establishment of a victims commissioner?
We are keen to ensure that victims are prioritised and are always at the centre of what is done. Significant change has taken place, which started under my predecessor Cathy Jamieson and which was led in the main by the present Lord Advocate—both as Lord Advocate in the previous Administration and in her tenure as the Solicitor General for Scotland. We are prepared to consider Mr Stewart's proposal. I understand that he has arranged a meeting on the issue. A commissioner would not be cost free. Ultimately, the Parliament must decide whether resources are best put towards a commissioner or towards front-line services for individuals. We will happily discuss those matters. I am sure that Ms Curran and the Government are at one in recognising the importance of looking after victims' interests.
Civil Contingency Plans
To ask the Scottish Government whether civil contingency plans will be revised in light of the recent disclosure that radioactive coolant from a nuclear submarine leaked at HM Naval Base Clyde. (S3O-7160)
That is a reserved matter. Nuclear and radiological safety regulations require any installation to have contingency plans in place to respond to any type of accident or emergency involving ionising radiation. It is a regulatory requirement that those plans are kept under continual review.
Does the cabinet secretary agree with the assessment of retired general Sir Hugh Beach, the former deputy commander-in-chief of United Kingdom land forces, who said of the UK's Trident missile system:
That is an entirely reserved matter, but I will allow the cabinet secretary to comment.
I am more than happy to make it clear that the Scottish Government's position is that weapons of mass destruction are militarily ineffective in dealing with the troubles that we face in the world; economically unaffordable when we have the crisis of cuts in public services; and morally reprehensible in the world in which we live.
Members have previously been cautioned against using unparliamentary language, even when it appears in a quotation. I caution members against doing so in future.
Student Support (Maintenance Loans)
To ask the Scottish Executive whether it is satisfied that maintenance loans available to Scottish full-time higher education students under the non-means-tested support system remain at £830 per year while in England students studying away from home can access at least £3,300 of non-means-tested maintenance loans. (S3O-7143)
Unlike in England, students in Scotland do not have to pay tuition fees. As a result, English students have to pay an additional £3,000 each year and leave with greater debt than Scottish students—and that is despite their generally studying for a year less. In fact, for the first time since devolution, the average Scottish student loan debt fell in 2007 and now stands at £5,354 compared with £9,580 in England.
I believe that the minister has misunderstood the question. Scottish students studying in England on courses that are not available in Scotland can access only £830 of maintenance loans. That is what my question was about. I would have appreciated an answer that was related to the question, so I will ask it again. Will the minister look to ensure that Scottish students who are perhaps on courses that are not available in Scotland can have at least some help with maintenance loans, which are currently a maximum of £830 for many students?
Through reducing the charges on loans and debts for students, the Government has managed down debt for the first time since devolution. In addition, we have provided an additional £44 million, which is twice as much as was provided under the previous Administration. Far from misunderstanding the question, I do not really understand where Mike Rumbles is coming from. He said in his manifesto:
Does the minister accept that the choices that are offered in the consultation document have been completely rejected by student leaders? Will he agree to meet, along with the Cabinet Secretary for Education and Lifelong Learning, the main Opposition party spokespeople to discuss our specific and fully costed proposals, which have the in-principle agreement of student leaders?
Claire Baker will know from the discussion that we had in the debate last week that the cabinet secretary has taken on board the points that have been raised and the responses that have been received so far. However, the consultation has closed only recently, so further consideration has to be given to the responses. The amendments and the motion that were passed following last week's debate were indicative of a large degree of common ground between the parties. I am sure that that point is not lost on the cabinet secretary, who is currently considering the request to meet Opposition parties to discuss these issues.
Does the Government accept that it is much better for students to be able to borrow money under the student loans scheme, which charges a very low rate of interest and where the loans are not repayable until a graduate is earning £15,000 or more, than to have to borrow from commercial lenders or, worse still, on credit cards? Surely it is about time that the Government dropped its ideological blinkers, dropped the opposition to student loans and recognised that the student loans scheme helps alleviate student hardship.
Murdo Fraser has essentially repeated the point that he made during last week's debate. On what he says about additional debts being incurred by students, we acknowledge that there are problems and we have to move from a situation of concentrating on debt alone to recognising that Labour's recession means that there is an increase in hardship, which is why we have increased funds to universities to deal with that. It is important to bear down on debt. It is not the case that there is evidence of huge additional debt through private borrowing by students. If that were so, it would not be the case that the average debt has fallen and that, for the first time since devolution, bankruptcies in Scotland among students have gone down.
Sri Lanka (Humanitarian Assistance)
To ask the Scottish Executive what plans it has to provide humanitarian assistance to the people of Sri Lanka. (S3O-7167)
While the Scottish Government is not presently providing humanitarian assistance to Sri Lanka, we are continuing to monitor the situation and, of course, we remain in close contact with the Department for International Development, the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and, in particular, the Disasters Emergency Committee Scotland, whose attitude towards this matter will of course assist in determining our own, if an appeal is launched.
Does the minister share my dismay at the outcome of the special meeting on Tuesday of the UN Human Rights Council, which ignored calls for an international, independent investigation into allegations of human rights abuses on both sides of the war? Will he offer humanitarian assistance by joining Amnesty International and my Tamil constituents, who are unable to sleep or eat because they are desperately worried about the fate of their missing loved ones, in calling for international aid workers and monitors to have immediate, unhindered access to internment camps?
It is significant that all the European members on the council voted in favour of the inquiry. There is unanimity among the European nations—and countries further afield—that there should be such an inquiry. There is wider unanimity that there must be humanitarian action to protect and support those on both sides of the conflict who are suffering now that the conflict has come to an end. I put all the Government's weight behind the appeal that the member makes. I hope that that adds to the international voices that are making it absolutely clear that humanitarian assistance is at the centre of this matter.
Opencast Coal Mining (Climate Change)
To ask the Scottish Executive whether it considers that an increase in opencast coal mining is compatible with its stated climate change targets and objectives. (S3O-7179)
Coal will continue to form an important part of the energy mix in Scotland for some years. However, it must go hand in hand with the development of clean coal technology. Such technologies, including carbon capture and storage, have the potential both to transform the way we generate power and reduce emissions significantly.
The minister has already conceded that last month's sweeping new planning circular leaves almost all planning applications for opencast coal sites in the hands of councils, which have huge vested interests, while ministers wash their hands entirely of responsibility. Since the Administration came to power, at least 10 new sites have been approved, which involve around 8 million tonnes of coal. Those scars on Scotland's landscape are the dirty face of so-called clean coal. They are the price that Scotland's communities pay when the Government supports new coal plants, whether notionally carbon-capture ready or not.
Ask a question please, Mr Harper.
Given the Scottish Government's commitment to reduce carbon emissions by 80 per cent by 2050, in what year does the minister expect the last opencast site to be approved?
I will courteously disagree with the member about the responsibilities of councils. I believe, as does the Government, that those who represent communities and who are connected closely to their concerns are very well placed to make the appropriate planning decisions. The issue of coal remaining part of the energy mix in Scotland is an important one. However, moving forward with carbon capture and storage mitigates the effects of the combustion of coal. It is a technology in which we could have the opportunity to lead the world. It will form an important part of the interim phase of power generation for years to come, before we go to wholly renewable green energy.
The minister will be aware of the serious local concern in the Douglas area of South Lanarkshire at the prospect of a new opencast quarry at Mainshill. Will the minister confirm that the Scottish Government's decision not to call in that proposal means that the final decision on whether to proceed rests with South Lanarkshire Council and not with the Scottish ministers?
It is indeed the case that planning decisions are generally being left to councils, where that is appropriate. The issue that the member raises lies with South Lanarkshire Council, which I hope will give it the consideration that it merits and will come to an appropriate decision that reflects local needs and interests.
Gulls (Nuisance)
To ask the Scottish Executive what measures it is taking to protect the public from the nuisance presented by gulls in urban and other populated settlements. (S3O-7127)
Gulls can be controlled, using lethal force if necessary, in a way that is consistent with the statutory framework that is provided by the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981. The Scottish Government has provided advice to local authorities on a range of techniques for displacing urban gulls and is currently supporting a pilot project in Dumfries to assess the effectiveness of using a falcon to deter gulls from nesting in the town centre and causing a nuisance to residents. If the pilot proves successful, other local authorities might want to consider adopting the approach as an additional control option.
I welcome the pilot. The minister will be aware that in many communities people are concerned that not enough action is being taken to tackle the growing nuisance of gulls. If the pilot is successful, will the Government consider imposing duties on local authorities to act more promptly when it is necessary to take control of the issue?
The general position is that the responsibility for dealing with urban gulls already lies with local authorities, rather than directly with the Scottish Government. The success of the trial will be monitored and, depending on the results, we will consider the advice that is given to local authorities.
Will the minister acknowledge that there is significant inconsistency in how local authorities tackle the problem and in how they perceive that they are allowed to tackle it? Will she undertake to give the strongest possible advice to ensure that action is taken in as appropriate a manner as possible?
The Government is aware of the widespread problem that gulls can cause, particularly in coastal areas, where they are endemic. I mentioned a couple of options that are within the powers of local authorities, and the list could be expanded. I will take on board what the member said. It might be worth reminding all local authorities of the range of options that are available, including—[Interruption.]
Order. I am sorry, minister. There is far too much background noise in the chamber.
There is the capacity for the Government to issue a general licence for lethal control, which local authorities might want to consider as one of a range of options.
Compulsory Purchase Legislation
To ask the Scottish Executive whether it plans to review compulsory purchase legislation. (S3O-7109)
The Scottish Government has no plans to review compulsory purchase legislation.
I am disappointed to hear that. I hope that in his travels around Scotland the minister will come to Auchinleck and Dailly in my constituency, to see the derelict former commercial premises that blight those towns' main streets. The local councils tell me that compulsory purchase legislation does not enable them adequately to deal with the problem. Will the minister review his position on the matter?
I am aware of the difficulties in Auchinleck. The member and I have been in correspondence on the subject. We are considering the compulsory purchase order process, as distinct from the legislation, and we are considering how best to respond to stakeholder concerns about CPOs. If the member has specific suggestions about how I might engage with her on the issue, I will be happy to discuss them.
Can the minister confirm that the use of compulsory purchase legislation for a private business venture, such as the Trump development in Aberdeenshire, would be entirely wrong?
The planning process in relation to the Trump development continues and I do not want to comment on where it will go.
Previous
Supporting Scottish Business