Skip to main content

Language: English / Gàidhlig

Loading…
Chamber and committees

Plenary, 31 Jan 2008

Meeting date: Thursday, January 31, 2008


Contents


Question Time


SCOTTISH EXECUTIVE


Finance and Sustainable Growth

Good afternoon. We have a single theme for themed question time this afternoon: finance and sustainable growth.


Public-private Partnerships (Alternatives)

To ask the Scottish Government what progress has been made in formulating an alternative funding mechanism to public-private partnerships. (S3O-2088)

The Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Sustainable Growth (John Swinney):

The Scottish futures trust is our alternative funding mechanism to the standard private finance initiative. It will deliver better, more efficient infrastructure for taxpayers. A consultation paper on the SFT was launched in December 2007, with responses due by 14 March. Work on the development of the Scottish futures trust is continuing and is making good progress.

Gil Paterson:

The pitfalls of PFI and PPP are well documented. The sooner they go, the better. Could the cabinet secretary assure me that the new scheme will place emphasis on community needs and that the buildings, infrastructure and services that will be paid for by the public will be for their benefit, rather than for the benefit of the contractors or their shareholders?

John Swinney:

Mr Paterson will know the position of the Government. We are keen to ensure that the Scottish futures trust develops a programme to deliver a better deal for taxpayers, by combining the opportunities for maximising investment levels and for reducing costs. As part of its design, we must take into account the fact that many PFI structures that have been established, particularly on the schools estate, make securing community access difficult. We certainly want to ensure that community access to important public facilities is maximised under the Scottish futures trust proposals.

Andy Kerr (East Kilbride) (Lab):

Mr Paterson might want to extend his reading list on the so-called alternative to PPP. Perhaps he might go so far as to read the Unison document that says that the Scottish Government's proposal is simply PPP/PFI by another name. It still raises funds from bonds, commercial banks and private investors, and profit is still made. The Government has simply put a gloss on that model. Would the minister care to be more honest about what he said in paragraph 7.2 of the consultation document, where he stated that the Government would be more "pragmatic"? Has the Government not accepted the model of PPP and tried to rebadge it?

John Swinney:

What the Government has done since the election has indeed been pragmatic. The Government took the view that it would not be wise to terminate programmes or projects that we inherited from the previous Administration and that had already undergone significant development, and to replace them with alternatives. A great deal of work has been undertaken and cost incurred on some projects.

The Scottish futures trust is a model that will maximise the benefit for taxpayers and minimise the costs to them, in contrast to some of the elaborate and expensive arrangements that have been put in place. Securing greater value for the taxpayer lies at the heart of the Scottish futures trust. We will be happy to defend that approach to Parliament and to Scotland more widely.


Air Routes

2. John Scott (Ayr) (Con):

To ask the Scottish Government what contact it has had with Scottish airport operators and airlines regarding the development of new international air routes following the ending of the route development fund for direct flights to and from Scottish airports. (S3O-2065)

I understand that the minister has damaged his back. I am sure that the Parliament will be understanding if he is not able to stand up.

The Minister for Transport, Infrastructure and Climate Change (Stewart Stevenson):

It is all right—I am managing to stand so far, Presiding Officer.

We have regular contact with airport operators and airlines at ministerial and official levels on issues of mutual interest, including that of improving Scotland's international connectivity.

John Scott:

In answer to a previous parliamentary question, the Minister for Transport, Infrastructure and Climate Change confirmed:

"The Scottish Executive's Route Development Fund has contributed substantially to the growth of direct international air routes to and from Scotland."—[Official Report, Written Answers, 17 July 2007; S3W-1844.]

In answer to another question, he stated:

"An evaluation of the economic benefits arising from the Route Development Fund (RDF) will be carried out".—[Official Report, Written Answers, 20 July 2007; S3W-1845.]

Scotland's airports are key to growing our economy and establishing connectivity to our international markets. The routes that were previously created by the fund are also key routes for facilitating migrant workers' access to our economy—

Could we have a question, please?

They contribute to population growth and increased participation rates in the Scottish labour market. Given that the cabinet secretary has said—

Question, please, Mr Scott.

John Scott:

I am coming to it, sir. Given that the cabinet secretary has said that the route development fund is not to be reinstated, what measures is the minister prepared to take to support the continuing development of Prestwick airport, which is so vital to the Ayrshire economy?

Stewart Stevenson:

The member makes an interesting contribution. The development fund has been valuable, although it is worth noting that many of the Ryanair routes that are successfully operating out of Prestwick airport have not had support from it. The market is increasingly delivering without the interventions from ministers that there have been in the past.

We welcome engagement with airlines and airport operators to ensure that we are addressing the climate change agenda through more efficient aircraft and new modes of operating. That is an increasingly important part of our focus as well.

Jamie Stone (Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross) (LD):

The minister will recognise the potential of Wick airport for the development of new international air routes. Does he agree that, in addition to the prospect of increased business usage of the airport as replacement industry and commerce are established while Dounreay continues to decommission, the northern North Sea and west of Shetland oil sectors present future opportunities for flights between Wick and Bergen and Haugesund—I hope that I have pronounced that correctly—in Norway and for helicopter movements between the northernmost airport on the Scottish mainland and marine oil and gas installations?

Stewart Stevenson:

One of my few air journeys was to Wick, and coincidentally I spent my honeymoon in the 1960s in Haugesund, so the member has managed to press all the right buttons for me.

Wick airport has a number of particular advantages. It supports an area that is lacking in mainstream rapid communication, so it is very important. As part of my work, I have looked at whether it might be a suitable area for developing new approach facilities with the Civil Aviation Authority, using global positioning systems technology. That would increase the accessibility of Wick and reduce the number of diversions. We will continue to pay close attention to the development of Wick airport.

Perhaps the contortions that the minister undertook this morning in the transport debate have contributed to his bad back.

Or was it his honeymoon?

Des McNulty:

That was a long time ago.

Before the Government took the decision on the ending of the route development fund, did it consult the international experts who the First Minister and Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Sustainable Growth were so keen to highlight would be involved in all decisions that contributed to Scotland's prosperity? If so, what did they say?

Stewart Stevenson:

The member, who was a minister in the previous Administration, will be well aware that the change in the status of route development support derived from decisions by the European Union in 2005. It is now possible to provide support only if the airports at both ends of the route have fewer than 5 million passengers per annum. Furthermore, we can support only routes within the EU, and we cannot assist non-EU carriers. That restricts the fund to the extent that the market is a much more effective way of ensuring that Scotland's economy continues to be supported by the development of new routes—and that is what is happening successfully today.

I hope that the number of supplementary questions has helped the minister to stand up and sit down enough to ease his back.


Single Status Pay Agreements (Costs)

To ask the Scottish Executive what its latest estimate is of the cost to councils of implementing single status pay agreements and meeting equal pay claims. (S3O-2060)

The cost and implementation of single status agreements and meeting equal pay claims are matters for individual local authorities.

David McLetchie:

I am astonished by that complacent answer from the cabinet secretary, who normally likes to cultivate the prudential image of an Aberfeldy bank manager. He seems somewhat blasé about the potential liabilities facing our councils.

The cabinet secretary will be aware that, two years ago, following an investigation by the Parliament's Finance Committee—of which he was then a member—the cost of funding equal pay compensation was estimated at between £310 million and £560 million. Two years later, we are not a great deal further forward. How can the cabinet secretary's financial settlement for local authorities over the next three years be regarded as in any way sustainable when they face huge, unbudgeted liabilities that could blow his proposed council tax freeze out of the water?

John Swinney:

I assure Mr McLetchie that no one is blasé on this side of the chamber.

I fully respect the right of local authorities to operate as independent financial entities. Local authorities must be in a position to manage their own resources and to manage the issues that they need to address. As Mr McLetchie well knows, some local authorities have resolved the equal pay and single status issues whereas others have not. By virtue of the fact that some local authorities have been able to resolve the issues, it is clear that they can be resolved. I want to treat local authorities with respect and allow them to resolve the issues.

Mr McLetchie will not need to wait much longer to find out the reaction of Scotland's local authorities to the Government's approach to the council tax. We will perhaps soon have an answer to his question on what stance councils will take on the council tax freeze.

Bob Doris (Glasgow) (SNP):

Is the cabinet secretary aware that in 1993 the Conservative Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Employment, Miss Ann Widdecombe, messed up a Government review of equal pay gloriously by including a retrospective limit of only two years in the Sex Discrimination and Equal Pay (Remedies) Regulations 1993? Does he agree with Unison's submission to the Finance Committee's review of single status agreements that that

"seriously undermined the ability of local government employers and trade unions to accurately project the costs of equal pay during single status negotiations in 1999"?

Does he further agree that any additional financial support to local authorities for equal pay should come from south of the border and that we should look to successive incompetent United Kingdom Governments to pick up the bill?

John Swinney:

Presiding Officer, this has been a fascinating afternoon. We have had a reminder of Mr Stevenson's honeymoon and a reminder of Ann Widdecombe. Heaven knows what is coming next.

Obviously, there have been long-running problems in resolving the issues of equal pay. The Government's stance is to encourage local authorities and trade unions to make progress on resolving the issues. Clearly, if resources can be made available through the UK Government to support the settlement of equal pay and single status claims, the Scottish Government will not stand in the way of any such generosity.

Des McNulty (Clydebank and Milngavie) (Lab):

At a recent meeting of the Scottish women's budget group that both the cabinet secretary and I attended, the point was made that some local authorities that had reached agreement and paid out in settlement of single status claims were now facing, for a second time round, further claims for a subsequent period. Will he take account of the fact that asking ratepayers and council tax payers to pay twice for the same deal is fundamentally unsatisfactory? We cannot ask people to keep paying for claims that are not properly resolved. Does he recognise that the Scottish Government has a responsibility for ensuring that the interests of council tax payers are properly protected and that the claims are dealt with properly?

John Swinney:

As I said to Mr McLetchie, local authorities are independent institutions and are therefore able to manage their own resources. I say that to put on record that I think that it is for local authorities, trade unions and employees to resolve the issues. Having said that, I think that Mr McNulty makes a fair point. If the issues are to be resolved at local authority level, they should be resolved on one occasion and in a fashion that does not expose the authority to further claims at a later date. For example, there is no point in sorting out the equal pay element and not sorting out the single status element, because that will simply create a problem that will return as a burden on council tax payers. I encourage those who are attempting to resolve the issues to bear that in mind.


Capital Funding (Edinburgh)

To ask the Scottish Executive what further discussions it plans to have with City of Edinburgh Council regarding capital funding. (S3O-2114)

The Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Sustainable Growth (John Swinney):

The Government is providing record levels of investment for local government, including support for capital infrastructure projects, in the forthcoming local government finance settlement. I have accepted the need to look further at the additional pressures on Edinburgh as Scotland's capital city. The results of a study on that will be discussed with the council when they become available.

Sarah Boyack:

Is the minister aware that the Scottish National Party-Liberal Democrat council believes that it now faces a £20 million increase in the cost of the third wave of the schools programme for Edinburgh, which the SNP promised during the election campaign that it would match brick by brick? In his review, will he commit to looking seriously at what the council's education leader has called a "last ditch" attempt to persuade the Government that the situation in Edinburgh is desperate? Will he accept that, without Scottish Government help, Edinburgh simply will not get the new schools that we desperately need?

John Swinney:

I assure Sarah Boyack that the Government engages in regular discussions with the City of Edinburgh Council. We take seriously the issues that local authorities raise with us. I am quite sure that there will be further discussions on the point. I had a fruitful and productive meeting with the leader of the council just before Christmas, and I am sure that we will have other opportunities to address the points that Sarah Boyack made. It is very important to sustain investment in our school infrastructure The Government is contributing formidably with a significant increase of 13 per cent in the capital expenditure that is available to local authorities in the coming financial year. That will contribute significantly to tackling some of those issues and demands.

Margo MacDonald (Lothians) (Ind):

The Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Sustainable Growth knows that I am thinking, "So far, so good," about the capital city supplement. However, I urge him to take on board the question that Sarah Boyack asked and which I am going to repeat. Will he match, brick for brick, the cost of building new schools in Edinburgh? The situation is as serious as that.

John Swinney:

The Government has made significant resources available to local authorities. I made the point that we have put into the system a 13 per cent increase in capital budgets for local authorities in the current financial year. Of course, we will continue to have discussions with the City of Edinburgh Council, during which ministers will address issues of concern to the council.


Textile Industry (Borders)

To ask the Scottish Executive what it is doing to help the textile industry in the Scottish Borders. (S3O-2059)

The Minister for Enterprise, Energy and Tourism (Jim Mather):

Scottish ministers provide a wide range of support to the textile industry throughout Scotland, including the Borders, through the enterprise networks, Scottish Development International and regional selective assistance, which is our national scheme of financial assistance to industry. In addition, we held a lengthy consultation session with senior members of the textile sector in November. The textile team in Scottish Enterprise works closely with the industry to raise its profile, to forge collaborative links in complementary technologies, to support skill development and to deliver the national textile industry strategy "Scotland at the cutting edge: a strategy for the textiles industry in Scotland 2007-2010". In addition, textile companies can rely on a broad range of business support services that are offered by Scottish Enterprise Borders through the business gateway and the account management mechanism. Our Scottish manufacturing advisory service also delivers specialist advice to manufacturing companies Scotland-wide.

John Lamont:

The minister will be aware of the proud tradition of textiles in the Borders and of the challenges that the industry has faced in recent years. Indeed, in the past few months, there have been significant job cuts in a number of mills across the region, including at Pringle of Scotland in Hawick. What does the Scottish Government intend to do to protect Scottish textile firms from overseas firms that are often able to dramatically undercut our industry while giving the impression that they are producing Scottish goods?

Jim Mather:

We are working more closely than ever with the industry. Last week, I had a meeting with representatives of the industry and some Chinese consultants that the industry brought here. They were reinforcing the goal set by the industry at the consultation session, which was essentially about making the industry stand tall in Scotland, making it carve out a niche in the luxury goods market, and protecting current employment. All of that will be further fulfilled when we have our second meeting with the textile sector.

I make an offer to the member. If there is sufficient appetite in the Borders to bring together the textile companies with the local authority, Scottish Enterprise and SDI, I will be more than happy to engage at that level and do the same as we have done in North Ayrshire and my constituency to focus on the sector in situ and further differentiate it from that locus.

Christine Grahame (South of Scotland) (SNP):

Those are encouraging words from the minister, but they come too late not only for the Pringle workers but for those at J Barbour and Sons in Galashiels, where many jobs were lost recently. Will the minister's officials enter into discussions with Scottish Enterprise to determine whether some of the public funding that Barbour received can be retrieved? Does he share my concern over the company delaying contact with Government and enterprise agencies? Given that it did not make contact before announcing the closure, will he ask his officials to determine whether, if the company had sought help at an earlier stage, support could have been made available to it to avoid the job losses?

Jim Mather:

I agree with the member's description of the impact of the job losses. Coming from a rural constituency, I know the enormous impact on a rural area of the loss of 46 jobs. I will commit to looking at the retrieval potential and to looking again at what more we can do to move things forward. I repeat the offer that I made to John Lamont of a focused session in the Borders on the issue, the aim of which is to bring together hearts and minds and identify all the stakeholders that contribute to the sector.

When we ran the session for the electronics sector, we heard of their appetite to have suppliers and customers in the room, too. They said that that could square the circle of trying to identify the best way of moving forward. My big sadness is to see Scottish companies go when all that may have been required was further innovation and a little bit more courage. The message from the Chinese consultants was that the luxury market out there, which includes an appetite for Scottish goods, has yet to be sated. We should be satisfying that appetite.


Efficiency Savings

To ask the Scottish Executive what progress has been made in identifying efficiency savings in the budget. (S3O-2121)

We are making good progress in identifying efficiency savings across portfolios and will publish our efficiency delivery plans by the end of March 2008.

Will the cabinet secretary assure me that the savings will be used not to balance the budget, but to expand front-line services, as happened under the previous Labour-Liberal Democrat Executive?

John Swinney:

The purpose of the efficiency programme is to ensure that we can invest the greatest possible proportion of resources in front-line services. I think that everyone believes that there is an opportunity to improve the efficiency and design of public services to achieve more from the resources that are available to us. I reassure Patricia Ferguson on that. The Government's objective for its efficiency programme is to ensure that we expand investment in front-line services. I am glad that that commands support across the chamber.


Quangos

8. George Foulkes (Lothians) (Lab):

Given yesterday's statement, I may be able to anticipate the answer, but I will put the question nonetheless.

To ask the Scottish Executive what progress it has made towards its objective of a 25 per cent reduction in the number of quangos. (S3O-2122)

The Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Sustainable Growth (John Swinney):

My recollection is that a statement was made to Parliament yesterday by the First Minister in which he set out how the Scottish Government will exceed our 25 per cent target and bring the number of national public organisations to around 120 in 2011, which is the lowest number since devolution.

George Foulkes:

I am overwhelmed that all my written questions and this oral question elicited yesterday's statement. I am only sorry that the finance secretary was gazumped by someone else making it.

I will not repeat all the political arguments that were made yesterday and which have been repeated today. I return to the question that Des McNulty raised yesterday. I am genuinely concerned that putting the Mobility and Access Committee for Scotland together with the Public Transport Users Committee for Scotland will reduce the power and effectiveness of disabled representation. Yesterday, the First Minister said that the Public Transport Users Committee can recommend, whereas MACS can only advise. I cannot see the practical difference between advising and recommending.

Question please.

I hope that the finance secretary will think again about the issue, or at least say that he will have another look at it, to ensure that the interests of disabled passengers are not overlooked.

John Swinney:

The Government's intention in relation to access to public transport will most definitely not result in the interests of disabled people being overlooked in any way. We want to ensure that we have an effective channel of communication for all transport users so that we can hear clearly and directly in the round the input from disabled people.

I give George Foulkes the assurance in all seriousness that the Government is determined to ensure that effective channels of communication are in place so that we can hear the concerns and aspirations of disabled people in relation to access to public transport. We are putting in place a more effective channel of communication that will give a more decisive voice to people with disabilities. When designing the arrangements in the period ahead, we will bear in mind the concerns that George Foulkes has expressed and that Mr McNulty expressed yesterday.

Can the cabinet secretary answer a question that the First Minister dodged earlier today? What percentage reduction in cost will there be for taxpayers as a result of the reduction in the number of quangos?

John Swinney:

Earlier today I was sitting beside the First Minister, who answered the question that he was asked simply and clearly. He said that the reduction in the number of quangos is part of the Government's programme, which is designed to deliver 2 per cent efficiency savings across the board. He identified a saving of about £25 million from the measures that we are putting in place. That is the clearest possible answer that Mr Brown could be looking for on how the initiative fits into the Government's wider programme of delivering a more efficient and simpler structure of government in Scotland. I assume that that aspiration is shared by members from all parties.

David McLetchie (Edinburgh Pentlands) (Con):

My question relates to the First Minister's camouflage of the quangos that we heard about this morning and to his announcement of a policy of no compulsory redundancies. Will the cabinet secretary confirm that the Scottish Government's policy of no compulsory redundancies did not apply to Mr Dougie Donnelly?

John Swinney:

My honest opinion is that Mr McLetchie's question needed a bit of camouflage. We have been around these houses before, and we will probably have to go around them a few more times. We are merging two organisations, with two chairs, into one. There is a requirement to provide one chair for the organisation to take it forward. The Government has taken a sensible, pragmatic approach to that change. I should have thought that sensible, pragmatic measures would have appealed to Mr McLetchie, of all people.

Patricia Ferguson (Glasgow Maryhill) (Lab):

I draw the cabinet secretary's attention to the way in which the Scottish Arts Council and Scottish Screen are being merged to form a new organisation, creative Scotland. The process did not require either of the chairs of the two predecessor bodies to be sacked. The method is working well, and I recommend it to the cabinet secretary. Is he aware of that way of doing things?

John Swinney:

I hear the example that Patricia Ferguson cites, but the Government is taking a fresh approach to the issue of sport. We are drawing together sportscotland and the Scottish Institute of Sport to provide a comprehensive, clear approach to the development of sport in Scotland and are putting together the leadership arrangements to make that happen.


Budget 2008-09 (Policy Priorities)

To ask the Scottish Executive what its policy priorities are for the 2008-09 budget. (S3O-2130)

The Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Sustainable Growth (John Swinney):

Our policy priorities for the 2008-09 budget are set out in our spending review. In preparing the budget, the Government has remained focused on achieving its central purpose—to create a more successful country, with opportunities for all of Scotland to flourish, through increasing sustainable economic growth.

James Kelly:

Given the importance of the completion of the M74 to the west of Scotland economy and to my constituents in Cambuslang and Rutherglen in particular, and given the M74's strategic importance to the 2014 Commonwealth games, will the cabinet secretary confirm that the budget will include spending to formalise tenders for the project, so that it can be completed by 2011?

John Swinney:

The Government is absolutely committed to the completion of the M74. We are currently examining the tender for the contract, in association with Glasgow City Council and other local authorities that are partners in the project. Decisions will be taken in due course. The issue will be resolved in the context of the spending settlement that the Government has announced.

Alex Neil (Central Scotland) (SNP):

I draw the cabinet secretary's attention to one of the budget priorities—that of reducing fuel poverty in Scotland—and point out to him that, as a result of the recent energy price increases, the additional VAT revenue obtained by the Treasury next year will be around £175 million. Will he urge the United Kingdom Government to use that money—and to give us our share of it—to address the increasing problem of fuel poverty that has resulted from the energy price increases?

John Swinney:

Bearing in mind the significant increases in the cost of fuel and the impact that they have had on household energy prices, it is clear that fuel poverty is a significant problem. Mr Neil can be assured that this Government will do everything in its power to ensure that Scotland benefits from resources to which we are entitled. As the First Minister simply pointed out at First Minister's question time, Scotland generates significant resources for the United Kingdom for which we receive not a penny. Scotland should benefit from its natural resources—that is long overdue.


Environmental and Ethical Schemes (Business)

10. Bill Wilson (West of Scotland) (SNP):

To ask the Scottish Executive whether it is aware of Scottish, United Kingdom, European and international schemes and awards designed to recognise or support businesses that achieve excellence with regard to environmental and ethical criteria, such as the CommunityMark programme of Scottish Business in the Community and the green tourism business scheme. (S3O-2093)

The Minister for Enterprise, Energy and Tourism (Jim Mather):

I am aware of a wide range of schemes and awards, including CommunityMark; the green tourism business scheme; vision in business for the environment of Scotland; the Carbon Trust's low-carbon building award; and environmental management systems. I encourage Scottish companies to seek suitable recognition in those areas. The Scottish Government welcomes activities that seek to raise awareness and understanding in the business community through the promotion and recognition of best practice in order to encourage action.

Bill Wilson:

Will the Scottish Government consider varying business rates according to companies' performance, as measured by some or all of the criteria that have been adopted by those schemes and awards—for example, by rewarding companies for complying with the Government's objective of reducing greenhouse gas production?

Jim Mather:

That is an interesting idea, but on the table at the moment are pragmatic reasons why measures such as the green tourism award allow Scottish businesses to appeal to the discerning visitor, create a climate for repeat and regular visits, lower costs and increase margins and turnovers. Such incentives are in place as part of an effective market and I am keen for them to have more publicity so that more people want to take part in them and see the advantages of doing so.


Police Pensions (Additional Funding)

To ask the Scottish Executive whether additional funding will be allocated by the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Sustainable Growth under the spending review to meet police pension liability over the next three years. (S3O-2141)

The Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Sustainable Growth (John Swinney):

In my statement to Parliament on 13 December, I stated that funding for police pensions is included in the local authority funding settlement. It is for police boards to negotiate budgets with their constituent local authorities. Indeed, there was a positive meeting last week with ministers and representatives of the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities, the Association of Chief Police Officers in Scotland and police board conveners at which police pensions were discussed. The meeting confirmed that it is for councils, police authorities and chief constables to address pensions pressures.

Pauline McNeill:

Is the cabinet secretary aware that in year 2 of the spending review, the shortfall in police pensions in Strathclyde—the largest police board area—is £27 million, which Strathclyde Police has described as "problematic" for the police budget if it is not resolved?

Will the cabinet secretary confirm that that figure for year 2 is correct? Will he also confirm today that the Government will live up to its responsibility for police pensions? Does he accept that, if we do not resolve the problem of the shortfall in police pensions, which is £50 million over three years for Strathclyde, it will definitely eat into the police operational budget and affect the ability to recruit new officers?

John Swinney:

All I can say to Pauline McNeill is what I said in my earlier answer. I made it clear in my statement on 13 December that funding for police pensions is included in the local authority funding settlement.

On our approach to the matter, the payment of pension liability is a statutory duty on police authorities. The Government has put resources into the local authority funding settlement to allow for that to be undertaken. The issue can be most effectively pursued by doing what the Cabinet Secretary for Justice and I are doing and encouraging dialogue involving local authorities, police authorities and chief constables to ensure that we get a well worked out and sustainable approach to supporting our police service in all the challenges that it faces. That is what this Government is determined to do.


Additional Funding (Edinburgh)

To ask the Scottish Executive what progress is being made in discussions regarding the allocation of additional funding for public services and affordable housing in the city of Edinburgh. (S3O-2085)

The Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Sustainable Growth (John Swinney):

For 2008-09, Edinburgh has been allocated nearly £8 million through the open market shared equity pilot scheme to assist first-time buyers. The city's allocation from the affordable housing investment programme will be announced in due course. I have also accepted the need to look further at the additional pressures on Edinburgh as Scotland's capital city, and a study on that subject is under way.

Ian McKee:

Last week, the cabinet secretary resisted the temptation offered by the Liberal Democrats to say the wrong three words to Margo MacDonald and instead promised a capital city supplement for Edinburgh. In view of the urgent need, will he not only keep that promise under continuing review but consider further measures to tackle the severe shortage of affordable housing in the city?

John Swinney:

As I said in my first response, the allocation of support for Edinburgh through the affordable housing investment programme will be announced in due course. I have made an announcement about the capital city supplement for Edinburgh, and I gave the chamber the commitment that a study on that issue, which is now under way, will be completed in time to allow me to make provision for such a supplement in the 2009-10 budget. I will most definitely keep that commitment when I come back to Parliament with the budget settlement for the next financial year.

Malcolm Chisholm (Edinburgh North and Leith) (Lab):

Does the cabinet secretary realise that, according to Professor Bramley's housing needs assessment, which was commissioned by the Scottish Government, the positive net need for affordable housing in Edinburgh is five times that of any other local authority in Scotland and that although resources for Edinburgh are twice what they were three years ago, they are still well below the per capita Scottish average? Will he take action significantly to increase housing resources to Edinburgh to meet homelessness targets as well as Edinburgh's wider social and economic needs?

John Swinney:

As well as delivering the largest local authority settlement ever in Scotland, the Government is making an allocation to the City of Edinburgh Council from the affordable housing investment programme and is taking other measures to support the capital city. I say to Mr Chisholm that Edinburgh's affordable housing problems have not simply come along in the past eight months; they have been bubbling away for a number of years, utterly unattended to by the previous Administration. This Government will do its level best to tackle those issues in the months to come.


Council Tax Regulations

To ask the Scottish Executive whether it has any plans to review existing council tax regulations. (S3O-2084)

Having made clear our intention to abolish the council tax and replace it with a fairer local tax that is based on ability to pay, we are focusing our efforts on that rather than on changes to the council tax regulations.

Michael Matheson:

I draw the minister's attention to the experience of two of my constituents who were notified a couple of months ago by the local assessor's office that their property, bought two years previously, should have been rebanded at the time of purchase but, due to an administrative error by the assessor's office, had not been. Now that the property has been moved up a band, the assessor's office has applied the rebanding retrospectively to the past two years and is holding my constituents financially liable, stating that there is no provision in the relevant regulations to waive the liability. Will the minister look into the issue to ensure that mistakes by the assessor's office are not held against constituents who simply did what they should have done and paid what they believed at the time to be the correct council tax?

Mr Matheson makes a fair point. If he will provide me with details of the case, I will most certainly look into it and try to identify whether any provision in the regulations will enable us to tackle the problem.

Derek Brownlee (South of Scotland) (Con):

Given that the new leader of the United Kingdom Liberal Democrats has made it clear that the Scottish party will not be allowed to support the Scottish National Party's local income tax proposal because it would be a fixed rate, would it not make more sense, pragmatically, for the Government to consider the regulations on council tax and to work with the Labour Party, the Conservative party and others to consider how we can make the council tax fairer, rather than go off on some hare-brained scheme that will not even attract parliamentary support? [Interruption.]

John Swinney:

I see that Margaret Curran has arrived in the chamber—suitably noisily, I must say. It is always a pleasure to work with the Labour Party when Margaret Curran is involved, and to work with the Conservative party into the bargain. Despite my avid reading of the newspapers, I had not picked up the fact that the Liberal Democrats have received fresh orders from London. In fact, I have not heard anything much from the Liberal Democrats for a considerable time. I used to hear a lot more from them when Sir Menzies Campbell was the leader, but now that there is a new regime, we do not hear anything about them.

I believe firmly that we should move from the council tax to a local income tax. I am absolutely delighted that we had in-principle endorsement from Parliament for such a step, which will deliver fairness and equity to the population. I look forward to Mr Brownlee having a conversion to the cause in the next few weeks.