Tax Payments (Companies in Receipt of Government Grants)
The Scottish Government is in touch with HM Revenue and Customs about a range of issues. However, questions about tax paid by individual companies that are in receipt of Scottish Government grants are covered by taxpayer confidentiality and so are not discussed. The amount of tax paid by companies in the United Kingdom is a matter for HM Revenue and Customs and the UK Government.
We welcome investment wherever it comes from, but does the minister agree that if a company has been in receipt of funding from the Scottish Government it should at least declare its financial performance and taxes paid in this country? I sought information regarding Vion UK’s tax liability through a freedom of information request, but HMRC advised me that it will refuse to reveal any information, citing a catch-all exemption.
HMRC operates within a legal framework that regards taxpayer information as confidential. There are good reasons for not disturbing that framework. However, information about tax paid by a company should be available from its published reports and accounts. Recent experience shows that such information is available and can be used to support public debate about the taxes that corporations pay.
Does the minister think that revenue Scotland would be a more efficient tax collector for Scotland than HM Revenue and Customs is? Will he say why?
From April 2015, revenue Scotland will be responsible for collecting two devolved taxes in Scotland: land and buildings transaction tax, which will replace stamp duty land tax; and landfill tax. Through revenue Scotland, we will serve the needs of the people of Scotland at a lower cost than the UK set-up does. We will therefore deliver a better system that is more in line with Scotland’s needs. We are satisfied with the work that has been done to that end thus far.
Orkney Ferry Services (Service Model Assessment)
As is noted in “Scottish Ferry Services: Ferries Plan (2013-2022)”, which was published on 19 December 2012, our intention is to take the work forward this year. Following publication of the ferries plan, I met Orkney Islands Council and agreed with the council that we will seek to conclude our consideration of its internal ferry services as quickly as possible.
The minister will be aware of concerns about lack of detail in the ferries plan that was published before Christmas, but I welcome what I understand was a constructive meeting earlier this month with Orkney Islands Council.
Perhaps it will reassure Liam McArthur to know that I said to Orkney Islands Council that we will not wait on discussions with other councils to progress what we are doing with Orkney Islands Council.
Will ministers ensure that they continue to consult hauliers, including livestock hauliers, so that the specific needs of the sector are factored into any agreement?
I am struggling to see the connection between that question and Liam McArthur’s. We consult hauliers as a matter of routine. We have done so in relation to the road equivalent tariff. We also have a process whereby we intend to have a unified, comprehensive system of commercial fares across the ferries network, and during the course of work in that regard we will of course talk to hauliers and those who transport livestock.
Blacklisting
The Scottish Government is aware of the on-going House of Commons Scottish Affairs Committee inquiry into blacklisting in employment, which was established to determine the scale of the problem and what is being done to eradicate it. We are following the progress of the inquiry and await its findings with interest.
I am sure that the minister shares my concern about recent reports of more than 50 construction workers in the north-east featuring on a blacklist—and many more across Scotland, as we know. Will he join me in congratulating Unite and all the other trade unions that are campaigning for an end to this pernicious practice? Does he agree that the forthcoming procurement bill presents an opportunity to consider measures to ensure that any firm that engages in blacklisting does not win public sector contracts?
Yes, I think that, broadly speaking, we share concerns about any proven use of blacklisting. We would all deprecate such a practice. We will take the member’s remarks under advisement and look carefully at the specific request that he has made. However, it is fair to say that we can proceed only on the basis of evidence and not on the basis of allegations. I hope that all members agree that it is in that way that we must consider these matters.
A parliamentary answer that I received last week revealed that the Forth crossing contractors’ joint venture appeared on the list of names operated by the Consulting Association, which was running the blacklist. About 400 workers across Scotland, including 70 of my constituents, appeared on the blacklist. Will the minister support my call for a Scottish Parliament inquiry into this human rights abuse?
I am aware of the answer that the Deputy First Minister provided to Mr Findlay on 22 January. A comprehensive reply has already been provided to him. I repeat that we share the general concern about blacklisting and we will follow the progress of the existing inquiry at the House of Commons closely. However, I remind members that this is a Parliament and not a court. It is not appropriate, in my view, to bandy around allegations without evidence. In that light, we must proceed with great caution in this matter, and that is the approach that we will take.
Concessionary Travel Scheme (Government Support)
Earlier today, I announced that we have reached an agreement with the Confederation of Passenger Transport on the reimbursement and funding arrangements for the national concessionary travel scheme over the next two years. The agreement is based on independent research developed in full consultation with the CPT. It is fair, robust and financially sustainable.
Surely the reality is that we will now see bus fares rise and more services lost. In the end, the price will be paid across the country by hard-pressed low-income bus users and pensioners, who will find that it is more expensive to use the bus or that there is simply no longer a bus on which to use their pass.
If the member believes that the scheme that we offer is so bad, she should compare it with some of the schemes—those that still exist—down south. She must acknowledge that an additional £10 million is being put in this year and an additional £5 million will be put in in future. We have one of the most generous schemes in these islands. It protects those people whom the Labour Party has said that it wants to look at. For example, Richard Simpson and Elaine Murray have talked about changing pensioners’ entitlement. We are not doing that. We are keeping the scheme completely as it is.
In addition to the national scheme, how many local government concessionary schemes exist in Scotland?
Local authorities across Scotland have discretionary powers to provide local concessionary schemes. The terms and conditions of each scheme are for individual authorities to decide, taking account of local needs and circumstances. Most local authorities provide local travel concessions, but the concessions and the modes of transport involved, which include ferries, rail and taxis, differ from area to area.
Mortonhall Crematorium (Stillbirth and Neonatal Death Society Lothians)
As Kezia Dugdale will be aware, I met with representatives from SANDS Lothians on 17 January. Mr MacAskill also attended the meeting in his constituency role. Following the meeting, I asked officials to explore what assistance we may be able to provide to SANDS, given the exceptional circumstances. As a result, the Scottish Government has provided the charity with some one-off funding to support its work with those affected by the practices at Mortonhall crematorium.
I welcome the additional money that is going to SANDS. I am sure that the minister agrees that SANDS does a wonderful job of supporting families who are in a very vulnerable position.
I thank the member for that question. I recognise that this is a very sensitive issue and it is important that those who have been affected by it get the answers that they require. I have no doubt that the independent investigation that Elish Angiolini will conduct, for which the City of Edinburgh Council will be responsible, will provide answers to those parents who still have questions.
The minister will be aware that the historic cremation practices at Mortonhall do not just affect Edinburgh residents. What measures are in place for parents who may have been affected from my constituency in Midlothian and the Borders, who have contacted me directly because they were not aware of what was happening? Are there measures to extend arrangements beyond Edinburgh?
I urge anyone who was directly affected by the practices at Mortonhall and wishes answers to contact the City of Edinburgh Council. It has committed to investigating every case that is reported to it and making answers available. Information is available on the council’s website, and there is a dedicated phone number and a form that can be used to contact the council. I encourage any families who may have been affected and wish answers to make use of those facilities.
Local Planning Decisions
Planning decisions should be made at the appropriate level. Whether a decision is made by the planning committee or is delegated to planning officials is a matter for individual planning authorities. Scottish ministers may occasionally call in cases for determination when they consider that it is appropriate to do so. The appeals process is also a feature of the planning system, under the provisions of the Planning etc (Scotland) Act 2006.
Those are fine words, but our experience in East Lothian does not really match them. In recent times, decisions on the Dunbar incinerator and the demolition of the Cockenzie boat repair yard have been overturned on behalf of Scottish ministers but, more notably, wind turbines at Oldhamstocks, Innerwick and East Linton that were deemed inappropriate by the local planning authority have been railroaded through on behalf of Scottish ministers, and our local capacity strategy has been simply ignored. Does the minister understand that that contempt for local democracy is undermining confidence in the planning system and unhelpfully fuelling blanket opposition to wind power?
I disagree with the member’s comments. The facts speak for themselves: Scottish Government reporters overturn a minority of local authority decisions, which just goes to show—[Interruption.] I know that Labour members do not like the facts.
Is the minister aware that local councillors’ rejection of planning permission for a pyrolysis incinerator in my constituency was overturned by reporters? Will he meet my constituents to hear their case for stopping that development?
Although I will need to stay within the statutory guidance on live planning matters that might be subject to judicial review, I am happy to meet the member’s constituents and representatives of the organisations that she referred to.
Renewable Energy Investment Fund
The fund, which is delivered by the Scottish Investment Bank on behalf of the Scottish Government, will provide bespoke investment deals in the form of loans, loan guarantees and equity finance alongside co-investment partners to accelerate renewable energy deployment.
Will the Government ensure that, with the introduction of this most welcome development fund, an increasing amount of renewable components will be manufactured and more clean power jobs created in Scotland?
Yes—and much of our work is devoted to precisely those objectives. Indeed, I was delighted to attend the all-energy conference in Aberdeen yesterday where a memorandum of understanding between Highlands and Islands Enterprise and four Highland ports—Kishorn, Ardersier, Cromarty and Nigg—was entered into. That is a move in the right direction to achieve precisely the objectives that Mr Gibson has described and to see more Scottish jobs and businesses created and more existing business benefit from renewable energy developments in Scotland.
Offpeak Train Travel (Discussions with Transport Scotland)
The Scottish Government wants to further encourage commuters to switch to offpeak services to better spread demand and encourage greater use of the train rather than the car for leisure travel. After discussions with Transport Scotland, and successful negotiation with ScotRail, a package of fare measures has been developed to make rail a more attractive and affordable option. For example, the price of offpeak train travel will not increase for the remainder of the current franchise from 2013, provided the retail prices index remains below 3.5 per cent.
Constituents in the west of Scotland have brought it to my attention that some rail travellers are missing out on offpeak train travel because they miss the threshold by one or two minutes. However, in other parts of the west of Scotland, the offpeak fare is offered before 9 o’clock in the morning. What action is being taken to address that differentiation and to prevent my constituents from having to pay higher costs?
I reassure Stuart McMillan that we are looking at services, timetables and fares and, as I have said, we have already negotiated with ScotRail a freeze on fares. Major enhancements to services in Ayrshire and Inverclyde were introduced in December to improve service frequency and increase passenger options for offpeak travel, and ScotRail is reviewing all aspects of those changes, including the timetable from Wemyss Bay. I hope that that reassures Stuart McMillan and his constituents that the matter is being looked at.