Plenary,

Meeting date: Thursday, May 31, 2001

Official Report 542KB pdf

---

First Minister's Question Time

---

SCOTTISH EXECUTIVE

---

Cabinet (Meetings)

To ask the First Minister what issues will be discussed at the next meeting of the Scottish Executive's Cabinet. (S1F-01110)

The Cabinet will next meet on 5 June, when it will discuss issues of importance to the Scottish people.

I am sure that the First Minister agrees that it is important that politicians deliver on their promises to the public. I am holding a Labour party document that says that the Government is committed to bringing

"waiting lists down by at least 10,000 by the next general election".

Waiting list figures were published this morning and show that Labour has failed to deliver on that election promise. Given that Labour has failed to deliver on that key pledge from the previous election, how on earth can anyone take seriously what Labour has to offer at this election?

It would be useful if John Swinney could distinguish a party document from a manifesto commitment. However, I am delighted that we are talking about waiting lists, because the whole Parliament and the whole of Scotland will want to celebrate the fact that waiting lists reduced by 3,293 in the period from 31 December 2000.

Waiting list numbers are falling. Members have said often enough that much more has to be done. The figures are falling. More than half of Scots never join a waiting list. Eight in 10 Scots are treated within three months and, of course, the information was also published today that no patient has waited more than 12 months for in-patient and day case treatment up to 31 March 2001.

As it is a manifesto commitment, we will fulfil the promise to reduce by April 2002 the waiting list figure below that of March 1999. That is a firm commitment. Let us hear the nationalists welcome the fall in those figures.

I am just reading out what the Labour party puts through the doors of people in Scotland. The document says that waiting lists will be

"down by at least 10,000 by the next general election".

Unless I have missed something this afternoon, a general election is taking place next Thursday, and the figures are not falling fast enough.

All that I am interested in is where accountability lies. In the past two years, waiting lists have not fallen, but risen by 12,000. Perhaps that is the fault of the Liberal Democrats, entering Government and making the position worse. Who is responsible? Is it Tony Blair, who made the wrong promise in the first place? Is it the Liberal Democrats, for putting up the numbers in the past two years, or is it the First Minister for failing to deliver on his election promises?

This is the fourth question time in a row that John Swinney has failed to deliver anything in a discussion about health. When we look at the meagre contribution that his party is making to the debate on the NHS during this election campaign, the nationalists will have to acknowledge that we are on target to meet the pledges and promises that we made. We have seen a significant reduction of nearly 4 per cent in the three months to 31 March. That figure is significant.

Let us also look at the promise that has resulted in 120,000 more operations now than in 1997: in heart bypass, in angioplasty, hip replacement and knee joint replacements. We are working with the NHS to provide a great deal more. Let us talk about the biggest building programme that Scotland has ever seen. I hear Tory members saying "Ours". The Scottish people will take a great deal of convincing when they hear the Tories say "Ours" about anything that happened under the Tories in the national health service.

As the nationalists have raised the subject, let us reflect on the fact that, when we look at doctors and nurses, we can see positive achievements. There has been a £1.8 billion increase in the period 1999-2000 to 2003-04. People will see that Labour is delivering, but that all that the nationalists have are false promises. People do not know whether those promises will be delivered in this Parliament or in some far-off bit of the future where independence might be a distant hope.

The First Minister says that we are making progress. For him to deliver on his election promise, 1,000 people will have to be taken off the waiting lists every day for the next seven days. Making progress does not sound to me like the reality, when in-patient waiting times are up, out-patient waiting times are up, inequalities are up and the only thing that is down are operations, which are down by 30,000.

Is not it time that we had a Government that stopped dealing in rhetoric and started to deal in reality? Is not it time that we had a Government that delivered, and did not fail, on its promises? Is not it time that we had a Government that stands for Scotland?

That was as pathetic as it was predictable. The great thing about the SNP asking questions about health is that it is selective about what it wants to throw in. The SNP's economic policies would be ruinous for Scotland. We would see public investment slump absolutely.

Let us get back to some of the key issues, including the £0.5 billion that is being invested in the biggest hospital building programme in the history of the national health service. We are delivering record investment to transform the NHS—over £400 million more this year alone.

The First Minister has said that already.

I hear a member say that I have said that already, but facts are important in an election campaign.

The people of Scotland will see that we are delivering on our NHS commitments. The people of Scotland will treat the SNP with utter contempt, as it has nothing more to offer than a debate about fiscal autonomy and Barnett. The SNP has the ability to talk Scotland down at every possible occasion.

---

Prime Minister (Meetings)

To ask the First Minister when he will next meet the Prime Minister and, depending on the timing, what issues he plans to raise with Mr Hague or Mr Blair? (S1F-01107)

It is always useful to distinguish between optimism and sheer fantasy. There is a part of my mind that can indulge itself in fantasies at times, but it does not remotely include the prospect of the leader of the Conservative party of the United Kingdom going to Downing Street.

I last met the Prime Minister on 25 May. We have no immediate plans to meet.

I am sure that, when the First Minister meets the Prime Minister, he will fill him in—metaphorically, of course—on his plans to host the European football championships in 2008 in Scotland. As someone who shares the First Minister's interest in football, I think that all of us in the Parliament would love to see the championship come to Scotland, but I have some concerns about the cost to the public purse of going it alone.

When I see this morning's newspapers quoting figures of £40 million for building two new stadiums, I think immediately of another publicly funded project that started off at £40 million and then multiplied sixfold.

Will the First Minister continue to examine the option of a joint bid for the championships with the Republic of Ireland or Wales—as he indicated to my colleague Brian Monteith at last week's question time—or have the First Minister and the Scottish Executive now ruled that out?

David McLetchie is often inclined to start off by soaring to the mountain tops but then to end, pretty quickly, on the foothills.

We are talking about hosting one of the biggest sporting events that Scotland will ever have seen—if we can put together a bid. The European football championships are the second biggest event in football and come second only to the world cup.

It is important to recognise, as we said yesterday, that although we can all indulge in passion, and we can all indulge in pride and ambition for our country, a fundamental hard-headed approach is required. We need to look at the costs that would be involved. For any potential public investment, we must look not only at what is required for the tournament but—as the taxpayer and the people of Scotland require—at the significant sporting benefits we might get out of it in the long term.

At this stage, I can say that no option has been ruled out in looking forward to preparing a bid. I hope that we get the Parliament's support—which I would welcome—to move forward.

Last week, I gave the commitment that if we proceeded to the next stage, which is what we are now doing, I would want to inform the party leaders at an early stage about what was happening.

I thank the First Minister for that answer. I was a little baffled by his reference to mountain tops and foothills. His Executive's record on issues such as Sutherland and fishing compensation exemplifies why when it comes to the grand old duke of York—marching people up to the top of the hill and marching them down again—the First Minister is the past master.

I am pleased that the First Minister has not ruled out all the options, because there should be a practical way of bringing the tournament to Scotland. It would be a major boost to our tourist industry, sport and many other businesses.

When the Taoiseach visits Scotland in two weeks' time, will the First Minister raise with him the possibility of a joint bid? Will the First Minister encourage the Scottish Football Association to meet the Football Association of Ireland to discuss the feasibility of such a bid? Will he make that a condition of public funding for the project whenever a final decision is taken?

No option has been ruled out. At the press briefing yesterday, it was highlighted that the Welsh and the Irish had expressed interest in a joint bid. The SFA has had some very tentative discussions with the Irish football authorities, but at this stage no decision has been made. I take on board the fact that we are talking about significant sums of public investment. We are also talking about the possibility of ensuring that we can get support for a particular application if we put in a bid.

The bid for the tournament is an on-going issue and we will keep the Parliament fully involved and fully informed about what is happening. If we can pull it off, it will be an incredible development for Scotland. In the meantime, we should be hard-headed and consider every conceivable funding possibility.

The First Minister acknowledged that there would be a role for the Education, Culture and Sport Committee in taking forward the 2008 bid, particularly given our experience in the Hampden inquiry. Will he put on record his commitment to involve the committee in any subsequent discussions, particularly in ensuring that any new stadiums that are built involve private finance initiatives, and that they include substantial community development facilities and enhance grass-roots sport development at the same time?

The comments yesterday were designed to ensure that we had an inclusive approach to the tournament in 2008. When I talk about involving the Parliament, I include the Education, Culture and Sport Committee, which Karen Gillon convenes, because clearly it has an interest in the subject.

The event is a challenge not just for the Scottish Executive or the SFA, but for the whole of Scotland. That is why funding is crucial. If Scotland wants to play on the big stage of world sport, it must raise its game. That is why I look to the corporate sector and the football clubs in Scotland, the SFA and local authorities, for the team effort that will be necessary to ensure that, if we submit a bid, it has the support of the whole of Scotland. The Parliament and its Education, Culture and Sport Committee will be kept informed and involved in those developments.

---

National Health Service

To ask the First Minister what progress is being made towards improving the service delivered by the NHS to patients. (S1F-01113)

I referred earlier to the improvements that are being made. The figures that were published today show further sustained improvement in waiting in the NHS. Waiting lists on 31 March 2001 are 3,293 lower than at December 2000, and no patient waited longer than 12 months for treatment. The Executive continues to work with the NHS to deliver sustained improvement for patients through a wide-reaching programme of investment and reform.

I thank the First Minister for that answer and welcome the figures that he quoted.

I am sure that the First Minister would agree that one of the ways in which the health service can be improved is by building new hospitals. He will be aware of the urgent need for a new acute services hospital on the south side of Glasgow—the only major population centre in Scotland that did not have a new-build hospital throughout the 20th century. Will the First Minister acknowledge that when the decision is made on where that new hospital is to be sited, it will not be made simply on the basis of the cheapest option, but will take full account of the need for accessibility to all the patients in the area that it is designed to serve?

I endorse Mike Watson's points on the on-going debate. Obviously, the review is throwing up some difficult issues in Glasgow; we agree with Mike Watson that those issues must be examined thoroughly and that all the relevant factors must be considered. It is important that Greater Glasgow Health Board considers and consults on a full range of options. The genuine involvement of the public and interested organisations is vital.

That answer is set against the huge building programme in which the Executive is involved. It is important to recognise the scale of that programme. We seek not only to improve the quality of the service with our doctors and nurses—the whole range of staff members—but to ensure that we have the most modern facilities that we can provide. That will be the situation in Glasgow, as it is throughout Scotland.

I do not expect the First Minister to have an excuse to hand for every hospital in Scotland that is underperforming according to the standards that were promised at the start of the Parliament. However, I draw to his attention the current seven weeks' waiting time for women who are referred to the Western general in Edinburgh for breast examination. I invite him to agree that there is no way that we will ever make up the shortages in the specialities working in the oncology unit involved unless we have control of all Scotland's taxation and spending and call it full fiscal autonomy for the Parliament.

I was just about to say how elegant Margo MacDonald looked in her colours today, but after the last part of her question, I decided I might not want to. [Interruption.] Oh well, I will stick by the compliment that I had planned to give her.

On behalf of the people of Scotland, let us ignore the last part of Margo MacDonald's remarks. The issue is important, but not in the context of the nonsense that the SNP speaks about economic policy. Cancer is a top priority for the Executive and the NHS in Scotland. We acknowledge that breast cancer is the most common cancer in Scots women and we know that throughout Scotland, except in the Lothians, waiting times for urgent out-patient referrals range from 48 hours to two weeks. It is the Executive's intention to move on improving the quality of the service, not only in Lothian but throughout Scotland. However, to do that we need sound public investment—that is what we get from the partnership with the United Kingdom. That will continue and we will ensure that cancer services improve.

With relation to the First Minister's commitments to NHS service, perhaps he would like to comment on his manifesto 1997 pledges on health. We still have no NHS Direct, we have no public health minister, we have rising waiting lists, not shorter, we have longer cancer care waiting lists, not shorter and we have mixed-sex wards. The First Minister comments on the figures from March 31. [Members: "Get on with it."] I am coming to it—members might not like the truth, but it is coming. On March 31, the waiting list figures were dropping. Perhaps the First Minister might like to comment from today's figure of the actual waiting list, which is a rise on March 31 on the upward spiral. Perhaps he would like to admit that he has failed on all his commitments to the NHS. Rather than trying to blame the Tory hospital building plans, he should admit that he has failed.

I think that Dorothy-Grace Elder may have found in Ben Wallace a target for the Plain English Campaign. I am not sure what the point of his question was, but let me make a stab at answering what I think it was.

We have just said today that waiting lists are coming down. The figures are real and have been published, and nobody can argue with them. We endured 18 years of indifference to the NHS from the Conservative party in the United Kingdom. The Conservatives have the audacity to question our progress and our record so far, which is very formidable indeed, as I have pointed out. We should recognise that sound public investment will ensure that there will be significant improvements in every part of the NHS. A tremendous amount of work is being done on NHS 24 in Scotland, and the service will be launched in due course.

Let us talk up the health service for a change. Let us stop listening to the squeals of the nationalists and the Tories. The net effect of their policies is to increase taxes and to cut public investment. Labour wants investment in the NHS, and that is what will happen.

---

Elderly People (Care)

To ask the First Minister what it will cost annually to make personal care free for all elderly people. (S1F-01115)

The care development group, chaired by Malcolm Chisholm, will bring forward proposals for the implementation of free personal care along with an analysis of the costs by the end of August.

I am glad that the First Minister said that, because that is what I thought was the case: that the care development group had been set up not as a delaying tactic, but to analyse the cost. However, lo and behold, a press release issued by the Scottish Labour party on 18 May tells us that the cost of free personal care is actually £80 million a year. If the Scottish Labour party can put a cost on free personal care, would it not be a good idea to share that information with the Scottish Executive, so that it can stop prevaricating on the issue and get on with the job of delivering free personal care for all elderly people now?

Once again, the SNP is playing politics with an important issue for older people in Scotland. [Members: "That is not true."] It is absolutely true.

Nonsense!

John Swinney may say that it is nonsense, but let me put on record the fact that the Executive is committed to the delivery of free personal care for the elderly in Scotland. Nicola Sturgeon is raising every red herring that she can find to try to disguise the fact that we have a commitment and the SNP has not. Let us also make it quite clear that the personal care development group is considering how we can take forward free personal care and the costs involved. The best commitment that I can make today is to say that, by April 2002, we will start to implement free personal care in Scotland. It could not be clearer, so let us clear up any doubts. The SNP smokescreen has evaporated. We are committed to free personal care for our older people. [Applause.]

I call Margaret Smith.

Is it me now?

Yes.

I am sorry, Presiding Officer. There was such a racket going on.

Does the First Minister agree that the Executive's commitment to community care cannot be faulted by the Opposition parties? We have said time and again that we are committed to free personal care and to community care in general. In fact, we have delivered three times what the SNP promised in its manifesto for the Scottish parliamentary elections two years ago. Will the First Minister tell us exactly what the current timetable is for the care development group to present its plans for free personal care for the elderly? When will Malcolm Chisholm report to the chamber, what will the consultation period be, and when will free personal care be delivered for the people of Scotland?

As has been said, the development group will report to the Executive by the end of August. We will then want to move to an implementation of the policy in the spring of 2002. Again, it is a question of sound public investment. We believe that older people are important enough to have that public investment. The nationalists would leave it to the lottery of some oil projection in the future to provide that help. We are not having that. We will stick by our older population in Scotland.

We are well past the time for question time. We will move to the next item of business.