Engagements
Later today, I will join Mary Robinson, the former President of Ireland, at the launch of Scotland’s climate justice fund. The Scottish Government is providing £3 million for the fund—£1 million each year over the next three years. That will support water projects in Malawi, Rwanda, Tanzania and Zambia, which will increase the resilience of some of the world’s poorest communities to the impacts of climate change. The chamber will agree that this is an area where Scotland is providing strong leadership on a hugely important issue, and we call on other industrialised nations to share our ambitions on climate justice.
We of course support Scotland working in partnership across the world on these very important issues.
The Bank of England’s monetary policy committee has nine members, four of whom are appointed by the Treasury. We expect to be a part of the appointments process—[Laughter.] There is nothing unusual about that. For example, the chair of the Committee on Climate Change—we have just been talking about climate change—is jointly appointed. In addition, the Treasury has a non-voting observer on the monetary policy committee, and we expect to have the same representation.
Order. Let us hear the First Minister.
These are arrangements that are put in place between independent countries. It really requires a remarkably diminished view of Scotland and its position not to believe that we are entitled to the same representation as other people making the same arrangements would get. There is a United Kingdom Treasury observer on the Financial Services Advisory Board, which is a Scottish Government committee. Why should Johann Lamont think that any of these things would be unusual for an independent Scotland? As I have discussed with her before, given that we are providing £30,000 million sterling of protection for the UK balance of payments, the UK Treasury and the Bank of England will be glad to have us there.
Even by the First Minister’s standards that was an astonishing response to what was a very simple question. I think that the response to the question was that Nicola Sturgeon was wrong when she said that, and that it is about assertion, belief and hope. Of course, the problem is that the First Minister thinks that an independent Scotland would have influence on the monetary policy committee—although we do not have influence now, we will somehow have influence when Scotland is a foreign country. That simply beggars belief.
Johann Lamont is reverting to reading her script again, which indicates that, regardless of how I answer her question, she is going to get her head down and read the script. The Scottish Government and I spoke to the governor of the Bank of England on 16 February, if I remember correctly.
I have always told my children that it is not grown up just to cross your fingers and hope for the best. It is not grown up for the First Minister to be incapable of arguing for something that he has believed in for 40 years. Never mind a script, he cannot answer basic questions about simple economics in an independent Scotland.
I am answering and giving an explanation of what I believe the position would be. I am not responsible for Johann Lamont not being able to ask the right questions. I am answering the questions—[Laughter.]
Order.
I have set out the context of monetary policy and how it is administered. I have set out the shape of the monetary policy committee of the Bank of England. I have pointed out to Johann Lamont that the Bank of England has been an independent bank since 1997 to give it freedom from political determination. I have set out the reasons why it would be not just to Scotland’s advantage but to the advantage of the rest of the UK to have the sterling zone that we propose.
The sterling zone! [Laughter.]
The sterling zone is a matter that is well understood in terms of currencies and polity. [Interruption.] I do not know why the Labour Party should find such a simple explanation so—it is revealing of the Labour Party’s attitude.
I did not realise that there was a right question for me to ask the First Minister, given that the only right question that his back benchers are allowed to ask is, “Just how good are you, First Minister?”
On the proposition that we will put forward in the white paper next year and the timescale for the referendum that we have set out, I am interested in Johann Lamont’s belief that the independence campaign will lack the strength and vigour of the Tory-Labour alliance that will be set against it. The secret six met recently at Alistair Darling’s home. When I was a child, I occasionally read Enid Blyton’s books about the secret seven, and the secret six are no doubt something very similar. The Labour-Tory alliance against independence—which we see so well displayed in this chamber—will be limited in numbers, limited in enthusiasm and, above all, limited in its ambition for the people of Scotland. I know that, these days, Johann Lamont has taken to speaking on behalf of the people of Scotland, but maybe she should take the precaution of getting herself elected before she makes that presumption.
Prime Minister (Meetings)
I have no plans to meet the Prime Minister in the near future. I do not think that I can match the number of meetings between the Prime Minister and Tony Blair, which seem to be extensive.
I am not sure whether I have asked in advance whether this is the right question, but I am going to be old-fashioned and press on anyway.
There is nothing new in the principle of the arrangement, which has been in place for many years because of the totally misguided attempt by the United Kingdom Government to impose tuition fees and the necessities of European law and regulation.
The First Minister is yet again giving us the broad brush but not looking at the detail. How many of those applying were doing so under an Irish passport? That is the question that the First Minister has to answer. Yet again, he is running off to shore up his flailing education secretary, but what is interesting about Mike Russell’s letter is that he kind of contradicts himself. It comes down to this idea of domicile and residency. There is a boast in the letter when Mike Russell says that he is absolutely clear that the domicile is the deciding criterion, but in the next sentence he contradicts himself by saying that those with dual nationality get to choose. Again, we come back to whether the criterion is domicile, nationality or residency.
That was so bad that it did not even get cheers from the Labour benches.
Cabinet (Meetings)
The next meeting of the Cabinet will discuss issues of importance to the people of Scotland.
This week, the First Minister’s bulldozer came charging back out of the garage. This time, it was the Justice Committee ramming through police centralisation and crushing amendment after amendment. What is next in the bulldozer’s path? Perhaps it will be emergency control rooms. Can the First Minister guarantee that he will not close local police and fire emergency control rooms?
I am still trying to work out the bulldozer thing. The most recent bulldozer, I suppose, was during the Scottish local government elections. If I remember correctly, Liberal Democrats the length and breadth of the country, as they did in last year’s Scottish parliamentary elections, made this the centrepoint of their campaign, spreading gloom, doom and despondency around Scotland and saying that central Scottish police and fire services will not work for local communities. The only unfortunate thing—the only bulldozer in operation—was the bulldozer that the Scottish people lumped over the Liberal Democrats.
So I get no answer—absolutely no answer. The First Minister stood there before, boasting about the big numbers that his centralisation plans will save. We should not forget that, in his own consultation, his plans were rejected by two to one. He should not give me any of that tosh about the public supporting his plans for centralisation. The truth is that his changes will cost money, not save it, which is why the control rooms are under threat. People at the Scottish Police Federation think that emergency control rooms will close. Only a couple of weeks ago, a chief fire officer told Radio Scotland that he believed that closures were on the way. When will the decision be made? People rely on control rooms at Thornton, Dundee, Inverness, Aberdeen, Govan and many more places. When will they be told their fate?
The programme for police and fire reform continues according to the timetable. We have made the point that we think that within the Scottish structure we can improve local accountability.
RAF Leuchars
The Scottish Government has made strong representations to the United Kingdom Government, seeking clarity on its future plans for RAF Leuchars. The Cabinet Secretary for Parliamentary Business and Government Strategy has written repeatedly to the Secretary of State for Defence, setting out our continued concerns and calling for a meeting with UK ministers to discuss the defence transformation issues that are affecting Scotland. The Minister of State for the Armed Forces has agreed to that meeting, which I understand will take place on 14 June.
It is almost a year since the Secretary of State for Defence announced the closure of RAF Leuchars. We have had no further details of its transition to an Army base, so I welcome the First Minister’s statement. As he will appreciate, the whole community has been extremely perturbed by the absence of information, so anything that he can do to provide that information will undoubtedly be appreciated.
I absolutely give that assurance. In the contacts that we have had with the UK Government on this matter, we have consistently made the exact point about risk that Roderick Campbell identifies. At his meeting with the minister of state, the cabinet secretary will rigorously reinforce that message. Throughout the process, the Scottish Government has been clear that we will work with all concerned to bring about the best result that we can in the circumstances for service personnel and their families and for the communities such as Leuchars that have so proudly hosted them for so many generations.
The First Minister previously said that an independent Scotland would have just one airbase. Would that one airbase be at Leuchars or elsewhere?
The inheritance that we will get will be according to the defence review that was set out by Liam Fox when he was defence secretary. Of course, we thought that that was what we would inherit. Since then, the latest defence secretary has cast some doubt about key aspects of that, not least of which is the designation of cap badges of the Scottish regiments. I will make an arrangement with Murdo Fraser. If he can find out from his colleague in London exactly what the latest review of the defence review means for Scotland, I will be able to answer his questions comprehensively.
Healthcare (Access Target)
The patient experience survey of GP and local national health service services for 2011-12 was published this week and showed that 92.6 per cent of patients were offered the opportunity to see or speak to a doctor or nurse within 48 hours, which is above our target of 90 per cent; 85 per cent of patients were able to see or speak to a doctor or nurse within two working days; and 8 per cent were offered an appointment but the person whom they wanted to see was not available or the time was not convenient.
The Sunday Post ran an interesting front page this week. I thank the First Minister for his response, but is he really telling the Parliament that we should be confident in the patient experience survey, which covered fewer than 2 per cent of patients and had an even lower response rate on the specific question about the target on 48-hour access? If he is saying that we should be confident in the survey—which we really should not be—is he pleased that one in five practices did not reach the 90 per cent target for 48-hour access and that in some practices the rate is as low as 72 per cent?
Let me tell Richard Simpson why we should have confidence in the patient experience survey. I know that he was not in the Parliament during the session before 2007—neither was I—but if he checks, as I am sure that he will do after question time, he will find that in 2006-07 it was up to GPs to declare to NHS boards their compliance in relation to 48-hour patient access.
Business Start-ups by 18 to 24-year-olds.
Interesting new business registration statistics from the Office for National Statistics show that there were 15,530 business start-ups in Scotland in 2010, which was up 5.5 per cent on 2009. That compared with decreases of almost 1 per cent in England and almost 10 per cent in Wales in the same period. The measure of business registrations by age group is not available in that survey, but evidence from the 2012 global entrepreneurship monitor, which the University of Strathclyde collects, showed that 6 per cent of people aged 18 to 24 in Scotland were engaged in early-stage entrepreneurial activity, compared with a rate of less than 3 per cent in England.
The First Minister will be aware that, on Monday, the private sector-funded £82.5 million business start-up loan scheme was established in England. Does he think that he has already covered his responsibility to do that in Scotland or does he think that additional resources need to be gathered and used effectively, to ensure that young Scottish businessmen and women have the opportunity to establish themselves in the years to come?
I saw the report and the suggestion that seemed to be made that the scheme is using private sector funding. My understanding now is that it is not private sector funding, although a number of companies are facilitating the process of the loan scheme. I have looked for information on the scheme for the past couple of days and it has not been immediately forthcoming, if I can put it as gently as that, but my understanding—I will give Alex Johnstone a correction if this is not the case—is that the initiative is being run as a pilot scheme that is funded by United Kingdom Government departments. I am suspicious of that. As he probably knows, pilot schemes can be non-Barnetted, and the scheme is for England only. If I find out that Government money is being deployed in the scheme, which seems to be interesting, I hope that I will have the whole Parliament’s support on the point that Barnett consequentials should flow to Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.
I know that members will wish to join me in welcoming Mary Robinson, former President of Ireland and former United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, who joined us in the gallery during First Minister’s questions. [Applause.]