³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ

Plenary, 08 Mar 2001

Meeting date: Thursday, March 8, 2001

Official Report 649KB pdf

---

First Minister's Question Time

---

SCOTTISH EXECUTIVE

---

Secretary of State for Scotland (Meetings)

To ask the First Minister when he next plans to meet the Secretary of State for Scotland and what issues he intends to raise. (S1F-898)

First of all, I would like to identify myself with international women's day. Equally important, I congratulate, in a bipartisan way, the Parliament and all the political parties on the contribution that they are making to equality of opportunity. In that context, I welcome the fact that Linda Fabiani has been promoted to be the adviser on sartorial elegance to the leader of the Opposition.

I look forward to meeting the secretary of state this weekend in Inverness.

I would love to know who the First Minister's adviser on sartorial elegance is—if he does not have one, he had better get one pretty fast.

The First Minister and I took part in a consensual occasion this morning—with Mr Jim Wallace and Mr David McLetchie—in launching the census. On another note of consensus, I associate myself with the First Minister's remarks on international women's day. I was pleased that two heroines of my constituency were able to attend a reception that the Secretary of State for Scotland hosted at Edinburgh Castle.

I welcome the long-term measures that the Executive announced this morning on decommissioning in the fishing industry. I am sure that the First Minister will be disappointed that his proposals—I presume that they are his proposals—have gone down like a lead balloon in the fishing industry. On the news at lunch time, John Buchan of the Fishermen's Action Committee expressed his despair, anger, frustration and disappointment. Alex Smith of the Scottish Fishermen's Federation expressed the view that the Executive has failed to grasp the short-term issue.

Last week, the First Minister said that he appreciated the urgency and the short-term nature of the problem. Why at that time did he raise expectations among the 25,000 people whose livelihoods depend on the fishing industry only to dash them this morning?

In relation to raising expectations, it is important to mention the context. We are delivering £27 million—the biggest-ever financial package for Scotland's fishing industry. Let us inject a bit of balance into the lunch time commentaries. Hamish Morrison, on behalf of the SFF, said that fishing leaders had said that they were happy with the money that the Executive had pledged to the industry but believed that part of the £25 million decommissioning package should have been used to fund a compensated tie-up scheme. Let me say this: we are investing £27 million in the fishing industry because, like the industry, we believe that we need to secure a long-term sustainable fishing industry. Unlike the case in previous years and in previous decommissioning, the investment will not be spread over a number of years; it will be spent this year.

We had a constructive meeting yesterday with fishermen and their representatives. They brought the same passion and candour to those discussions that they bring to every part of Scotland when they talk about their industry. Some reflection is required. The investment is significant. We want a long-term future for the industry. I am glad that John Swinney has at least said that he welcomes the income. That is not something that Alex Salmond has yet been able to do.

My colleagues made it quite clear this morning, as the SNP has always done, that we support decommissioning measures for the fishing industry. The First Minister is in enormous difficulty if he cites Hamish Morrison on this issue. The quote that he used vindicates absolutely the point that I was making, which is that decommissioning is welcome but that there is a short-term problem, for up to four weeks, until the minister's conservation measures come into place.

There is a tie-up scheme—

The Deputy Minister for Rural Development (Rhona Brankin) indicated disagreement.

I see the fisheries minister shaking her head. This morning, she told Parliament that it was not possible to have a tie-up scheme, despite the fact that the Government of Belgium has been able to negotiate one with the European Union for 18 days' time, which is now being paid for in Belgium.

As the First Minister knows so much about the fishing industry—so much more than the fishermen themselves—will he tell fishermen what they are supposed to do for the next four weeks, until the conservation measures come in? Have they to go to sea and slaughter the fish stocks, or are they to stay at home and go bankrupt? Is it slaughter at sea or bankruptcy at home? Which one is it?

That contribution certainly generated more heat than light. Today, the Parliament heard—we used the chamber for the purpose—about a £27 million investment in the future of the industry. We believe that the long-term objectives are crucial. I do not want to pay fishermen to be in port; I want us to put money into a scheme that allows fishermen to fish. That is the essence of what we are trying to do. That is why we want to take decisions for the long and medium term, not to grab a headline today.

The fact is that we need a sustainable, viable industry. I invite the SNP to sign up to that declaration because, one, two or three years from now, we will be able to look back at this point in time and say that we secured long-term investment in the industry. Surely that is an aspiration that we must all embrace.

The First Minister is not listening to what the people who represent the fishing industry and fishing communities are saying—not a word. He has told us that we must invest everything in the long term. I have expressed our support for the long-term measures, but we will never get to the long term if we do not get the short-term measures correct. He has said that he is not prepared to pay fishermen to be in port, so I take it that he wants the Scottish fishing industry to go to sea and slaughter our long-term fishing stocks. Is that what he wants?

If John Swinney had listened to my fisheries minister, he would know that the essence of this issue is conservation. Linked to the decommissioning scheme were other measures that were announced this morning, which will complement the conservation attempt. In addition, £1 million is being put in immediately to help to take forward some of the ideas of the fish processing working group that has been established. I reject John Swinney's accusation that we are simply not listening. If we are not listening, why have we announced today a £27 million investment in the future of the industry?

We want partnership to work. We have said that to the industry. When I was with Hamish Morrison yesterday, I said that we would put a package to the Parliament. I agreed when he asked whether we could discuss further the implementation of the package. I am perfectly happy to do that if he wishes.

We have talked about fairness and about progress. We are achieving both.

---

Prime Minister (Meetings)

To ask the First Minister when he will next meet the Prime Minister and what issues he plans to raise. (S1F-890)

I want to ask the First Minister when he will next meet the Secretary of State for Scotland and what issues he plans to raise.

That is not the question on the business bulletin.

Is it not? I beg your pardon; I should have said the Prime Minister. Well then, when does the First Minister want to meet his great friend the Prime Minister and what issues does he intend to raise with him?

It is not often that one has two sessions with David McLetchie in one day, so I will forgive that lack of memory.

I am pleased to say that the Prime Minister will be with us in Inverness this weekend.

It is perhaps appropriate that the First Minister styled himself as a bit of a fashion guru earlier in first minister's questions, as new Labour is a triumph of style over substance. If the First Minister and the Prime Minister can tear themselves away from the glossy brochures, they might get round to discussing the implications of the budget for Scotland. In his budget, the Chancellor of the Exchequer failed to reverse the damaging stealth taxes that have increased the burden of taxation on Scots by the equivalent of 10p on the basic rate of income tax since Labour came to power. Does the First Minister agree that the budget was an opportunity missed by the chancellor—our pick-pocket chancellor—to right some of his previous wrongs?

I was not advocating sartorial elegance on my part, but if John Swinney's adviser is paid more than the minimum wage, I may want to avail myself of those services.

To talk about the budget in any sense other than as a success for Scotland is to miss the point. David McLetchie has asked where Scotland will benefit. Of course it will benefit. What the country needs to know, if we could ever get a straight answer out of Michael Portillo, is what will happen in terms of the public expenditure cuts that the Conservatives are advocating if they win the next election.

The budget is a courageous one for Scotland, investing as it does in enterprise, fairness for pensioners, attacking the productivity challenge, making sure that more children move out of poverty, and helping families. The budget hits at the core of what Scotland needs—a balanced budget. Of course, when we consider the breathtaking announcement on the national debt, we see the real contrast between Labour prudence, Labour stability and the boom-and-bust era that we witnessed over 20 years under the Conservatives.

Of course, the First Minister of all people should not believe everything that Mr Blair's spin doctors tell him about the budget, as they are usually trying to stab him in the back. The only cuts that the Conservatives plan to make are cuts to Labour's taxes, cuts to Labour's waiting lists and cuts to Labour's red tape. The truth of the matter is that Labour has imposed 45 new stealth taxes on the people of this country since 1997, which is equivalent to nearly £700 per household. Despite that, our public services are not getting any better. Hospital waiting lists are longer, crime is rising and standards in our schools are falling. When will the First Minister wake up to the fact that his Executive has failed the people of Scotland on those fundamentals?

On a point of order, Presiding Officer.

Is it a real point of order?

I seek your guidance, Presiding Officer, on whether this matter is relevant to the Scottish Executive.

We are in danger of wandering away from the responsibilities of the Parliament. First Minister, can you bring us back?

I do not think that any of us is willing to listen to a lecture on school standards, hospital standards and public expenditure from a party that spent 19 years making sure that its free-market policies did not result in an improvement to the quality of life of the people whom we are now seeking to help. We can talk about pensioners, because they are getting an income. We can talk about schools, education and health, because they are getting £2 billion extra to spend. We can talk about families. We can talk about getting children out of poverty.

The question for the Tories is this: they started off with £16 billion of cuts. Michael Portillo said that they will now accept Labour's expenditure for the first year. That brings the amount down to between £8 billion and £10 billion. Add on £2 billion. Where will the Tories get the £12 billion of cuts? Let us have no lectures on standards in schools. The election of a Tory Government will mean drastic cuts to the things that we have fought for over the past four years.

---

Fishing Industry

To ask the First Minister what measures the Scottish Executive intends to introduce to safeguard juvenile haddock stocks in the North sea and to address any wider concerns in the fishing industry. (S1F-903)

We announced this morning a £27 million package of support for the industry, including up to £25 million for decommissioning during the coming year. Today, we shall also consult on proposals for legislation to improve further the selectivity of fishing gear. Those measures will reduce discards by up to 70 per cent this year.

Is the First Minister aware that the Government's decision this morning to kick the fishing industry when it is down has effectively issued redundancy notices to hundreds of fishermen in the short term and perhaps thousands in the long term? Does he accept that, as John Swinney explained, a tie-up scheme is perfectly possible, as has been shown in Belgium? Will he confirm—this is an important point—whether he will allow the renegotiation of the financial package to allow a compensated tie-up scheme to be incorporated into the package, if that is what the industry wishes, to allow the Government to deliver for our fishing communities in their hour of need and to protect one of Scotland's most valuable and oldest industries?

We are trying to protect the industry. We are providing investment for the long-term viability and sustainability of the fishing industry. If the Government was not interested in that, why would we spend £27 million? I made the point that we believe that the balance of advantage lies in proceeding with a decommissioning scheme as quickly as possible. That is the correct way of proceeding. I invite Richard Lochhead to support the investment that we announced today.

---

Biodiversity

To ask the First Minister what action the Scottish Executive is taking to protect biodiversity. (S1F-899)

The Scottish Executive is committed to the implementation in Scotland of the UK's obligations under the Convention on Biological Diversity. In response to a question from John Home Robertson, we announced yesterday the publication of "The Nature of Scotland: A Policy Statement". It sets out the wide range of the Scottish Executive's action on biodiversity and proposes reform of policy and law on the way in which we protect Scotland's special habitats and species. It establishes a new duty on Scottish ministers to have regard to biodiversity in exercising all our functions.

I thank the First Minister for his answer. In the past, rural communities have been wary of conservation initiatives, fearing an effect on their livelihoods. How does the First Minister plan to balance the rights and responsibilities of rural communities with conservation interests to allay any such fears?

The subject is important. All Scottish authorities are developing local biodiversity action plans to try to achieve a balance in the countryside and to make a further effort in striking a balance for the species to which I referred. Some species in Scotland are under considerable threat.

---

Power Supplies

To ask the First Minister what action the Scottish Executive will initiate to ensure that disruption to power supplies in rural areas is minimised in adverse weather conditions. (S1F-900)

Last week's weather, particularly the heavy snow and high winds that were experienced in the Borders, was appalling. I fully recognise that the resultant widespread dislocation to electricity supplies caused a large number of people severe hardship, especially those in areas in which mains gas is not available. Throughout the week, I kept in close touch with Scottish Power. The Executive worked closely with Borders Council, the police and the emergency services in the areas that were worst affected, to restore power as soon as possible. I pay tribute to all concerned in responding to that severe weather emergency, but—this "but" is important—the response to all such emergencies is best led locally. Nevertheless, we will consider all actions and emergency plans to find out whether we need to conduct a review or discover the lessons that may be learned.

Is the First Minister aware of the call by the convener of Borders Council for a rolling programme of undergrounding power cables? Will his Executive take the case to Westminster and the regulator to ensure that the suppliers plan and implement appropriate action to promote undergrounding and make other appropriate investment to deal with weather such as occurred recently, particularly given the likelihood, with global warming, that recurrences will become more frequent?

I agree that global warming and associated changes in weather patterns will mean that the frequency of such weather events could increase. I am happy to take up the member's suggestion to discuss matters with the utilities and our colleagues at Westminster to find out whether further progress can be made on what would be a tremendous improvement in an area that is vulnerable because of overhead lines.

I thank the First Minister for the interest that he has taken and for intervening at key moments during last week's severe crisis. When he next sees the Secretary of State for Scotland—who was the UK minister responsible for energy—will he ask her to raise the matter with the regulator, who has a duty to ensure security of supply? Scottish Power could then undertake some of the work on undergrounding the network and reinforcement. Adequate resources must be made available for that work.

I am happy to take up that request. Many members were in touch with the Executive and me on the issue and many did much work to respond to needs in their communities. I am happy to discuss improvements that could be effected in the area with the Secretary of State for Scotland and other colleagues at Westminster.

May I recommend in the nicest possible way a ministerial trip to Siberia? Even with temperatures of minus 57 deg Celsius and the worst winter in living memory, only 6,000 Siberians were disconnected for a short time, whereas in the Scottish Borders 40,000 people were disconnected, around 5,000 of them for as long as seven days.

Perhaps I can balance up the Siberian experience with my experience in Alaska, where I experienced minus 60 deg Celsius. We might have more chance of finding out what the SNP's policies are in Siberia than we would in Scotland.

I associate myself and Euan Robson with the tribute to the emergency services. I ask the First Minister to recognise that the local authority incurred massive expenditure during those power cuts and hope that he will consider positively any request that he receives from that authority for further financial assistance in such circumstances.

Again, I applaud the efforts of Scottish Borders Council. I can also advise that we are awaiting information from that council to establish whether support can be offered under the Bellwin scheme of emergency financial assistance. We want to play our part, but we are awaiting further information.