Plenary, 01 Jul 2004

Meeting date: Thursday, July 1, 2004

Official Report 691KB pdf

---

Question Time

---

SCOTTISH EXECUTIVE

---

Environment and Rural Development

---

Fishing (Public Access)

To ask the Scottish Executive whether it has any plans to improve public access to fishing on rivers. (S2O-2883)

The Executive's partnership agreement contains a commitment to improve access to watercourses for anglers and to remove prohibitive restrictions. Officials are working with all interested parties to address that and other issues relating to freshwater fisheries management.

Does the minister recall that, in April 2000, one of his predecessors—a pretty radical kind of guy—launched some alarmingly radical proposals for the improvement of public access to fishing on rivers? As the House of Lords is no longer in a position to exercise a veto on behalf of landowners in Scotland, will the minister seek an early opportunity to introduce legislation in this session to maximise public access to licences to fish on Scottish rivers?

Being a radical kind of minister, I, too, welcome the diminishing influence of their lordships and am pleased to be able to tell John Home Robertson and other members that there is a provisional slot for a fisheries bill this session. That will provide the means for repealing the Freshwater and Salmon Fisheries (Scotland) Act 1976, which would be widely welcomed. We are in the process of consulting on what we would wish to put in its place.

Does the minister agree that the best way in which to improve public access would be to repeal the notorious 1976 act and to replace it with legislation to set up a democratically constituted Scottish anglers trust that would administer all freshwater fishing in Scotland?

In the meantime, will he reject any new applications for protection orders under the 1976 act, in view of the fact that such orders would more appropriately be called exclusion orders and given that the underhand way in which the Scottish Executive dealt with the Assynt - Coigach Area Protection Order 2004 (SSI 2004/260) has been severely criticised not only by me but by the Subordinate Legislation Committee?

I dispute that the order to which Mr Canavan refers was dealt with in an underhand way. I would expand on my view if more time were available. While the existing legislation remains in force, people remain entitled to make applications and we are required to continue to deal with the applications according to the requirements of the legislation. I inform the member that I acted to ensure that the timescale of that protection order was set with reference to our parliamentary timetable.

I recognise Mr Canavan's long-standing commitment to this subject over the past 30 years or more and repeat the commitment that I gave to John Home Robertson: we intend to repeal the Freshwater and Salmon Fisheries (Scotland) Act 1976 and replace it with more modern mechanisms, which will include the trusts to which the member refers.

---

Renewable Energy Targets

To ask the Scottish Executive what the impact on the environment will be of meeting its renewable energy targets for 2010 and 2020. (S2O-2991)

The ambitious targets that we have set for renewable energy reflect our desire to protect Scotland's environment by reducing harmful greenhouse gas emissions. Any environmental impact issues raised by individual developments will continue to be properly and thoroughly assessed against robust planning guidelines.

Does the minister accept the recent comments made by the Enterprise and Culture Committee about renewable energy? Does he recognise that the establishment of wind farms across Scotland will result in little reduction in CO2 emissions, given that the constant back-up that wind energy requires will always produce CO2 emissions? Does he agree that the extension of the 400kV transmission lines that will be required if wind farms are erected across Scotland will be detrimental to the environment of Scotland?

The member has raised two separate issues. First, in setting the 40 per cent target, the Scottish Executive made it clear that we were keen that there should not be a reliance on wind power and that wave and tidal power should play an integral part in achieving the target. That is why the Scottish Executive is pursuing the question of an intermediary technology institute in Aberdeen and why we are funding the research institute in Orkney. I believe that wave and tidal power will make a major contribution to a seriously sustainable energy supply. Secondly, the Scottish Executive is anxious to work with the Office of Gas and Electricity Markets and the British electricity trading and transmission arrangements to ensure that improvements to the infrastructure and the grid are made in a way that does not disadvantage Scottish consumers and that will give us the opportunity of developing renewable energy over the widest possible geographical area.

Picking up on the points that Phil Gallie raised, does the minister accept that linking his remarks with the committee report that was published yesterday is a total distortion of anything that the committee, of which I am the convener, said in its conclusions? Secondly, does he agree that the successful development of renewable energy will necessitate the strengthening of the grid, given that most of that development will take place around the coasts and in the rural areas of Scotland, far from the market for electricity? Does he also agree that it is not sufficient just to rely on market forces to provide the finance for or the direction of that strengthening?

Obviously it is disappointing for the convener of the committee to find his report being distorted by another member in the chamber. I see that Mr Gallie is looking suitably chastised. [Interruption.] Mr Morgan may laugh, but I can only say that that is how it looked to me—he might be getting a different view from where he is.

The matter of the grid is extraordinarily important, as the Scottish Executive has consistently acknowledged. On sharing costs and pump priming, I go back to the latter part of my answer to Mr Gallie. Those matters are dependent on our engaging with Ofgem and BETTA. The arrangements for sharing costs on a United Kingdom basis—not something that Mr Morgan might want to advocate—would be of great benefit to Scotland and the development of its renewable resource.

As a member of the Enterprise and Culture Committee, I associate myself with the convener's remarks about the report's findings. Is the minister aware that one of those findings is that energy demand reduction is a vital component of any Scottish energy policy? Will he therefore support measures to increase energy efficiency as a way of conserving the environment?

Absolutely. Indeed, as the member is aware, we have done so. Comparatively recently, we took measures to change the building control regulations to improve the energy efficiency of new build. That has to play its part. However, there are always two sides. We need to try to dampen down demand at the same time as trying to increase the amount of dedicated renewable resource.

---

Planning (Third-party Right of Appeal)

To ask the Scottish Executive what input its Environment and Rural Affairs Department has had to the consultation on the third-party right of appeal in respect of planning applications with an environmental impact. (S2O-2967)

It is normal practice for relevant departments in the Scottish Executive to liaise on work that cuts across their respective interests. My officials have worked with colleagues in the Development Department during the preparation of the consultation paper on rights of appeal in planning.

I hope that the minister will bear in mind the example of Dunbeth park in Coatbridge, where the public-private partnership, if it is allowed to proceed, will result in the removal of natural parkland and the loss of habitat and trees—the lungs of the surrounding area. Floodlights, security fencing, Astroturf and entrance charges will also be introduced. Will he ensure that those things do not happen? Bearing in mind that environmental impact, will he use his good offices to put pressure on all concerned to ensure that the community cannot be ignored and that a third-party right of appeal will be assured?

Those are two quite separate matters. First, as the Minister for Communities will confirm, any application for a development of that magnitude requires to be accompanied by an environmental impact statement. Indeed, the member is well aware that the decision was the subject of a call-in by Scottish ministers and the reporter who was appointed duly came to a conclusion based on the evidence, which included an environmental impact assessment.

Secondly, reform of the planning system involves consideration of a wide range of issues, including third-party right of appeal, on which the Executive is currently consulting. However, the third-party right of appeal alone will not resolve the complex matter on the site to which the member referred. With all due respect, even if there had been wider public access to appeal, some form of arbitration would still have been required at the end of that process—it is likely that reporters or other arbiters would still have had to have been appointed to make a final determination, notwithstanding any extension of the right of appeal. Land designation is an issue that requires the right control measures to be in place at the outset. I understand what the member says, but I do not believe that a third-party right of appeal is a panacea for dealing with such issues.

I am grateful for the minister‘s response to Carolyn Leckie's question. Does he agree that, although the merits of introducing a third-party right of appeal must be carefully considered, the planning system needs to engage with communities effectively at an early stage to ensure that bad planning decisions are avoided? Given that a third-party right of appeal will not always ensure that communities get the decisions that they want, does he agree that what Scotland needs is good planning decisions and good planning law?

I acknowledge Karen Whitefield's constituency interest. I made it clear in my earlier response that I do not believe that a third-party right of appeal would have provided a panacea in this instance. I am sure that my colleague Margaret Curran would agree with me on that—indeed, she has made it clear in her consultation on the third-party right of appeal that such a right would be only one element in the planning process. Karen Whitefield's well-made points about the need to engage the public early in the process will be considered by my colleague in any reform or adjustments that she makes to the planning system.

---

Domestic Water Conservation

To ask the Scottish Executive what priority it places on domestic water conservation measures. (S2O-2921)

I am tempted to preface my remarks by saying that I make them despite the recent weather. Nevertheless, domestic water conservation measures are a high priority—and the economic and environmental benefits of conservation will be greatest—where water resources are scarce. Such measures benefit water consumers and the environment.

I concur that this might be difficult to recollect given the amount of rainfall that we have had over the past few weeks, but there was a distinct lack of water in most of our reservoirs last October and November, when drought orders had to be imposed. What additional steps do the Scottish Executive and/or Scottish Water intend to take to reduce household consumption of water? In particular, what steps can be taken to enable householders to use less water in future?

As Scott Barrie has said, there are two aspects to the issue. There is an imperative on Scottish Water to ensure that it prevents undue consumption, misuse and contamination of the water supply. Scottish Water makes use of those powers. In its water efficiency project, it is considering ways of optimising water use and of encouraging users, including domestic users, to use water more efficiently. A leaflet on water efficiency for domestic customers has been produced and a forthcoming leaflet will address more efficient use of water in other domestic and non-domestic circumstances. In the interests of water efficiency, Scottish Water recently obtained a relaxation of the byelaws to allow retrofitting of dual and interruptible flushing mechanisms for toilets.

---

Salmon Farming

To ask the Scottish Executive what progress is being made with the application to the European Union to safeguard the Scottish salmon farming industry. (S2O-2955)

Having carried out a thorough preliminary investigation, the European Commission has reported its findings to the member states. We believe that we have significant support from the member states, which will allow the Commission to introduce provisional measures at this stage. We think that that is good news for the industry, which has been under severe financial pressure, mainly due to cheap imports of salmon coming into the European Union from Norway and being sold below production cost.

I thank the minister for that encouraging response. I applaud him and his United Kingdom colleagues for their collective effort to secure measures to safeguard our fish farming industries. When can we expect the measures to be put in place and for how long will the protection be used?

The Scottish Executive has worked closely with the UK Government on the issue. That has resulted in the Prime Minister, the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry and the Minister of State for Trade and Investment, who has responsibility for foreign trade, all becoming involved in discussions with the EU on our behalf. That is an example of the UK working in partnership in the interests of the Scottish aquaculture industry. I hope to see the measures introduced within the next few days or the next week. They will operate for 200 days, which will be important in providing the stability that our aquaculture industry needs at this time.

It would be churlish of me not to welcome the execution of a U-turn by the Westminster Government, even though it has taken five years. Does the minister recognise the parlous economic state of the salmon farming industry in this country? Does he agree that, in order to safeguard it, three simple measures will be required? Those measures are, first, to remove the rental charges exacted by the Crown Estate; secondly, to heed the arguments put forward by Scottish Quality Salmon and others with regard to the regulatory regime that applies here but not in Norway or in other countries; and, finally, to promote salmon as a healthy part of people's diet and as being especially beneficial to the cognitive development of the unborn child.

Mr Ewing is quite wrong to suggest that there has been a U-turn on the matter on the part of the UK Government or of anyone else. That suggestion is symptomatic of the policyless, directionless and leaderless state of the SNP at the current time. Perhaps Mr Ewing wants to fill that leadership gap.

I agree with Mr Ewing that the health benefits of eating two portions of oily fish per week cannot be overstated and that salmon provides a reliable and nutritious source of that dietary element. We shall continue to work and act on behalf of the industry. The aquaculture framework strategy, which we set up, is working closely with the industry to ensure that it is as competitive as it can be, but the safeguard application has clearly shown that the Scottish industry is as competitive as the Norwegian industry is, to within less than 1p in the pound.

Although attempts to reduce Norwegian, Chilean and Faroese salmon imports to the European Union might appear to help the Scottish industry, does the minister accept that nearly half our industry is Norwegian owned? Is he concerned that attempts to block salmon imports from Norway, however well intentioned, might lead to a salmon price war that could eventually have serious repercussions for Norwegian-owned salmon farms in Scotland?

I was absolutely astonished to hear Struan Stevenson expressing similar sentiments during the European election campaign and I think that the Scottish public gave the Conservatives their response. I do not think that there is the danger that Mr Brocklebank describes; if I did, we would not have pursued the approach that we did. The needs of multinational industries in the aquaculture sector are quite different from those in the indigenously owned sector, if I can call it that, who want bigger sites and better regulation. That is what we are working with that sector of the industry to procure through the framework strategy.

---

Marine Environment

To ask the Scottish Executive what action it is taking to improve Scotland's marine environment. (S2O-2960)

I will give the member the answer when I find it. I have now found it—I apologise to the Presiding Officer for the delay.

The Scottish Executive has developed a number of initiatives to ensure the sustainable management of our marine environment. Those include the biodiversity duty in the Nature Conservation (Scotland) Act 2004 and its underpinning Scottish biodiversity strategy, both of which extend to the marine environment; the sustainable Scottish marine environment initiative, which is piloting ways of delivering an ecosystems approach to the management of human impacts on our seas; the Scottish coastal forum's commitment to draft a strategy for the management of Scotland's coasts by 2006; and the current strategic review of inshore fisheries. In addition, we are currently consulting on a strategic framework for Scotland's marine environment. I am sure that members will agree that that answer was worth waiting for.

The answer was comprehensive and it shows that the minister is aware that improving our marine environment is vital environmentally and for those whose livelihoods depend on it. One approach that has been taken in other countries to achieve that aim is the establishment of marine national parks. Does he agree that the establishment of a national coastline park in Scotland could help to ensure the proper management and improvement of the marine environment?

I agree with that, as I stood on that political platform at the election. The aim of the strategic framework for Scotland's marine environment is to bring a more coherent approach to the Executive's activities on the marine environment. The framework brings together existing or planned initiatives and sets out what I hope is a clear vision for keeping a clean, healthy, safe, productive and biologically diverse marine environment. I have no doubt in my mind that a marine national park will play an important role in that process.

---

Health and Community Care

---

Hospital and Primary Care Facilities (Lothian)

Good Lord, it is me again.

To ask the Scottish Executive what progress has been made with plans for the provision of new hospital and primary care facilities in the Lothian area. (S2O-2884)

I understand that, at its meeting on 23 June 2004, Lothian NHS Board approved the move to public consultation on its three strategy areas: the mental health review; the pan-Lothian review of older people's services; and the better acute care in Lothian project. The outcome of the consultation process will set a clear direction for the new hospitals planned in Lothian, including the provision of hospital services in Haddington.

Is the minister aware that four years have passed since people in East Lothian registered strong support for plans to develop new hospital and primary care facilities at Roodlands in Haddington and in Musselburgh? Does he share the concerns that Susan Deacon and I, as constituency members, have expressed about the long bureaucratic and consultation delays to the fulfilment of the promises? Now that NHS Lothian has endorsed a strategy to increase the number of hospital places in East Lothian from 204 to 236, can we stop talking about the plans and get on with the job of implementing them?

I am assured by NHS Lothian that that is exactly what it is doing. There were particular reasons for the delay in Musselburgh, which were to do with the site. As I indicated in my previous answer, in Haddington the issue is now very much dependent on the outcomes of the consultation.

NHS Lothian should be congratulated in general on the extent to which it has developed so many new hospitals and health facilities over the past five years or so—perhaps I can say at this point that I will open the new community treatment centre in Leith next Friday. I think that NHS Lothian has achieved an excellent balance between centralising specialist services in specialist hospitals and delivering as many local services in local hospitals and community treatment centres as possible. It has been very successful in achieving that balance.

Does the minister share my concern about some of NHS Lothian's plans to reduce services at the Western general hospital, which I know is very important to him as well as to my constituents? Does he also share my concern about the decision to hold the important consultation on those plans over the summer months?

Consultations often take place over the summer and I am sure that the length of the consultation will take that into account. It would be premature of me to make any detailed comment on NHS Lothian's current proposals, although obviously I have a local as well as a national interest in the Western general. As I indicated in my previous answer, NHS Lothian is in general striking a good balance between services that need to be centralised and those that can be delivered locally.

The minister is aware, because I have told him on many occasions, that my constituents in Midlothian have been waiting 30 years for a new community hospital. Will he give me an assurance that the totally inadequate provision in Midlothian will be replaced as soon as possible by a high-quality service, including a new community hospital and community-based services that are fit for the 21st century?

I know that plans are well advanced for that. The fact that there are proposals for East Lothian and Midlothian, as well as the development in my constituency, shows that NHS Lothian wants to have as many local facilities as it can to balance the superb centres of excellence that it already has at the Royal infirmary, the Western general and St John's.

I remind the minister of the 1,000-plus patients who are waiting for a first appointment at the sleep centre at the Edinburgh Royal infirmary. That is against a background of a £100,000 drop in funding from NHS Lothian compared with the previous year. Given that the treatment that is provided is effective, will he revisit his decision not to fund the sleep centre centrally and speak to the consultants, who want the centre to be a centre of excellence with satellite provision elsewhere in Scotland?

I have spoken to the lead consultant, Professor Douglas, on more than one occasion and I am aware of issues around the service. I recently spoke to someone who is involved and I know that action is being taken to address the problem. I agree that the situation is unacceptable, but I am reassured that NHS Lothian is taking action to address it.

---

Social Inclusion Partnerships (Glasgow)

To ask the Scottish Executive what progress has been made in improving health and well-being within social inclusion partnership areas in Glasgow. (S2O-2961)

Our health improvement policy aims to improve health for all while reducing health inequalities. We have seen heartening signs of improvement in Glasgow social inclusion partnership areas. A recent report on the health and well-being of the greater Glasgow population clearly shows that there have been positive changes to key health indicators among people living in social inclusion partnership areas. In addition, we are providing an additional £12 million to Greater Glasgow NHS Board in this and the next financial year to support action to address unmet health needs in deprived populations.

Does the minister agree that it is essential that the progress that has been made, which he outlined, continues? That will involve the funding of a number of community organisations that assist in the delivery of health care locally and make a big contribution, such as Healthy Castlemilk, which has had a major impact in that part of the city.

I agree with those sentiments. Some of the health outcomes in the city of Glasgow—such as the disparities between some sections of the city in life expectancy—are totally unacceptable. I assure the chamber that the Executive has put in place a range of measures that are designed to address those discrepancies.

---

Maternity Services<br />(Caithness and North-west Sutherland)

To ask the Scottish Executive whether it will ensure that maintenance of the status quo will be one of the options in NHS Highland's consultation on the future of maternity services in Caithness and north-west Sutherland. (S2O-2932)

NHS Highland will consider the options on 2 August and ministers will give a view at the end of the process.

The fear is that, when NHS Highland considers the options, it will present a series of alternatives that essentially represent a choice of downgraded services. By the status quo I mean, as the minister understands, some form of consultant-led services in the north. Given the risk to mothers and babies of having to travel 100 miles to Inverness, there has to come a time when the Scottish Executive steps in and says, "This risk is too great." It is a matter of life and death. The Executive must say to NHS Highland, "Halt. Enough is enough."

As is well known, ministers have a formal role in these matters, as I described in my answer. I will be saying the same thing at the end of today's members' business debate on Argyll and Clyde. I spoke recently to the chair of NHS Highland, who assured me that he and the board are committed to looking at any options that people put forward. He specifically said that any option that Jamie Stone wished to propose would be considered. Options have to be sustainable and in particular they have to be consistent with the working time directive in relation to the hours that consultants or any other health care staff work. There are constraints but, within those, the board has reassured me that it will look at all the options.

---

Prescription Charges

To ask the Scottish Executive whether the £6.40 prescription charge deters patients from seeking the medicines that they need. (S2O-2996)

No, we do not believe so. Extensive exemption and remission arrangements are in place to ensure that no one need be deterred from obtaining prescribed medicines on financial grounds.

The minister may be aware that my member's bill seeking to abolish prescription charges completed its consultation period yesterday. One of the respondents, the Social Market Foundation, has described the current system as a dog's dinner that lacks all logic. Does he agree with that and with his Labour colleague in the National Assembly for Wales, the Minister for Health and Social Services, Jane Hutt? She stated:

"prescription charges do deter people from having their prescriptions dispensed. Free prescriptions for all is the simplest and most effective way of resolving inequalities and inconsistencies in prescribing".

Alternatively, is he determined to see chronic sufferers on low incomes continue to go without the medicines that they need because they cannot afford them?

It is important to put prescription charges in their proper context. More than 50 per cent of Scotland's population are exempt from the charges. The low-income scheme, which is for people on low incomes who have less than £8,000 in capital, is available to those in employment, those who receive benefit and students. Around 72 million items are prescribed in Scotland every year and in excess of 91 per cent of those items are prescribed free. The current charge for a prescribed item is £6.40, but the average cost of a prescribed item is £12.69.

Will there be a review of the chronic condition exemption scheme? The scheme is unfair and has not been considered for a long time. More and more patient groups are pointing out to members that they are now, in a sense, the working poor and that they do not get the support that they require for their chronic conditions—and only for their chronic conditions.

I confirm that such a review is under way.

I notice that the minister did not respond further to that question. The review that the Scottish Executive is undertaking is welcome, given that for 36 years, under all sorts of Governments, we have not had a review. Will he confirm that he will progress the matter as soon as possible?

I am happy to confirm that the review is an important part of the partnership agreement, which covers the coalition arrangements in Scotland. We will progress the review as soon as we can. I repeat that it is extremely important to put the overall issue in context: 72 million items are prescribed each year and more than 91 per cent of them are prescribed free.

Question 5 has been withdrawn.

---

Clinical Improvement (Distinction Awards)

To ask the Scottish Executive how the efficacy of distinction awards as a driver of clinical improvement is measured. (S2O-2922)

The Scottish Advisory Committee on Distinction Awards allocates awards on the basis of an individual's record of achievement on a range of factors, including clinical excellence, outstanding contribution to the achievement of service goals and research, innovation and improvement in the service. We are committed to a fundamental review of the awards scheme, which will ensure its effectiveness as a means of encouraging and rewarding outstanding contributions to the national health service.

I am glad that there will be a review. Does the minister agree that all staff in the NHS should be properly rewarded and that the distinction award scheme, with its old-boys-club approach through which consultants reward one another, is at best opaque and should be replaced by a scheme that is founded on a proper objective basis and that does not reward only those at the top of the medical hierarchy?

In the recent past, improvements have been made in the way in which awards are made. Clearly, we believe that there can be further improvements, which is why we will undertake a wide-ranging review, during which the issues that Scott Barrie raises will be considered.

---

Bowel Cancer (Screening)

To ask the Scottish Executive whether it will introduce colonoscopies as the standard test for colorectal cancer as part of the national bowel cancer screening programme, in line with practice in most of the United States of America and Europe. (S2O-2999)

Colonoscopy is not a procedure for routine population screening. It is used for diagnostic purposes, but national evidence-based clinical guidelines for the management of colorectal cancer state that there is currently no clear consensus as to the investigation of choice for the diagnosis of colorectal cancer. We shall build capacity in colonoscopy as part of our planning for the future roll-out of national screening for colorectal cancer.

In a parliamentary answer to me, the minister has stated that it would take five years to plan a Scotland-wide colorectal cancer screening programme. If that cancer is detected soon enough, it is curable in 80 per cent of cases. Will the minister say why it will take five years simply to plan a programme? Current tests are inadequate and men who could live are dying.

We should not confuse the issue of screening with the issue of diagnosis. As I have indicated, colonoscopy is a diagnostic tool; it is faecal occult blood testing that is used in the screening programme. It is a great credit to Scotland that the bigger of the two pilot sites in the United Kingdom is in Scotland. We will still be in the second stage of the screening pilot until 2005, so obviously there are more results to come. However, we are not simply waiting for the end of the pilot. We have said that, in principle, we want to roll it out. Clearly, however, capacity has to be built up. Colonoscopy services will be part of that.

We should acknowledge the enormous progress that has been made over the past three years in the diagnosis and treatment of colorectal cancer. Recently, I launched the framework for bowel cancer. At that event, I was told of the great advances that have been made through the managed clinical networks for colorectal cancer. In fact, £4 million of recent cancer money has been spent on developing endoscopy services. That has included money for new colonoscopy equipment and extra sessions in Edinburgh.

Does the minister recall the case that I raised with him of Gerard O'Neill, which concerns stomach cancer and its diagnosis? Does he agree that, when diagnoses are made, much more regard must be given to family history? As the minister may recall, that young man was not diagnosed until it was far too late?

Many issues arise relating to the diagnosis of stomach and other cancers. Politicians should be careful when they go into that particular territory. That is why, in my answer to Christine Grahame, I referred to national evidence-based clinical guidelines. Politicians have to accept those guidelines. In Scotland, we have guidelines from the Scottish intercollegiate guidelines network that are internationally famous. We have to respect them.

I cannot comment on the individual case that Tommy Sheridan raises, or indeed on the case that was highlighted in a recent newspaper article on colorectal cancer. Although I cannot comment on those particular cases, it may well be that particular mistakes have been made but that the guidelines are not wrong.

---

General Practitioners

To ask the Scottish Executive what action it is taking to address any shortage of GPs. (S2O-2931)

The new general medical services contract recognises the importance of both the recruitment and the retention of general practitioners and contains a number of measures that support that, including the continuation of the "golden hello" scheme for GPs with a standard £5,000 payment. Funding has been agreed for additional GP vocational training, ensuring that 280 places are available in 2004-05. New work-force planning arrangements across NHS Scotland will take into account the changing needs of primary care service teams.

I am encouraged by the efforts that have been made to improve GP services throughout the country. However, the minister will be aware that some areas of the Highlands and Islands find difficulty in attracting and retaining GPs—especially in small and remote practices. Will the minister consider offering additional financial inducements in order to recruit and retain more GPs in those areas?

We already offer particular inducements to GPs in rural areas. The new contract should be beneficial in helping both to recruit and to retain GPs in rural areas. I know that out-of-hours services have been causing concern, but the new options for GPs in the new GMS contract will make general practice more attractive, as will the other positive features of the contract.

---

General Questions

---

Affordable Rented Housing

Thirty seconds early, we come to general questions. Question number 1 is, again, from Mr John Home Robertson. [Applause.]

House!

To ask the Scottish Executive what progress has been made with its plans to enable local authorities to undertake prudential borrowing to fund the provision of affordable rented housing. (S2O-2885)

Anyone who has just walked into the chamber will be most interested to know why Mr Home Robertson is so popular. I reassure them that he is indeed our number 1 guy in the chamber. [Laughter.] Can I have it in the Official Report that Allan Wilson laughed?

I am considering the options in this area as part of the review of affordable housing.

I am grateful to the minister but, seriously, does she recall, from her visit to East Lothian last year, that although there are 6,000 people on the waiting list for council houses, only 400 houses become available for re-let each year, which means that some people are having to wait 10 years or more to get an affordable rented house? Will she give urgent and active support to East Lothian Council's plan to borrow to build 2,700 homes to let and—this is important—will the Executive consider changes to the right-to-buy legislation to ensure that every area keeps a reasonable stock of affordable rented homes?

John Home Robertson will have paid attention to last week's discussion on the right to buy, when the Executive pointed out to the chamber a number of options that we have introduced to address the pressures resulting from the right to buy. Mr Home Robertson will know that the right to buy was modernised under the Housing (Scotland) Act 2001. That act also introduced pressured area status, for which local authorities can apply if they are under pressure. East Lothian is considering other ways of meeting the challenges that it faces and a number of local authorities such as East Lothian, with low debt and low investment needs, are considering a new-build programme through borrowing under the prudential regime. My officials are considering the details of that scheme. East Lothian has come up with a number of interesting examples. We need to consider some of the regulatory issues, in order to protect the interests of tenants, but the scheme is something that we are interested in and will give some attention to, as part of the review of affordable housing.

In addition to designating areas as pressured areas, would the minister consider giving housing associations the right to apply for an extension to the opt-out from the right to buy in 2012? If they can prove that there is a shortage of affordable housing in their area, should they not be able to apply to the Executive to be exempted from the right to buy, for a period to be agreed, so that such housing can be protected until the situation is better in that area and the right to buy can be reinstated?

I am sure that Shona Robison is well aware of the vigorous debate about right to buy during the passage of the Housing (Scotland) Act 2001. I firmly believe that the policy that the Executive evolved and the mechanisms that we introduced at that time are the right ones. On the coalition benches, we have a comprehensive approach to ensuring that we balance the supply of housing with the right of people to exercise their right to buy. I would be interested to know whether the Scottish National Party is abandoning the right to buy. Is it likely to emerge with that policy? It is always criticising and questioning the right to buy and asking us to make changes. My only conclusion, given the political debate that is about to take place, is that the SNP is abandoning the right to buy—that would be an interesting policy development for that party.

If the minister had listened to what I said, she would have heard me ask whether, in 2012, when the right to buy is extended to housing association tenants, if a housing association applies to the Executive to say that there is a crisis of affordable housing in the area, it would not be responsible of the minister to consider postponing the implementation of the right to buy in that area until affordable housing is less under pressure. That is not about removing rights; it is about balancing rights against the affordable housing crisis in that area. Is that not a sensible way to proceed?

This is interesting. I reassure Shona Robison that I listened carefully to both her questions. I think that I am right in saying that the SNP opposed the extension of the right to buy to housing associations. The fact that the SNP is now saying that it just wants to fiddle about with the details begs some questions. We hear inconsistent messages from the SNP, which constantly wishes us to curtail the right to buy. It did not support our modernisation plans for the right to buy. The coalition's policy is a balance between allowing people who have lived in the housing for some time, and should have rights, to exercise those rights, and issues of supply. We have the right policy. It is perfectly reasonable for me to say that I am unclear what the SNP policy is.

Question 3 is from Irene Oldfather.

To ask the Scottish Executive what action it is taking to assist manufacturing industry.

I am sorry, I think that I have skipped a question. Forgive me. We will go back to question 2 and I will come to Irene Oldfather in a minute.

---

Schools (Road Safety)

To ask the Scottish Executive what progress has been made in improving road safety around schools. (S2O-2951)

Speed limits of 20mph are now in place at 716 out of the 2,855 schools in Scotland, which is more than one in four of our schools. I expect more limits to be introduced shortly with the funding that the Executive is making available to local authorities. Those lower limits will improve safety for all children walking or cycling to school.

I am aware of the good results that have been achieved by the speed limits that South Lanarkshire Council has introduced around schools in my constituency. What work has been done to evaluate the effectiveness of initiatives that involve walking to school, such as safer routes to schools, which not only aid safety but promote exercise for children.

As Janis Hughes knows, we are investing heavily in cycling, walking and safer-streets initiatives. Between 2000 and 2006, we are providing funding of £38 million to local authorities for such initiatives and we are currently providing £1 million per year for school travel co-ordinators. Through those initiatives, we want to encourage more children to cycle and walk to school.

Scotland's record on that is reasonable, but there is room for significant improvement. Already, more than 50 per cent of our children walk to school and the latest figures, which are for 2002, show the highest level—56 per cent—since the Scottish Parliament was created in 1999.

Will the minister confirm that 20mph speed limits outside schools have been a complete success, that they have substantially reduced casualties and that there is a strong case for rolling them out throughout Scotland?

Yes, I agree with all those points. When I was Deputy Minister for Education and Young People, I visited several schools and saw the success of 20mph schemes and I have continued to do that as Minister for Transport. Some of those schemes have achieved remarkable reductions in the number of incidents and injury accidents. Previously, some schools in Scotland had concerning levels of accidents and I was surprised at the regularity with which accidents, sometimes serious ones, took place near or around schools in Scotland. We are starting to drive those figures down, but more can and must be done and my ambition is that we have 20mph speed limits outside all our schools in Scotland, including schools on our trunk roads.

---

Manufacturing Industry

To ask the Scottish Executive what progress has been made—no, that is question 2.

To ask the Scottish Executive what action it is taking to assist manufacturing industry. (S2O-2935)

I seem to be having a disruptive effect on question time for the second week running.

The Executive's top priority is to grow the economy, and the manufacturing sector plays a major role in Scotland's economy. A range of support is available to manufacturing through business gateway and assistance schemes such as regional selective assistance, the small firms merit award for research and technology and support for products under research. The Executive has also responded positively to the recommendations of the Scottish manufacturing steering group's report of February 2003.

The minister will be aware of the effect that the rapid decline in world market prices for penicillin is having on GlaxoSmithKline in my constituency. Will he assure me that the Executive will work with the company to protect the 600 jobs that it sustains in my constituency? I invite the minister to come down to Irvine to hear at first hand about some of the difficulties that the company is experiencing in world markets at the moment.

Mr Wilson.

Wallace.

I am sorry. Mr Wallace.

It is catching.

The point that Irene Oldfather makes is important. Indeed, she has not only written to me about it but spoken to me about it. I recognise GlaxoSmithKline as a major contributor to the Ayrshire economy. Inevitably, such a company operates in a dynamic and global market and must always consider the challenges and develop its product range with new and different products. I assure her that Scottish Enterprise Ayrshire maintains regular contact with the company to assist, as far as is possible, with its forward strategies. She has already issued her invitation and I have asked my officials to meet her and the management of the company at some time over the summer recess, either in her constituency or in Glasgow.

---

Charities (Tax Exemption)

To ask the Scottish Executive how the roles of the Office of the Scottish Charity Regulator and the Inland Revenue will be co-ordinated to ensure that organisations receive tax exemption when they are recognised as a Scottish charity. (S2O-2984)

We are consulting on the draft Charities and Trustee Investment (Scotland) Bill, which sets out a Scottish charity definition that is similar to the one that is being proposed by the Home Office. Bodies that are granted charitable status by OSCR will be entitled to local rates relief. However, relief from United Kingdom taxes is a reserved matter and is the responsibility of the Inland Revenue. Nevertheless, I expect that, as long as the final definitions are sufficiently similar, OSCR's decisions on charitable status will also be accepted for UK tax purposes. Officials from the Executive and the Inland Revenue are discussing how best to co-ordinate those roles.

Does the minister acknowledge that problems could arise for organisations if they are recognised as Scottish charities by OSCR but are not recognised by the Inland Revenue? Has she considered the option of transferring ministerial functions from the UK to Scotland, as is allowed under the Scotland Act 1998, so that organisations that have achieved charitable status with OSCR are not left waiting for a UK body to determine their status for tax purposes?

The member is asking me to be very ambitious and bold by transferring powers from Westminster. What an enticing possibility!

I assure Patrick Harvie that when we were preparing the draft bill in co-operation with a range of organisations, we had long and detailed discussions with the relevant sectors, because a variety of organisations expressed concern about inconsistencies that would mean that some bodies might not get tax relief even though they had been granted charitable status in Scotland. That is a position that we all want to avoid.

The best way forward, which has received the broad support of the sector, is to continue to hold negotiations on the bill that is going through Westminster and on our proposals, and to have a close dialogue with the Inland Revenue and OSCR. I am fairly confident that those discussions should allow us to ensure that we avoid significant difficulty as we advance.

Does the minister agree that it would be more intriguing to discuss what the Inland Revenue would do if an organisation did not secure Scottish charitable status but continued to be deemed to be a charity in other parts of the country and was therefore still eligible for tax relief? Will she assure me that that issue will be raised in her discussions with the Inland Revenue and others? She will know that the Communities Committee is already engaged in dialogue on the matter with her Westminster colleagues. I trust that she will continue to be robust on the connection between charitable status and tax relief.

I am delighted that members of the Parliament want me to continue to be robust in all the work that I do. I would take great glee in doing that.

I assure Johann Lamont that we will ensure that when we introduce proposals on definitions of charitable status and on the granting of such status, organisations will have things to prove. They will have to be able to prove public benefit. I am sure that the proposals and the mechanisms that we have in place will ensure that organisations are tested on that and that they can prove that.

Will the minister also be examining the position of Government quangos which, quite perversely, enjoy many of the benefits of charitable status?

We will be doing that. Quangos will have to go through the public benefit test and will have to comply with the other requirements that are made of them.

---

Integrated Community Schools

To ask the Scottish Executive what progress it is making towards implementing the commitment to ensure that every school is an integrated community school by 2007. (S2O-2911)

More than 2,000 schools have now adopted the integrated community school approach. In partnership with local authorities, we are on track to roll out that approach in all schools by 2007.

Does the minister agree that access for our local communities to good facilities and resources on our community school sites—especially over the coming summer period—needs to be actively encouraged by the Executive and all our local education authorities?

I agree entirely. When we invest in schools, we make substantial commitments of public expenditure. It is right that those schools are open to the public for as long as possible, both during school holidays and in weekday evenings. In that spirit, part of the work of integrated community schools is to consider the packages that should be in place at any time of the year to support young people.

---

Housing (Infrastructure)

To ask the Scottish Executive what steps are being taken to ensure that necessary infrastructure is in place to support housing and other new developments. (S2O-2924)

In relation to the current investment programme of Scottish Water, which is part of the overall infrastructure that is necessary to support housing and other new developments, it is estimated that some £240 million, including £41 million specifically for rural areas, will help to provide infrastructure to support further development. The Executive plans to launch two consultations to address the issue of infrastructure provision for new development. They will be called "Paying for Water Services" and "Investing in Water Services".

I am sure that the minister is aware of and shares the growing concerns that have been expressed by many individuals and organisations about the scale and pace of infrastructure development in Scotland. For example, the matter is examined in a recent report by the Institution of Civil Engineers in Scotland. Does she agree that although increasing investment in the area is key, it is also vital for decision-making processes to be speeded up to ensure that the pace of change can be accelerated. For example, the report to which I referred identifies the need for better joined-up working and the need to examine planning and land-use issues. I ask the minister to make every possible effort to ensure that the pace of decision making is accelerated so that Scotland gets the infrastructure that it desperately needs and deserves.

I am aware of the report by the Civil Engineering Contractors Association to which Susan Deacon refers—in fact, ministerial colleagues will be meeting the organisation later this month. It is important for us to examine the way in which all decisions are taken, not only those in relation to Scottish Water, which is seeking to undertake a programme of work. A working group that involves the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities, Communities Scotland, Homes for Scotland and the Scottish Federation of Housing Associations is specifically examining the need for support for continuing development work and that will also be part of the continuing review of affordable housing. We are taking the issue forward along a number of avenues and we take it seriously.

I am pleased to hear that the minister takes the issue seriously. The development constraints that exist as a result of Scottish Water in areas of the south of Scotland such as Scottish Borders and Dumfries and Galloway are becoming increasingly difficult. There is little prospect of any housing development, affordable or otherwise, unless there is a policy change. What discussions has Mrs Curran had with Mr Finnie on Scottish Water to ensure that there is a policy change and that greater emphasis is placed on the removal of development constraints?

I assure David Mundell that my colleagues Ross Finnie and Margaret Curran have had a great deal of discussion on the matter. I remind David Mundell that the reason why we are in the position that we are in is the lack of investment in water services while his party was in government. We are now addressing that and we will ensure that the water provision that we need is in place to provide for the development that the Executive is bringing about.

I reintroduce a consensual note by suggesting that all parties agree that we desperately require more affordable housing with suitable infrastructure. Does the minister agree that one of the barriers to that is the high cost of land? If so, is that cost not due simply to the short supply of land that is suitable for housing? Does the minister agree that the remit of the Forestry Commission, which is perhaps the largest landowner in Scotland, should be extended to providing affordable housing and to using its millions of acres so that young people in Scotland can have, as well as a job, one acre to call their own?

I am pleased that affordable housing is repeatedly pursued in the chamber each week, because it is essential to have housing available for low-cost home ownership or to rent. As for Mr Ewing's precise Forestry Commission example, we recently announced a project in Moray under which Forestry Commission land was made available for housing. His suggestion is not one that I would not wish to pursue.