Contents
- Scottish Parliament Thursday 2 October 2003
- Antisocial Behaviour
- First Minister's Question Time
- Question Time
- Antisocial Behaviour
- Business Motion
- Private Escorting of Abnormal Loads
Question Time
SCOTTISH EXECUTIVE
Planning
To ask the Scottish Executive what plans it has to modernise the planning system. (S2O-536)
Modernisation of the planning system is a key objective of the Executive. The partnership agreement commits the Executive to
"improve the planning system to strengthen involvement of communities, speed up decisions, reflect local views better, and allow quicker investment decisions."
I draw to the minister's attention the issue of helicopter landing and departure. [Laughter.] That was a pause for effect. The arrival and departure of a helicopter from the garden ground adjacent to residential property is not subject to restriction either by planning regulations or by Civil Aviation Authority regulations. Will the minister consider the operation of helicopters from private ground, including roads on private ground, in any future modernisation of the planning system?
Planning seeks to control physical development, which is why the issue that Mr Monteith raises is not covered by the planning system. The operation of helicopters is obviously much closer to Mr Monteith's heart than it is to that of other members because no other member has ever asked a question on the issue. However, I assure Mr Monteith that I will speak to my colleague the Minister for Transport to find out whether the issue needs to be addressed.
As the minister will know, a number of community councils in the Stirling constituency fed in their views to the "Getting Involved in Planning" consultation. Does she agree that, in the period leading up to changes in primary and secondary legislation, it is vital that as many community groups as possible are involved in the discussion so that the resulting legislation will provide sustainable development that strikes a better balance between community aspirations—including the need for affordable housing—and business interests?
I am aware of the responses from the community councils in the Stirling area which, I am sure, are partly a result of Sylvia Jackson's activity. Such responses are appropriate if we are to fulfil our commitment to involving people in the whole planning process and not just allowing them to react to planning decisions. I welcome the contributions from the Stirling area. I will attend a planning forum, which is one aspect of public involvement, in my colleague Pauline McNeill's constituency tomorrow. I want to see more planning forums because they encourage local people to get involved throughout the planning process.
What plans does the Executive have to deal with the problem faced by councillors who are members of planning committees who, because of the code of conduct, are prevented from acting correctly as democratic local representatives because they are not allowed to speak out or assist their constituents on planning issues? I hope that the Executive will address that serious point.
Councillors can always represent their constituents, but I recognise Donald Gorrie's point about the interpretation of a conflict of interest. Mr Gorrie has raised the matter with me and with the minister responsible for local government. We will continue to consider ways in which the issue can be resolved.
Does the minister agree that the envelopes that are drawn round many settlements by national planning guidelines unfairly award lucky landowners huge cash bonuses when they choose to sell land for house building? Does she therefore agree that national planning guidelines must be amended to include specific zones for affordable housing so that urgently needed land can be assessed and secured to build homes on for many people, whose only alternative in some cases is to leave the country?
As I have already said, the planning process is responsible for dealing with development opportunities, which we want to encourage. However, the Executive is totally committed to increasing the availability of affordable housing. If we can resolve the issue through planning guidance, we will do so. I recognise that there are issues around competition between private and public housing and therefore the work that the Executive is doing to encourage the development of affordable housing will continue.
NFU Scotland (Meetings)
To ask the Scottish Executive when it will next meet the National Farmers Union of Scotland. (S2O-514)
I have regular meetings with NFU Scotland, the most recent of which was on 30 September. I will next meet it on 6 October in the context of the Executive's conference on common agricultural policy reform.
When the minister next meets NFU Scotland, will he discuss the lack of land available to rent as a result of his policies over the past two years? He recently stated that the new tenancies should be in place by Martinmas of this year. Will he now admit that there will be no new tenancies this year and that people who want to make land available to the many who are desperate to rent it are unable to do so? Will he also admit that his policy has done exactly what we warned and has led not to a reinvigorated tenanted sector but to the death of it?
I hate to disappoint Alex Fergusson, but I assure him that an order will be laid with a view to having sections 1 and 3 to 8 of the Agricultural Holdings (Scotland) Act 2003 in force by Martinmas. That is what I said we would do and we intend to do it. Given that he started his question on an entirely false premise, it is not surprising that the rest of the question almost falls. We do not accept the basis of the question. Of course, the member opposes anything that gives tenants proper rights—it is his right to do so. I do not share his view. I think that the act has been warmly welcomed by tenants. It was intended to redress the balance between landowners and tenants, which had drifted far too far in favour of the landlord. Those who have a sensible view of the matter take that view and stick by it.
Borders Railway
To ask the Scottish Executive what criteria it will apply when assessing the business case produced to support a request for Executive funding of the Borders railway. (S2O-523)
The business case will be assessed in accordance with the Scottish transport appraisal guidance.
Will the minister confirm that, in order to provide the funding, he will require a positive net present value, as he required in the case of all the roads that were approved under the strategic roads review?
The Scottish Executive is committed to supporting the construction of the Borders railway. We have already invested more than £2 million in the project by supporting the Waverley railway partnership. A bill is now before the Parliament and I hope that the project continues to make good progress. The Executive is committed to that.
The minister will be aware of the long-term strategic importance of the rail line to my constituents and I hope that a long-term view will be taken when the business case is considered.
The Tories' conversion to rail is rather novel. Can the minister tell the chamber how many rail projects were completed under 18 years of Tory rule compared with how many have been supported by the Executive?
"Very few" and "a lot" are the respective answers to those questions.
I have had a batch of written answers that tell me nothing about the criteria for assessing the business case for the Borders railway but are merely holding answers. Here is the minister's opportunity. I asked him which ScotRail routes would have passed the business case test that will be applied to the Waverley railway line, to which he answered:
"I shall reply to the member as soon as possible."—[Official Report, Written Answers, 1 October 2003.]
The time has come. Will the minister give me an answer?
It is obviously important—[Interruption.] I will give the written answer in due course. I still do not have the information that Christine Grahame requests, but I will give her a full and fair answer as soon as I have the information.
It is important that Christine Grahame realise that all projects now go to STAG appraisal, as it is called. It is important that we have a procedure for assessing a range of projects. [Interruption.] I am not sure whether she wants to hear the answer, because she continues to interrupt. It is important that we have a method of appraisal for all projects, whether they are road projects or public transport projects. We now have such a system. I hope that she will welcome that, and also the shift in emphasis that we are making towards public transport investment.
We are committed to supporting the Borders rail link. Christine Grahame should have been present in the chamber last night when her party's spokesperson on transport was less than whole-hearted in his commitment to the Borders rail link. I am confident that it will be this Executive rather than any SNP Administration that will deliver the Borders rail link for Scotland.
Submarine Decommissioning
To ask the Scottish Executive what representations it has made to the Ministry of Defence about whether the decision on the acceptability of the proposals for decommissioning submarines at Rosyth will be based on the environmental principles of waste minimisation and "concentrate and contain". (S2O-555)
The Executive has made no such representations to the Ministry of Defence. We would, however, expect all such proposals to meet stringent environmental standards.
Does the minister agree that no cutting up of nuclear submarine reactor compartments should take place in Scotland and that only the cutting out and land-based storage of the entire sealed nuclear reactor compartments of only those existing submarines that are stored afloat at Rosyth should be considered for consent by the Scottish Environment Protection Agency?
The environmental impact of what is proposed will be judged by the regulators against standard processes, including best available technology, not entailing excessive costs and best practicable environmental option. The criteria involve waste minimisation, sustainability, pollution and emissions, and socioeconomic issues. Within that, concentration and containment are the principal means by which it would be intended to dispose of the waste.
As the minister will be aware, the recently announced consultation will not result in a final decision being taken by the Ministry of Defence for two years. Could he clarify for me and for my constituents in Rosyth what planning powers the Scottish Executive will have with regard to any decision by the Ministry of Defence to dispose of the submarines that are currently located at Rosyth dockyard?
That is a good question. I acknowledge the member's constituency interest. Government departments benefit from Crown immunity from planning control, but it may interest the member and the wider chamber to know that the Executive and the UK Government intend to remove Crown immunity from planning control. Amendments to the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Bill, which is currently before colleagues at Westminster, will be introduced to this Parliament by a Sewel motion, so colleagues will have the opportunity to make input to the process at that point.
In making representations to the MOD, why has the minister simply not told it that it is unacceptable that Rosyth, or any other part of Scotland, should become the graveyard for redundant nuclear submarines? Why has he not told the MOD that Devonport got the jobs, so why should Scotland end up being the nuclear rubbish bin of the UK?
Narrow nationalism and nimbyism rolled into one—not a very attractive sight. If Mr Crawford took off his narrow nationalist blinkers he would know that Scotland is a net exporter of nuclear waste—we are not an importer of nuclear waste—and that we are also a net exporter of toxic waste. At all levels his argument fails and is completely fallacious.
European Union Justice and Home Affairs Council (Meetings)
To ask the Scottish Executive whether it will be represented at the justice and home affairs council of the European Union in Luxembourg on 2 and 3 October 2003. (S2O-513)
The Executive will be represented at official level as part of the UK delegation which, as always, ensures that the UK position reflects Scottish circumstances and concerns.
Does the minister agree that when more and more big decisions that affect all our lives are being taken in Europe at intergovernmental level—as is the case in particular with justice matters—Scotland's proper place is at the top table? Does she also agree that, when tomorrow's agenda for the justice and home affairs council includes matters that fall within the devolved competence of this Parliament—such as parental responsibility and criminal and contract law—it is not good enough for Scotland not to be represented by ministers from this Parliament?
I do not agree with everything that Nicola Sturgeon says and the reasons why are simple. The final decisions that are taken at the justice and home affairs council come after many months, sometimes even years, of discussions that involve officials and ministers from both here and Westminster. I am aware of important decisions that will be taken tomorrow—for example, about the parental responsibility regulation—and I assure Nicola Sturgeon and the chamber that the Scottish perspective and the position in relation to Scots law have been well represented in the discussions up until now. The important point is that the regulation will make a difference to safeguard the rights of Scottish children and parents. We can do that by working in partnership with our UK colleagues.
It is right to acknowledge the work done by Scottish officials and ministers to amend the current proposals on parental responsibility, which could impact generally on the principles of Scots law. Does the minister agree that the legal supremacy of European law in the context of devolution is not widely understood? It is not just about ministerial involvement; it is crucial that the committees of the Parliament are directly involved in scrutiny before such amendments are ratified and not after. Surely we also have a responsibility to the general public to make them aware of decisions made at European level on their lives.
I agree absolutely with Pauline McNeill's comments. I commend the justice committees for indicating that they will try to use their influence at an early stage. I have given a commitment to the committees and I have already written to Pauline McNeill to outline some of the areas that will come up in the future, on which I look forward to working with the committees.
Respite Care
To ask the Scottish Executive whether it is satisfied with the provision of respite care for people with dementia. (S2O-519)
We are always seeking ways to improve provision, as is demonstrated by our recent investment decisions on respite care. We are providing local authorities with more finances than ever before to provide respite services—£11 million this year and, on top of that, £10 million to implement the carers strategy. We are confident that people who suffer from dementia and those who care for them will see real differences as a result of that investment.
I spoke recently to a group of carers who expressed concerns to me. One of their major worries was the stack of forms that they have to fill out every time they access a respite care bed. If a patient goes back to the same bed three months later, the carer has to fill out all those forms again. Will the minister look at the issue, to see whether there is a way in which we can streamline the paperwork that is involved, so that carers who are already in a stressful situation do not have to face that additional stress every time they access respite care?
I have recognised before in the chamber the tremendous work that carers do and I am happy to do so again. I regularly meet carers groups—I did so recently—and I have asked carers to identify the key areas that they think we need to progress during this parliamentary session. They have told me that they are happy to go away and consider the major issues that need to be tackled and to come back with their agenda. We will be more than happy to consider that agenda; if it contains the point that Murdo Fraser raised, we will be happy to consider that issue.
I am sure that the minister is aware that one of the concerns that carers organisations have raised is the Executive's apparent lack of effective monitoring processes for the implementation of the carers strategy in general. More specifically, there is a lack of effective monitoring of the use of the additional resources that the Executive has allocated for the strategy and for services such as respite care. Will the minister look into the matter and take steps to tighten the monitoring arrangements, so that we can find out what progress is being made across the country and do more work to ensure that the Executive's commitments to carers are translated into practice right across Scotland?
The development of outcome agreements lies at the heart of our approach, not only to investment in relation to carers but to a series of investments in the social care strategy that we are making through our colleagues in local government. We are currently developing outcome agreements. I fully concede that the work is taking longer than I would have liked, but we have instructed officials that it is a priority. Outcome agreements, which allow us to monitor the success of our investments, are vital not only to ensure the good stewardship of public funds but to ensure that people who suffer and the people who care for them receive the appropriate services at the right time.
Schools (Traffic Congestion)
To ask the Scottish Executive how it intends to tackle traffic congestion around schools. (S2O-541)
We are tackling traffic congestion by encouraging walking and cycling to school and by promoting road safety initiatives. Last week we announced funding direct to local authorities for new 20mph safety zones and other schemes around schools, amounting to £5 million this year, £11 million next year and £11 million in 2005-06.
I warmly welcome the initiative for 20mph zones round our schools. Does the minister think that we can reduce congestion, especially around primary schools when children are being dropped off in the morning or collected in the afternoon, by persuading parents to abandon the car and by promoting alternatives such as walking buses, which have the twin benefits of ensuring that children get to school safely and providing some youngsters with much-needed exercise?
I agree that that is extremely important. When schools go back at the start of term, there is an opportunity to target our message at parents who would normally take their children to school by car in the mornings. As well as 20mph zones, it is important to encourage a range of other initiatives, such as walking buses and other safer-routes-to-school initiatives. I hope that the local authority school transport co-ordinators that we help to fund will develop a range of new initiatives. We must do more to encourage young people to walk or cycle to school in the mornings. That will be good not only for Scotland's transport but for the fitness and health of our young people.
Will the minister check up to make certain that local authorities are allocating sufficient resources for safer-routes-to-school schemes?
Yes, I will. I am conscious of the scale of the effort that needs to go into that, but we have allocated £27 million of new funding. The cost of an average 20mph safety zone scheme is between £10,000 and £25,000, so we will be able to develop a significant number of new initiatives throughout Scotland over the next three years. I will be asking local authorities to ensure that they spend the new money on such schemes and to report back to the Executive on how it has been spent.
Electricity Generation (Renewable Sources)
To ask the Scottish Executive how it intends to increase the percentage of electricity generated in Scotland from renewable sources. (S2O-547)
The renewables obligation (Scotland) obliges licensed electricity suppliers to provide an increased proportion of the electricity that they supply from renewable sources. In addition, we work with a range of partners to support commercialisation of world-class research from Scottish universities, to promote new renewable technologies, and on other relevant issues.
Will the minister reveal the extent of the work and the costs that will be required to upgrade, strengthen and extend the existing national grid, so that the resultant increase in renewable power production can be carried to the necessary markets, such as Shetland and the Western Isles?
We are aware of the importance of that issue and I certainly welcome Linda Fabiani's support for a single integrated and competitive transmission and distribution system for the whole of Great Britain. It is absolutely important that we go in that direction. In order to do that, it is clear that we need to work with our colleagues in the UK Government, with the Office of Gas and Electricity Markets and with the electricity companies, with whom primary responsibility for the upgrades that need to be done will lie. In our work with them, we are holding discussions about a number of areas of the grid where improvements may be required.
To what extent does the Scottish Executive favour enhanced energy efficiency as a means to increase the percentage of electricity generated in Scotland from renewable sources?
We very much favour energy efficiency, both in domestic consumption, where we have set a target of 20 per cent, and in business and industry, where we are working hard with partners to achieve those levels of efficiency. That is critical, because we want both to reduce unnecessary use and consumption of electricity and energy and at the same time provide more and more from renewable resources.
Strategic Rail Authority Funding
To ask the Scottish Executive what funds have been committed by the Strategic Rail Authority to rail projects in Scotland. (S2O-557)
The Strategic Rail Authority is currently helping to fund the new Edinburgh Park station and platform-extension works on the Fife circle and Bathgate lines and other parts of the Scottish rail network.
As the minister will be aware, £1.3 billion was spent opening the high-speed rail link from London to the channel tunnel. Given that trains were purchased for a direct link from Scotland and that Scotland was promised a direct link to the channel tunnel, and given also the statements that were made by the Executive, will the minister tell us when Eurostar services from Scotland direct to Europe will commence?
Those are issues that will have to be resolved at United Kingdom level. I would be very pleased to see such services. Indeed, only yesterday I was discussing with the Scottish Association of Passenger Transport how a service to Euston might be encouraged. I am prepared to do all that I can in my position as Scottish Minister for Transport to encourage such developments. I would also like to see the Strategic Rail Authority invest more in Scotland. We have in prospect the £9.9 billion upgrade to the west coast main line. That is a significant investment, which I hope will proceed as soon as possible. I would also like to see the Strategic Rail Authority contribute to the upgrade of Waverley station—it is currently chairing the steering group that I hope will lead to that upgrade. On all of those issues I will continue to put Scotland's case as powerfully as I can.
Maybole Bypass
To ask the Scottish Executive what consideration it has given since May 2003 to the provision of a Maybole bypass. (S2O-542)
[Interruption.] My apologies, Presiding Officer, I have lost my notes.
The Executive keeps proposals for new bypasses on the trunk road network under regular review.
The minister should have discarded his notes and said, "Not a lot."
Did the minister hear the First Minister this morning refer to the fragile state of the economy in the south-west of Scotland? Is he aware of recent reports in which the A70 and the A71 in Ayrshire are spotlighted as the most lethal roads in Scotland? In taking into consideration the requirement to maintain volume and heavy transport from the south-west in the south-west, and the vital need for the Maybole bypass, does the minister agree that the hazards that I have identified need to be addressed if the First Minister's aspiration to improve the economy in the south-west of Scotland is to be fulfilled?
I am very conscious of the issues relating to the trunk road network in that area. The Scottish Executive has already invested in safety measures that affect the roads to which Phil Gallie referred. We are always prepared to consider new possibilities. We have been in discussion with the police in the area and we are considering the possibility of introducing new measures.
Earlier this week, after decades of campaigning—and, if I may say it, throughout the period when the Conservatives were in office—I was pleased to inaugurate the three towns bypass, which will bring new investment into the area and offer much-needed relief from congestion. We are investing in the new extension to the M77 and I am determined that, in due course, we will do more to invest in and tackle the trunk road problems in Phil Gallie's area. I will keep closely in touch with local members who have made representations to me on the issue, and with all the regional members in the South of Scotland.
Police Cover (Fife)
To ask the Scottish Executive when it last had discussions with Fife constabulary about the level of police cover in Fife. (S2O-512)
The Executive is in regular contact with Fife constabulary, as well as with other forces, about various issues, including levels of police cover.
The minister is aware that the Fife police complement is 26.7 officers per 10,000 population, compared with the Scottish average of 30.6 officers per 10,000 population. That is 200 fewer police officers than our population requires. I understand that there is a review of the staffing formula, which ministers are considering and which agrees that Fife needs more officers. Will the minister confirm when that review will be completed, and when we can expect that Fife will receive its fair share of police officers?
It is worth noting that as at 30 June this year, Fife constabulary had 948 police officers, which is 113 more than it had in June 1999. Tricia Marwick shakes her head, but that is a fact—that information is accurate.
I have said that the review of police grant-aided expenditure that is under way will report to ministers in spring next year. I hope that Tricia Marwick and her colleagues will welcome the additional resources that we intend to put into the police to allow them to remove from police officers the time-consuming and inappropriate requirement to escort prisoners, so that other people can take that on and allow front-line police to go back on the streets.
Does the minister agree that effective community policing is essential to support the partnership's antisocial behaviour strategy? Will she join me in congratulating Fife constabulary on its community policing efforts, which have been recognised by HM inspectorate of constabulary, but which are frequently under pressure for operational reasons? Will she give me a commitment to look favourably on any request for resources from the chief constable of Fife constabulary or other chief constables for additional community-based police officers?
Operational matters are, of course, the responsibility of chief constables, but Christine May's point is important. Only last night, I discussed with chief constables, including Fife constabulary's chief constable, how we can work together in partnership to deliver on our agenda of tackling crime and antisocial behaviour. The response was positive and we outlined clearly a way forward. It is clear that forces throughout Scotland are working hard on community policing. It is not for ministers to take operational decisions, but I will continue to work closely with chief constables and local police.
Does the minister agree that the rationale for community wardens is far from proven? Police are lukewarm towards the concept. As we heard in this morning's debate, police in many parts of Fife do not have the resources to cope with the level of antisocial behaviour. Does she agree that we should talk not about the number of police, but about where and how they are deployed?
I do not agree with what the member said about community wardens and antisocial behaviour. This morning, we heard good examples of why community wardens are making, and could make, a difference in many communities throughout Scotland. The intention is not that they should perform duties that police officers should undertake.
I am interested that the member said that the debate is not about the numbers, but about how we deploy resources and achieve the best value from the resources. I take it that that means that the Tories will stop calling for ever-increasing resources to be added to all sorts of initiatives.
National Health Service (Winter Pressures)
To ask the Scottish Executive what action it is taking to prepare the NHS for winter pressures. (S2O-548)
Plans will include provision for extra staff, more beds, increased critical care capacity, additional nursing home places and continued co-ordinated action on delayed discharge. That is supported by significant extra investment. Health spending is set to increase on average by more than £630 million each year from 2003-04 to 2005-06 and £30 million has been allocated to address delayed discharges from hospitals.
I welcome the initiatives that the minister outlined. However, is he aware of the confusion in some health boards about the fact that the annual allocation included winter-pressures funding? Will he give an assurance that he will investigate that and that future Health Department letters will be clear about what the allocation includes?
Does he agree that prevention is better than cure? How does the Executive intend to maximise the uptake of the flu and pneumonia vaccines?
I assure Irene Oldfather that letters from the Health Department are clear. Placing the winter-pressures money in the general allocation was supported by the service-led winter planning group and clear information was provided in letters from the department on 9 July and 18 August. I know that Irene Oldfather does not criticise that policy, but I remind members who do that I was criticised last year for not putting that funding in the board allocations.
The other issue that Irene Oldfather raised is important to winter planning. The flu injection programme is being repeated this year and people who are over 65 will be offered the pneumococcal inoculation at the same time. Those are important preventive measures.
What measures is the minister taking to reduce trolley waits in Glasgow hospitals? That might be linked to his earlier answer. The concern is that people are waiting on average four hours in accident and emergency departments and casualty departments.
It is clear that some of the points that I raised in my first answer to Irene Oldfather's question are extremely relevant to Dr Turner's question.
It must be said, however, that delayed discharge is among the biggest issues —if not the biggest issue—in relation to trolley waits. That is why I was so concerned by the reverse over the past year in the trend for numbers of delayed discharges to decline—the figure had started to come down very significantly, although it is true that it is still 680 fewer than the figure for this time last year. On Tuesday, my colleague Tom McCabe held a meeting with some of the authorities in which the trend in the figure has gone into reverse and I have asked for rigorous analysis of the reasons for that. We will take whatever further action is necessary to ensure that the trend in delayed discharges is that their number continues to fall.
Council Tax
To ask the Scottish Executive what plans it has to review the council tax. (S2O-546)
The Executive is committed to an independent review of local government finance. We are discussing the timing, remit and format of the review with Convention of Scottish Local Authorities.
Will the Executive bring to the attention of those who are conducting the review the growing revolt against the council tax by pensioners in England, including a non-payment campaign, and the fact that the last opinion poll on the matter in Scotland showed that 72 per cent of Scots want the council tax to be abolished and replaced by a fairer system that is based on income? In addition, does the minister accept that five of the seven parties in the Scottish Parliament want the council tax abolished?
It is important to point out that the average increase in council tax in England is 12.9 per cent whereas the increase in Scotland is 3.9 per cent. Indeed, projections for the next two years show that any increase in council tax will be limited to less than 5 per cent. It is also important to say that 40 per cent of our elderly community claim council tax benefit. Indeed, more elderly people should claim that benefit and all of us should advise elderly people in our constituencies to claim the benefit. Given that 25 per cent of all households claim council tax benefits, we need to get the issue into perspective.
I agree that we should have a fairer taxation system—everyone wants to argue that case. Of course, under the Scottish Socialist Party's proposals, a general practitioner with a partner who is a part-time teacher would pay £400 a month more, but a family with two income earners who earn only the average wage would pay excessively more under the SSP's system. It is easy for parties to claim that they have a fairer taxation system, but their replacement for the council tax will be unfair on many people in Scotland. The Executive wants to attract professional, trained and skilled people to work in Scotland's public services. Under the SSP, those people would never come to Scotland.
Emergency Contraception
To ask the Scottish Executive whether it will support and resource the free availability of emergency contraception at all current outlets including pharmacies. (S2O-543)
Emergency contraception is already available free on prescription. Some pharmacies also provide it without cost under local national health service board initiatives. Future arrangements will be considered in the context of the national sexual health strategy for Scotland, about which we will consult soon.
I have now received the final report of the expert group. I would like to take this opportunity to thank the group for all its hard work and deliberations and I am pleased that all its members have signed up to the draft strategy. We will now take the opportunity to consider the group's report, which will be published in full and will be subject to wide public consultation later in the autumn. We will consider all responses before we make final decisions.
I am sure that the minister will agree that access to emergency contraception has been further compromised by the centralisation of gynaecological services. The fact that emergency contraception is free in some pharmacies does not mean that it is free in all of them. At a cost of £24 to £30, such contraception is unaffordable to those who are most vulnerable in the poorest communities.
I know that the sexual health strategy is yet to be published. The minister said that all members of the expert group have signed up to the draft strategy. Bearing in mind public statements that have been made by one member of the expert group, does the draft sexual health strategy exclude free emergency contraception? Does it exclude availability of supported emergency contraception in schools or beside schools?
The reality is that everybody has signed up to the strategy and it is up to the group to comment. I have only just received the report, which the group worked on over an on-going period.
I have already looked at the report and believe that it is more comprehensive than comparable documents. For example, it clearly acknowledges wider cultural and social influences on sexual health. I am sure that Carolyn Leckie will welcome that, given the final two lines of the motion on the sexual health strategy that she lodged recently.
As for Carolyn Leckie's question, emergency contraception will be considered. However, it is not the only issue that will be under consideration, and I repeat the first line of my answer: such contraception is already free on prescription.
It is 15:10, which is the end of question time.
On a point of order, Presiding Officer. Will you advise ministers that they should not mislead members deliberately, as the Minister for Finance and Public Services, Andy Kerr, did in relation to what people would or would not pay under a Scottish service tax? Will you advise ministers that it is advisable for them to tell the truth once in a while?
No, Mr Sheridan. That is a matter for the ministerial code of conduct, which is something that ministers take very seriously indeed.
Previous
First Minister's Question TimeNext
Antisocial Behaviour