Meeting of the Parliament [Draft]

Meeting date: Thursday, September 10, 2015

Official Report 836KB pdf

---

First Minister’s Question Time

---

Engagements

To ask the First Minister what engagements she has planned for the rest of the day. (S4F-02936)

Engagements to take forward the Government’s programme for Scotland.

On Tuesday, something very unusual happened in this Parliament: the Scottish National Party lost a vote

Every year, more than 20,000 children in Scotland have to deal with a parent going to prison. We do not know exactly how many, because we do not bother to count them. Mary Fee, supported by Barnardo’s, the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children and Families Outside, amended the Criminal Justice (Scotland) Bill to put that right. Those charities know that, if we can find those children, we can support them and help them to achieve their potential rather than any predetermined destiny.

The amendment was agreed to in the committee against the will of the First Minister’s MSPs. Of course, she can use the full force of her majority to remove that amendment—that progress—at stage 3. Will she respect the committee and promise not to do that?

I assure the Parliament that we will give full consideration to the amendment that was agreed to, and we will consider whether it best meets our objective of helping the children of those who are sent to prison.

I hope that Kezia Dugdale will recognise the sincerity and determination of the Government to ensure that we are not sending people to prison who do not need to be in prison. I also hope that she will acknowledge the change of direction that was instituted by Michael Matheson around the plans for a women’s prison, because we recognise that having women in particular in prison affects children. All of us want to make sure that we are identifying, and ensuring support for, all children whose mothers or fathers have to serve prison sentences.

As, I hope, the Parliament would expect us to do, we will give full consideration to that amendment, and to other amendments that have been discussed in relation to the Criminal Justice (Scotland) Bill.

The First Minister and I both talk a lot about closing the attainment gap. The children who are affected by parental imprisonment are about as far on the wrong side of that gap as it is possible to be. They are three times more likely than average to have severe mental health problems, and the statistics tell us that, without help and support, more than 50 per cent of them will end up in jail.

The First Minister’s Minister for Children and Young People, Aileen Campbell, knows what a difference the arrangement that the amendment proposes would make. She herself proposed such an arrangement in an amendment when she was a backbencher in the previous session of Parliament.

I might be wrong, but I do not think that the plight of these children has ever been raised at First Minister’s question time before. On that basis, I will give the First Minister another chance to do the right thing. Will she instruct her MSPs to support Mary Fee’s amendment to the Criminal Justice (Scotland) Bill?

I am going to continue to do what I think is the right thing to do. Having had a vote two days ago in Parliament on a particular amendment, the right thing to do is for the Government to reflect on its position in light of that vote. The Government would not be doing the right thing if it did not seriously reflect on that position in light of the vote in committee. However, we also have to reflect on the view of Elish Angiolini, which I will have to paraphrase because I do not have the document before me. The issue that we are discussing is one that she considered when she carried out her considerable and respected work in this area. I think that she came to the conclusion that the social work assessment process that was already in place was right and adequate.

That is the basis on which the Government has taken the position that it has taken. However, a committee has taken another position. In the normal course of things, before we get to the next stage in the passage of the legislation, we will consider our position. Either we will come to Parliament and accept the amendment that has been agreed to at stage 2, or we will come to Parliament and give careful reasons why we consider that it would not be the right thing for that amendment to stand. That is the responsible and rational way for any Government to proceed in the wake of such a vote.

I am happy to discuss the matter with Kezia Dugdale and any other member of the Parliament who is interested in the issue so that, collectively, we can come to the right decision, as a Parliament, about how we can best support children and young people whose parents serve prison sentences. That is the right way to go about it.

It is clear that the right thing to do would be to support the amendment.

The First Minister just got an answer from her justice secretary about social work assessments. Let me tell her about social work assessments. There is no mandatory requirement to fill them in. In fact, over the past year, the number of assessment forms that have been filled in has fallen. The reality of the situation is that those assessments are about the parents, not the kids. This is about giving those kids a chance.

If the First Minister will not do anything for children who are affected by a parent being in prison—[Interruption.]

Order.

I will ask her about children whose lives are blighted by homelessness. Yesterday, we debated the housing crisis. Homelessness is at the extreme end of that, and the children of homeless families are the most vulnerable. Can the First Minister tell the chamber how many children in Scotland are sleeping in temporary accommodation and whether the number is going up or down?

This Government—supported, I think, by members across the Parliament—has done a great deal to tackle temporary accommodation for those who are homeless.

So is it going down?

Order.

We are also on track to meet our target for building new homes in order that we can continue to provide the homes that those who are homeless and people who require different or bigger accommodation need. Iain Gray, who is sitting next to Kezia Dugdale, once said that Labour passed world-leading housing legislation but just did not bother to do anything about building the houses to support that world-leading legislation. This Government is making sure that we have the right legislation in place but also that we are making the right investment to build the houses that are needed to support that legislation, and that is what we will continue to do.

The issue of children whose parents serve prison sentences is very important, and I am happy to seek to build consensus. Kezia Dugdale said that it is absolutely clear what the right thing to do is, but I am not sure that I am yet in a position to say with clarity what the right thing to do is. We have had work done, which the Government has based its position on, and a parliamentary committee has taken a different position. It is incumbent on me, as the First Minister, and the justice secretary to consider all of that carefully before we come to a conclusion, because it is so important that we give the right support to children who are in those circumstances. I will continue to give the matter the attention that it deserves and we will continue to treat it as seriously as we should. I give a commitment to Kezia Dugdale and members across the chamber that we will consult them—we are happy to discuss the matter further with them—and try to proceed in a way that commands support across the parliamentary chamber.

The First Minister has had eight years to know what the right thing to do for those children is.

I asked her specifically about children in temporary accommodation, so let me give her the answer. The answer is that 4,555 children live in temporary accommodation, without a home of their own. That figure has gone up by 402 children in the past year alone. After eight years in government, the First Minister is presiding over a rise in the number of children who are sleeping in temporary housing. She is resisting helping children who are affected by a parent being in prison, and we have not even started to talk about the 16,000 rejections in child and adolescent mental health services. Those children are waiting for us to help them; we cannot wait any longer to act. If the First Minister is really serious about closing the gap, surely she will commit today to producing an action plan for Scotland’s most vulnerable children.

Everything that my Government does will be intended to help the most vulnerable in our society, particularly the most vulnerable children. That is something that we should seek to agree on, not to divide on.

What about CAMHS?

Order.

Let me run through some of the issues that Kezia Dugdale has raised. We are investing heavily in child and adolescent mental health services—we are seeing an increase in the number of staff who are working in CAMHS—in order that we can target waiting times, which have been too long, and reduce them to the target time. In fact, I specifically mentioned CAMHS in my statement on the programme for government just last week.

This Government is also making sure that we have the right legislative framework and the right investment in place to tackle, reduce and eliminate homelessness.

Surely Kezia Dugdale cannot stand here in this chamber today and deny the impact of welfare cuts on, for example, homelessness and poverty in our country? [Interruption.]

Order.

Of course, this time last year Kezia Dugdale was arguing vigorously for the Tories to remain in charge of welfare issues. Therefore, her credibility on the issue might be a little bit stretched. [Interruption.]

Order.

For our part, we are spending £104 million this year to mitigate the impact of welfare reform, in addition to what we are doing on legislation and our investment in housing. That £104 million will help to mitigate the impact of welfare reform. It would be better if Kezia Dugdale got behind us on some of those actions, stopped arguing for the Tories to remain in charge of these things and equipped this Parliament to do them even better.

---

Secretary of State for Scotland (Meetings)

To ask the First Minister when she will next meet the Secretary of State for Scotland. (S4F-02933)

I have no plans to do so in the near future.

We know that having school qualifications in the so-called STEM—science, technology, engineering and maths—subjects unlocks doors to a huge variety of careers. We also know that far too few young women are taking up those opportunities at school. When I asked the First Minister about the issue in January, she said:

“I readily agree that we need to get more girls and women into STEM subjects. I do not take the view that we have done everything that we need to do, but we are doing the hard work.”—[Official Report, 29 January 2015; c 15.]

Let us see what “hard work” the Scottish Government is doing. What measures to address the situation has she outlined in her programme for government or her framework for Scottish education?

This is an important issue, so let me run through just some our work to increase the number of women who are participating in STEM subjects. I will then come on to some of the progress that is being made on school qualifications and on college and university education.

We are doing a range of things to encourage more girls at school to take STEM subjects. Ruth Davidson will be familiar with, for example, the funding that we are giving to Equate Scotland. That funding, along with schools’ efforts, will be focused on getting more women into modern apprenticeships in STEM subjects. We are also funding work to get more paid placements for female undergraduates in STEM subjects, we are funding Equate Scotland to support recruitment, retention and the return of women to work where they are significantly underrepresented, and we are supporting Close the Gap, which is about changing employment practices.

On school qualifications, if we look at the most recent available figures, 48 per cent of passes in STEM subjects at Scottish credit and qualifications framework levels 3 to 7 were attained by females. That is a slight increase on the previous year, but there is still work to do.

If we look at colleges, the most recent statistics show a 20 per cent increase in the number of women doing science and maths since 2006-07 and a 32 per cent increase in the number doing engineering. In universities, there has been a 56 per cent increase in the number of women doing engineering and technology since 2006-07.

We are making significant efforts and we are starting to see some progress, but this is an area in which we still require to do a considerable amount of work. I want us to have much greater gender equality not just in the professions in which women are underrepresented but in the professions in which men are underrepresented.

The pathway to science and engineering jobs starts in schools, but there is no mention in the First Minister’s plans for the year ahead of doing anything in that regard—there is literally zero mention of any plans. Unsurprisingly, with no plans for improvement at school level, there is no improvement at school level.

Members will have noticed the statistics that the First Minister missed out—the statistics that show that attainment is going in the other direction. New figures show that since the Scottish National Party came to power the share of young women in higher maths and computing is down and the share in physics and technology is as low as it has ever been. The figures should be contrasted with those from elsewhere, where there are programmes that make real improvements. The United Kingdom Government has invested £10 million in that area and—guess what?—numbers have gone up. In Scotland, the First Minister talks a good game, and members have just heard some very selective figures, but she does nothing and—guess what?—the numbers have gone down across the board.

We are in a new school year since I last asked the First Minister about the issue. She agreed then that more needed to be done. When will she finally back her words from then and those that she has spoken today and get on with the action that is so urgently required?

I have just given Ruth Davidson a range of things that we are doing. Let me add to them. Skills Development Scotland has supported the appointment of two project officers to work specifically with schools on best classroom practice in reducing the gender imbalance in students progressing to STEM subjects. Those project officers are focusing particularly on physics and will provide practical support for primary schools and secondary school science departments. They are arranging activities for students and are implementing whole-school approaches to tackling gender stereotypes.

Ruth Davidson said that I cited figures selectively. I simply cited the most recent figures that we have for passes in STEM subjects—I cited those for levels 3 to 7. Let me mention level 7, which is the advanced higher. At that level, 44.7 per cent of passes in STEM subjects were attained by females, which is a 2.1 percentage point increase on 2011-12.

I do not suggest we do not still need to do much more work, but I will not accept that the Government is not absolutely determined to do the hard work so that we do not have gender underrepresentation in the subjects in which that has been the case for far too long.

Last week, W L Gore and Associates (UK) Ltd announced 120 redundancies at its plant in Livingston. What assurances has the Scottish Government received from Gore about the remaining jobs and what support will be given to the people who are to lose their jobs?

Obviously, this will be a very concerning time for those who are employed at W L Gore and for their families. The Government is already engaging with the company and, as is always the case in such situations, the partnership action for continuing employment provisions will be made fully available. The Deputy First Minister and Cabinet Secretary for Finance, Constitution and Economy will continue to be very closely engaged on the issue.

What assessment will be made of procedures that were employed in relation to the seizure and non-return of a Sea Shepherd UK boat from Lerwick harbour?

Obviously, it would be inappropriate for me to comment in detail on the matter because it is under criminal investigation. The Crown Office received a letter of request from the Faroese authorities and subsequently sought a warrant in the matter, which was then executed, on the basis of allegations of criminal activity. Given the circumstances, it is not appropriate for me to say any more on the issue.

---

Cabinet (Meetings)

To ask the First Minister what issues will be discussed at the next meeting of the Cabinet. (S4F-02931)

Matters of importance to the people of Scotland.

Last week, the Cabinet Secretary for Education and Lifelong Learning defended the Government’s return to national school testing by quoting to me the apparent support of the Educational Institute of Scotland teaching union, but two days later that claimed support evaporated. The EIS said:

“it will be almost impossible to put in place safeguards which would stop national assessments leading to the league table, target setting agenda”.

As the EIS is opposed to them, will the First Minister now rethink her plans for national testing?

We will continue to work with teachers, local authorities and parents in order that we take the action that will allow us to raise attainment and close the attainment gap. The education secretary met the EIS yesterday. We continue to work constructively with it.

Let me repeat what I said last week in my programme for government statement: there is a need to standardise the assessments that are used across the country. This is not about additional assessment: it reflects the fact that 30 of our 32 local authorities already use a form of assessment. It makes sense that they all use the same form of assessment, but it will replace the existing assessment so that it does not increase workload for teachers or students.

The assessment is not intended to be the be-all and end-all of measuring children’s performance. It is intended to provide evidence that informs teacher judgment—it will not replace teacher judgment, but will inform it. I have no desire to return to league tables. One of the issues on which we will engage closely with teachers and others is how we will use the information to avoid crude league tables being drawn from it. However, I am determined—I make no apology for it—that we will have better information about the performance of young people in primary and lower secondary school.

Ruth Davidson and I have just had an exchange about higher-grade passes in STEM—science, technology, engineering and mathematics—subjects. The truth of the matter is that any one of us can go and look at higher passes and other qualifications in upper secondary and see how young people are performing and what the attainment gap is. We cannot do that in the same way for primary school or for lower secondary school, and I do not think that that is acceptable.

The First Minister is being cheered by the Conservatives. [Interruption.]

Order! Settle down.

That is all fine, but in the old days, when the First Minister was in opposition—[Interruption.]

Order. Let us hear Mr Rennie.

That is all fine, but in the old days, when the First Minister was in opposition, she complained about targets and league tables. Back then, she said that

“Governments are attracted to things that are easy to measure”

and

“just as easy to manipulate.”—[Official Report, 22 March 2000; c 814-5.]

Back then, she agreed that, too often, the aim was to come top of national league tables rather than to serve pupils’ needs, so her past self and the EIS were at one, but they are not now. Now it seems that only the Conservatives are on board with her.

On national testing and league tables, will the First Minister stand with the teachers, or is she just going to stand with the Conservatives? [Laughter.]

If it were not such a serious issue that we are discussing, I would struggle to get to my feet and answer Willie Rennie’s question because of the laughter that it inspired. In the good old days—in other words, the past five years, which are not the good old days as far as Willie Rennie is concerned—Willie Rennie constantly and consistently cheered the Conservatives.

The views that I expressed all those years ago and which Willie Rennie has just quoted have not changed. I do not want to go back to the national testing that was in place previously—the kind of high-stakes national testing in which pass or fail is the only measurement of a young person’s performance in school. That is not what I am proposing. Equally, I have no intention of having league tables of school performance produced.

However, I am determined that we will get—in a consistent and clear way—information that will let us know what is and what is not working in our education system, because it would be an absolute abdication of my responsibility as First Minister not to do that. I will stand with the young people of this country—the kids for whom we need to do more to make sure that they can fulfil their full potential in school. I make absolutely no apology for wanting to ensure that we have a world-class education system for everyone and that, in the areas that need it most, we make sure that we are driving up improvement.

---

Film and Television Production

To ask the First Minister what steps the Scottish Government is taking to promote Scotland as a competitive location for film and television production. (S4F-02942)

We have no current plans—oh, sorry; I am on the wrong question. [Laughter.]

It is question 4, First Minister.

The figures that were produced this week, which show an increase in investment in shooting films in Scotland, are extremely encouraging. As the Government, we have recently announced additional support for the film sector in Scotland, and we want to continue that so that we can ensure that a sector that contributes so much to our economy continues to be well supported.

I thank the First Minister for that full answer. Welcome as the record spend on TV and film production in Scotland is, does she agree that the BBC charter renewal process must be used to champion increased and fairer funding for Scottish productions from the licence fee? As the expansion of investment in Scotland’s screen sector from such an increase would be transformational, does she share my disappointment with the BBC’s first formal response to the charter review, which shows absolutely no ambition for Scotland?

Yes—I strongly agree with that. Fair funding for Scotland from TV licence fees would allow for a dramatic expansion in TV production in Scotland.

The BBC’s response to the green paper on charter renewal, which was published on Monday, has some merits, but it falls far short of our ambitions for BBC Scotland. It has made relatively minor proposals on news and current affairs and the online presence of the BBC in Scotland. They are to be welcomed, but they are overdue and do not need a new charter to be effected. That cannot be the limit of the BBC’s ambitions for Scotland, so we will use the charter renewal process to build support for a better, bolder BBC in Scotland that reflects our national life.

At a creative industries conference this week, it was clear that the lack of a film and television studio in Scotland is hindering the sector’s growth. A film studio was announced over the summer, but that was in Yorkshire. Scotland’s productions sit in sixth position in the United Kingdom outside London. We are behind Northern Ireland, Wales and English regions. I appreciate that negotiations are on-going, but can we expect an announcement soon?

As Claire Baker will be aware, there is on-going work to seek to deliver a permanent film facility for Scotland that is consistent with European state aid rules. We hope to be in a position to make an announcement as soon as possible. However, we should not lose sight of the significant good news that was announced this week. Film and TV programme makers invested more than £45 million in Scotland last year. That is an increase of almost £12 million on the previous year, and the figure is more than £20 million higher than the figure five years ago.

As I have indicated, the Cabinet Secretary for Culture, Europe and External Affairs announced earlier this year two new funds for additional financial support for Scottish TV and film. We will continue to do everything possible to support an extremely important and valuable industry for Scotland.

---

Abortion Law

To ask the First Minister what discussions the Scottish Government has had with women’s groups following reports that the United Kingdom Government plans to devolve abortion law. (S4F-02941)

Last year, the Smith commission report recommended that further serious consideration should be given to the devolution of abortion. A final decision has not yet been taken by the UK Government, but the Scottish Government’s view is that abortion should be devolved to bring it into line with almost all other health matters.

The Scottish Parliament is responsible for scrutinising how the national health service in Scotland operates. It should also be responsible for setting the laws that the NHS works to.

However, let me be absolutely clear that the Scottish Government’s position on abortion law remains unchanged. We have no plans to change the law on abortion. Indeed, the Cabinet Secretary for Health, Wellbeing and Sport is writing to a number of women’s groups this week to confirm that and to offer to meet them if they would find that helpful.

I listened to that response with interest. I am glad that the First Minister is aware of the concerns of women’s groups such as Scottish Women’s Aid and Rape Crisis Scotland, as well as those of the Scottish Trades Union Congress, among others. They have concerns that devolving abortion law could have an impact on women in Scotland. If the First Minister has no plans to change the law, and given that we believe that powers should be sought for a purpose, what is the purpose?

I take the view that the Scottish Parliament should be responsible for those matters, and I think that across a range of issues. As I said, since the Parliament is responsible for the NHS framework, we should also be responsible, as we are in most other matters, for the laws that the NHS works within. The Parliament has many responsibilities for issues in relation to which I have no current plans to change the substance of the laws. That does not negate the principle that it is the Scottish Parliament that should have responsibility.

Let me be absolutely clear on my view and the Scottish Government’s position. The Scottish Government and I have no intention of legislating to change the current time limits for abortion.

---

Progress in International Reading Literacy Study and Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study

To ask the First Minister, in light of the proposed national system of standardised assessment in primary schools, whether the Scottish Government will reinstate the progress in international reading literacy and trends in international mathematics and science studies for Scotland. (S4F-02934)

We have no current plans to reintroduce those studies. However, as I just outlined to Willie Rennie, we continue to engage with local government, teachers, academics and parents to inform our approach on assessment. By standardising assessment, we will replace the variety of systems that local authorities use and therefore reduce the burden of assessment on teachers and children, and we will provide a clear and consistent picture of children’s progress to inform teacher judgment, not replace it.

The First Minister will know that several experts in education at home and abroad believe that the trends in international mathematics and science study, or TIMSS, and the progress in international reading literacy study, or PIRLS, measure the qualitative progress that pupils make in relation to the curriculum in a way that does not happen with other tests. Will the First Minister acknowledge that the absence of those two tests in Scotland conflicts with her commitment to Willie Rennie to improving the quality rather than the quantity of data that we have to hand?

I will continue to keep all those matters under review, but it is important to point out that, as I am sure Liz Smith is well aware, we have participated since 2000 in the largest international survey—the programme for international student assessment, or PISA, which is run by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development and focuses on maths, reading and science. Unlike TIMSS and PIRLS—the two surveys that Liz Smith referred to—PISA has the participation of all OECD countries, so it is a more effective indicator of how the whole Scottish education system is performing relative to other countries.

We have the information that allows us to make international comparisons, and the proposals for assessment that we are taking forward can supplement that with information about how we are performing domestically. Of course, we will continue to look at these things, to ensure that we are equipping ourselves with the information that we need to do the job of raising attainment and closing the attainment gap.