Plenary, 30 Oct 2003

Meeting date: Thursday, October 30, 2003

Official Report 707KB pdf

---

Question Time

---

SCOTTISH EXECUTIVE

---

Cod Fishery (Closure)

To ask the Scottish Executive what steps it is taking to minimise the impact of any closure of the cod fishery on fish processors in Scotland. (S2O-645)

Without any doubt, the December fisheries council this year promises to be another difficult negotiation. However, given that there are some encouraging signs of cod recovery, my objective will be to assist fish processors and others by resisting closure while pressing on with the recovery programmes.

I certainly welcome any efforts that the minister will make to resist closure. He will be aware that haddock are the most prolific species in the North sea, with around 400,000 tonnes of stock, but I am unsure whether he realises just how difficult it is for Scottish processors to market that haddock at the moment. Could extra funding be made available to support the processors?

One difficulty that we appear to be having in our current discussions with the processors is a misunderstanding about the money that we have set aside within the allocation under the financial instrument for fisheries guidance. We also have the fish-processing action plan, which Rhona Brankin originally introduced. There seems to be some doubt, but we are not prepared to fund things that duplicate the work of other organisations. The Sea Fish Industry Authority has a very important role to play as a marketing organisation. I recently had a meeting with the fish processors in which I tried desperately to get them and all the organisations to agree that we need to use all the available funding in the optimal way to benefit the processors.

Will the minister clarify that statement a little further? In the mind of many fish processors, the minister indicated back in February that there would be a financial package for the fish-processing sector. Is he saying that the proposed funding will not be available?

Absolutely not. Indeed, at my most recent meeting with the fish processors, which took place within the past fortnight or so, I was quite staggered to find that one of them had formed such a view. They made a counter-proposal in response to my request that they come back with further measures because we had originally set aside a discrete £1 million for specific items, which I have always said would remain available. That money remains available, but it may not be used either to run the administration of the fish processors organisation or to replicate those matters that can properly be addressed by bodies such as Seafish.

The minister wrote to me last month to say that a range of possible measures were being considered to increase applications for aid under the FIFG programme, and I am grateful for that response. Can he now tell us how those deliberations are progressing? Although fish processors can apply for the aid, the uptake is low.

The biggest problem at the moment is the matter to which Brian Adam referred when he started this question and which was slightly picked up by Ted Brocklebank and now by Richard Baker. I am slightly at a loss to understand why the major fish processors organisation thinks that we are not prepared to release funds when I have been quite explicit that the only two reasons that we would not do so are either that the request related to the administration of the fish processors organisation or that those funds could more properly be used by other organisations. There has been a continuing uptake. For the 2002-06 period, some £30 million of the £36 million available under the FIFG programme to the fish-processing sector still remains to be allocated. I can only repeat that I am anxious that that money be used by that sector.

---

Maternity Services (Glasgow)

To ask the Scottish Executive what its position is on the centralisation of maternity services in Glasgow. (S2O-658)

Planning and providing maternity services in Glasgow is in the first place a matter for NHS Greater Glasgow. At its meeting on Tuesday 21 October, the NHS board approved proposals that will now be the subject of public consultation. The outcome of that process will in due course be submitted to me for consideration.

Will the minister acknowledge the wave of concern at the proposal to close the Queen Mother's maternity hospital? Will he acknowledge that those concerns are genuine and that they exist among patients, professionals and the wider public? Will he tell us what he intends to do to ensure that the concerns that have been voiced do not fall on deaf ears?

As I indicated in my first answer, at the end of the consultation and once the board has submitted its final proposals to me, I will have to come to a view. It would therefore be wrong for me to express a view at this stage. I assure Patrick Harvie that I am conscious of the very strongly held views in support of Yorkhill. I am also conscious that other points of view are being expressed. One of the things that strikes me in the debate, which is possibly different from other debates, is the genuine division of opinion among senior clinicians on the issue.

The minister will be aware of the accusation that has been made by paediatricians that their advice has been ignored in the course of the independent review and report and that Greater Glasgow NHS Board says that a million signatures will not change its decision. Does he agree that Greater Glasgow NHS Board should be told that that is not an acceptable way in which to conduct a consultation, as it will jeopardise the Scottish Executive's policy on genuine consultation? Further, what are the exact criteria that he will use in making the decision on the fate of the Queen Mother's hospital, which has one of the most treasured maternity units in Scotland?

One of the issues that I have to look at is the adequacy of the public consultation round the issue. The second issue is the substantive proposal that is to come to me on the reorganisation of the services. Those are the two key issues that I will look at. Clearly, I will pay close attention to what the paediatricians are saying. I will equally listen to the views of obstetricians.

The minister has heard the concerns of constituents and professionals. I want to go one step further. He mentioned the three-month consultation process, but he is aware that Glasgow has already undergone a consultation process. We are not happy about the present situation. Indeed, professionals and public alike believe the process to be flawed. I ask him not to wait until the end of the so-called consultation process. I ask him to instigate an investigation into Greater Glasgow NHS Board's handling of the whole affair of the maternity services review. I plead with him on behalf of the public and professionals to wait for the three-month process to be undertaken.

The correct thing to do is to ensure that public consultation takes place now. It would not be appropriate for me to take the action that Sandra White suggests. I can certainly assure her that I will pay close attention not only to the substantive arguments that are being made but to the nature of the public consultation. As I made clear this week, when the final decision is made, there will be no question of my just rubber stamping it. Over the next two months, which is the length of the remainder of the consultation, I will look in great detail at the issues. I have already started to do that and I assure her and others that I will continue to do that.

Last week, in an answer to Jackie Baillie on the issue of maternity services, the minister said that he had asked NHS Greater Glasgow and NHS Argyll and Clyde

"for a more detailed report … on the pattern of patient choice between Glasgow and Paisley"—[Official Report, Written Answers, 20 October 2003.]

in relation to maternity services. However, he said that the report would not be available until "April 2004". How can he allow a decision of this magnitude to take place when he does not even have that detailed report?

As I indicated, the reality is that the proposal from Greater Glasgow NHS Board will probably not come to me for another three or four months, which will be in alignment with the time scale that Tommy Sheridan indicated. However, he has flagged up an important issue, which will be raised again in Carolyn Leckie's question. I will deal with the regional dimension at that point. I made it clear to NHS Argyll and Clyde that I was not going simply to rubber stamp its proposals. I am asking for further work to be done.

---

Audiology Graduates

To ask the Scottish Executive how many students it expects to graduate within NHS Scotland in an audiology discipline in each of the next three years. (S2O-655)

NHS Education for Scotland has been asked to report to ministers before the end of this year on the options for education and training for audiology services in Scotland. Clearly, however, a new undergraduate course will involve a lead time of a number of years before audiology students graduate in Scotland.

Will the minister outline the progress that has been made in improving audiology services following the needs assessment report that was commissioned in 2001? Is he satisfied with the progress that is being made to establish new training places for audiology services? Does he have any plans to meet the training providers soon to discuss the matter?

The audiology report of 2001 highlighted significant gaps in service provision. We have always known that there would be no overnight solutions to plugging the gaps in that service. However, since the publication of the report, we have committed investment of more than £19 million—£9 million of which I announced recently. We have established an audiology project board, chaired by an NHS board chief executive, and we have appointed a project manager to oversee the implementation of the service and drive forward improvements.

As I said, I expect a report on progress on undergraduate training to be produced before the end of the year. If progress is insufficient, I am more than happy to add ministerial weight to those discussions.

On the aspect of ministerial weight, given that the current waiting time for a hearing test in the Scottish Borders is almost a year, what assistance will the minister give to NHS Borders, which has one of the highest levels of elderly population in Scotland, to reduce that shocking statistic? There is not much point in digital hearing aid programmes if people have to wait a year for a hearing test.

I indicated in my previous answer that we know that there are significant gaps in provision. That is why the various initiatives that I outlined have been taken. Each NHS board in Scotland has been asked for their modernisation plans. When the plans are received the Executive will consider them and an adequate response will be made. That is as much the case for Borders NHS Board as it is for any other board.

Can the minister confirm that the target of the 2004-05 academic year for the start of the BSc audiology course could still be realistic? I was a little concerned when he referred to the fact that it might be introduced several years down the line. Can he confirm that 2004-05 is a realistic target?

I am not in a position to confirm that time scale as realistic because the discussions have not yet been concluded and the report has not come to ministers—as I said, it will not come to ministers until the end of the year. I realise that there is a need for urgency. We will pursue the matter as soon as the information is available.

---

Genetically Modified Crops

To ask the Scottish Executive when it intends to make a statement on its plans for the future of genetically modified crops. (S2O-663)

A statement will be made when we have had the opportunity to evaluate both the outcome of the dialogue on genetically modified crops and the advice from the Advisory Committee on Releases to the Environment on the implications of the farm-scale evaluation results.

Will the minister assure me that when decisions are being reached on the future of GM crops the precautionary principle will be rigorously applied? Will he take full account of the failure of the seed companies to provide pure samples for the recent trials in north-east Fife and elsewhere, which cast doubt on their ability to maintain separation of GM and non-GM materials? Will he also take full account of the recently published reports on the field trials, which suggest that farming methods associated with GM oil-seed rape are damaging to biodiversity?

I am pleased to give Iain Smith the assurances that he seeks. I go further and say that development of our future policy will be based on all the relevant information, including the outcome of the public debate to which he refers, the science review, the study on costs and benefits, and the results of the farm-scale evaluations, on which we will of course seek additional expert advice from ACRE prior to making any response. I suspect that a response will be made towards the end of the year or at the beginning of the new year.

Does the minister agree that the delay and indecision that have followed the discussions on the GM issue during the summer are damaging to the clean image of food in Scotland? Will he make it possible for a case to be made to the European Union for a GM moratorium in Scotland as soon as possible, so that we can end the indecision?

No. I do not agree with any of that. Last night, I was in discussion with colleagues in the ministries in Wales, Northern Ireland and Westminster about the development of the policy, which will continue to be science based and will continue to constitute responsible policy making. I have had this conversation with Mr Gibson in the past. He knows that it would be contrary to the EU single market for any member state or any part of any member state to impose the type of restrictions that he would seek to impose on the development of GM technology in this country.

I remind the minister of EU directive 2001/18/EC, on the deliberate release into the environment of genetically modified organisms, which states:

"The competent authority should give its consent only after it has been satisfied that the release will be safe for human health and the environment."

Given the results of the science, will the Scottish Executive now state that it, as the competent authority, will follow that directive and not give consent for the release of genetically modified organisms?

That is an unproven case as yet. I said to Mr Smith and repeat to Mr Ballard that we will take expert advice from the scientific community on the outcome of the farm-scale evaluations. I make one observation in advance of that: given that, in coming to our decision, we will apply the European regulatory framework to which Mr Ballard refers, any decision that we take will protect human health and our environment. However, the outcome of the farm-scale evaluations demonstrated clearly that the worst as well as the best result for biodiversity was from conventional farming.

---

East Lothian Schools Public-Private Partnership

To ask the Scottish Executive what involvement it has had, and plans to have, in the East Lothian schools public-private partnership. (S2O-641)

The Scottish Executive's role in all schools public-private partnerships, including the one in East Lothian, is to consider bids for financial support on the basis of business cases submitted by authorities. We also provide general advice and guidance as projects progress to contract signature. Thereafter, matters arising are subject to the agreed contracts.

Does the Scottish Executive share concerns about the fact that Ballast plc has now been placed in administration? Can the Executive tell us who owns the schools in East Lothian as of today? Should the Executive have to provide financial support at any time for the project to complete, would that not undermine the argument that PPP is off balance sheet and that the private sector takes the risk?

As I understand it, the position is that East Lothian Council and the administrator are taking matters forward on the basis of the contractual position. The Executive has no present plans to intervene or to provide financial support. Fiona Hyslop asks about matters of contract between the parties concerned. It is my understanding, from East Lothian Council, that matters are being taken forward and may be resolved imminently.

The minister will be aware of the effect that the collapse of Ballast plc is having on local subcontractors. One long-standing family firm in my constituency is set to lose 350 jobs as a result of it. Can the Executive do anything to put pressure on the administrator to deal with the matter as timeously as possible to try to ensure that payments are made? I am interested that the minister says that some movement on the matter may be imminent. Will he give us any further details about that?

The matter of the subcontractors, which Mrs Smith has been assiduous in following up on behalf of her constituents, should be taken up with the administrator by the legal agents retained by the subcontractor. It is not for the Executive to intervene and raise the matter with the administrator. It is a matter of contract between the contractor, the subcontractor and the administrator working to recover the contractor's position.

East Lothian Council has given general indications that progress is being made with the administrator. My understanding is that there may, in the near future, be a possibility of a company taking over Ballast's assets, but not necessarily its liabilities. However, that too is a matter between the council, the administrator and those involved in the contract.

Notwithstanding opportunist political gripes from a nationalist list member who has some kind of ideological objection to the investment of millions of pounds in improvements to schools in East Lothian, is the minister aware that there are already several high-quality bids to take on the PPP contracts, and that the project should be back on track within the next few weeks at no extra cost to East Lothian Council? In relation to the point raised by Margaret Smith, will the Executive consider ways to ensure that Ballast's administrator hands over the £2 million that has been paid for work that has been done by about 20 local subcontractors? Would it not be a scandal if those companies were to be done out of their legitimate earnings?

I am fully aware of the implications for the subcontractors, and I will consider the member's remarks. I agree that East Lothian Council has acted quickly to try to recover the position. The Executive has not been party to those negotiations, nor should it be. However, as I have said, I will consider the member's comments.

---

Primary Medical Services (Scotland) Bill (Remote Areas)

To ask the Scottish Executive how the Primary Medical Services (Scotland) Bill will help improve access to health services in remote rural areas. (S2O-627)

The Primary Medical Services (Scotland) Bill and the contractual arrangements that it underpins will benefit general practitioners and patients in remote and rural areas, just as they will benefit people in more urban settings. For example, they will assist recruitment and retention and will facilitate the development of a broader range of high-quality services in primary care, with a 33 per cent increase in resources for primary care over a three-year period.

It will come as no surprise to the minister that my concern regards the factor of distance and remoteness. The minister's colleague the First Minister will know from his recent visit to Stoer what we are talking about with regard to long distances in the north-west of Sutherland. Out-of-hours cover is the issue and I seek reassurance from the minister that there will not be a problem in that area, as there is a fear that there might be. I ask him to work as closely as possible with NHS Highland to ensure that a problem does not emerge in that regard.

I shall certainly work with NHS Highland. In addition, the group that is working on out-of-hours provision is working with NHS boards, and work on the issue is also being undertaken with boards through the remote and rural areas resource initiative.

Jamie Stone is right in what he says. The new contract is good in that it provides extra resources and, under the new formula, gives an extra weighting to rural issues. Overall, it is a very good contract for rural areas, as it is for urban areas. Work is being done on out-of-hours services. I saw some of the redesign work, which involved using paramedics in new ways, when I visited Moray during the summer. GPs and nurses will of course be involved too. There is great scope for services to be delivered in different ways. Any transfer of services will be made only to an accredited alternative provider.

The minister knows about concerns in Stirling constituency about out-of-hours provision under the new general medical services contract, particularly at an inducement practice in Killin. Can he provide details of the discussions on inducement practices that are continuing between the minister's officials, the Scottish General Practitioners Committee and the Rural Practices Association?

Some of the details are still being negotiated, but inducement practitioners can be reassured. As I said at a previous question time, their current income is guaranteed. In fact, the situation is improving for them. Not only will they benefit by the new formula, which is particularly beneficial for rural areas, but the current system, whereby practitioners who earn extra income beyond a certain point have that clawed back, will end. Inducement practitioners will certainly benefit from the new contract, as will primary care health care professionals and, more important, patients throughout Scotland.

---

Healthy Eating

To ask the Scottish Executive what plans it has to advance healthy eating in light of the recent reported issues with its healthy eating advice line. (S2O-662)

We will continue to take forward healthy eating as part of the integrated and wide-ranging strategy that was set out in "Eating for Health: a Diet Action Plan for Scotland" and which was included in "Improving Health in Scotland—The Challenge".

I agree with what the minister has outlined, but I wonder whether he might comment on a couple of ideas. Could he undertake to instigate discussions with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities as to how it might use the new well-being measures in local government legislation to dissuade people from selling food that is frankly antisocial, and which has a very high fat content?

Secondly, will he take the initiative in convening a European conference on the issue, which must be tackled throughout Europe? The conference should be charged with finding areas of common interest and ways in which European Governments and Administrations such as ours might dissuade the manufacturers and advertisers of junk food from getting at children through children's media.

As has been made clear in a number of documents, we see local authorities as an important part of health promotion in Scotland. Our discussions with local authorities through COSLA continue and I know that local government is keen to play an active part in improving Scotland's health. A number of initiatives have already taken place and cities such as Glasgow will show the way through the health promotion initiatives that they will launch in the near future.

As I am interested in promoting healthy eating and health improvement in Scotland, I would like first to spend my time concentrating on this country; perhaps I will think more about the European Union later.

What is the Executive doing to promote healthy eating in schools and hospitals? What can the Executive do to challenge the burger-chips-and-fizzy-drink mentality in schools and to improve the quality of food that is on offer? Is the minister aware of Unison Scotland's food for good campaign, which aims to turn hospital food into a byword for excellence rather than for poor quality?

A number of initiatives are taking place and have been discussed before in the Parliament. They include encouraging healthy eating in schools and the production of nutritional standards for food in hospitals and other public places. A considerable amount of work is being done to ensure that food that is consumed in public facilities is of a proper quality and meets appropriate nutritional standards. I am happy to endorse any initiative, such as the Unison campaign, that aims to improve nutritional standards in the food that is served in public places throughout Scotland.

---

European Constitution

To ask the Scottish Executive what discussions it has had with Her Majesty's Government about the representation of Scotland's interests at the intergovernmental conference on the proposed European constitution. (S2O-652)

The Scottish Executive has been and remains in close contact with the United Kingdom Government in order to ensure that Scotland's interests continue to be represented at the intergovernmental conference.

Is the minister aware that the UK Government has made no objections in the IGC to the handing over of exclusive control of Scotland's fishing industry to the European Union? Will he clarify whether that is a result of the UK's ignoring the Scottish Executive's representations or of the Scottish Executive's failure to press the Scottish fishing industry's case with UK ministers? Does he agree that, if Scotland were an independent member of the European Union, there would be no question of our fishing industry being so badly let down because no Scottish Government worthy of the name would allow that to happen?

If Scotland were an independent nation it would sit in a far corner of the room with little or no influence over what happens in Europe. In that case, the views of our fishing industry, farmers and communities would not be well represented by an independent Scottish representative in the IGC or in any other European forum. The Hain paper, which was promoted in concert in Scotland and Wales, will ensure that, under European subsidiarity, regional Governments and sub-national Parliaments such as ours will be at the heart of Europe when it comes to accountability, consultation and decision making. That will make a real difference. I do not agree one bit with Nicola Sturgeon's interpretation of the situation of the fishing industry in Europe.

Given the importance of the EU constitution, will the Scottish Executive make representations to Her Majesty's Government to seek a Britain-wide referendum on the constitution? If the British people find the constitution offensive, they should have the right to throw it out.

The member really wants a referendum to take Britain out of Europe. If we read the conclusions of his party's think-tanks and the treatises and leaflets that his party's MPs have written, we see that that party aims to create a different Europe altogether; one that is about trading and nothing else. To divorce ourselves from most of the institutions in Europe would mean that we would lose all the value and benefit that we get from Europe and do Scotland no good.

For a referendum to be required, there must be a proposal for substantial change in relationships between the member organisations and the EU. However, a substantial change will not take place. Murdo Fraser's party said that the Nice treaty was the end of democracy as we knew it but, of course, many years down the line that process has resulted in no great change to Scottish and UK democracy.

Will the minister join me in welcoming to the gallery senators from the Czech Republic? [Applause.] Does he agree that the IGC and European enlargement provide opportunities for Scotland? Does he believe—as I do—that it is on the foundations of educational, cultural and business links that the new Europe will progress and move forward with Scotland playing a full part in that?

That is absolutely correct. European enlargement offers great opportunities for Europe and its nation states, including Scotland.

I was over in the Czech Republic recently, and I was welcomed there. I return that welcome in warmly welcoming the senators to Scotland. I saw democratic changes and reforms there and I saw the way forward for Europe, involving wider state coverage within Europe. Those are very positive things. In the British embassy in Prague, I met British and Scottish suppliers in order to ensure that the trade and learning that we can pass on to our colleagues in the Czech Republic were being passed on. That presents advantages and benefits to Scotland as a whole.

---

Housing Grants (Water Supply)

To ask the Scottish Executive whether, under the terms of the new housing grants scheme, local authorities may make grants in relation to applications made under the terms and conditions of the old scheme, with particular reference to water supply provision where current installations have been declared unfit for use. (S2O-666)

Local authorities may continue to award grants under the terms and conditions of the old scheme if an application was approved before the new scheme came into effect or if the grant is linked to a statutory notice made before that same date. A statutory notice could have been made in relation to a house that lacks a wholesome water supply.

From a quick assessment of that, I believe that I can take some encouragement. Can the minister confirm that, under the transitional arrangements under note 19 of the terms of guidance, an improvement order or a repair notice could be taken as an indication that a water supply that has previously been subject to a grant should be considered for a grant under the old terms of the scheme?

I hesitate to give Phil Gallie any further encouragement, in case he makes a point of order. Nevertheless, I think that he can take some encouragement from that.

---

Maternity Services

To ask the Scottish Executive what progress has been made on regional and national planning in relation to the provision of maternity services. (S2O-651)

The report of the expert group on acute maternity services makes it clear that acute maternity services should be planned and commissioned in a regional context. To help to facilitate that, we have provided funding for a regional maternity services co-ordinator in each of the three regional planning groups. I also emphasised the importance of looking at maternity services across board boundaries when I responded to the Argyll and Clyde maternity proposals last week.

As the minister indicated in reply to Jackie Baillie's question, he shares my concerns about the lack of regional planning. Does he also share my concern that an inspection of the minutes of the meetings of Argyll and Clyde NHS Board and Greater Glasgow NHS Board shows that there was no one from the neighbouring health boards in attendance at any of those important decision-making meetings? Does he share my concern that there is no reference to any research having been conducted into the impact of the changes across health board boundaries and that the Glasgow area medical committee has not been asked for its opinion on the proposals in Argyll and Clyde? In the context of competing rationales being put forward for stand-alone maternity units in Argyll and Clyde and for the closure of an obstetric unit at the Queen Mother's hospital, does the minister agree that, until there is proper and accountable planning, there should be a moratorium on all maternity closures?

I do not think that we can have a moratorium, because it is widely recognised that some of the current services are not sustainable. However, I certainly accept that we need to do more in a regional context. That is why I asked both Argyll and Clyde and Glasgow NHS boards to undertake further work in that area. It is important that we do not look at the matter just in the context of board boundaries. That is my strong view and it is the view of the expert working group on acute maternity services report to which I have referred.

Therefore, there is a strong regional dimension to the issue and a strong national dimension in terms of the framework that the EGAMS report outlines. Obviously, Carolyn Leckie raised other points about community midwife-led units and Yorkhill. I have talked about Yorkhill, but just as there are different views on Yorkhill, so there are different views on community midwife-led units. Carolyn Leckie has a view and many other people, including other midwives, have different views. Certainly, the EGAMS report believes that there is a place for community midwife-led units. That is certainly an important way of giving women choice and the opportunity of local delivery.

---

Police (Racism and Sectarianism)

To ask the Scottish Executive what steps it is taking to ensure that racism and sectarianism have no place in the Scottish police service at grass-roots level. (S2O-634)

A wide range of measures have been put in place to promote and improve race equality within the Scottish police service and to ensure that racism is not tolerated. All police forces now have detailed guidance to enable them to fulfil their statutory commitment to eliminate unlawful discrimination, as well as racial diversity performance indicators covering recruitment, retention and career development.

Thank you—that is encouraging. Can the minister ensure that the police take the most effective action that they can to deal with recruitment and training? Unfortunately, some police recruits reflect the racism, sectarianism and prejudice that are present in parts of our society and the police force has to try to educate its recruits out of such attitudes. Will she encourage that to happen?

I put on record again that there is no place for racism or sectarianism in the police force, or in any part of Scottish society. We must be constantly vigilant to ensure that recruitment processes and training stop people from having such attitudes and deal effectively with the problems when they arise.

---

Scottish Forests (Support)

To ask the Scottish Executive whether it accepts the conclusions of the recent University of Newcastle upon Tyne study that stated that Scottish forests contribute £104 million per year in total benefits and whether current support for Scottish forests is adequate. (S2O-659)

Yes, ministers are pleased to accept the conclusions in the report "The Social and Environmental Benefits of Forests in Great Britain". The estimated value of public benefit supports the rationale behind the Scottish forestry grants scheme and the continuing management of Scotland's national forests by the Forestry Commission Scotland.

I thank the minister for his answer. Given the significant social and environmental benefits that Scottish forests provide, will the Executive seek to take full advantage of the current opportunities that the reform of the common agricultural policy affords by modulating funds into rural development measures at the maximum possible level, thereby ensuring that woodland and agri-environment schemes are more adequately funded in the future?

There are different historical aspects to that, which have produced a set of circumstances in relation to wider CAP spend. Mr Finnie would certainly wish to consider those matters in the context of the opportunity for discussion of the balance of support. The university study, of course, does not compare values from forestry with the values from other activities including agriculture, but seeks merely to quantify environmental and other public benefits that accrue from forestry investment.

---

Edinburgh Royal Infirmary (Generators)

To ask the Scottish Executive whether the provision of standby generators at Edinburgh royal infirmary is adequate. (S2O-649)

The site has three generators, any two of which can provide for the full requirements of the hospital. There were differences between the two recent power interruption incidents at the ERI. The first one, on 4 September, was due to equipment issues; a forensic examination of equipment and systems has been undertaken. The second, on 21 October, was due to human error, and a programme of retraining for engineering staff at the infirmary has already started.

I thank the minister for his answer. Given the obvious dangers that a loss of electrical power represents in a state-of-the-art hospital—there have been two such losses in as many months—and given the remarks of the chairman of the Lothian NHS Board, Brian Cavanagh, who said that he had "little or no trust" in Consort Healthcare (Edinburgh Royal Infirmary) Ltd's ability to provide such electrical power, does the minister believe that the recent episodes expose again the fact that private finance initiative projects put profits ahead of the need to save lives and to provide quality health care for the people of the Lothians? Is it not time that the new royal infirmary was taken into public ownership?

It is quite a big jump from two power interruptions to that conclusion. I understand the extreme frustration and dissatisfaction of the chair of Lothian NHS Board, Brian Cavanagh, and I commend him for the robust attitude that he has taken towards Consort Healthcare. It is unacceptable that such power cuts happen. As I explained in my initial answer, robust action is being taken to deal with the problem and we do not expect the power supply to be interrupted again. There is now 24-hour cover by permanent engineering staff should anything go wrong again.

That concludes question time. As usual, I ask members leaving the chamber to do so quickly and quietly.