Scottish Parliament, 26 February 2014

297 contributions from 59 members. The official report.

Finance, Employment and Sustainable Growth

Elaine Smith (Labour, Coatbridge and Chryston)

Good afternoon. The first item of business is portfolio questions. I have a huge number of prenotified supplementary question requests, so in order to get in as many members as possible, I would prefer succinct questions, with answers to match, please.

Glasgow City Council (Meetings)

Paul Martin (Labour, Glasgow Provan)

1. To ask the Scottish Government when it last met representatives of Glasgow City Council. (S4O-02927)

Derek Mackay (Scottish National Party, Renfrewshire North and West)

The Scottish Government regularly meets representatives of Scotland’s councils, including Glasgow City Council, to discuss a range of issues.

Paul Martin (Labour, Glasgow Provan)

Will the minister enlighten me on whether, in his discussions with Glasgow City Council or any other council, he has said whether the Government still intends to introduce its flagship policy of implementing a local income tax?

Derek Mackay (Scottish National Party, Renfrewshire North and West)

Paul Martin will welcome the Scottish Government’s delivery of the council tax freeze for a number of previous years and again in this financial year. We will produce in this parliamentary session a consultation on replacement of the unfair council tax, in line with what is in the manifesto on which the Scottish National Party was elected to government.

Independence (Currency)

Elaine Murray (Labour, Dumfriesshire)

2. To ask the Scottish Government what economic risks an independent Scotland would face if it was to use sterling without being in a formal currency union with the rest of the United Kingdom. (S4O-02928)

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The fiscal commission working group set out a number of viable currency options for a country of Scotland’s size and economic strength. It concluded that retaining sterling as part of a formal monetary union with the rest of the United Kingdom would be the best option for an independent Scotland and for the rest of the UK. The Scottish Government is clear that an independent Scotland will retain sterling, and we have set out our currency proposals on pages 109 to 117 of “Scotland’s Future”.

Elaine Murray (Labour, Dumfriesshire)

It was reported in this morning’s press that Alistair Cotton, the head of corporate dealing at Currencies Direct, has said that using a currency without a formal union would leave an independent Scotland

“without the economic levers to support its ... financial sector”

fully. Owen Kelly of Scottish Financial Enterprise believes that using the pound without a formal currency union could threaten Scotland’s membership of the European Union. Is continuing to use the pound, irrespective of currency union, a viable plan B?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

As I said to Dr Murray in my original answer, the fiscal commission working group looked at a number of viable options and it assessed and considered the contents of the different propositions. The Scottish Government is clear that we support and endorse the fiscal commission working group’s preferred option, which is to retain sterling as part of a formal monetary union with the rest of the United Kingdom. The Scottish Government will continue to set out that proposition to the people of our country.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Very briefly, Marco Biagi.

Marco Biagi (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Central)

Alistair Darling has been noted as saying that a currency union is “logical” and “desirable”, but added to that now is Jackson Carlaw’s endorsement of such a union as being “rational and sensible”. Does the finance secretary agree that, on a currency union, George Osborne now and George Osborne the day after a yes vote will be very different, not least because it will be in the overwhelming interests of Scotland and the rest of the UK to conclude the deal and to do so swiftly?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Mr Biagi makes a fair and strong point. The Scottish Government has clearly made the point that businesses south of the border will save on transaction costs as a consequence of a formal currency union. We estimate that those costs would amount to £500 million, which would be significant for businesses in the rest of the United Kingdom.

Another aspect is that, if George Osborne sustained the line of argument that he advanced in his speech in Edinburgh a week past Thursday, he would be arguing for the rest of the UK to assume the entire national debt of the UK. I do not imagine that taxpayers south of the border will want to wrestle with that obligation, which would be greater than what would exist if a formal currency union were to be established between Scotland and the rest of the UK.

Murdo Fraser (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

The cabinet secretary and his colleagues are fond of quoting Nobel prize winning economists. I wonder whether he read the piece in The New York Times on Monday by the Nobel prize winning economist Paul Krugman, who, in relation to what the independence campaign has said about currency, said:

“what it has said on that crucial subject seems deeply muddle-headed ... sharing a common currency without having a shared federal government is very dangerous.”

Is that not a damning verdict on Mr Swinney’s policy?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

No.

Alex Johnstone (Conservative, North East Scotland)

Yes.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Order.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

What is worthy of analysis is the comparison between the fiscal commission working group’s report and the speech that was delivered in Edinburgh by the governor of the Bank of England. [Interruption.]

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Order, please.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

If Murdo Fraser was to go off and do some homework and look at the contents of the fiscal commission working group’s report—the issues it raises and the solutions it offers to some of the issues relating to a currency zone—and compare that with the analysis that was put forward fairly, reasonably and dispassionately by the governor of the Bank of England, he would find that there is a clear and robust relationship between the thinking of what is in the fiscal commission working group’s report and what is in the governor of the Bank of England’s statement to the people whom he addressed in Edinburgh.

That analysis must have struck Alistair Darling as making the case for a currency zone “logical” and “desirable”. I am absolutely delighted that Jackson Carlaw has added his significant influence to that, as part of the discussion that we are having.

Scotland Act 2012 (Tax Avoidance)

Stewart Stevenson (Scottish National Party, Banffshire and Buchan Coast)

3. To ask the Scottish Government how it will tackle avoidance of the taxes devolved under the Scotland Act 2012. (S4O-02929)

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I have made clear this Government’s determination to act decisively on avoidance of devolved taxes. The Revenue Scotland and Tax Powers Bill, which is currently before Parliament, contains powers that will enable revenue Scotland to take robust action to counteract tax avoidance, and we have included anti-avoidance measures in both the devolved taxes acts that this Parliament has already passed.

Stewart Stevenson (Scottish National Party, Banffshire and Buchan Coast)

Is the cabinet secretary aware that the latest HM Revenue and Customs figures report that the United Kingdom Government is failing to collect £35 billion in taxes through avoidance schemes, illegal tax dodging and mistaken underpayments? Given that Scotland’s share of the amount that is being lost to the UK Treasury is approximately £3.47 billion, can the minister tell us how Scotland would benefit between now and 2016 if the UK Government were to implement a general anti-avoidance rule?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

As I made clear to Parliament in the introduction of the Revenue Scotland and Tax Powers Bill, the bill will include a general anti-avoidance rule that is simple and more comprehensive than the corresponding provisions that the UK Government is considering. Our general anti-avoidance rule is designed to catch artificial tax-avoidance arrangements, whereas the UK approach is based on a narrow test of abuse.

Our general anti-avoidance rule will, of course, apply only to devolved taxes. If we had the ability to apply it across the full range of taxes, we could apply the ethos and approach that I have set out to consideration of wider taxation issues.

In introducing the Revenue Scotland and Tax Powers Bill, I have made it clear that I want Parliament to consider and to test the provisions that the Government is putting in place. If there are measures that Parliament believes would strengthen the general anti-avoidance rule that we have advanced, I would be very open to considering them and to ensuring that Scotland embarks on its approach to tax collection with as robust an approach to tackling tax avoidance as possible.

Patrick Harvie (Green, Glasgow)

The cabinet secretary has spoken about building a new culture of stopping tax avoidance so that we never see the scenario that the UK has in place, in which so much more effort is spent on chasing a relatively small amount of benefit fraud than is spent on chasing a vast amount of tax evasion by the wealthiest. A general anti-avoidance rule is a good start, but does the cabinet secretary agree that additional measures such as conditions on public procurement or conditions on corporate welfare payments, such as legal selective assistance grants, can create additional disincentives for companies to engage in tax avoidance?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I reiterate the last point that I made to Stewart Stevenson, which is that the Scottish Government intends to embark on the design of a tax-collection system with maximum intolerance of tax avoidance. The test that I have set my officials, and on which I have been advised by the tax consultation forum—whose contribution I value enormously in relation to the formulation of the Revenue Scotland and Tax Powers Bill—has been to take that maximalist approach. I know that Patrick Harvie will support that approach, given his contribution to the matter over many years in Parliament.

We have brought forward a sophisticated proposition in the bill. The invitation is there to Parliament to test the position and see whether it can be taken a stage further. Obviously, I will engage seriously with the issue when feedback from Parliament is received.

It is important that we ensure in the design of every measure that we undertake that it is legally compliant—something that the Government would have to wrestle with in relation to the procurement legislation that Mr Harvie suggested—and that we take every step that we can in our wider policy interventions to ensure that the spirit and the letter of measures to tackle tax avoidance are reflected in all our actions.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

We will hear a brief supplementary from Gavin Brown, and, I hope, a brief answer.

Gavin Brown (Conservative, Lothian)

The cabinet secretary said that he had a “sophisticated proposition”. Can he share with Parliament the targets that have been set for revenue Scotland in relation to tax avoidance?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I want to minimise tax avoidance. I am certainly not going to go around saying that X amount of tax avoidance is okay. What an absolutely absurd proposition.

Gavin Brown (Conservative, Lothian)

It is in the financial memorandum.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Order.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I want to ensure that the Scottish Government is able to take all possible steps to tackle tax avoidance and to put in place the measures to do so.

Public Sector Staff Recruitment and Retention (North-east Scotland)

Richard Baker (Labour, North East Scotland)

4. To ask the Scottish Government what recent discussions ministers have had with Aberdeen City Council and Aberdeenshire Council and public sector agencies in the north-east regarding the recruitment and retention of staff. (S4O-02930)

Derek Mackay (Scottish National Party, Renfrewshire North and West)

The Scottish Government and public bodies have policy and delivery functions across Scotland. Any allocation of central Scottish Government resources, such as to health boards and councils, is typically distributed through needs-based formulae that incorporate indicators such as population, deprivation and rurality.

It is for councils, in collaboration with their community planning partners, to determine appropriate use of the resources that are under their control, including decisions on recruitment and retention of staff.

Richard Baker (Labour, North East Scotland)

Last week, in the Evening Express, Richard Carey talked about the difficulty of recruiting to the health sector and other public sector bodies in Grampian, and both local authorities have highlighted problems with recruitment due to the high cost of living in Aberdeen and the north-east more widely. What consideration has the Scottish Government given, or what consideration will it give, to the calls of trade unions and others in the area for an Aberdeen weighting?

Derek Mackay (Scottish National Party, Renfrewshire North and West)

We are able to give local employers the flexibility to deliver schemes that are suitable for local circumstances, where there are pressure points. With regard to the health service, the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Wellbeing receives updates about any vacancies that arise. We keep a close watch on the issue.

The matter that Richard Baker raises relates to the general issue of resourcing. Things would be somewhat easier for Aberdeen City Council in that regard if it had access to the £7.3 million that the Labour Party has denied the area, having turned down the needs-based formula that would on this occasion have supported that local authority. I ask the Labour Party to look closely at the mess that it has created in the city.

Maureen Watt (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen South and North Kincardine)

Does the minister agree that the main problem in recruitment and retention of staff is the lack of affordable housing in the area, and that it would be better for the Labour-led council to agree with the proposal of the Scottish National Party group on the council that the strategic infrastructure plan should include the building of 2,000 council houses, instead of the council’s suggestion to build 1,000 private sector and shared-equity homes?

Derek Mackay (Scottish National Party, Renfrewshire North and West)

Clearly, housing is a critical issue in relation to the concerns around growth and demand in that part of the country. I am sure that Maureen Watt will welcome the fact that Aberdeen and Aberdeenshire’s share of housing resources has increased, in terms of the housing planning resource assumptions.

Furthermore, if we had followed the needs-based formula, not only would revenue to Aberdeen City Council have increased but capital would have increased as well, which would have given the council even greater flexibility to deliver on housing targets. I am at a complete loss as to why the Labour leadership in Aberdeen City Council has turned down extra resources for its area. It seems to be the result of ignorance, incompetence and ineptitude.

Chancellor of the Exchequer (Meetings)

John Pentland (Labour, Motherwell and Wishaw)

5. To ask the Scottish Government when the Cabinet Secretary for Finance, Employment and Sustainable Growth last met the Chancellor of the Exchequer and what was discussed. (S4O-02931)

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Scottish ministers regularly meet ministers from the United Kingdom Treasury to promote the steps that we are taking within our limited powers to deliver a more prosperous and fairer Scotland. I will engage with UK ministers in the coming weeks to highlight Scotland’s priorities for the UK budget in March.

John Pentland (Labour, Motherwell and Wishaw)

I assume that you are not sticking with plan A like the Deputy First Minister, so will you tell me whether the First Minister’s plan B would be a temporary fix and, if so, for how long using the pound without a currency union would last before we were forced to consider a plan C?

The Deputy Presiding Officer

I remind members to speak through the chair.

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

As I explained in my answer to Dr Murray, the Scottish Government took the advice of the fiscal commission working group, which considered a range of what it described as “viable currency options” for an independent Scotland. We accepted its preferred approach, which is the establishment of a currency zone and continued use of the pound sterling, which is Scotland’s currency as much as it is that of the rest of the United Kingdom. That is the approach that the Scottish Government will continue to express to the people of our country.

John Mason (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Shettleston)

Will the cabinet secretary confirm that he will, if he meets the chancellor, discuss the debt as well as the pound, and the suggested figure of something like £25,000 per head by which Scotland will be better off if the chancellor refuses to share both?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Mr Mason makes the point that, if the chancellor wishes to continue with the line of argument that he took during his speech in Edinburgh, he will be signing up to saddling the United Kingdom with additional debts of up to £130 billion and debt servicing charges of between £4 billion and £5.5 billion each year. That is equivalent to increasing the basic rate of income tax by 1p.

If the chancellor wishes to sustain that line of argument and explain it to the people of the rest of the United Kingdom, that is up to him. However, it is an example of why the story from the UK Treasury will change once there is a successful yes vote in the referendum, and the practical benefits and realities of a currency zone between Scotland and the rest of the United Kingdom are clearly demonstrated and deliverable.

Malcolm Chisholm (Labour, Edinburgh Northern and Leith)

John Mason raised an interesting question. Many people in Scotland might think that there is some attraction in what he suggests because we would not have to pay that money in debt. However, many disadvantages would clearly go along with that scenario. Why cannot the cabinet secretary be honest with the people and spell out what he regards as the disadvantages?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Mr Chisholm should know that the fiscal commission assessed a number of credible and viable currency options for an independent Scotland. The Scottish Government accepted the preferred option that the commission proposed, which was the establishment of a currency zone. We have set out that argument. It is strong and compelling not only for Scotland but for the rest of the United Kingdom. We will continue to put that point of view to the people of our country.

Minister for Youth Employment Visits (Stirling)

Bruce Crawford (Scottish National Party, Stirling)

6. To ask the Scottish Government when the Minister for Youth Employment will next visit the Stirling constituency. (S4O-02932)

Angela Constance (Scottish National Party, Almond Valley)

As it happens, I will visit Mr Crawford’s constituency tomorrow. I look forward very much to visiting Fallin Community Enterprises and learning more about its recyke-a-bike project and the contribution that the project is making to employability in the Stirling area.

Bruce Crawford (Scottish National Party, Stirling)

As members might imagine, I am delighted that the minister will visit the Stirling constituency tomorrow to see for herself the great work that is undertaken at the recyke-a-bike project at Riverside.

In the meantime, will the minister please confirm how many modern apprenticeships were completed in Scotland between 1 April and the end of December 2013 and how many were in training at the end of December in the Stirling area?

Angela Constance (Scottish National Party, Almond Valley)

As Mr Crawford and other members in the chamber will be well aware, the Scottish Government has signed up to a very ambitious target of 25,000 new modern apprenticeship starts for every year of the lifetime of this Parliament. It was only last week that Skills Development Scotland published information over quarters 1, 2 and 3 to the end of 2013. I am pleased to inform the chamber that we are indeed making very good progress towards meeting that target.

At the end of December 2013 we were at 19,124 modern apprenticeship starts. I am pleased to say that that represents a 7 per cent increase on the number at the end of 2012—that is, there were 1,200 extra starts. In terms of the achievement rate, there has been an 8 per cent increase in modern apprenticeship completions. In response to Mr Crawford’s specific request for information, I note that there were 343 starts in the Stirling local authority area and that the total number of people in training there was 642.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Question 7 was not lodged and an explanation has been provided.

Innovation (Links Between Key Partners)

Jim Eadie (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Southern)

8. To ask the Scottish Government what steps it is taking to establish links between key partners in innovation. (S4O-02934)

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The Scottish Government and its partners already have strong connections in innovation and we are working collectively to develop those links further. Through the Scottish Government’s innovation and entrepreneurship framework, we are developing—with public, private and third sector partners—practical actions that are aimed at developing and embedding a culture of innovation across Scotland.

We are also taking steps to improve industry and academic links by establishing innovation Scotland as well as a network of innovation centres.

Partners in health are collaborating through programmes such as the innovation partnership board and health innovation partnerships. Those initiatives will provide a supportive environment for industry to engage with clinicians and the national health service.

Jim Eadie (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Southern)

I thank the cabinet secretary for that comprehensive answer. Does he agree that the Edinburgh BioQuarter epitomises what can be achieved through successful collaboration between key agencies such as the University of Edinburgh, Scottish Enterprise and NHS Lothian to support innovation in the development of new medicines, diagnostic tools and devices to treat diseases? Also, what more can the Scottish Government do to support and promote Edinburgh as a leading European and global destination for innovation and translational medical research?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The Edinburgh BioQuarter is a stunning example of the collaboration between the University of Edinburgh, Scottish Enterprise and NHS Lothian—and I will add the City of Edinburgh Council to that list.

I chair a biannual forum on the Edinburgh BioQuarter to drive its further development and to open up and realise the opportunities that were highlighted by Mr Eadie in his question. The life sciences advisory board—which is jointly chaired by the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Wellbeing and Dr John Brown of the Scottish Lifesciences Association—provides significant leadership in driving forward the degree of health collaboration that is required.

Scotland is very well placed to be a focal point for innovation within our health service. We continue to develop the links between clinical research, academic research and the private marketplace. The commercialisation programme at the Edinburgh BioQuarter has created seven spin-out companies to date, most recently Edinburgh Molecular Imaging, which was established with a £4 million initial investment led by Edinburgh-based Epidarex Capital. There are many good examples of innovation and investment arising out of that tremendous cluster of healthcare leadership and activity in the Edinburgh BioQuarter.

Spring Budget Revision 2013-14

Gavin Brown (Conservative, Lothian)

9. To ask the Scottish Government what main changes will arise from the 2013-14 spring budget revision. (S4O-02935)

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The substantive changes are detailed in the introduction section of the supporting document to the spring budget revision, which was published on 6 February 2014.

Gavin Brown (Conservative, Lothian)

The budget line “supporting economic growth/housing supply” was £373 million at the autumn budget revision. It is £341.6 million as a result of the spring budget revision. Can the cabinet secretary explain the sudden £30 million drop?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

Issues in connection with the spring budget revision will be considered fully when I appear before the Finance Committee in the next few weeks to discuss the relevant Scottish statutory instrument. As Gavin Brown well knows, we make a range of changes to budget programmes to align them with a variety of factors to satisfy the Government’s financial objectives in any given financial year. I will ensure that all the changes that we are considering for the spring budget revision are considered fully by the Finance Committee when members assess the statutory instrument.

Iain Gray (Labour, East Lothian)

The outturn figures from the 2013-14 spring revision, among many other things, will inform the cabinet secretary’s preparation of a draft budget for 2015-16. We would usually expect to see that document in early September. When does he expect to publish his draft budget this year?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I expect to publish my draft budget in October 2014.

Work Sharing and Work-time Accounts

Ken Macintosh (Eastwood) (Lab)

10. To ask the Scottish Government what its position is on promoting the German model of work sharing and work-time accounts as a means of moderating the worst effects of the recession. (S4O-02936)

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The Scottish Government has used all available powers and resources to allow Scotland to continue to provide the most competitive environment for business in the United Kingdom, and to support employment and protect people during the difficulties of the recession. While employment and industrial relations are currently reserved to the UK Government, we have made clear our commitment to a partnership approach involving employers, employees, trade unions and other interested parties to deliver sustainable economic growth.

Ken Macintosh

Does the cabinet secretary agree that, as we emerge from the recession, we have the perfect opportunity to end the old-fashioned practices and them-and-us attitudes that have so often soured employee-employer relationships and move to more collaborative ways of working? Those could include recognising trade unions; promoting tax transparency and employee representation on boards; and focusing on long-term investment and sustainability and commitment to local communities. To what extent might the cabinet secretary use the Procurement Reform (Scotland) Bill to begin that process?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I agree substantially with Ken Macintosh’s point, which is why, on 11 February, the Government set up an independent review of progressive workplace policies. As I am sure Mr Macintosh is aware, the group will be chaired by my former colleague Jim Mather, who was Minister for Enterprise, Energy and Tourism in the previous session of Parliament. I think that it is beyond dispute that he will bring to that area of policy some of the most creative thinking on how some of the practices of the past can be eliminated and we can work more collaboratively. I am delighted with the participation that has been secured for the review, which will involve representatives from the trade union movement, the public sector and private industry in Scotland. I look to the review to produce some creative thinking on how we can advance these issues.

The Government’s Procurement Reform (Scotland) Bill is designed to ensure that, in the areas of activity in which we are actively procuring goods and services, we can maximise the economic impact and provide sustainable benefits for the Scottish economy and the workforce in Scotland. The Government will seize on any ways in which the bill can be strengthened.

John Wilson (Scottish National Party, Central Scotland)

I draw members’ attention to my entry in the register of interests, and in particular to my membership of Unite the union.

I welcome the cabinet secretary’s statement on building better relations between employers and employees. Can he outline the additional tools that will be available to build further on better relations in an independent Scotland?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

One of the limitations of the current arrangements is that many aspects of employment policy and workplace practice are reserved to the United Kingdom Government. The review that Mr Mather is chairing may well raise issues that stray into areas of policy over which the Scottish Government does not have responsibility. We will be able to reflect on those issues once Scotland has voted yes in the referendum. There is of course a wider range of responsibilities that can be taken forward. In “Scotland’s Future: Your Guide to an Independent Scotland” we have set out plans to establish a fair work commission and a national convention on labour and employment relations, which will emphasise further the partnership approach that the Government believes should be taken on employment issues.

Local Authorities (Private and Institutional Funding)

Alex Johnstone (Conservative, North East Scotland)

11. To ask the Scottish Government how it encourages local authorities to take advantage of the private and institutional funding streams that are available to them. (S4O-02937)

Derek Mackay (Scottish National Party, Renfrewshire North and West)

In the current economic climate, the Scottish Government and local authorities have been working jointly to find innovative ways of financing investment in a range of areas, including through the hubco initiative and the Scotland’s schools for the future programme, which includes revenue-financed secondary schools, and by attracting private investment to support affordable housing.

Alex Johnstone (Conservative, North East Scotland)

The minister might be aware that a number of businesses that operate in Scotland are talking to local authorities about funding, in particular for the construction of affordable housing. Deals are close to completion in many cases, but there seems to be a logjam and an unwillingness on the part of local authorities to take the issue forward. Is there anything that the minister can do to encourage local authorities to make the move and take the opportunity to help people who need housing in Scotland?

Derek Mackay (Scottish National Party, Renfrewshire North and West)

The Scottish Government welcomes opportunities to work in partnership. There can be partnership between local authorities and private developers to deliver housing in a constructive and innovative way. Issues have emerged to do with risks and guarantees, and the Scottish Government has offered constructive support in mediating and navigating our way through such issues.

The unlocking of the potential of the pension funds, for example, to help to deliver sustainable economic growth, is to be encouraged. Scottish Government officials work closely with local authorities to try to unlock that potential.

Island Areas Ministerial Working Group

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

12. To ask the Scottish Government when the island areas ministerial working group will next meet and what will be discussed. (S4O-02938)

Derek Mackay (Scottish National Party, Renfrewshire North and West)

The island areas ministerial working group will next meet on 24 March in Stornoway. Although the agenda has yet to be finalised, the subjects for discussion will be issues of interest and importance to the island council areas.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

The minister will be aware of opposition in the islands to the decision to move control centres for police and fire and rescue services to the central belt, and he will have heard Orkney Islands Council’s criticism of the move. Can he advise the Parliament whether his working group will take time in Stornoway to consider the impact that that decision and other centralising decisions are having on the three island communities, as well as the other issues that will no doubt be discussed?

Derek Mackay (Scottish National Party, Renfrewshire North and West)

I advise Mr McArthur that the island areas ministerial working group will consider whatever items local authorities want to discuss with us. There has been a wide-ranging agenda in that regard.

We will work closely in partnership, in a constructive and positive way, as we approach the referendum and develop the proposition about how we can unlock the islands’ potential in the context of independence. Scottish National Party members understand that only through independence and new powers for Scotland can we truly empower the islands. I look forward to constructive on-going engagement with our island communities.

Mike MacKenzie (Scottish National Party, Highlands and Islands)

I am sure that the minister agrees that the provision of interconnectors to the island groups is one of the most significant problems that our islands face. Does he share my disappointment at the recent decision by wave energy company Seatricity to relocate from Orkney to Cornwall because of a lack of grid connection to Orkney? Does he agree that that is entirely a failure on the part of the United Kingdom Government, which has continually postponed the provision of a new interconnector to Orkney?

Derek Mackay (Scottish National Party, Renfrewshire North and West)

I concur with that. Mr Ewing has been leading work on connectivity on the islands. I am sure that we will return to the subject.

“Coping with the cuts? Local government and poorer communities”

Sarah Boyack (Labour, Lothian)

13. To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to the report by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation, “Coping with the cuts? Local government and poorer communities”. (S4O-02939)

Derek Mackay (Scottish National Party, Renfrewshire North and West)

At a time when the Scottish Government’s budget has been cut by around 11 per cent in real terms over the period from 2010 to 2016 as a result of the Westminster parties’ austerity agendas, the Scottish Government has worked closely with our local government partners to protect communities from the worst of the cuts.

As the interim Joseph Rowntree Foundation report makes clear, Scottish local authorities have fared far better than their English counterparts. Over the four-year period from 2012 to 2016, local government’s revenue funding and capital share will be maintained on a like-for-like basis, with extra moneys for new duties.

Although the Joseph Rowntree Foundation report recognises the protection that we have provided to council budgets in Scotland, it is disappointing that the analysis fails to recognise that the level of funding for individual local authorities in Scotland has until now been determined by the needs-based funding formula agreed by the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities, which is largely the same as the formula that we inherited from the previous Labour Administration and is driven by population and pupil numbers. COSLA has indicated that it wants to move away from the needs-based formula for the 2015-16 settlement.

Sarah Boyack (Labour, Lothian)

Will the minister acknowledge the toxic combination of local budgets falling while costs rise by 10 per cent and the underfunding of the council tax freeze since 2007, which has led to a crisis in council funding and undermined councils’ capacity both to serve low-income groups and to provide the range of services that we would all support across the social spectrum? Will he acknowledge that pitting authority against authority is the antithesis of the partnership working that our constituents urgently need?

Derek Mackay (Scottish National Party, Renfrewshire North and West)

I say again that it is the Scottish Government that has delivered the fair funding settlement to local government. I remind the Labour Party that, this year, it voted for the budget and the share of resources that goes to our local authorities. When the Labour Party was opposing all the previous budgets, I never heard it call for extra resources for local authorities around Scotland.

I quote Councillor Sir Merrick Cockell, the chairman of the Local Government Association south of the border:

“Every year I meet my opposite numbers in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland and they listen to us in wide-eyed disbelief at the budget cuts we are enduring and they are not.”

I agree. We have protected budgets in Scotland to protect our front-line services and the most vulnerable in this country.

Tourism (2014 Priorities)

Rhoda Grant (Labour, Highlands and Islands)

14. To ask the Scottish Government what areas of tourism it is prioritising in 2014. (S4O-02940)

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

In 2014, the Government will be taking forward a range of events with partners. Homecoming Scotland provides the key focus with Scotland joining more than 700 events across the length and breadth of the country, as well as being host to some of the biggest sporting events in the world, such as the 2014 Glasgow Commonwealth games and the Ryder cup, and hosting the MTV Europe awards.

Rhoda Grant (Labour, Highlands and Islands)

Will the cabinet secretary join me in congratulating Lewis, Harris and the Western Isles on coming top of TripAdvisor’s top 10 European islands?

The cabinet secretary will also be aware of the Outer Hebrides Tourism Industry Association’s concerns about ferry capacity to the islands. The Stornoway to Ullapool route was at 84 per cent capacity on sailings in July while the Oban to Lochboisdale route was at 100 per cent for the same period. In the past, I have asked to see stand-by lists to ascertain the level of unmet need, but I cannot access them.

Will the cabinet secretary take steps to monitor, keep a note of and make public the figures for unmet need? Will he also make more capacity available by making the Lochboisdale to Mallaig sailing permanent?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I agree unreservedly with Rhoda Grant’s comments about Lewis and Harris. They have very special places in my heart, and my family and I visit them regularly. We will not have the privilege of wrestling to get on ferries to the Western Isles this summer because we shall be wrestling to get on a ferry to Tiree, which will, I suspect, be as congested as it was last summer.

I take seriously Rhoda Grant’s point about ferry capacity. It is invaluable in ensuring that the tourism industry is able to fulfil all its aspirations during the busy periods of the tourist season. The ferries are also critical at other times of the year because they provide support to communities.

I am not sure of the historical context, but for the first time in my recollection the Government has taken steps to put in place a Mallaig to Lochboisdale ferry connection and I know that it has been welcomed. The Government will, of course, continue to monitor capacity and the utilisation of all ferry routes. It is in all our interests to make sure that we maximise the number of people who are able to visit those most special parts of our country.

Scottish Loan Fund

Christian Allard (Scottish National Party, North East Scotland)

15. To ask the Scottish Government how the Scottish loan fund is helping small and medium-sized enterprises. (S4O-02941)

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

The £113 million Scottish loan fund issues loans that range from £250,000 to £2 million and, in exceptional circumstances, up to £5 million. The fund is aimed at established growth and exporting companies.

Christian Allard (Scottish National Party, North East Scotland)

Does the cabinet secretary agree that the Scottish loan fund’s investment of £3.5 million in Coretrax, an energy services company based in Aberdeen, demonstrates the Scottish Government’s commitment at every level to the continued success of the energy sector?

John Swinney (Scottish National Party, Perthshire North)

I welcome the investment that was made in Coretrax, which is an example of a number of investments that have been made in the oil and gas sector.

On Monday, the Government also announced an oil and gas innovation centre to be based in Aberdeen, which will develop many of the new technologies and interventions that the Government is supporting and the oil and gas industry is championing. That demonstrates the strong support that we can give to the industry to ensure that it realises its full potential within the North Sea sector.

Justice

Elaine Smith (Labour, Coatbridge and Chryston)

The next item of business is a debate on motion S4M-09133, in the name of Graeme Pearson, on justice. I call Graeme Pearson to speak to and move the motion.

Graeme Pearson (Labour, South Scotland)

I am grateful for the opportunity to move the motion and speak in support of it. I note that the rather wordy amendment from the Government focuses on what we in the chamber have come to know as “operational outcomes” rather than the business of Government. I am sure that we will come on to that during the debate.

I acknowledge the sterling work that is performed on behalf of Scotland’s communities by the staff of Police Scotland, the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service and all the emergency services. However, the Cabinet Secretary for Justice has changed the very essence of policing in Scotland. He has abandoned his responsibility for oversight of the exercise of police powers and services and has allowed an undemocratic authority, selected by him, to implement a change from a focus on local policing to a metrocentric approach. Policing by consent as a basic principle appears to have become an archaic rule. Accountability and transparency within the decision-making processes of the justice system have been all but eroded, making the notion of consent redundant.

The public consultation exercises that were undertaken on public counter closures, traffic wardens and the police and fire services’ control room rationalisations were farcical exercises. They were hurried and confused, and they lacked any real opportunity for meaningful consideration of important local views and local priorities, which were reduced to an afterthought as national teams for firearms, road policing, football policing and ports policing and national air support and mounted sections were deemed to be of greater import.

Key performance indicators have become the language of Mr MacAskill’s new force. Stop and search, the subsuming of crimes into single reports, the downgrading of reports to avoid the realities of crime in our communities and reports from police officers themselves of the fiddling of crime reports all contribute the creation of a service that is focused on headlines, good-news stories and information management instead of public protection and victim-centred services.

The widespread changes, together with worsening conditions for our police officers, have been widely reported to cause morale to reach new depths among our front-line officers and staff. A recent poll showed that only one staff member in 10 feels valued, with backroom cuts causing mounting workloads for civilian staff and almost 300,000 hours of extra duties for front-line officers, reducing the time that they have available to patrol our streets. A recent Unison survey also found that two thirds of staff believe that their workload has increased with the advent of Police Scotland, and morale among support staff appears to be even lower, with almost 1,200 jobs already lost and hundreds more to go.

Many people fear for their jobs, having seen colleagues sacrificed at the altar of the Scottish National Party pledge to deliver 1,000 additional officers at a cost of £50 million, which overlooks the need to scalp another £60 million a year from police budgets, no matter what. Simple mathematics shows that 1,000 more officers minus 1,200 support staff leaves a staff deficit in the service.

The recently announced executive-level pay hikes of more than £20,000 for some staff have left many in the police feeling let down and disappointed. The police family looks to be on the verge of breakdown. A vocation has been reduced to a job, and a mission has been replaced by a form of Taylorism time management previously unknown in the emergency services.

The closure of public counter services and the abandonment of control rooms have been predicated on Government efficiencies. The truth is that the need to rid Police Scotland of low-paid staff to meet Government cuts ensured that the services, once reduced, could be maintained thereafter only—

Mark McDonald (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Donside)

Will the member give way?

Graeme Pearson (Labour, South Scotland)

I am happy to give way.

Mark McDonald (Scottish National Party, Aberdeen Donside)

Like many other members, I have made representations about the service control centre that is based in my constituency. Given that the member backed the creation of the single force and the Government budget that allocates the money to the police force, what would he do differently within that envelope, based on his voting record?

Graeme Pearson (Labour, South Scotland)

I am very grateful for that question. I hope that it is meant in the good faith in which it is received. We have a different approach to what is being delivered, and I promise to come on to that.

The rush to close the Dumfries control room a matter of weeks after a total absence of meaningful consultation and the subsequent closures in Stirling, Glenrothes and Aberdeen ahead of any effective information and communication technology strategy or new contracts to replace what is described as the very expensive Airwave provision all smack of crisis management that is driving towards an announcement of the great success of a £60 million saving for the public. In the meantime, the true cost to the police and, to an extent, the fire and rescue service in terms of front-line, public-facing services is denied. Where is the evidence of any true reform of control rooms in the past seven years? There has been no attempt to rationalise emergency services across boundaries. Shared control rooms for police, fire and ambulance services, or even—

Kenny MacAskill (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Eastern)

Will the member take an intervention?

Graeme Pearson (Labour, South Scotland)

I am happy to do so.

Kenny MacAskill (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Eastern)

Is the member aware that, in 2004, the previous Labour-Liberal Executive moved from eight to three ambulance command-and-control centres? Was that wrong?

Graeme Pearson (Labour, South Scotland)

I do not know whether that was wrong or right at the time; I am suggesting to the cabinet secretary that the past couple of years presented Scotland with a real opportunity to move its emergency services into the 21st century. The cross-boundary provision of control rooms would have been the opportunity for the next 50 years.

The co-location of services on sites across the country would have ensured savings in relation to buildings, heating, facilities and support. It would have been an opportunity for the services to share control rooms across the country at a cost that they could have afforded, while delivering a more effective service. What has happened to genuine consultations with local communities on their expectations, priorities and service needs before decisions are taken at headquarters? Instead, we have HQ talking about what is good for communities from a distance.

Recently, the cabinet secretary attended the Dumfries control room, shortly after it was visited by the Justice Sub-Committee on Policing. He failed to speak to the control room staff who stood on the pavement waiting to talk to him. Furthermore, in response to all the local concerns that have been raised, in media reports thereafter he focused heavily on firearms teams, helicopter support and mounted officers. All those services are highly valued, but he failed to demonstrate his understanding of communities’ need to feel confident in their local emergency services with regard to everyday calls such as those about antisocial behaviour related to drunks, dogs fouling in public areas, shoplifters and vandals, all of which destroy quality of life.

If recent reports about the subsuming of crimes into one report are accurate, if the reports on negative stop and searches are true, and if the feedback that MSPs from right across the chamber have received from their constituents is anything to go by, there are concerns about how the police and fire services are being delivered.

The Police Service is insufficiently accountable and it needs to be subject to proper governance, because if it is not properly governed, there is a danger that it will become merely an army of occupation that is maintained at public expense. Police and staff did not join the service to be party to that ethos, and they did not expect to be abandoned to enable such an approach to be taken.

It is time for a change in approach; it is time for openness on what is going on across our services; and it is time for SNP policy to deliver not merely announcements, but quality services in and for our communities—services for which it is accountable to those communities.

This week, the chief executive of the Royal Bank of Scotland, Ross McEwan, announced a commitment to rebuild his bank from the ground floor up.

Tricia Marwick (None, Mid Fife and Glenrothes)

I need to get you to wind up, Mr Pearson.

Graeme Pearson (Labour, South Scotland)

I will.

He committed to getting the bank to deliver services that are important to its customers. The cabinet secretary needs to focus on locally based services. He needs to ensure that the Scottish Police Authority is linked to the local boards, and that those local boards are heard with some clarity.

I move,

That the Parliament believes that the Scottish Government should better support community and staff involvement in policing and fire service decisions.

Kenny MacAskill (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Eastern)

I welcome the opportunity to respond to Graeme Pearson in this Labour debate.

At a time when we are 11 months into the historic reform of our police and fire services, we can reflect on and take pride in the positive achievements that have been made and the legislative change that was overwhelmingly supported by the Scottish Parliament following detailed scrutiny by four parliamentary committees. Collectively, the Scottish Government, Police Scotland and the Scottish Police Authority are committed to protecting and supporting front-line services.

Let us consider what has been achieved at a time when crime is at a 39-year low, supported by an extra 1,000 officers in our communities in comparison with 2007. The reform of the police and fire services aimed to strengthen the connection between those services and communities, and it has done that. Local policing remains the bedrock, and police and fire services are positively engaged in community planning. Local police plans are in place across the country, local fire plans are being finalised, and communities and councillors have more access than ever before—

Elaine Murray (Labour, Dumfriesshire)

If the SPA and the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service are so engaged in community planning, how come there was no consultation with local communities before the control centres were all closed?

Kenny MacAskill (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Eastern)

There are procedures that have been agreed by the unions and management on how consultation should be carried out, given the legal requirements on redundancy. That consultation process has begun. No one should have been in any doubt—Unison certainly was not—that discussions were under way about where matters were heading. The appropriate consultation period is being followed, as is statutorily required. Indeed, that is not just a statutory requirement—it is good practice.

There are designated local police commanders for each of the 14 divisions, and there are 17 local senior fire officers.

Lewis Macdonald (Labour, North East Scotland)

Does the cabinet secretary not appreciate that Elaine Murray’s question, rather than being about consultation with staff regarding redundancy, which is clearly appropriate, was about consultation with community planning partners regarding the closure of local services?

Kenny MacAskill (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Eastern)

Those consultations and discussions are on-going. The whole purpose of community planning is that people get together in the same room. Indeed, that is why we have local police plans.

Graeme Pearson (Labour, South Scotland)

Will the cabinet secretary give way?

Kenny MacAskill (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Eastern)

I will make some progress and then I will come back to the member.

What is more, the SPA and the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service Board have designated board members who engage with all 32 local authorities, which ensures that they have a direct way of influencing the governing bodies. That has been done.

Graeme Pearson (Labour, South Scotland)

Would the cabinet secretary at least acknowledge that consultation normally means having the ability to have some impact on a decision before it is made, as opposed to being informed of it once it has been made and having to deal with the consequences?

Kenny MacAskill (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Eastern)

The consultation is on-going and the police will discuss and debate the issue. At this point, however, I want to put on record that the police are most certainly not an army of occupation. Those who wear the police uniform do so with grace and dignity as they face daily difficulties and challenges in such an outstanding way.

The aim of police reform was to create more equal access to specialist support and national capacity, and that is what it has done. Our national resources—the air support unit, the marine and underwater unit, the mounted branch and specialist crime teams, to name but a few—have supported a range of incidents across the country. We need think only of our emergency services’ outstanding response to the tragedy at the Clutha bar, the co-ordinated search for young Mikaeel Kular or the Willowbrae shooting.

The divisional domestic abuse investigation unit has proved effective in investigating prolific and high-risk offenders, leading to arrests of people who might otherwise have escaped prosecution. In the Highlands and Islands, officers from the organised crime and counterterrorism unit have been effectively deployed on an operation in the Shetland Isles aimed at disrupting the availability of drugs in that community. In Tayside, a total of 137 officers from across the service were deployed in operation amaranth to manage a Scottish Defence League demonstration and ensure limited disruption to local communities, while in Dumfries and Galloway the smooth running of the Wickerman music festival was supported by a total of 56 officers deployed from national and regional resources to detect and prevent any antisocial behaviour and related crimes.

Alex Fergusson (Conservative, Galloway and West Dumfries)

Does the cabinet secretary accept that the Wickerman festival has run very smoothly ever since it was first brought into being and before it had the so-called benefit of Police Scotland?

Kenny MacAskill (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Eastern)

It has run smoothly but I think that the additional officers were welcome. I also remember meeting officers in the area when Annan was playing Rangers. I understood the significant disruption that the match would have caused the Annan community had the matter been left simply to officers from Dumfries and Galloway. People were delighted and welcomed the fact that the football unit and other officers from Glasgow were able to come down to ensure an appropriate level of policing.

Aileen McLeod (Scottish National Party, South Scotland)

The cabinet secretary will be aware of concern in Dumfries about how members of staff can realistically benefit from any relocation opportunities that arise from the closure of the Dumfries control room, given the town’s remoteness from such opportunities. What efforts are being made to address such concerns?

Kenny MacAskill (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Eastern)

The chief constable is making every effort to engage; indeed, when I met him last week, we discussed the matter. Discussions are on-going and everyone is happy to continue that process. Indeed, I myself have met the council’s leader and deputy leader to continue the discussions.

In comparison, almost as many officers as serve here in Scotland have been lost south of the border. What is more, we now hear that Labour is promoting the idea of merging police forces and axing elected crime commissioners down there. It is clear, therefore, that Scotland is leading the way.

Graeme Pearson (Labour, South Scotland)

Will the cabinet secretary give way?

Richard Simpson (Labour, Mid Scotland and Fife)

Will the cabinet secretary give way?

Tricia Marwick (None, Mid Fife and Glenrothes)

The cabinet secretary is in his last 30 seconds.

Kenny MacAskill (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Eastern)

Eleven months on, we have already successfully delivered the £42 million of savings that were identified for year 1. We can look forward to Scotland’s outstanding police force continuing. We have a 39-year low in recorded crime; we have the lowest homicide rates since we started recording them; violence has dropped by 60 per cent; and crimes of carrying and handling offensive weapons are down by two thirds in Glasgow. That is all down to our outstanding police service.

I move amendment S4M-09133.1, to leave out from “believes” to end and insert:

“recognises the excellent work done by the officers and staff in Police Scotland and the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service (SFRS) in keeping the people of Scotland safe with an unprecedented level of engagement with communities and local authorities, which is complemented by a process of engagement with staff; further recognises that crime is at a 39-year low and welcomes the 1,000 extra officers that the Scottish Government has delivered in communities since 2007; welcomes the lowest number of fires recorded in Scotland in the last 10 years; acknowledges the positive impacts of reform; recognises the value of national governance provided by the Scottish Police Authority and the SFRS Board; acknowledges that more locally elected members than ever are having their say on local policing matters as a result of local scrutiny arrangements, and agrees that significant progress has been made on the reform journey that began with the legislation that received the overwhelming support of the Parliament.”

Alex Johnstone (Conservative, North East Scotland)

I rise to support Graeme Pearson’s motion. I do so because of my own experience.

When I was listening to the minister, I became slightly worried that he was going to come to that wonderful conclusion reached by many a minister before him, which is that those of us who are concerned about the structures of a public service are somehow levying direct criticism at those who provide it. At the outset, I make it absolutely clear that my sympathies lie with those who provide the police and fire and rescue services and that my criticisms are directly targeted at this Government and minister. In my experience, our police and firemen are members of our community. I have cause to talk to them about many things, not only the provision of their service, and they are often all too willing to volunteer their experiences.

As a Conservative, I make it quite clear that when we considered the original proposals for streamlining our fire and rescue service and police service we were quite convinced that there was a case to be made for such a move.

Kenny MacAskill (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Eastern)

Will the member give way?

Alex Johnstone (Conservative, North East Scotland)

I will carry on for the moment—I have only five minutes.

However, during that process, it became increasingly clear to us that there was no accountability in the new proposals. That is why I, as a Conservative, was happy to vote against the proposals at the end of the process.

We have seen many things happen. We have seen radical decisions being taken with the police counter closures, which have impacted on many areas across Scotland—I am sure that individual members will bring forward cases in their particular areas. The closure of the control rooms has caused a great deal of concern. The loss of both fire and rescue and police control rooms in Aberdeen is seen as creating a vacuum in an extremely important area of the country that requires a foot on the bedrock of control in our services. Can anyone imagine what would happen if—heaven forbid—another Piper Alpha incident happened and there was no control facility available in the north-east of Scotland? I am very concerned that that was not taken into account.

Sandra White (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Kelvin)

Will the member take an intervention?

Alex Johnstone (Conservative, North East Scotland)

I will carry on, given the limited time that is available to me.

I want to bring the consultation process to the fore in the debate, because we have heard quite clearly from the minister that consultation has acquired an entirely new meaning. It seems that, in this fine new world of ours, consultation starts with an irreversible decision and is then about discussing that decision with the people whom it directly affects. There has been no proper consultation in the process. No discussion has taken place with those who should have some influence over the process or with those who work in the services. Worse still, we have seen no effective business case to demonstrate that the approach will save us much money.

The fact is that we have been presented with a fait accompli, and we have no decision-making process that can be taken into account. Worse still, we have the minister’s amendment, which he has just moved and which deserves to be printed in large type, framed and hung on a wall somewhere in this building, because it has no grip whatsoever on reality.

When I was thinking about what I would say in my speech, I was reminded of something that happened during the Gulf war. I do not want to make light of the Gulf war, which was a serious event that we should all consider carefully, alongside the lessons from it. However, there was one light moment in it: the emergence of a character who became known to us all as comical Ali. Comical Ali was the man who, during an interview, stood and claimed that an American soldier would never set foot in Baghdad as a line of American tanks drove up the street behind him. I was concerned about comical Ali and was worried about where he was. Having read the amendment, I am convinced that he is alive and well and working as an SNP press officer somewhere in Holyrood.

Tricia Marwick (None, Mid Fife and Glenrothes)

We move to the open debate. I remind members that they have four minutes.

Christian Allard (Scottish National Party, North East Scotland)

I thank Graeme Pearson for bringing this debate to the chamber and giving me the opportunity to talk about locally delivered police and fire services. However, I do not recognise the picture that he has drawn. This month, I got all the updates that I needed from the local police force when I attended the community council of my wee town of Westhill in Aberdeenshire. We can see in all those communities that strong local engagement, which is getting better and better.

Over the years in my community, we made it clear where we wanted our police officers to be. We told them to leave the counter and get on their bikes. In fact, the counter in my wee town of Westhill is manned by Aberdeenshire Council and is shared with a small police station to minimise costs. Perhaps a previous Administration failed to do that. It is most important to keep our police officers on the beat.

What brought me to the idea of single police and fire services was the example of our Grampian fire chief, who lives locally in Westhill. Over the years, he made some incredible statements. Believe you me, I was very surprised when I read in the Press and Journal on 1 April 2002 that new fire engines would be white from then on. I did not get any consultation papers and nobody asked me whether I thought that it was a good idea to have fire engines painted white. However, Mr David Dalziel, the firemaster, decided that it would be a good idea.

Mr Dalziel hit the news again in the Daily Record in April 2010, when it emerged that that same Grampian fire chief was offered a £350,000 payout for agreeing to stay in the same job. David Dalziel was meant to retire, but Grampian fire brigade rehired him on a new contract after he got a lump sum from his pension. Do we want to go back to those levels of regional payout? That is perhaps the alternative that some of the political parties here would like us to go back to.

Richard Simpson (Labour, Mid Scotland and Fife)

I think that the member is making the point for our motion. We voted for centralisation of the police, but the major criticism of that from outside was localisation would be lost. The decisions on control centres and traffic wardens have been taken in a dictatorial manner and without consultation. In the case of Stirling, it shares an out-of-hours service with Clackmannanshire Council, but it was not even consulted. That is an SNP council, so the member is making our point for us.

Tricia Marwick (None, Mid Fife and Glenrothes)

Mr Allard, you now have 45 seconds.

Christian Allard (Scottish National Party, North East Scotland)

What I was trying—and managing—to explain is that we had a dictatorial situation beforehand. We also had the problem of political intervention. I can remind a Lib Dem MSP who is present today—Alison McInnes—that she had to say sorry to the fire service because she had used a picture of the fire chief on her election leaflet. I think that such political interference is not acceptable. Thank goodness that the police service is now away from the politicians and is a single force, which is a lot better.

Lewis Macdonald (Labour, North East Scotland)

As we said at the time, the creation of single police and fire services has brought both opportunities and risks. The biggest risk was that those services would fail to get the balance right among Scotland’s regions, and we are here today precisely because they have already failed that test. The other big risk was that concentrating power in the hands of ministers and their appointees would mean an end to any meaningful local accountability. The decisions to close police and fire control rooms and the way in which they were taken have confirmed all the worst fears about that lack of accountability to local people.

Ministerial appointments to the police and fire boards included not a single individual from the area served by the former Grampian police and fire services. There was no one from the Grampian area to speak up for local services when the police and fire boards decided last month to close the police and fire control rooms in Aberdeen, and the police service centre at Bucksburn. There was no discussion with community planning partners such as Aberdeen City Council and Aberdeenshire Council, which rely on police staff and pay the police for a number of out-of-hours services.

The fire control closures were forced through against the wishes of board members from regions outwith the central belt. The police closures were nodded through without a business case, a meaningful debate or even a show of hands on the SPA board. It was claimed that there was no need to consult the public, because the public were not fit to make such complicated decisions. Unions representing staff in both services made a powerful case against the scale of cuts and closures, but what we got instead were mirror-image decisions from the two boards to concentrate resources and services in Tayside, Lothian and Strathclyde and to discard all the technology, expertise and experience that had built up in the other regions of Scotland.

The anger of local people in and around Aberdeen has been palpable. The Evening Express has mounted a strong campaign to “stop 999 cuts”. A poll of Press and Journal readers found that more than 90 per cent wanted the closure decisions reversed. A petition to this Parliament called for a parliamentary inquiry into closures planned across the north and north-east, and it very quickly attracted over 1,000 signatures.

The people who work in those services are angry, too, and some have already walked away. Skilled and highly trained people whose services are no longer wanted will go elsewhere, and public services will be poorer as a result. A worker whose job in Aberdeen is scrapped when there is no comparable post anywhere north of Dundee has no choice about being made redundant. There is nothing voluntary about these redundancies. That is the situation that control room and service centre staff now face.

In the eyes of many people in the north and north-east, the police and fire services have shown the worst kind of central belt bias, forcing through their plans without even a pretence of consulting local people or their community planning partners in local government. Staff have had no chance to make their case. This week, the Scottish Cabinet ventured north to Portlethen, and some ministers heard directly from local police staff. It is a pity that the First Minister felt that he had more important things to do than to engage with his constituents who came to talk to him about these issues.

What people in the north-east see is Government agencies that act as if Scotland stopped somewhere south of Stonehaven, and a Scottish Government that sees nothing wrong in concentrating public services in the central belt.

Christian Allard (Scottish National Party, North East Scotland)

Will the member take an intervention?

Tricia Marwick (None, Mid Fife and Glenrothes)

The member is in his last 30 seconds.

Lewis Macdonald (Labour, North East Scotland)

The police and fire boards, by their actions, have lost the confidence of whole regions of Scotland, and ministers are in danger of doing the same. It is time that they stopped telling each other how well it is all going and started actually listening.

Roderick Campbell (Scottish National Party, North East Fife)

In this debate, we should keep it clear in our minds that the role of the police and fire services is to protect the public. Police Scotland’s purpose is

“to improve the safety and wellbeing of people, places and communities in Scotland”,

and the SFRS protects communities by responding to incidents, but also helping to prevent them from happening in the first place.

Statistics, including a near 40-year low in recorded crime and significantly reduced incidences of fire, show the levels of success that the new police and fire services have had in recent months, building on past improvements. There is no room for complacency, and the Government, Police Scotland and other agencies still have a lot of work to do, but overall the picture is one of crime dropping and Scotland becoming a safer place.

Graeme Pearson mentioned the SNP Government’s manifesto commitment to deliver 1,000 extra police officers. Let us never forget that, at the same time, officer numbers in England and Wales are falling. The commitment by the SNP Government is central, but it is clear that, at a time of austerity, it is imperative to deliver both police and fire services more efficiently. That is the background to police and fire reform.

One of the overriding principles of the recent reform is to ensure that local involvement in policing is maintained. That is why every single one of the 353 council wards in Scotland has a local policing plan based on feedback that local officers receive from the community, and it is why, despite the unification of Scotland’s eight former police forces into a single force, there are local commanders in each of the 14 divisions.

Decisions on police and fire control rooms were made by the SPA and the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service Board. Surely the Opposition recognises the need to minimise political interference. I do not wish to sound flippant, but it is fair to point out that Graeme Pearson himself said on the BBC’s “Sunday Politics Scotland” on 2 February:

“It doesn’t matter where the telephone is answered.”

That is patently true in operational terms, and it is why the SPA and the SFRS boards took the decision to reduce the number of control rooms.

Graeme Pearson (Labour, South Scotland)

Will the member take an intervention?

Roderick Campbell (Scottish National Party, North East Fife)

I am tight for time. No offence is meant.

Chief Superintendent Val Thomson said:

“I am personally convinced that what we are proposing provides the best means for us to improve service levels to the public, to enhance our operational response and realise efficiencies.”

In the fire service, Chief Officer Alasdair Hay said:

“I’ve been in the fire service for over 30 years, and my sole professional purpose is to make the communities of Scotland safer. I would not bring forward a proposal that would compromise the safety of the people of Scotland.”

It is clear that the geographical location of a control room has absolutely nothing to do with the provision of local policing or indeed fire services. Having a smaller number of larger control rooms allows the services to rationalise and consolidate their resources without compromising their ability to protect the public and local communities.

Recently, I visited the police control room in Glenrothes, which is a fine control room with room for expansion. To me, as a local member in Fife, it is galling that, as a result of a sensible policy to reduce the number of control rooms, that facility is closing, but I respect the board’s right to take that decision.

It is clear that talk of consolidation and efficiencies will always cause concerns about job security, but let us not forget that control room staff are protected by the Scottish Government’s policy of no compulsory redundancies. There has been a lot of interest in the voluntary redundancy scheme. I take on board Aileen McLeod’s comments about Dumfries and Galloway, but we must recognise that offers of relocation and travel expenses have been made.

That all allows Police Scotland to protect the number of officers who are working in local communities.

John Scott (Conservative, Ayr)

Please draw to a close.

Roderick Campbell (Scottish National Party, North East Fife)

In all the criticism of the decision, I accept that there are concerns about how the decision was announced. Could the Government do better? I have no doubt that, like all Governments, it could. However, the proposals are now the subject of consultation with staff and unions. I hope that, at the end of the process, at least some of the concerns that have been expressed today will be allayed.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

I call Alison McInnes, who has a precise four minutes.

Alison McInnes (Liberal Democrat, North East Scotland)

The Scottish Liberal Democrats are deeply concerned, too, about the dismantling of local services across Scotland and the manner in which that is occurring. Sixty police public counters are set to close; road safety units and the police traffic warden service have been scrapped; and the network of police and fire control rooms and service centres is to shrink, to the extent that 999 and 101 calls that are made anywhere in Scotland will be diverted to the central belt.

In my region, Aberdeen will be among the hardest hit places, as three facilities are condemned to closure. As I noted in yesterday’s debate on the traffic warden service, a worrying pattern has emerged since the nationwide services became operational last April. The approach to each significant reform has been characterised by a lack of proper public engagement and community partner consultation. Even when public-facing local provision is at stake, the predilection is for unilateral decision making. Community planning partners, which were once central to the decision-making process, are being sidelined and left to find out about developments on the news.

The staff involved, such as those whom I met in the Aberdeen fire control room, often have decades of experience, but they are typically consulted only after a decision has been all but made. The only genuine discussion is about whether to accept voluntary redundancy, take early retirement or be redeployed elsewhere, perhaps many miles away. The discharge of many will therefore in effect be compulsory.

I have been contacted by a wealth of people, not just from my region—North East Scotland—but from the Borders to the northern isles. Every one of them is concerned that crucial knowledge of their area will be lost. Every one believes that the service that they receive will be poorer for the reforms. Every one of them—from the north and the south of Scotland—argues that their needs have been ignored.

Communities and newspapers across the country have launched campaigns to protect locally delivered services. Petitions have been lodged in the Parliament, and others that are circulating on social media have gathered the support of thousands. The new nationwide Police Service is keen to increase its profile online and on social media, but I doubt that that is what it intended.

There is genuine anger about the democratic deficit and a formidable appetite for wider participation in decision making. The frequency with which deficiencies are raised in the chamber by members of all parties highlights that. In that context, the justice secretary’s amendment is nothing short of ludicrous. I do not know whether he has been transported to Airstrip One or whether he has stepped through the looking glass, but whatever—his words mean the opposite of what everybody else understands.

For example, the explanation that the police gave the SPA for not holding a consultation on control room closures was extraordinary. They claimed that the closures would lead to an enhanced service, so there was no need to ask the public about them. The police claimed that the issues were too complex to expect people to come to an informed opinion on them. They also claimed that the public would naively want to protect jobs in their areas, so any consultation would not be meaningful.

SNP members may decry the closures in their areas, but I am sure that their constituents will remember that they backed the justice secretary to the hilt when the Police and Fire Reform (Scotland) Bill was passed in Parliament. At that time, 125 amendments that were aimed at improving accountability, reasserting local authorities’ roles and creating greater transparency were rejected—without exception.

The manner in which the reforms are being undertaken leaves a great deal to be desired. Inevitably, people are asking themselves what is next and when they will be informed.

Lewis Macdonald (Labour, North East Scotland)

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. Alison McInnes suggested that the cabinet secretary has been transported to Airstrip One. Presiding Officer, will you advise whether it is in order for Mr MacAskill to move an amendment and be missing for as much of the debate as he appears to have been absent for?

The Deputy Presiding Officer

What Mr MacAskill does during the debate is a matter for him. Like Mr Macdonald, I would have expected him to be in the chamber. However, that is not a point of order.

Jamie Hepburn (Scottish National Party, Cumbernauld and Kilsyth)

I welcome the debate on this issue. I acknowledge that the changes that have driven the motion are not without their challenges, but it is interesting that the essence of the motion calls for the Scottish Government to become more directly involved in the decision process.

We should reflect on the fact that the final decisions on police and fire control rooms and police station counters were made by the boards of the Scottish Police Authority and the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service. They are matters for the boards, not the Scottish Government. I seem to recall that during the passage of the Police and Fire Reform (Scotland) Bill, Opposition members repeatedly emphasised the need for the avoidance of political interference. Indeed, Alison McInnes spoke at that time of protecting the independence of the chief constable and Scotland’s police.

Graeme Pearson (Labour, South Scotland)

Will the member take an intervention?

Jamie Hepburn (Scottish National Party, Cumbernauld and Kilsyth)

I am afraid that I do not have time today; I apologise.

Willie Rennie said:

“People want police and fire services to be laser-focused on local needs, not subject to political control from ministerial offices.”

Call me cynical, but if we had the reverse situation and saw the Scottish Government exerting the level of political control that members were concerned about, today we would be debating a Labour motion slamming that.

We have established the structure of Police Scotland and the Scottish Fire and Rescue Services, supported by the Labour Party. Surely it is right to let them make operational decisions.

Graeme Pearson (Labour, South Scotland)

Will the member take an intervention?

Jamie Hepburn (Scottish National Party, Cumbernauld and Kilsyth)

I am afraid not, for the same reason I gave before.

I turn to the specific changes that have been raised in the debate. The changes to control rooms do not directly affect my constituency, as there is no control room in it. However, I am somewhat intrigued by the concern about the loss of local knowledge. The Johnstone control room demonstrates that that should not be a huge concern, because it serves the whole of the Strathclyde area, including islands, and handles more than 50 per cent of Scottish Fire and Rescue Service calls. That area includes my Cumbernauld and Kilsyth constituency and it stretches from its boundaries with Ardnamurchan in the north to its border with Galloway in the south. It is an enormous area.

It was somewhat before my time, but during the last reorganisation in the 1970s there would have been a reduction in the number of control rooms and I do not doubt that the issue of a lack of local knowledge would have been raised then. Not once has a constituent contacted me regarding a problem with the control room in Strathclyde having a lack of local knowledge.

I turn to the issue of police station counters, which has affected my constituency. The chief constable said that the changes were being made because he and the police force

“want police officers out on the streets and responding operationally to the public.”

I agree with that; surely we all do.

That has not been a big issue in my constituency. Two constituents have contacted me about the change, neither of whom had ever visited the police counters at the time when their closure was proposed and neither of whom was concerned. They and, I suspect, most people are more concerned about how the community will be policed properly and safely.

I am regularly in touch with the local chief inspector; I meet him regularly. He and his inspector are assiduous in engaging with local communities. As Christian Allard said, the police are always at community councils. I also engage regularly with Cumbernauld fire station, which is also engaged with its community.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Please draw to a close.

Jamie Hepburn (Scottish National Party, Cumbernauld and Kilsyth)

I do not recognise the suggestions that we do not have a locally responsive police force or a locally responsive fire service. Frankly, such suggestions are insults to those who work day in, day out to protect us and our communities.

John Pentland (Labour, Motherwell and Wishaw)

The US president, Harry S Truman, famously had a sign on his desk that said, “The buck stops here.” I am not sure whether that sign could be found on the desk of the cabinet secretary—

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Pull your microphone up and point it at your mouth, please. It is a directional microphone.

John Pentland (Labour, Motherwell and Wishaw)

There is every chance that I may swallow it, Presiding Officer.

Although we accept that the chief constable should have responsibility for operational matters, should that mean that the cabinet secretary escapes responsibility for his actions or is allowed to pretend that his inaction is simply an avoidance of being political?

It is clear to me and the public that the cabinet secretary’s chosen role on this reform journey is to sit back and watch the decline and destruction, and wash his hands of the consequences. The public have the right to answers from the cabinet secretary. Does he support the cuts and the closures of police stations and control rooms? Does he support thousands of civilian jobs being axed? Does he really believe that those are purely operational matters?

As we have already heard, the cabinet secretary does not even insist on proper consultation with staff and communities before decisions are made. Further, let us be honest: consultation after decisions have been taken is not really consultation. It is just letting people say what they think and then ignoring them.

Members of the SPA may complain about a lack of consultation and a lack of evidence but, at the end of the day, that looks like posturing when they accept closure plans without amendment or delay.

Next month, we will see the publication of the corporate business strategy for 2013 to 2016. Presumably, that will retrospectively seek to justify last year’s cuts alongside future financial savings. Never mind the quality, feel the cuts. Has the cabinet secretary had any say in the next £60 million that will be cut from the budget, or will it be dismissed as just another operational matter?

I believe that, whatever is in the document, the continued demolition of Scottish policing is a direct consequence of Scottish Government policy. The inevitable result will be that public confidence in the police will be undermined.

The good will of civilian staff is being severely strained by their treatment. Do not take my word for it. We now have a Unison survey that shows that staff cuts are leading to heavier workloads and increased bitterness. Some 86 per cent of the 1,300 staff who were surveyed felt undervalued; almost three quarters complained that senior management neither knows nor cares about their contribution to policing; and two thirds reported an increase in workload. Meanwhile, others stated that they had less work because some duties had already been taken on by police officers, perhaps in anticipation of the future lay-offs.

It has been calculated that front-line officers are looking at more than 250,000 hours of extra duties. Does the cabinet secretary really believe that that will not reduce the time that they spend patrolling the streets? Why does he pretend that that has nothing at all to do with him?

The Scottish Government’s cuts have created this festering sore. When will the cabinet secretary accept that it is his responsibility to deal with the situation? He needs to stop passing the buck for the problems and putting Harry Truman’s sign on the chief constable’s desk.

James Dornan (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Cathcart)

I will pick up on a point that John Pentland made about the thousands of jobs that he said were being axed. Given that there are no compulsory redundancies, that is not really the case, is it? [Interruption.] So it is? Is it the same thing, then? The claim is scaremongering, as is the motion.

Lewis Macdonald (Labour, North East Scotland)

Will the member take an intervention?

James Dornan (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Cathcart)

There will be no interventions. Not one of the member’s colleagues took an intervention.

Lewis Macdonald (Labour, North East Scotland)

That is not the case.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Mr Macdonald, the member is not taking an intervention.

James Dornan (Scottish National Party, Glasgow Cathcart)

As everybody knows, I represent a Glasgow constituency, which, like Jamie Hepburn’s constituency, is not affected to a great degree by the control room closures. However, even with regard to the counter closures, which have an impact on my constituency, I have not had one complaint. The reason is that the people of Castlemilk and the other areas of my constituency recognise that it is much more important to them that antisocial behaviour and low-level and high-level crime are dealt with more effectively by having policemen on the beat.

Earlier, Graeme Pearson complained about police not being on the street. However, in the next breath, he said that he wanted the counters to stay open, with a police officer standing behind a desk when they should be out on the street. I think that it is clear that this is a politically motivated motion that has got no reason to be debated except to allow an opportunity to have a go at the Scottish Government.

We live in difficult financial times. The move will save £1.1 billion over 15 years. That important saving will be made by reducing duplication. We know that duplication takes place. We live in a world in which technology means that we do not have to continue to do things the same way as we always did them.

I did two things before I came in to the chamber. One was to ask my staff whether we had ever received any complaints about the counters, and I was told that we had received none.

The other thing I did was to look at the history of Glasgow city police. In 1886, all police stations and fire stations were connected by telephone, and I have no doubt that the Labour politicians of the day were up in arms that the common touch was being lost because people would not be able to walk from here to there to make their complaint.

In 1931, the police force was reorganised and fingerprint and photographic evidence was introduced. That probably took officers off the street and, again, a Graeme Pearson of the day probably had a go at the police for that. The first radio patrol car was introduced in 1936 and the police information room was set up in the central police office in 1957. Those changes were all driven by technology. It changes the way that we police. It changes the way that we do everything.

You are saying that we should keep all the control rooms that we had because some people will be upset about losing them. I understand the concerns of people who are affected by any change—people do not like change; that is its nature—but the Government must consider things in the round and think about how to improve services. If you had been in power—I am sorry, you were in power; I forgot because it is such a long time ago—you would have made similar changes if you had had the courage to take on the vested interests. The restructuring is an important thing to do and the right thing to do.

In 1960, the regional crime squad was formed. That would have meant taking officers from all the different local areas, and I have no doubt that we would have heard some of the complaints then that we hear now.

The restructuring is a good and sensible move. It will make life safer for the people of Scotland.

Graeme Pearson said that the important thing about the police force was the quality of service. There is no greater quality of service than having the lowest crime figures in 39 years.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

I remind members that all remarks should be addressed through the chair.

I call Alex Fergusson. You have four minutes.

Alex Fergusson (Conservative, Galloway and West Dumfries)

Given that I have only four minutes, I make no apology for being entirely parochial and concentrating on the closure of the police and fire control rooms in Dumfries—a decision that has caused, and continues to cause, a level of anger and frustration the like of which I have rarely witnessed in my constituency since I became a member of the Parliament in 1999.

Local people are absolutely furious. Many of them voted for the Parliament—some, indeed, for the Government—in the belief and expectation that their communities would be protected, that services would be delivered as locally as possible and that, when change, which inevitably comes, was proposed, they would be fully consulted on the outcome and consequences of it. That fairly accurately sums up most people’s aspirations for devolution, so no wonder they feel angry and let down.

In the justice portfolio alone, those hopes and aspirations have been well and truly shattered. First, we lost our local police force, then we lost our local courthouses, then the ability to access our police officers face to face across the counter and now, as well as losing our traffic wardens, we are to lose our local police and fire control centres. No ifs, no buts and no consultation: the centres in Dumfries are to close and close soon.

My constituents and those of Dr Elaine Murray are totally justified in asking what, if any, options were considered before the decision was taken. Did anyone consider the possibility of Inverness and Dumfries sharing the workload of the proposed police national computer, given that Dumfries already possesses the technology, training and licences and already provides a service to officers on the beat? That solution would have provided a degree of geographic balance in the restructuring.

Did anyone consider the possibility of locating one of the remaining control rooms in Dumfries or combining the Dumfries control room technologically with, perhaps, the one in Motherwell? Did anyone consider the possibility of a joint police and fire control room?

Did anyone, in fact, consider anything other than closure and redundancy for Dumfries? It certainly does not look that way. I hope that the cabinet secretary does not hide behind the cloak of no compulsory redundancies because, as has been stated, for someone who lives in or around Dumfries, being offered alternative employment in Govan or Motherwell is compulsory redundancy by another name.

The day after the police control centre in Stranraer was closed in 2004, a constituent of mine phoned the control room to report that her uncle had gone missing late at night, having last been seen near “the Port”. The control room, which was newly transferred to Dumfries, sent police officers to search the ferry port in Stranraer—logically—but found nothing. The next morning, the missing person was sadly found dead in a field near Portpatrick—the village that anyone living in the west of the region knows as the Port.

The lack of local knowledge might not have cost a life on that occasion, but it certainly did nothing to save one. That situation was brought about by centralisation within the region and suggests to me that it does matter where the telephone is answered.

Just last week, in response to a question from my colleague Margaret Mitchell at the Justice Sub-Committee on Policing meeting about the potential of retaining the existing control room sites, Stevie Diamond, the chair of Unison police staff Scotland, said:

“The service has gone for centralisation of control rooms ... It is as if there has been a need to dispense with people—that is certainly the case in Dumfries, where there has been obscene haste in trying to close the control room by the end of April”

just to save money. He added that they were in

“the first part of a consultation process around the C3 proposal”

but that, in essence, local knowledge would be lost because no other options were being consulted on.

That is no way to run a consultation, but then, as the motion suggests, this is no way to deliver any decision, least of all one that throws good people out of work in an area in which they have little hope of finding an alternative. It is no way to run a consultation and I suggest that this is no way to run a country.

Roseanna Cunningham (Scottish National Party, Perthshire South and Kinross-shire)

In summing up, I want to say something about the fire service, for which I have responsibility. It is crucial to acknowledge the clear and shared passion that is reflected in the chamber for delivering safer and stronger communities across Scotland. In respect of the fire service, that is a Scotland in which fires are already at their lowest level in a decade.

In any change programme, decisions will be made that cannot please all of the people. We could exchange opinions at length about how best to involve and consult communities and staff around the services designed to keep them safe. Graeme Pearson, however, does himself and his argument no favours at all by applying phrases such as “army of occupation” to Scotland’s police.

Graeme Pearson (Labour, South Scotland)

For the record, I said that there was a danger in future that the Police Service could become an army of occupation—not that it currently was.

Roseanna Cunningham (Scottish National Party, Perthshire South and Kinross-shire)

I see that Graeme Pearson is already wishing that he had not said what he did.

To build on the cabinet secretary’s remarks about policing in Scotland, I will highlight the significant progress since the inception of our national fire service last year. I will look at progress against each aim of the reform.

One key aim is to strengthen the connection between services and communities. That has been ensured by making the fire service a statutory partner in community planning and by designating a local senior officer for every local authority. What impact has that had? Public consultation on the first local plans that were prepared by local senior officers has recently concluded. The overwhelming message from local partners is that information flow and engagement has never been stronger. The result will be tailored, action-focused plans with prevention and partnership embedded in them that reflect risks affecting individual communities across Scotland.

Another aim is to improve access to specialist resources. Progress in the past eleven months has delivered a Scotland in which access to national capacity, when and where it is needed, is already enhanced. I shall simply highlight the fire investigation unit in Aberdeen, now covering the whole of the north, which has mobilised to work with police in Orkney to investigate a fire at a children’s home there; the Clutha bar tragedy, during which specialist resources and crews from across Scotland were deployed, either to the scene or to provide back up at affected stations, without the previous bureaucracy; and the state of the art Clydesmill training centre, which is now available to all firefighters across Scotland.

The aim of protecting and improving front-line outcomes is a true success story, so Rod Campbell’s intervention was timely. Have any communities in Scotland noticed a drop in service provision? No, it has been seamless. Has the fire service been unable to respond to the call to protect our communities? No, it has met that challenge head on, even in its early days, when Scotland was hit by wildfires and when the threat of industrial action was very real.

Facing Westminster cuts, we are improving local services and placing community participation at their heart, not simply closing fire stations, as has recently been seen in London. I notice that Alex Johnstone did not mention that inconvenient fact.

I will say, returning to the subject of consultation and engagement, that I simply did not recognise Graeme Pearson’s sweepingly apocalyptic description of a failure of consultation in the fire service.

Lewis Macdonald (Labour, North East Scotland)

Will the minister take an intervention?

Roseanna Cunningham (Scottish National Party, Perthshire South and Kinross-shire)

The feedback that we have had from the local planning process highlights the improvements that have been felt locally. The process is supported by board members who are each taking responsibility for strategic engagement in a specific service delivery area in Scotland. Alison McInnes should know who the relevant board member is for the area that she covers, as should other members if they are doing their jobs.

Lewis Macdonald (Labour, North East Scotland)

Will the minister take an intervention?

Roseanna Cunningham (Scottish National Party, Perthshire South and Kinross-shire)

I mean, of course, if the MSPs are doing their jobs, because I know that the board members are.

Lewis Macdonald (Labour, North East Scotland)

Will the minister take an intervention? No? Why not?

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Mr Macdonald, it appears that Ms Cunningham is not taking an intervention.

Roseanna Cunningham (Scottish National Party, Perthshire South and Kinross-shire)

On the recent discussions about the rationalisation of the fire service estate, including control rooms, I can point to a programme of engagement that chairs, chief officers and members undertook throughout Scotland. That engagement ranged from visiting local authority chairs and chief executives to one-to-one meetings with affected staff to discuss the range of change management options that were open to them.

Lewis Macdonald (Labour, North East Scotland)

Will the minister take an intervention?

Roseanna Cunningham (Scottish National Party, Perthshire South and Kinross-shire)

Lewis Macdonald’s characterisation of the SFRS board position was ridiculous, given that there were two separate board discussions months apart, the first of which certainly did not accept the recommendations that were put to it.

Lewis Macdonald (Labour, North East Scotland)

Will the minister take an intervention now?

Roseanna Cunningham (Scottish National Party, Perthshire South and Kinross-shire)

Indeed, the discussions included members in the chamber, not least—as I understand it—Lewis Macdonald himself. I hope that he has taken the time to visit Johnstone control room, which Jamie Hepburn rightly mentioned.

The way in which Alex Fergusson described the situation in his area suggests that he is arguing for a control room in every single community in Scotland. He must know that that is wildly impractical.

With regard to relationships with staff, we should not forget that retraining is an option. All 18 of the first cohort of trainee firefighters who are graduating under the new service are former support and control room staff, so it is clear that the service is presenting a real retraining and redeployment opportunity to staff.

The service has established the “Working together for a safer Scotland” framework with the Fire Brigades Union and is actively involved in partnership working to consider how best to deliver the benefits of reform.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

The minister should draw to a close.

Roseanna Cunningham (Scottish National Party, Perthshire South and Kinross-shire)

Just today, the service and the FBU published a joint statement that outlined an agreement on future standardised crewing arrangements. That demonstrates the partnership in action, and stands in contrast to the misrepresentations in today’s debate.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

The minister must close, please.

Roseanna Cunningham (Scottish National Party, Perthshire South and Kinross-shire)

Presiding Officer, we should jointly celebrate the significant successes that police and fire reforms are already delivering on the ground. Frankly, Opposition parties need to decide whether they want political interference in the police and fire services or not.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

The minister must close, please.

Roseanna Cunningham (Scottish National Party, Perthshire South and Kinross-shire)

On today’s evidence, it sounds as if they do.

Elaine Murray (Labour, Dumfriesshire)

Like other members, I make no apologies for being parochial, because in Dumfries and Galloway 34 civilian staff in the Dumfries police control room and 15 staff in the Dumfries fire and rescue emergency centre face an uncertain future. They are well-trained, experienced and dedicated workers—the vast majority of whom are female—with many years of service, and their local knowledge and professionalism have provided help and reassurance and have on many occasions saved lives. Their loyalty has now been rewarded by the jettisoning of their jobs.

The chief constable told the Justice Committee during our budget scrutiny that civilian staff are queueing up for voluntary redundancy. Well, I have spoken personally to one member of police staff who wanted the redundancy package; the rest who have applied have told me that they did so because they felt that they had no choice. That is, as Lewis Macdonald said, compulsory redundancy in all but name.

Commuting to Glasgow or Motherwell in the case of police staff, or to Johnstone in the case of fire control staff, is not a viable option. Relocation for workers with families and partners with jobs in Dumfries and Galloway is not an option for most staff. Despite receiving assurances from C3 management in Police Scotland that no closures of police control rooms would happen in advance of the Commonwealth games, police control room staff learned on 30 January that their jobs were to go in April and May.

Those were not the only assurances that proved to be hollow. Staff were told that there would be full consultation with Dumfries and Galloway Council before any proposals were put forward, but that turned out to be a conversation between David Hume and the chief executive and the convener of the police and fire sub-committee prior to the SPA meeting on 30 January. That hardly fulfils the statutory duty to participate in community planning.

The minister spoke about fire staff, but fire and rescue emergency control staff in Dumfries have been treated no better. They were advised almost a year ago that the fire and rescue service emergency control room in Dumfries was likely to go, but they still await details of when it will go, as well as details of redundancy terms and any redeployment and retraining opportunities.

There has been a degree of misinformation about fire and rescue emergency control staff. They are classified as firefighters (control), but they do not, and never have, ridden fire appliances. Therefore, their opportunities for redeployment are limited. They could retrain on fire safety, but there is no indication of how many community safety posts might be available or what the mix of uniformed and support staff posts will be. Control staff might be expected to apply for administrative posts at considerably lower salaries than they currently command.

Kenny MacAskill (Scottish National Party, Edinburgh Eastern)

This is the same question that I asked of Mr Pearson. In 2004, under the Labour Executive, in which the member served, the number of ambulance control rooms went from eight to three. Was Labour wrong?

Elaine Murray (Labour, Dumfriesshire)

I will touch on that at the end of my speech, because there are lessons that have to be learned from that experience in Dumfries and Galloway.

As Alex Fergusson, Alison McInnes and Lewis Macdonald said, there has been no meaningful consultation about the closures with staff, police and fire officers or local people. No serious consideration has been given to whether to bring control rooms together or to sit police and fire control with control rooms that are provided by health boards or councils. No such possibility has been explored and there has been little interest in retaining the expertise of staff.

The leader of Dumfries and Galloway Council was told that Police Scotland would seek opportunities to locate other business functions in Dumfries, to support employment, but there has been no indication of how that might be achieved. As Alex Fergusson said, it has been proposed locally that the PNC bureau be split between Inverness and Dumfries, thereby retaining some of the staff expertise, but there has been no indication that the approach will be considered.

In Dumfries and Galloway, as in other parts of Scotland, the cuts come hard on the heels of court closures. Annan and Kirkcudbright courts closed only in November, and next week we can look forward to police counter closures at Kirkcudbright and Dalbeattie, and reductions in opening hours at Cornwall Mount, Annan, Sanquhar and Lockerbie, to name just a few. We are losing experienced police civilian staff in large numbers and we are losing experienced firefighter control staff.

There is a strong and enduring perception that services are being centralised. The First Minister likes to quote Vince Cable on services being sucked into the maw of London. From the point of view of my constituents, services are being sucked into the maw of the central belt.

The minister mentioned Unison. I can tell him what Unison has been doing in my constituency: Unison has collected nearly 7,000 signatures on a local petition against the closure of the police control room. Local people are worried that safety will be compromised when control functions are centralised. The IT systems will not be in place. I understand that the SPA has announced that the i6 contract is running late and has achieved only one of its five targets, which are to be met by 31 March.

People are right to be worried. We do not know what sort of technology will be used to locate callers. Will location depend on the caller knowing the postcode of the place where the fire or incident is? Will it depend on there being a good GPS signal? In parts of my constituency it is not possible to get a GPS signal—in some parts we cannot even get a mobile signal. How will the information get to the new centre?

Our local staff know the area and are familiar with the landmarks. What happens if staff in the central control rooms are unfamiliar with local names and landmarks? Will they have to phone police officers in the area to check exactly where callers are before they send out the police?

Let us remember what happened when NHS 24 was formed, with two call centres, one in Glasgow and one in Edinburgh—and yes, that happened under the Labour-Liberal Government. It was not long before a call centre at Dumfries and Galloway royal infirmary had to be re-established. We know that there have been problems when patients have had to wait for a seriously long time to get an ambulance or an ambulance has taken far too long to get someone from Stranraer, for example, to DGRI. There have been problems for the Scottish Ambulance Service, but the Scottish Government has failed to learn from the experience.

John Pentland was right to say that there is a lack of accountability. The cabinet secretary, as always, tries to wash his hands of all responsibility, this time by lodging an arrogant amendment, which Alex Johnstone said has no grip on reality and which led Alison McInnes to ask whether the cabinet secretary is on Airstrip One. Alex Johnstone mentioned comical Ali, but, to be frank, I am not laughing at comical Kenny and my constituents are not laughing. The Government passed legislation that was supposed to ensure community planning involvement with new service providers. That has not happened. There has not been consultation. What is this Government going to do about that?

Scotland’s Children

John Scott (Conservative, Ayr)

The next item of business is a debate on motion S4M-09140, in the name of Neil Bibby, on Scotland’s children. I invite members who wish to speak in the debate to press their request-to-speak buttons now.

Neil Bibby (Labour, West Scotland)

Like all parties in the chamber, the Scottish Labour Party continues to support curriculum for excellence. We want it to work, and that is why Scottish Labour have brought the debate to the chamber today, so that members can raise concerns and reflect on the evidence that was given to the Education and Culture Committee yesterday, and ask the Scottish Government to spell out what it intends to do to allay the concerns of teachers, parents, and pupils.

We have a responsibility and a duty to listen to the concerns about preparations for new national 4 and 5 exams in May and the proposed implementation of new national 6 higher courses in June. I say at the outset that Scottish Labour welcomes the announcement about extra resources that was made on Friday ahead of yesterday’s Education and Culture Committee meeting. I hope that the announcement will settle some of the nerves of teachers and parents. However, we have to recognise that the resources have come very late in the day. Such belated actions are welcome, but the minister should have made the resources available long before now.

The Scottish Government has been warned by teachers, parents, pupils, and local authorities for more than two years. Indeed, the Labour Party led a debate in March 2012 to raise those concerns. What we have seen since is months of complacency and the Scottish Government grossly underestimating and ignoring teacher workload issues and concerns. As Larry Flanagan, the Educational Institute for Scotland general secretary said yesterday, the resources are very welcome,

“but it will not have a major impact on national 4 and national 5, because we are only six school weeks away from the deadline for those qualifications.”—[Official Report, Education and Culture Committee, 25 February 2014; c 3620.]

We have to take very seriously what our teachers have said and the concerns that they continue to raise. The EIS also told the Education and Culture Committee:

“It would not be an exaggeration to say that we have not encountered as widespread anger and disappointment and frustration with the exams authority as we are currently witnessing. Our members feel that SQA communication has not been effective, support has not been sustained or sufficient, and that too much bureaucracy has crept into the process.”

The Scottish Secondary Teachers Association has listed 31 complaints in six different areas. It complains about the impenetrability of the Scottish Qualifications Authority website; the lack of time to prepare for new highers; the materials from the SQA that contain mistakes, grammatical errors and poor-quality graphics; the extreme shortage of clear exemplars; the lack of detail and direction in marking schemes; the inconsistency of standards by different verifiers; and the workload issue, with many teachers working in excess of 50—some are working 60—hours per week.

The SSTA also raises concerns about Education Scotland, which it accuses of seriously failing to deliver real support, and it has concerns about there being virtually no course texts available. Although Alan McKenzie, the general secretary of the SSTA, also welcomed the Government’s announcement last week, he acknowledged that it is not the complete answer that the SSTA members have identified. The current situation is completely unacceptable and it needs further urgent action from the Government to address the outstanding issues and concerns that teachers have. We have seen a couple of press releases from the Government and the SQA during the past week, and they are welcome, but we should have a full report and full details of what the Government is going to do to address all those concerns.

What is the Government going to do about the lack of practice papers? What is it going to do to ensure that teachers have sufficient higher textbooks, that we do not see industrial action taken by teachers, and that those who have additional support needs and those pupils who are studying for qualifications at colleges get the support that they need? What is it going to do to address all the other concerns that we heard at yesterday’s committee?

On the issue of practice papers, we heard yesterday that teachers urgently want three practice papers in each subject, but they are to receive only one. The minister has said that that is adequate, but teachers do not think that it is adequate, and I believe that parents and pupils will agree. It is not good enough for the minister to say that he is listening; he needs to act, and with only six teaching weeks left before the new exams, he needs to act urgently.

If the Scottish Government disagrees with Scotland’s teachers and feels that nothing more is required, I hope that the minister, who is ultimately responsible, will tell the chamber that all the necessary support and resources are in place to allow teachers to deliver these important changes. In the interests of transparency and to reassure parents, the Scottish Government must also compile and publish, as soon as possible, a report on how many pupils are studying the new highers and the existing highers and in what subjects. We need to hear reassurances from the minister, because teachers clearly have many concerns about workload and assessment issues.

An EIS survey from December showed that, in Renfrewshire, 92 per cent of teachers spend more time on curriculum development than is allocated in their working time agreement, and they do not feel confident in delivering the new higher exam. I will read some of the comments from the teachers who responded.

“Never before have I disliked coming to work, I am by nature an organised person and I am finding the stress of not knowing unbearable. Late information from the SQA has been a major factor.”

“The SQA have made a real mess of the implementation of the N5 and I have no confidence that they will be any better in the new higher.”

“The lack of planning, organisation and support given to teachers is a disgrace.”

“We are starting 2014 with SQA still making changes to units which people are presenting from in May—a disgrace.”

“The SQA implementation of the Senior Phase has been a disaster.”

Alasdair Allan (Scottish National Party, Na h-Eileanan an Iar)

Will the member give way?

Neil Bibby (Labour, West Scotland)

I am happy to give way to the minister, who I hope will respond to the concerns of those teachers.

Alasdair Allan (Scottish National Party, Na h-Eileanan an Iar)

I am grateful to the member for raising these issues. As I have indicated throughout the process, the Government is keen to hear from teachers. It is important to note that the reason for the SQA making changes to some of the materials is that those changes were specifically requested by teachers. Does the member accept that, if the SQA is to respond to teachers, it must act and we cannot complain about the fact that it has done so?

Neil Bibby (Labour, West Scotland)

Teachers can complain about the situation because it is completely unacceptable. We need a review for the very reasons that the minister has just outlined. It has taken an outcry in the teaching community to get some of those changes made.

The teachers whom I have just mentioned are not alone; I have received emails from teachers throughout the country. To put it simply, this is a completely unacceptable situation. We need to understand what has gone wrong and what can be improved. We also need to understand why it has taken so long for support to arrive, and we need to know why warnings were ignored.

In March 2012, in a debate in the chamber, the Cabinet Secretary for Education and Lifelong Learning, Mike Russell, said:

“I do not believe that any teacher in Scotland who has the right support, the right help and the right leadership—which will come from the Government, from Education Scotland, from their local authority and from within their school—cannot rise to the challenge and deliver the conclusion of a programme that has been eight years in the making.”—[Official Report, 8 March 2012; c 7003.]

Given that so many schools will not be teaching and so many pupils will not be studying the new highers next year, one must deduce from the words of the cabinet secretary that our teachers have not had

“the right support, the right help and the right leadership”.

Michael Russell (Scottish National Party, Argyll and Bute)

The member has just asserted that

“so many pupils will not be studying the new highers next year”.

Can he benefit the chamber by telling me how many? What precise number of pupils will not be studying the new highers next year?

Neil Bibby (Labour, West Scotland)

Forgive me, Presiding Officer, but I did not know that I had assumed the position of Cabinet Secretary for Education and Lifelong Learning. If I was the cabinet secretary, I would want to know how many children were in that situation. It shows that the cabinet secretary has not got a handle on the situation that he is asking me how many pupils will not be studying the new highers next year.

Michael Russell (Scottish National Party, Argyll and Bute)

He does not know.

Neil Bibby (Labour, West Scotland)

Mr Russell does not know, and that is concerning. Instead of leadership, we have seen complete complacency—[Interruption.]

The Deputy Presiding Officer

Can we have a bit of order, please? [Interruption.] Order!

Neil Bibby (Labour, West Scotland)

It has fallen to local authorities such as Fife Council to give the leadership that has been lacking from the cabinet secretary’s actions. Such is its commitment to ensuring that no pupils are disadvantaged, Fife Council put in additional funds of more than £400,000. In contrast, we have had mixed messages from the Scottish Government and Education Scotland. For example, on 8 November 2013, the chair of the curriculum for excellence board stated in a letter that there was an expectation that all schools would implement the new highers only for that advice to be amended just 12 days later.

Like the Educational Institute of Scotland, I hope that, in spite of the lack of support that the Government has received, the commitment of teachers will ensure that the initiative is successful. However, it is also absolutely right to call for a review of the process because lessons must be learned. We are calling for urgent action and an independent review of the actions of the SQA, Education Scotland and the Government with regard to the preparations for the new exams and courses.

The Deputy Presiding Officer

I ask the member to move his motion as he draws to a close.

Neil Bibby (Labour, West Scotland)

It is vital that lessons are learned, so that we can prevent such a situation from happening again.

The situation is unacceptable and the Government has been complacent. We have heard serious concerns from the front line and teachers on the ground. The Government has failed to listen; it needs to listen fully and act on what has been said. Curriculum for excellence represents a great opportunity for our young people and we want it to succeed.

I move,

That the Parliament reaffirms its support for the curriculum for excellence, which it believes can make a significant contribution to Scottish education; however notes the serious and continuing concerns expressed by teachers and the worries of parents across Scotland about the readiness of preparation for the new National 4 and 5 examinations and the introduction of new highers, including over 30 complaints by the Scottish Secondary Teachers’ Association and also the EIS, which has “not encountered as widespread anger and disappointment and frustration with the exams authority as we are currently witnessing”; welcomes the somewhat belated announcement of extra resources and materials by the Scottish Government, which hopefully will allay many of these concerns, and now calls on the Scottish Government to publish a full action plan; agrees with the EIS that “lessons must be learned”, and further believes that an independent review should be carried out in summer 2014 on the actions taken by the SQA, Education Scotland and the Scottish Government when implementing the current phase of the curriculum for excellence.

Alasdair Allan (Scottish National Party, Na h-Eileanan an Iar)

I am grateful for the opportunity to pause to remember why we are doing what we are doing in CFE and to reflect on the positive progress that has been made for our learners, parents and teachers. As I have said, vital as it is for us to listen to teachers during the process—we will listen to them—it is important to reflect on why we are doing the work, which is for the benefit of young people.

I have visited schools regularly in my job for almost three years and can testify to the excellent work that is going on. It is particularly inspiring to hear young people enthusing about their learning. At yesterday’s Education and Culture Committee, I said that we all share the vision of Scotland’s being the best place in the world to go to school. Nothing has changed my view on that, and nothing has changed the recognition that we have a broad consensus in the chamber on the principles of curriculum for excellence—a policy that was begun under the previous Labour-Liberal Democrat coalition and which has been continued by this Government. Putting in place the last pieces of the CFE jigsaw is a prize that all parties have played a part in—or, as the EIS put it more trenchantly yesterday, it is a prize in which all parties are “complicit”.

I cannot emphasise enough that this Government recognises and appreciates teachers’ hard work, commitment and dedication. Much of the basis of curriculum for excellence is the intention to free teachers to use their professional judgment, so everything that we do nationally and locally must support that.

We hear reports that some teachers are anxious as we move to the new qualifications. That is a reflection of our teachers’ deep commitment to doing their absolute best for young people. However, we take very seriously the points that are raised around support and workload issues. I have never tried to shy away from the reality that this level of change in any education system implies a great deal of hard work. To that end, the Scottish Government, Education Scotland and the SQA have worked closely with local authorities, teachers, and parents in order to ensure that effective support is available; indeed, unprecedented levels of support have been provided. Much of that has been long planned and agreed, and all national support has been provided on or before schedule.

We have also always been willing to listen to calls for further support and to put that in place. Last Friday, I announced a package of £5 million further assistance, which the unions and others have welcomed. I take issue with Mr Bibby’s assertion that that is somehow the Government’s first meaningful response to what teachers have told us. Since 2012, we have in total provided more than £10 million of additional funding, three extra in-service days, including a further day for higher in 2014-15, full course materials for each of the 95 national 4 and 5 courses, and we will provide higher materials by April, and subject-specific and other events for thousands of teachers.

Neil Bibby (Labour, West Scotland)

Pupils, parents and teachers all need to feel confident before exams take place. Will the minister help to alleviate concerns by ensuring as a matter of urgency that adequate practice papers are made available?

Alasdair Allan (Scottish National Party, Na h-Eileanan an Iar)

I am glad that Neil Bibby has asked that, because it was one of the interesting issues that was raised at yesterday’s meeting of the Education and Culture Committee. With his permission, I will come on to that subject in a moment.

Before I do, it is important to say that the £4.75 million that I announced last week is specifically designed to enable local authorities to bring teachers together to work through the assessment process.

Another crucial component was announced by the SQA last week. Because it now has clear evidence that people have a good understanding of the standards that are required, the SQA has been able to make important changes to its approach to quality assurance, which will begin in April.

To pick up on Neil Bibby’s point about requests for practice papers—which came up at yesterday’s committee meeting—I note that a specimen paper for every national 5 course has been available since February 2013. By the end of March, the SQA will also have produced guidance that will capture still-relevant questions from past papers from the previous three years. I will be happy to ensure that that additional work is made available, because it will provide a rich pool of questions for learners to draw on as they prepare for their new national 5s. By the end of this week, the SQA will also release specimen papers for all new higher courses.

In addition, the SQA is writing to all young people who will take exams in 2014 to explain the new results services. From this summer, all candidates who suffer a bereavement, serious illness or other exceptional circumstances will find that they are much better served than they would have been under the previous appeals system, and candidates who wish to have their exam scripts rechecked will have the opportunity to request that service. For that reason, although the motivation of the Conservative amendment is reasonable enough, I believe that the concerns that it raises have been addressed.

Neil Bibby (Labour, West Scotland)

Will the minister clarify how many specimen higher papers will be published? He will be aware that concerns have been raised about the lack of resources for highers textbooks. Will he set the record straight and address those concerns. How much will be made available for highers course textbooks?