Scottish Parliament, 7 February 2008

393 contributions from 85 members. The official report.

Official Report 7 February 2008

Survivors of Institutional Abuse

Alex Fergusson (None, Galloway and Upper Nithsdale)

The first item of business is a statement by Adam Ingram on support for survivors of historical in-care and institutional abuse. The minister will take questions at the end of his statement and there should therefore be no interventions.

Adam Ingram (Scottish National Party, South of Scotland)

The determination of the Scottish Government to improve the life chances of children who are looked after is well documented. We all acknowledge that there are no easy fixes and that achieving fundamental change will take years. However, in many areas, there is tangible progress.

That said, we cannot forget the physical, emotional and sexual abuse of children that took place in Scotland's residential establishments. The issue has been a running sore in Scotland's history of taking care of children who could not live at home. The pain and trauma of those experiences were eloquently and bravely set out by survivors in their petitions to the Scottish Parliament. The cross-party group for survivors of childhood sexual abuse plays a crucial role by reminding us of survivors' concerns.

My statement today sets out the progress that we are making to improve the support that is available for survivors of in-care and institutional abuse. I make it clear that this statement is made on behalf of the whole Scottish Government. My ministerial colleagues and I cover the range of survivors' interests and, collectively, we are determined to work closely with our partners to achieve real change.

Survivors' commitment and action led, in 2004, to the then First Minister's apology for the abuse committed. He put in place a raft of work to get to the heart of how that abuse happened and to help us understand how we could prevent abuse on such a scale from recurring. One important area of work is the review that was led by independent expert Tom Shaw and which published, in November 2007, the document, "Historical Abuse Systemic Review: Residential Schools and Children's Homes in Scotland 1950 to 1995".

The Scottish Government is pleased to accept the recommendations of the Shaw review in full. There are a few differences in the detail of some of our proposals for taking forward the recommendations, but there is nothing that will affect their substance or intent.

In relation to Shaw's recommendation on the introduction of support services for in-care abuse survivors, I am pleased to inform Parliament of recent developments. Within the context of survivorScotland, the national strategy for adult survivors of childhood sexual abuse, which is being led by the Minister for Public Health, we intend to improve the well-being of, and services for, all survivors and to raise public awareness of the existence and impact of all forms of abuse.

The reference group that is taking forward survivorScotland has recognised the specific needs of in-care abuse survivors by establishing a sub-group, which is chaired by Gary Westwater and is made up of survivors and other stakeholders. That group concluded its work this week with proposals for a national service framework. It wants a national hub that provides advice and information and is able to link up with the local services that in-care survivors need, which should include advocacy, mediation and counselling services.

I am persuaded in principle that that is the way forward. I have made available central funding for the next three years and, subject to the comments of the survivorScotland reference group, I expect to be able to move ahead quickly with the procurement of this national service.

More widely, the Scottish Government has listened to survivors and their explanations of the importance of society acknowledging the suffering that they have experienced. At the moment, the courts are the only avenue by which survivors can receive such public acknowledgement. Of course, it is essential that abusers are brought to justice, but often that route alone will not meet survivors' needs.

I am pleased to inform Parliament that we have been actively scoping the adaptation of the principles of a truth and reconciliation model. We are committed to that. We are considering good practice examples for establishing a forum to give survivors the chance to speak about their experiences and to help them come to terms with the past. That will provide an invaluable opportunity to establish the facts, learn from the suffering and use the experience to help us protect and provide for children in the future.

I assure Parliament that, as the process develops, there will be further consultation with survivors of abuse, organisations that provide them with support and information and other providers of care that share with Government responsibility for acknowledging and supporting survivors.

In that context, I turn now to the Scottish Law Commission report, "Personal Injury Actions: Limitation and Prescribed Claims", which was published on 5 December. The time bar is an issue in cases involving survivors of in-care and institutional abuse. That has recently been brought directly to members' attention through a letter from a survivor. My ministerial colleagues and I have every sympathy for survivors of abuse. However, the Scottish Government accepts the Law Commission's recommendations that prescribed claims should not be revived. The events in question took place before September 1964, and any attempt to legislate to revive those very old cases would run into very serious difficulties in relation to retrospection and European convention on human rights considerations.

The Law Commission's report does not make specific recommendations for survivors of abuse in relation to the limitation period for raising a claim, which is currently three years. It recommends the continuation of non-time-limited judicial discretion for cases outwith that period.

We genuinely do not believe that a change in the law to give abuse survivors a right to take any case to court would actually right the wrong in question and provide positive outcomes for survivors. Changing the law is not the way to tackle this issue. The Government's focus is the development of the forum that I have just described.

Another aspect of support for survivors that was identified by the Shaw review was the importance of ensuring that survivors and past residents could access their records. It is a tragedy that so little value was placed on keeping children's records. The stories of adults discovering from their records that they had siblings or finding out details of their families' circumstances that they never knew before are deeply moving. Even more heart-breaking are the stories of survivors who can find no record of themselves or their family.

We have learned the importance of looked-after children having a diary and memory book and records maintained for them from birth. However, we still have a responsibility to support adults to access their records and to make sure records for children in care now are properly stored.

The Shaw report rightly makes important recommendations about records and record keeping. The first is the need for a review of public records legislation. There are clear advantages in such a review, as the existing law is more than 60 years old. We have therefore asked the keeper of the records of Scotland, in consultation, to review the legislation on public records in the light of the shortcomings that were exposed by Shaw.

Shaw also stresses the importance of using the existing law to improve the management of and access to children's records. Shaw recommends that children's organisations use the section 61 code of practice on records management from the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002. We agree, so we will seek to include that code as a model for best practice within the looked-after children regulations, which are currently out to public consultation.

Shaw highlights the overriding concern of the survivors to whom he spoke that all those responsible for children in residential care now and in the future must learn the lessons of the past. He outlined the need to develop a culture in residential child care that is founded on children's rights and the need to raise respect for those children. I whole-heartedly agree with him. I want to work with partners to make residential care the first and best placement of choice for those children whose needs it serves. The starting point must be improving the status, morale and skills of residential care staff, who have among the toughest of jobs in caring for our most vulnerable children. We depend on their dedication and commitment, and they deserve improvements.

I am pleased to announce that the Scottish Government intends to take the necessary steps to require residential child care workers to register with the Scottish Social Services Council. Of course, many such staff have already registered with the council, but progress is not good enough. We must ensure that all staff register with it in order to secure a well-qualified and highly professional workforce. We will engage with a range of key stakeholders, including employers and the council, to ensure that all parties are well placed to take forward such a vital agenda.

More widely, the Scottish Government is committed to the long-term, sustainable development of the social services workforce in Scotland. We have been working with the social services sector to build capacity and skills through developing a continuous learning framework, which will help everyone in the sector to manage their career development and learning more effectively, and through a programme of action to improve leadership capacity.

Further improvements in residential care are also required. I will invite a range of partners to work with us to help achieve residential care of the best possible quality. I will look for recommendations on how we can achieve a supply of residential child care that matches the full range of needs of children and young people. We must also strengthen care planning for children in and out of placements by using the getting it right for every child framework. Furthermore, we must develop a more consistent approach to commissioning that is based on the desired outcomes for all children, with agreed roles and responsibilities for commissioning authorities and providers. We need to achieve agreement among providers, local authorities as corporate parents, the inspectorates and others on respective responsibilities for ensuring safety and good-quality care for children. I expect to receive early proposals on how those challenges can be addressed by June this year.

I want partners to ensure that we demonstrate that we have learned the lessons that are set out in the Shaw review and other inquiries, but of course we need to be continually alert to the potential for the abuse of children and ensure that our systems for listening to children are continually refreshed.

In October, I announced that the Scottish Government and Glasgow City Council had jointly commissioned an independent inquiry into abuse at Kerelaw and that further details would follow. Today, I have placed on the Scottish Government's website the jointly agreed terms of reference for that inquiry. The inquiry team will engage thoroughly with survivors and ensure that their voice is central to the inquiry. Ex-members of staff will also be invited to provide insights into how abuse occurred over a long period of time without its being prevented. The inquiry team will produce further details on its engagement with all relevant parties as its work continues. When the inquiry concludes, we will have a comprehensive picture of the strengths of the systems that we have in place to protect children and keep them safe, the shortcomings of those systems and further improvements to them that may be necessary.

Knowing what we know now, the Scottish Government considers that no further inquiries into historical abuse are necessary. Rather, our efforts will focus on the prevention of abuse in residential care and on the provision of support for survivors now. I am sure that all members will agree that the programme that I have set out will, over time, transform support for survivors.

The time for saying that we need to learn the lessons of historical abuse is over. Survivors deserve visible signs of progress. Their campaigning and willingness to share the horror of what they suffered will result in important changes that will help to protect children in the future.

Alex Fergusson (None, Galloway and Upper Nithsdale)

The minister will now take questions on issues raised in his statement. I intend to allow around 30 minutes for questions, after which we will move on to the next item of business.

Mary Mulligan (Labour, Linlithgow)

I thank the minister for his statement and for the early sight of it, and I join him in thanking Tom Shaw for his comprehensive report. We all recognise the many practical challenges that Tom Shaw faced. The report was commissioned to consider past systems, but I particularly welcome the fact that he took time to speak to former residents before he constructed his recommendations, which built on their clear desire to protect current and future residents of residential care homes.

The minister spoke of a forum that will give survivors of abuse a chance to speak about their experiences. Will past workers in residential units be involved in that forum? Will it reflect the Irish example? In Ireland, the Government provides funds to make fair and reasonable awards.

The report recognised—as the minister has done in his statement—the crucial need to improve the training of residential care staff and other social workers. In the past, there was a specific budget of £6 million for social work training, but funding for such training is now part of general local authority funding. How will the minister ensure that money for social work training is protected and that every local authority can adequately fund such training?

Finally, the minister said that Shaw outlined the need to develop a culture in residential child care that is

"founded on children's rights and the need to raise respect for those children."

How will the Government ensure that every child who is being looked after or is in residential care will have their voice heard?

Adam Ingram (Scottish National Party, South of Scotland)

Perpetrators will, obviously, be invited to take part in the proceedings of the truth and reconciliation forum, as has happened in models elsewhere in the world—the South Africa model is the classic example. However, I am open to persuasion on the example that we should follow. You mentioned the Irish model, but models exist in other parts of the world. New Zealand provides an interesting example. Financial compensation or redress is not part of the picture there. The key issue for survivors of abuse is to be able to relay their experiences, get them out into the public domain and have them recognised, and to get perpetrators or organisations that were responsible to admit what had happened. That is the key element that allows individuals to move forward with their lives and lead fulfilling lives, and not to continue to be scarred by what happened in the past. As you know, the Catholic Church in Ireland has put up a substantial amount of money to assist financial compensation. At this stage, I am not persuaded that we should follow that model, but, as I said, I am open to persuasion and argument.

I turn to social work training and qualifications. It is clear that some of the problems with residential care and other social care services were a consequence of people's lack of qualifications, knowledge and understanding. We must improve the skills set in the social care workforce. Shaw highlighted that matter, and it is a priority of mine.

Under the new relationship with local government, we will work with our local authorities on the matter to maintain and improve training efforts at the local level. Just yesterday, I spoke at a conference hosted by the Scottish Social Services Council, at which a learning qualifications framework and new qualifications were introduced.

The key finding of the Shaw report relates to children's rights. Throughout the history of abuse, children were not listened to—their stories were not believed. We must address that. Last October, in my first statement on the subject, I indicated that I had spoken to the Commissioner for Children and Young People in Scotland about how to engage children in the Kerelaw inquiry. The key to future progress is to ensure that children's voices are heard and believed in residential care systems.

Alex Fergusson (None, Galloway and Upper Nithsdale)

Minister, I encourage you, as I encourage all members, not to refer to other members in the second person singular, but to use their full names. Thank you very much.

Elizabeth Smith (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

I pay tribute to the Government for bringing the matter urgently to the Parliament and I thank the minister for early sight of his statement.

There is no question but that we give our unequivocal support to addressing the issue, and I am sure that the same is true of all political parties in the Parliament.

I have two highly specific questions. First, will you clarify—

Alex Fergusson (None, Galloway and Upper Nithsdale)

I am sorry—my instruction not to use the second person singular applies not just to the minister, but to all members.

Elizabeth Smith (Conservative, Mid Scotland and Fife)

In his statement, the minister said that the Scottish Law Commission report

"does not make specific recommendations for survivors of abuse in relation to the limitation period for raising a claim, which is currently three years."

The report recommends that, outwith that period, the absence of a time bar should continue. Am I right in thinking that that is a matter for judicial review? Although the Government cannot interfere with judicial discretion, will it monitor the situation as regards cases that do not fall within the three-year period?

Secondly, will the minister provide additional information on how the hub system to which he referred will interlink with existing Government mechanisms and with the many local services that people who have been victims of abuse take advantage of, which help to allay some of their fears?

Adam Ingram (Scottish National Party, South of Scotland)

The time bar is an issue of some controversy. I emphasise that, in Scotland, the courts exercise their discretion in such cases. However, no guidance is provided to judges on how they should exercise that discretion. The Scottish Law Commission report recommends that such guidance should be issued. We will respond to that recommendation shortly, and to the notion of extending the limitation period from three to five years, which will apply to compensation claims for personal injury as well as those for abuse. We are not doing nothing on that front—we are making progress on it.

With regard to the hub system, as Elizabeth Smith might be aware, we are building on the survivorScotland strategy for survivors of childhood sexual abuse by extending services and support mechanisms to survivors of in-care abuse. Some £1.7 million has already been made available, over a two-year period, to 25 organisations to develop a range of services for survivors, so a network of expertise and support mechanisms is being built up. We hope to build on that initiative through the sub-group's proposals. As I said in my statement, I hope to commission services from the survivorScotland reference group and the sub-group immediately, and something should be up and running by the summer.

Hugh O'Donnell (Liberal Democrat, Central Scotland)

I thank the minister for the advance copy of his statement. As other members have said, we are all supportive of the expeditious way in which the matter has been brought to Parliament for consideration. The Liberal Democrats are fully supportive of the Shaw report's recommendations and we welcome the Government's determination to implement them. However, there are a number of issues that I would like the minister to clarify.

What level of funding will be provided for the national hub? What will the source of that funding be? Is the minister able to tell us about the likely composition of the truth and reconciliation centre that he mentioned? What powers to call witnesses will it have? For example, will it be able to compel witnesses to appear? Will the code of practice on record keeping cover all local authority records as well as those of voluntary organisations? Will such records fall within the scope of both freedom of information legislation and protection legislation?

Adam Ingram (Scottish National Party, South of Scotland)

The member's first question was about funding. I assure him that funding has been secured for the new services for in-care abuse survivors. I mentioned that £1.7 million has already been set aside for services for the survivors of childhood sexual abuse, the provision of which we will extend to survivors of in-care abuse.

As regards the truth and reconciliation model, we must discuss with survivors, representatives of survivors groups and other stakeholders what powers any such forum will have, to ensure that the model that we adopt will be effective. A number of issues must be considered carefully, not least because some truth and reconciliation models elsewhere in the world have failed. For example, the failure of the model that was adopted in Nova Scotia has probably added to the considerable number of problems that were already faced.

The member's final question was about the code of practice. As I said in my statement, significant problems were experienced with record keeping and the management of records. We suggest that the keeper of the records of Scotland should review the current public records legislation, which is 60 years old. In principle, we are prepared to introduce legislation to amend and update the law in that regard. As far as freedom of information is concerned, children's records are, of course, confidential and should not be available to everyone. However, we are keen to ensure that when children become adults, they are able to access all the records that are available to them.

Alex Fergusson (None, Galloway and Upper Nithsdale)

We come now to back-bench questions. There are nine members who wish to ask questions and 15 minutes to fit them in—I encourage brevity in questions and answers.

Sandra White (Scottish National Party, Glasgow)

I thank the minister for his statement, and I pay tribute to the survivors of abuse. The minister mentioned the time bar, which—as we know—prevents victims from taking action against their abusers. I understand that it would be very difficult to pursue some cases, considering the timescale, and I welcome what the minister says about the guidance and the extension of the limit from three to five years. The minister will, however, be aware of the recent ruling in England that virtually ends the time bar. If the forum that the minister mentioned does not meet the needs of survivors of abuse, will the Government examine the time bar again?

Adam Ingram (Scottish National Party, South of Scotland)

As I indicated in my remarks, the Scottish Law Commission has investigated that whole area of law, and has concluded that it could not recommend changes to the law. However, the situation in England and Scotland has until recently been different—the non-time-limited judicial discretion that we have in Scotland was not a feature of English law, so we should not make direct comparisons with cases in England.

As I pointed out in my response to Elizabeth Smith, we are seeking to extend the time limitation period and to make other adjustments that will, I hope, address the issues that the member is concerned about. In addition, the truth and reconciliation model that we propose will, I hope, deal with the key issues of addressing the historical abuse that people have gone through and helping to reconcile their situation.

Michael McMahon (Labour, Hamilton North and Bellshill)

I am sure that the minister will be aware that the previous Public Petitions Committee brought this issue to the chamber and that that has ultimately led to today's statement. As I convened that committee, I take a particular interest in the petitioners' position. I know that Tom Shaw's review group involved the petitioners, but will the minister tell members what discussions he has had with the petitioners? Have the petitioners indicated which issues remain outstanding and how will they be involved in developing the report's recommendations?

Adam Ingram (Scottish National Party, South of Scotland)

I have had no direct discussions with the petitioners as yet, although I pay tribute to them for bringing their petitions to the Scottish Parliament, and to the work of the Public Petitions Committee in that regard. However, I am keen that survivors, including some of the petitioners, make a significant contribution to putting together the truth and reconciliation model that we are talking about. I want to ensure that all their concerns are properly addressed.

Trish Godman (Labour, West Renfrewshire)

In your statement, you say that you believe—

Alex Fergusson (None, Galloway and Upper Nithsdale)

I ask the member to refer to "his" statement, please.

Trish Godman (Labour, West Renfrewshire)

Oh dear, imagine me getting that wrong. Minister, in your statement you state that the Government believes in improving status, morale and skills for residential staff. I worked in a residential list D school for three years. I had no qualifications, and I walked in the door because I knew somebody who knew somebody who worked there. I knew nothing about the girls, I was never told anything about them and no information was shared with me within or outwith the home so, for me, staff training is imperative.

Minister, can you assure me, on the record, that the single outcome agreements with local authorities will be adequate to ensure proper social work training? Will you—I mean, the minister—also say whether you will check the progress of those single outcome agreements? It is not very good if you are only checking every so often and then, between checks, we discover that the training is not taking place. From the councils' point of view—and I hate to say this—training and social work is an easy budget to cut.

Minister, will you also assure me that advocacy for both previously and currently looked-after children will be properly funded and the right to advocacy explained to the survivors and the children? We set targets—will you continue with them?

Alex Fergusson (None, Galloway and Upper Nithsdale)

I will not, but we will ask the minister.

Adam Ingram (Scottish National Party, South of Scotland)

The Government currently provides funding in the region of £2.2 million to the Scottish institute for residential child care, which assists with training in the residential care sector. What I announced today is essentially an upgrading of our efforts to improve training and to try to ensure that every staff member in a residential home has appropriate training. We are requesting that every staff member registers with the Scottish Social Services Council, and with that registration comes the obligation to acquire skills in relation to continuous professional development.

The indicators and outcomes in single outcome agreements are very strong in this particular area, and it is critical for the success of our approach that proper monitoring and scrutiny is put in to ensure the outcomes that we are all looking for.

I am sorry, I did not quite catch Trish Godman's last question, but I can perhaps respond to her in writing.

Christina McKelvie (Scottish National Party, Central Scotland)

I welcome the minister's announcement about the acceleration of registration for child care staff. My previous employers and colleagues will be delighted at such a commitment from the minister. Can he tell us about the work that he will undertake with the Scottish Social Services Council and local authorities to ensure that the historically slow progress of staff registration is addressed? Will there be a review of the minimum qualification requirements? There has not been such a review for about six years.

Adam Ingram (Scottish National Party, South of Scotland)

I am in discussions with the Scottish Social Services Council on those matters. The member is quite correct to say that the registration process with regard to residential care staff has been extremely slow. Of 4,000-odd staff, only 1,000 or so have registered, which is a matter of concern. That is why we are moving towards making registration a requirement rather than voluntary. As I mentioned, yesterday I helped to launch new qualifications for residential care staff at a conference that was hosted by the SSSC and I am keen to progress that particular issue. I believe that Garry Coutts, the convener of the SSSC, is in the public gallery to hear the statement. We are committed to the process.

Richard Simpson (Labour, Mid Scotland and Fife)

I thank the minister for his statement. I think that the Shaw report is excellent. I have spent a considerable proportion of my psychiatric life in treating patients who have experienced abuse, including abuse that has taken place in a residential setting. It is disappointing that psychiatrists have treated such individuals as personality disordered, and have not accepted that really serious damage has been done to them.

I want the minister to provide the Parliament with absolute clarity about funding. The previous Government provided £1.7 million, which the minister has mentioned already, for the creation of survivorScotland. I want to know whether the new money will be additional money and whether the existing 25 organisations that were supported by the previous Government will continue to be supported, because the fund was originally time limited. Will the new moneys, which will be for advice, counselling and treatment at a national level, be in addition to funding for those organisations?

I see that the Minister for Community Safety, Fergus Ewing, is in the chamber. I ask the Minister for Children and Early Years to consult him on the specific provision of counselling, advice and support for the 70 per cent of offenders in women's prisons who have been abused—that includes childhood abuse—according to research by Dobash and Dobash.

Adam Ingram (Scottish National Party, South of Scotland)

I acknowledge the member's knowledge and expertise and I guarantee that the funding for the commissioning of the new in-care abuse service will be additional money. It will not be part of the £1.7 million.

As I have said, I am keen to move ahead as quickly as possible. The sub-group finished its work this week and came forward with recommendations. I am keen now to get on with commissioning the service.

On Dr Simpson's final point I will happily consult my colleague, who will then perhaps write to Dr Simpson.

Des McNulty (Labour, Clydebank and Milngavie)

Although I do not underestimate the difficulty of gathering evidence and establishing proof in cases that date from before September 1964, that date seems arbitrary. In the Scottish Law Commission's report, the justification on human rights grounds for not reviving prescribed claims seems to me perverse. Survivors believe that changing the law is the way forward, so how does refusing to give survivors the right to take their cases to court provide resolution? Why are the human rights of the perpetrators placed above the human rights of the victims?

Like Sandra White, I ask the minister to take account of the recent House of Lords ruling in a rape case, in which the time bar was dropped to allow the victim to pursue justice. I ask him to allow the victims of in-care and institutional abuse in Scotland to gain the legal assistance and the legal redress through the courts that they need in order to get resolution for the evil acts that were done to them.

Adam Ingram (Scottish National Party, South of Scotland)

As I said to the chamber earlier, in Scotland we have taken a different approach to the time bar than in England. There is always judicial discretion in the pursuit of abusers; it is up to the court authorities or the judge to determine whether a case can be brought—taking into account all the possible difficulties in accessing evidence, finding witnesses, and so on. People trying to prosecute a case from 40 or 50 years ago would have to acknowledge that large holes would exist in the evidence. For example, many witnesses will have died.

There is a difference between prescription and time limitation. I am not a lawyer, so I will not go into the difference in detail today. However, I undertake to write to the member to explain how the European convention on human rights relates to these particular matters. It is not just about the abuser or perpetrator; it goes wider than that. The member might not be satisfied with my answer, but I will write to him anyway.

Aileen Campbell (Scottish National Party, South of Scotland)

The minister talked about survivorScotland and said that the Government was determined to raise public awareness of the existence and impact of all forms of abuse. How will the Government do that?

Adam Ingram (Scottish National Party, South of Scotland)

As the member may know, survivorScotland has a website, which obviously does the job of raising awareness. The survivorScotland strategy calls for a raising of awareness, and a roadshow is planned for later this year.

Margaret Curran (Labour, Glasgow Baillieston)

In light of the minister's response to Des McNulty's question, I ask him to meet me and a constituent of mine who is a survivor of sexual abuse. My constituent will be deeply disappointed that the minister is not moving on the issue of the time bar. What he and other survivors want is justice. I ask the minister to meet him to explain his next course of action.

Adam Ingram (Scottish National Party, South of Scotland)

I am happy to give that undertaking to the member. However, I point out to her that we are moving forward—in our consideration of a truth and reconciliation model. I hope that such a model would be able to get to the facts of the member's constituent's case and address them publicly. That would surely go a considerable way towards addressing his needs.

Paul Martin (Labour, Glasgow Springburn)

As the minister has rightly said, the time bar is controversial. Would it not therefore be fitting for the Parliament to launch a top-to-bottom review, so that we have an opportunity to consider a number of issues surrounding the time bar?

Adam Ingram (Scottish National Party, South of Scotland)

As I said, the Government has determined how we should move forward. It is time to move on, to address the concerns of survivors and, for the current users of residential care, to learn the lessons—finally—of what has gone on in the past. Of course the Parliament will always have its scrutiny and accountability function. I welcome that.

Commercial Forestry

Alex Fergusson (None, Galloway and Upper Nithsdale)

I warn members in advance that the debate on motion S3M-1315, in the name of Michael Russell, on commercial forestry, is heavily subscribed.

Michael Russell (Scottish National Party, South of Scotland)

I am very pleased to introduce this debate. This week is, of course, environment week—as we know from the events and receptions that are taking place around the Parliament building. As they walked to the chamber, most members will have seen a variety of posters and stands, one of which draws attention to the environment being a place of economic activity. Today's debate is about the economic benefits of one very important part of our environment in Scotland—forestry in both the public and private sectors.

In December, when I introduced the debate on forestry, access and health, I made a commitment to return to the chamber to debate the economic impact of the commercial forestry sector. I am glad to do so today.

Since becoming Minister for Environment last May, I have had the privilege of visiting quite a number of Scotland's forests and a number of the timber-processing and wood-using companies. I have been impressed throughout by the levels of innovation, investment and technology that are employed to transform a fairly simply thing—a small tree that starts out as virtually nothing—into a very large thing indeed, which can then become a variety of valuable and useful products.

What impresses me most about the forestry sector in Scotland is the long-term nature of its work. Forestry is not for the faint-hearted; it is for those who are prepared to take time to put effort into long-term investment and long-term success.

I will at no time claim that this Government has all the answers for the forestry sector. We are committed to working with a wide variety of organisations and individuals and to acknowledging the work that has been done before—by those of no political persuasion and by those Governments that have regarded forestry as an important part of Scotland's future, particularly since 1919 and the establishment of the Forestry Commission.

Despite fierce global competition, the forestry industry in Scotland is a success story. Our processors have managed to remain profitable through a period of historically low timber prices. That has been due to continuous investment in new equipment and to improved operating processes. Over the past two years alone, new wood-using developments, either commissioned or committed, have amounted to £250 million. They include new sawmills at Lockerbie, Dumfries, Fort William and Kincardine, as well as major biomass energy projects at Lockerbie, Irvine and Invergordon. Two weeks ago, I visited an impressive sawmill facility in Falkirk, which will relocate next year to state-of-the-art premises in Fife. That represents continued investment in the future profitability of forestry.

The emergence of the bio-energy sector represents another huge opportunity for Scottish forests and woodlands. The Scottish biomass support scheme is well subscribed and some £17 million of new projects will come on stream this year, assisted by £7.5 million from the scheme. I was pleased recently to receive the report of the wood fuel task force, which I set up last year. The report includes useful recommendations for massively increasing the supply of material into a rapidly developing sector. We are keen that bio-energy should develop at a pace and scale that suits our fibre resource.

Those and other positive investments not only represent timber use, but provide well-paid and worthwhile employment, often in parts of rural Scotland that are short of such employment. The forestry industry in Scotland supports 12,000 direct jobs and 14,000 indirect jobs—26,000 jobs in total—and recent investments can only add to the number.

There is also a thriving and growing hardwood sector, which operates in niche markets and produces uniquely Scottish products, often in rural areas. I was particularly impressed when I visited the Borders Forest Trust on a wet day last autumn to see how its work produces not only jobs but items of utility and beauty. There is potential to develop all those parts of the industry. I hope that the debate encourages such development, which will generate economic benefits throughout the country.

In 1970, just fewer than 750,000m3 of timber was produced in Scotland, mostly from the national forest estate. So successful has the industry been that in 2007 our forests produced 6.6 million cubic metres of timber, more than half of which came from the private sector. It is important to acknowledge that partnership between the private and state sectors, which is appreciated by both sides, is producing economic growth. Our Scottish forestry strategy indicates that we will increase output to about 8.5 million cubic metres per year during the next decade.

That cannot happen without forethought, planning and planting. The dip in planting since 1970 will soon produce a shortfall. I am supportive of the aspiration to plant around 9,000 to 10,000 hectares of new forests and woodlands each year. I am keen to drive forward planting, so that in time we meet the previous Government's aspiration, which we share, to have 25 per cent of Scotland's land afforested during this century. That will provide a long-term supply of wood to the sectors that I talked about. The aspiration represents significant additional woodland, much of which will be native and broadleaved woodland. We must also continue to invest in the right products to sell in the competitive forest industry worldwide.

It might seem strange to say that timber production is only part of a forest's success, but other things count in the success of forests. Forests support a vibrant tourism and recreation sector and add to the richness and biodiversity of our rural landscape. Forest-related activity, particularly in tourism, provided no less than £260 million in gross value added to the Scottish economy last year. Some 14,000 people are directly or indirectly employed as a result of such tourism activity. For example, the creation of a network of mountain bike trails by Forestry Commission Scotland has earned Scotland the title of adventure capital of Europe.

Not all forest tourism involves such strenuous activity. The growth of ecotourism and wildlife watching is starting to deliver economic benefits. The sea eagles of Mull, at Loch Frisa, are a firmly established tourist magnet, which pulls in thousands of wildlife enthusiasts. The Forestry Commission's Kyle Rhea otter haven on Skye is another example.

Jeremy Purvis (Liberal Democrat, Tweeddale, Ettrick and Lauderdale)

The minister will be aware of proposals for new mountain biking facilities in Glentress and Innerleithen, in my constituency. We will shortly reach the final stage of a feasibility study for a mechanised uplift facility at Innerleithen. Will the minister look favourably on the project if it requires public sector support? It could bring huge advantages in developing not just the Borders' place but Scotland's place in the mountain biking world.

Michael Russell (Scottish National Party, South of Scotland)

I am happy to look sympathetically at all investments that enhance Scotland's reputation in the world, and I will be happy to talk to Mr Purvis about the proposal and to visit the site, to see how we can help further. As he rightly pointed out, such investment has produced massive dividends. That is the key issue of the debate. State investment in the forestry sector is only part of the overall investment, but it unlocks huge benefit for the whole of Scotland.

I am well aware of concerns in the forestry sector about the hiatus that has followed the closure of the Scottish forestry grants scheme in April 2006 and I am keen that rural development contracts should be opened up as soon as possible. I welcome the European Union's imminent approval of the full Scottish rural development programme. Some £269 million will be allocated for forestry measures over the life of the programme. That represents more than £38 million of new investment in forestry every year, which is a historically high level of support and is provided in recognition of what forestry can deliver for Scotland. I am confident that the private sector will respond positively to the new rural development contracts and I have asked Forest Enterprise Scotland to develop, in parallel, a planting programme. As I said, the state and private sectors are working together, learning from each other and moving forward.

It would be wrong of me to conclude without mentioning the community woodland sector. The Government is keen on local participation. Woodland that is managed through local involvement helps to generate local activity, particularly economic activity. I have visited a number of projects during the past nine months, including Aline community woodland on Lewis—a surprising wood to come across on the road from Tarbert to Stornoway. The project is generating jobs and activity. Training has been provided for five local residents, who are now employed by the group. Forestry Commission Scotland works in partnership with more than 100 community woodland groups on the national forest estate and supports community woodland umbrella bodies.

Scotland's forests and woodlands, which cover 8 or 9 per cent of land mass—a proportion that we are keen to grow—deliver economic benefits, through employment in rural areas and the development of a profitable and expanding processing sector, and by making a major contribution to local industries, including the tourism industry. They also provide a backdrop to what this country is and what it can be. They provide a backdrop to our landscape, a haven for our rich biodiversity and a special place for people to find and to visit.

I am pleased to move, That the Parliament, mindful of the Scottish Government's purpose to achieve sustainable economic growth, acknowledges the contribution that forests and woodlands make through timber, tourism and direct and indirect employment, and recognises the need to support the continued development and expansion of the commercial Scottish forestry sector and the competitive and developing industries which it underpins.

David Stewart (Labour, Highlands and Islands)

In the dying days of the first world war in 1918, the country was ravaged by conflict, our young people had been sacrificed on the battlefield and our economy was in free-fall. That is the context in which the Forestry Commission was born, to replant, rebuild and renew a crucial asset that seemed impossible to replace. Replacing forests seemed to be an oxymoron. How could the native Caledonian pine forests, which were hundreds of years old, be replaced? However, the foresters of old in the 1920s and 1930s did what it said on the tin. They replanted our forests with fast-growing and mainly, but not exclusively, non-native species.

Today, the picture is very different. Our living forests play several roles—in climate change mitigation, industry and construction, jobs, biomass, housing and leisure, and biodiversity. For example, the Laggan community forest, which was born out of the national forest land scheme, is an exemplar of new thinking, which brings together various themes: timber processing, combined heat and power, holiday accommodation and recreational access. A few years ago, on a wet November morning, I attended the opening of the Wolftrax mountain bike trails, where brave adolescents risk life and limb—and their parents' blood pressure—to demonstrate that gravity does not apply to anyone under 21.

By my back-of-the-envelope calculation, which could be wrong, the Parliament last debated forestry in 2004. I strongly welcome the debate and commend the minister for bringing it to the chamber. As with our debate on biodiversity a few weeks ago, consensus may well break out in the chamber again today.

I share the view of the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds that the role of Parliament and Government is to enhance the environmental as well as the social and economic value of Scotland's forests and woodlands. I fully support the Scottish forestry strategy, which was developed by the previous Administration, and its three outcomes in the areas of health, competitiveness and the environment.

Time will not allow me to develop some of the important themes that relate to the debate such as business and community development, access and health, freight and roads, tourism, and crofting and forestry townships. I hope that future debates will allow more time for those subjects.

The Scottish woodland is an important natural resource. It helps in the fight against climate change by retaining carbon and acts as an integral part of our economy not only by ensuring the availability of raw materials for the construction industry but by supporting the jobs that are associated with that industry. It also has an important role in ensuring that people throughout Scotland can access woodland areas to experience the wide range of biodiversity that Scotland continues to have.

The forestry strategy's implementation plan for 2007-08 highlights a number of commitments that the previous Government made, including an allocation of £10.5 million to support biomass schemes, to which the minister referred. Although the biomass sector is at an early stage of development, it has potential for the future. As the minister will be aware, in some parts of Europe, biomass represents 50 per cent of power use. For example, 20 years ago, Styria in Austria started from scratch a combined heat and power scheme that has become a model in Europe. It uses biomass pellets to heat schools, hospitals and housing estates. It uses low-value wood close to source and is effectively carbon neutral.

I congratulate the previous Administration on developing support of this sector. When it comes on stream, the Balcas project at Invergordon will add to Scotland's energy efficiency by producing biomass pellets, thereby avoiding the need for imports. We are on the verge of a biomass revolution.

The Lockerbie E.ON UK project, which I think the minister is to open, will be the first 100 per cent biomass-powered plant to create electricity for the grid. Does the minister have plans to continue funding through the Scottish biomass support scheme so that the biomass sector can continue to grow?

The biomass action plan has been published, but the question remains how the Government intends to take forward the recommendations in the renewable heat group's report on a future renewable heat strategy. Also, will the Government bring forward a sustainable procurement action plan? Although we all want the biomass sector to grow, it is vital that a balance is struck so that demand for wood fuel for energy does not exceed supply and the wood-processing industry continues to have the raw materials that it needs.

The timber industry is important to our economy. It operates in a global market. Although prices for timber have held up well, particularly over the past 12 months, the industry is subject to the same economic pressures of any other global market. As we all know, the recent credit crunch, which stems from problems in the sub-prime market in America, has led to issues in the housing market. It has led to concern about the knock-on effect on the demand for timber as the housing market continues to slow. However, at the same time, there is a strong export market for timber from Scotland. Every effort must be made to ensure that the industry can grow further.

The minister will be well aware that James Jones & Sons, the maker of the innovative I-beam, announced recently that it is going to expand its plant in Forres. He will be aware that the I-beam forms a key part of the Forestry Commission Scotland's district headquarters in Inverness, which was constructed as an eco-building. I visited that building last week. It is an excellent exemplar of eco-building.

To ensure a sustainable future for Scottish timber in the construction industry, it is vital that people learn new skills. I welcome the minister's assurance that the development of skills in this sector is a priority. I will flag up another Highland initiative: the UHI Millennium Institute's Scottish School of Forestry at Balloch in Inverness, which is taking an excellent lead in this area.

Remote areas of Scotland are home to some impressive forests that could be used for processing. However, the difficulties in transporting the wood out can lead to companies ruling those areas out. Surely an increased role can be played by shipping and rail, through the freight facilities grant, to take the pressure off weak roads. Where that is not possible, it is vital that we bring weak roads up to standard. I hope that the minister will give his commitment to supporting the timber transport fund to help towards that.

The link between forestry and tourism is already well established. Members will be familiar with the world mountain bike championships at Fort William, which are an excellent example of that link.

I welcome this timely debate and acknowledge the contribution that the public sector, private sector and—let us not forget—the third sector make towards developing woodlands and forestry. We have witnessed a sea change in forestry management since the establishment of the Forestry Commission. We have a high-value product and a growing world price for timber. There is strong export potential for Scottish timber. Indeed, one snapshot from the past shows that pulp from Irvine was once exported to Manhattan for the production of Time magazine.

We now have affordable forest crofts, some of which are powered by biomass. We are seeing skills development in forest management. We have sustainable development of the commercial forestry sector in which recognition is given to the importance of biodiversity. We are also seeing the replanting and regeneration of native species, urban greening that provides fair access for all Scots, and the mitigation of climate change. By skilful management of the economic, environmental and social dimensions, we can preserve and develop Scotland's rich, natural asset.

I move amendment S3M-1315.2, to insert at end:

"and further notes the significant role that Scotland's woodland plays in the mitigation of climate change and the conservation of biodiversity."

John Scott (Conservative, Ayr)

I welcome the debate on one of Scotland's most vital rural industries. I thank the minister for honouring his commitment to hold the debate.

Notwithstanding that Scotland is one of the least wooded countries in Europe, with only 17 per cent of the land covered by trees, the Forestry Commission estimates that around £800 million of the Scottish economy is linked to forestry, with 6.6 million cubic metres of timber produced annually. Wood production and processing employ around 12,000 people in our fragile rural areas directly and 14,000 in downstream industries. In the hills and uplands of many parts of Scotland, forestry has replaced sheep farming.

In a debate on commercial forestry, it is worth remembering why the Forestry Commission was established and why it continues to be relevant today. First, in both the great wars of the last century, the strategic need for timber left much of Scotland and the rest of the United Kingdom denuded of timber, much of which had been grown over centuries. The Forestry Commission was established in 1919 to reafforest Britain in recognition of the strategic and commercial need for timber. Certainly, the commercial need for timber remains to this day. That is why the Conservatives welcome the Government's planting target of 25 per cent, although that target is a reduction on the historical planting target of 33 per cent that was aimed for in recent times past.

Commercial timber production delivers more than just timber. For example, forest tourism is worth £160 million annually to the Scottish economy. In addition, Scotland's 1.3 million hectares of forestry lock up 70 million tonnes of carbon, as well as supporting much of our significant and varied biodiversity. Those benefits will only increase as we move towards the 25 per cent planting target.

It is also interesting to note the willingness of the private sector to get involved in delivering the annual planting target of an additional 10,000 hectares that will need to be planted if we are to achieve the 25 per cent target. I understand that 8,000 of those hectares will be planted by the private sector, which is prepared to take the long view in its investment strategies. That is to be welcomed, as is the reintroduction of the forestry grant scheme now that the rural development programme has been agreed.

That said, we would not be being Conservatives if, even as long-standing friends of the Forestry Commission, we did not encourage it, as guardian of the public purse, to do better in future. Many in the private forestry sector believe that they do what they do in spite of, rather than because of, the Forestry Commission. Perhaps the public and private sectors could work more closely together in future to streamline and deliver a more efficient service in terms of UK timber production.

Michael Russell (Scottish National Party, South of Scotland)

Although it is probably right that tensions will always exist between the private and public sectors, on Tuesday I was pleased to attend an all-day meeting of the board of the Forestry Commission Scotland and to find a representative of the private sector there, helping with the discussion on the next corporate plan. That is the type of co-operation that is taking place and I am sure that the member will acknowledge it.

John Scott (Conservative, Ayr)

I am happy to do so. That co-operation should be encouraged in future—I am sure that the two sectors can work together fruitfully for us all.

On land use and planting techniques, we support the view that new planting should not take place in deep peat, as that endangers that soil type and releases further CO2 into the atmosphere. On the location of new forests, it is becoming more apparent by the day that strategically placed forestry may have a significant role in flood attenuation. If we are to have joined-up government, the minister must be aware of the emerging evidence on that in considering the forthcoming flooding bill. Given the much-increased risk of flooding throughout Scotland, which apparently is a result of global warming, public money must be spent intelligently to deliver reduced flooding risk. Soft engineering using strategically planted forestry may well be part of the sustainable and low-cost solution that we all seek to reduce flooding risk.

Increasing hydraulic roughness to slow flood surges and remove the peaks in major flood events may be part of the holy grail that we all seek of a low-cost method of flood-risk reduction. Although further research into that sustainable long-term method of flood-risk reduction may be required, ministers should have early discussions with the Forestry Commission on the possibility of strategically placed plantations to improve flood management. In addition, strategic planting for flood attenuation might well be a challenge that private forestry interests address if they perceive such projects to be in their interests as well as the country's. Strategic planting grants could be made available in future for planting forests in high-risk river catchment areas. Part of the £38 million of rural development programme funding that is earmarked for the forestry grant scheme annually could be targeted at flood attenuation.

Jamie Stone (Liberal Democrat, Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross)

rose—

John Scott (Conservative, Ayr)

Forgive me, but I am in my final minute.

I congratulate the Forestry Commission and private forestry owners on the efforts that have been made recently to increase biodiversity, which have been helped hugely by the Woodland Trust Scotland and RSPB Scotland. Our iconic capercaillie and the Scottish crossbill need all the support and protection that we can give them. The benefits from tourism are demonstrable. The opening up of our forests and woodlands to walkers, bikers and car rallying enthusiasts is just one of the additional benefits that forestry delivers. The Scottish Conservatives encourage further diversification of those national assets for public benefit.

I welcome the debate, which draws attention to the importance of commercial and amenity afforestation. Our forests are national assets that should be cherished and supported. We should encourage their use to deliver economic benefits and increased biodiversity and to play an important role in carbon capture. I urge members to support our amendment.

I move amendment S3M-1315.1, to insert at end:

"welcomes the firming up of the 25% target for forest coverage, planted in ways and using techniques which will contribute to carbon capture; further welcomes the fact that the majority of this additional planting is likely to be established through grant aid to the private sector, and supports efforts to increase the biodiversity value of all forestry in receipt of public funds, in particular new schemes which enhance habitats for key native species such as the capercaillie and the Scottish crossbill."

Jim Hume (Liberal Democrat, South of Scotland)

As members have said, forestry is a major player in Scotland's economy. That is especially true in the south-west, where the local enterprise company has specialised in forestry innovation. We have the new E.ON plant, which David Stewart mentioned and which produces electricity from locally grown willow. I will return to that issue. The forestry industry, like any other, lives in a dynamic world and therefore needs to change. The key to any industry's advancement is innovation. That can mean simply finding new markets for old products—which requires the industry to compete on the world market—or, better still, it can mean finding new products for emerging markets.

Renewable energy is an emerging market that I studied in a previous life when I was a trustee of the Borders Forest Trust. I am glad that the minister has visited the trust. About 10 years ago, I visited East Tyrol on the continent to see its community heating plants, which use local forestry waste products to produce hot water—simple brash is used to give warm baths. The first plant that I saw was in a rural location and fed hot water to about 300 disparate houses through a mains supply. At worst, the water in the main loses 1° C, in an area where I have seen snow in August. The fuel is simply brashings and bark, chipped to a regular size and naturally dried. Because all carbon residue is filtered out before it escapes into the atmosphere, the emissions are so clean that if somebody goes into the plant with a cigarette, the smoke alarm goes off. That plant is far better than having 300 boilers running with different effectiveness and having oil and gas transported in from who knows where to warm homes, while the profits from the heat go not just out of the community but out of the country.

Another plant that I saw on that and subsequent visits was the Stadwärme plant in Lienz. The town lies at the bottom of three valleys and had problems with pollution lying on it, which were addressed with a co-generation plant that feeds warm water to up to 5,000 houses and produces about 22MW of electricity from biomass in its two combined plants. It is hoped to get the figure up to 75MW fairly soon. That is all done using local wood products, with little processing involved. David Stewart mentioned a plant that used pellets, but the Lienz plant uses bulldozed-in waste products from the wood industry.

At the last count that I did, which was two or three years ago, Austria, with a population of about 8.5 million, had more than 700 community district heating plants. Scotland can and should do that, too—it is not rocket science. The technology exists already and can be improved. I want Scotland to be at the forefront on biomass energy, not only because it is good for the environment—as has been mentioned, it tackles our carbon footprint—but because it is good for the health of our people and, which is important, good for local economies. With such schemes, money that is spent on energy is spent locally and therefore does not go out of the economy. Also, if the whole energy process is local, that helps people to understand where their power comes from.

I lodged my amendment to strengthen Mr Russell's motion. The minister mentioned the expansion of forestry. I hope that members agree that that should be done in a way that does not exclude others and that includes all. I have mentioned before the importance of integrating existing land users with any expansion of forestry. The Borders Forest Trust has been involved in prime examples of that. I hope that the minister agrees that such integration is essential. We need only look at the valley of Eskdalemuir in Dumfriesshire to see the lack of local people working in that now forested glen.

Michael Russell (Scottish National Party, South of Scotland)

The member raises the interesting and always important issue of local involvement. Does he accept that the investment from the strategic timber transport fund in Eskdalemuir has been done with the co-operation of the local community and that it is producing a synergy between the community and the forestry sector that can only be beneficial, given the advantages that it will give to the village?

Jim Hume (Liberal Democrat, South of Scotland)

I recognise that point and I am fully aware of the situation. I hope that progress can be made on that in future.

John Scott mentioned indigenous plantings and peatland. I am led to believe that planting a tree in pure peat releases carbon into the atmosphere and that it takes the tree 30 years to negate that. I hope that the minister acknowledges that point.

We have seen the early growth of the renewables market in Scotland, which is no surprise to me. The Lib Dems made significant progress on biomass initiatives as part of the previous Administration with, for example, its £22.5 million investment in the Aberdeen Renewable Energy Group and its biomass action plan. In March last year, Nicol Stephen announced an extra £3 million for that initiative, which took the grant scheme up to £10.5 million. I call on the Government to put effort into progressing the biomass industry in Scotland to build on the previous Administration's work. That would help the Scottish National Party to meet its manifesto commitment on decentralising generation and developing local heat and power grids for communities.

I seek support from throughout the Parliament for the amendment in my name, on behalf of the Liberal Democrats. Combined biomass community central heating plants present a huge opportunity for Scotland, local communities and their economies and, of course, our environment.

I move amendment S3M-1315.3, to insert at end:

"further recognises the role that forestry can play in helping to meet Scotland's renewable energy targets through biomass generation; welcomes the work of the previous administration on promoting the biomass sector through the highly successful Biomass Support Scheme, and calls on the Scottish Government to maximise the opportunities for growth, jobs and sustainability offered by the expansion of the biomass sector in Scotland by delivering the previous administration's Biomass Action Plan."

Rob Gibson (Scottish National Party, Highlands and Islands)

Commercial forestry can create a good deal more employment throughout Scotland, but it is up to us to ensure that it is targeted at suitable localities. I hope that the large-scale clear-fell forestry of the past can be changed as we begin to develop sustainable forestry that has a more farmed nature. That would tie up with the idea of having many more forestry workers resident in the areas in which they do the job of growing trees, brashing them, cutting down some and farming them in a way that the clear-fell approach has not allowed in the past. That is why there is a potential for communities. New forestry, crofting and community forest enterprises can fit into the picture, so that commercial forestry is much more diverse than it has been.

Each amendment acknowledges that we must address the climate change imperative. If we are to do that, we need a clear map of Scotland showing the best areas for forestry. Jim Hume mentioned the fact that peat soils are dangerous to stir up, although we have already done so in large parts of the Highlands. We must be careful to plant new forests in a way that will not disturb the biosphere so much. I hope that we can consider the potential in the east of Scotland, which has lower-peat soils. I dare say that some of the areas to which I refer are grouse moors at present, but they could well become forests in future.

John Scott (Conservative, Ayr)

Does Rob Gibson agree that more research needs to be carried out to establish the level and depth of peat on which one should not plant? As Rob Gibson and I know, there is an issue with black-top ground. Will that be acceptable in planting terms, or will it not? I will be interested to hear what the minister has to say about that later.

Rob Gibson (Scottish National Party, Highlands and Islands)

I quite agree with Mr Scott. That is the sort of research that can give us a much clearer picture of where we should be planting. I urged the previous Executive to think about the matter, and I am sure that the SNP Government will treat it as a priority now.

We should give some thought to the kinds of species that we are growing. No one has yet mentioned that, if we are going to have a lot more wooden buildings, we should be growing more Douglas firs here. We need to do that commercially, to supply the main beams and structures that will last 300 years—rather than the 30 years' life of public-private partnership schools, houses and other buildings that are being built at the moment. We need to plan for the long term. If we start growing Douglas fir in our own country, rather than importing it, we have the opportunity to create many more jobs here. I believe that Sitka spruce can be used for cladding. We have got a lot of it, and such uses would be better than using it for the gash purposes that some fast-growing woods have previously been used for. We should recognise the huge new market in the kinds of timber that will be used for eco-friendly homes.

I have asked about the possibility of a forestry map, and about resident workers. It is interesting to take note of the Balcas factory, which I hope will soon be built at Invergordon. It is based on a structure used at Enniskillen in Ireland. The company there serves a whole market across Ireland by transporting the pellets that are created. If we can ensure that such a body gets going here, it will allow people to use wood-fuelled stoves, which cut the amount of carbon that is emitted and which increase the amount of heat in the home. That could be of great benefit.

I know that the minister is concerned that, when we tie up parts of the sector in producing the wood for making pellets and for wood burning in biomass form, we must have a secure market. Therefore, we must ensure that the machinery works. The plant that uses waste heat from the distillery in Wick is an example of something that must be able to work. There are plenty of good examples on the continent, as has been mentioned, which could help to ensure that we get the sort of equipment that can do the job. What an opportunity that is, considering the news that the waste plant in Lerwick is bringing hot water to 700 people—although it is burning waste, rather than wood, unfortunately. The thing that bothers me about the Lockerbie plant is that there is nothing there to use the waste heat. That is a mistake that cannot be repeated.

On the matter of having a joined-up rural agency, there has not yet been any mention of how the Forestry Commission is to work with other agencies. I hope that the minister can tell us a little more about how farmers, communities and others can buy into the whole sector. We know that the use of forests, in their many forms, can increase the number of people involved. We should ensure that the Administration enhances the potential to bring new people into forestry.

The rural development programme will be tight, and we will seek to make additions to it in the near future. The forestry sector offers one of the brightest hopes for us to create more sustainable jobs in Scotland. I fully support the motion, but I hope that we can sort out and agree on the amendments in such a way that they do not negate one another. The basic principle is that we need a sustainable forestry. That is the best way forward for Scotland.

Elaine Murray (Labour, Dumfries)

I am delighted to speak in this debate on forestry, because the industry is so important to the economy of the south of Scotland, particularly that of Dumfries and Galloway. Forty per cent of Scottish forestry capacity is in the south of Scotland, and 60 per cent of those businesses are located in Dumfries and Galloway. Many of them are small businesses, employing fewer than five people, but they offer vital employment in rural areas.

One of the challenges to forestry has always been how to add value to the felling and logging of trees. When I was first elected to the Scottish Parliament in 1999, the Steven's Croft site next to the M74 near Lockerbie was something of an embarrassment to the local enterprise company, which had invested heavily in it—from memory, I think that it invested about £1 million. The expectation had been that there would be a multimillion-pound development by the Austrian multinational firm Kronospan but, unfortunately, Kronospan shelved the plans.

At that time, the investment was perceived as a terrible waste of public money, and the local enterprise company was the butt of many sarcastic floats at the local galas. Perhaps there is a lesson there about the public sector being prepared to take risks: eight years, on, Steven's Croft is perceived as being a great asset to the area. It has become established as the site of a number of forestry-based industries. Admittedly, there have been highs and lows in the narratives of the firms that have located there. There was a loss of jobs last October, when Forest Garden decided to consolidate its production nearer its market. However, a month or so later, there was an announcement of a further investment of £20 million by James Jones & Sons for sawmills on its site. David Stewart has referred to the James Jones investment in Inverness.

Steven's Croft is now the site of the UK's largest biomass plant, I think. It came into production in the autumn. Totally by serendipity, I visited it a week past Monday—I was unaware at the time that this debate was to take place. E.ON's 44MW plant can supply energy to about 70,000 homes, and that is displacing about 140 tonnes of greenhouse gases. Including the supply chain, it will contribute about £12 million per annum to the local economy. It uses a mixture of fuels, including by-products from the sawmills on site. It uses logs that are the wrong size for further production, as well as branches. Increasingly, it uses short-rotation willow coppice, which is beginning to be grown locally. About 20 per cent of its fuel is recycled waste wood. It is all produced by the firm AW Jenkinson, which is in charge of commissioning the various products to fuel the plant.

There has been criticism of the plant over the failure to recycle the heat that is generated. I should say in defence of the plant that its efficiency is about 33 per cent, which compares very favourably with the efficiencies of coal-fired and oil-fired power stations. That does not mean that improvements cannot be made but, to an extent, the criticism has been unfair.

The biomass market encourages the management of neglected woodlands, and willow coppice offers diversification opportunities for local farmers, and also employment opportunities. Everybody is aware of my position on a balanced energy policy—indeed, I believe that nuclear power has to be part of that. One of the good things about biomass is that it contributes towards base-load capacity, which addresses one of our concerns about other renewable energy sources. The First Minister will be officially opening the plant in March, and I urge him to take advantage of the opportunity to climb up the outside of the plant. I do not say that out of any vicious intent; there is a very good view of the surrounding countryside from there.

Commercial forestry is contributing to the local economy in other ways. There has been reference to mountain biking. The 7stanes mountain biking trail through the Borders and Dumfries and Galloway is now well known, and it was awarded global superstar status by the International Mountain Bike Association in 2006. By the end of this year, the estimated annual number of visitors to 7stanes is expected to reach about 650,000.

The region offers a variety of events ranging from events for novices to major competitions. As a result of the success of the 7stanes, Dumfries will host the world mountain bike conference in September. I believe that that will be the first time that the conference has been held outside Canada, so it is quite a feather in our cap in Dumfries and Galloway. The conference will attract around 400 delegates and is expected to bring £1.3 million into the local economy.

Mention has been made of Eskdalemuir, which is also in my constituency. I stress the importance of the timber transport fund and the work that was done with the Eskdalemuir community over quite a long period to address the problems caused by the transport of logs through the village. The fund, which the previous Executive set up, has been extremely successful and I hope that the minister will confirm that such investment will continue in order to alleviate the problems that arise when harvested timber is taken through communities.

Jamie McGrigor (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

Forestry directly provides 19,000 jobs in Scotland, many of which are in my region of the Highlands and Islands, especially in remote and isolated communities where their value—and that of the associated jobs that they sustain—is consequently great. I hope that the number of people who are employed in the industry in the future will increase as the sector expands. Scotland has the land to provide further significant forestation and huge potential can be realised in many areas if the Government puts in place the right conditions and support, including adequate infrastructure.

I live on Loch Awe in Argyll. I remember when every house in the villages of Eredine and Dalavich, which were both purpose built by the Forestry Commission, was filled by a forestry worker. Almost all those workers have now departed, despite the fact that the forests are still there. I acknowledge that the Forestry Commission did good work in the past, but I share the concerns that have been expressed about how much value for money the taxpayer has received from the investment that was made.

Michael Russell (Scottish National Party, South of Scotland)

I am fascinated by the reference to value for money. I visited the village of Dalavich on a wet and dreich day last November to launch a Forestry Commission publication. I found that the community there was live and vital and that many people there are still working in some aspect of forestry. The diversification has been vital and has been about the state and the private sector working together.

Jamie McGrigor (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

I hope that the state and private sector will continue to work together, but I disagree with the minister that many of the people living in Dalavich work in forestry—they do not.

The private forestry sector is concerned that it does not have a level playing field. I hope that the minister will respond to such concerns in his summing up. Will he concede that the state forestry sector receives four to six times the level of support that the private forestry sector receives? Will he assure me that the new grant proposals under rural development contracts will be fair and equitable? Will he today provide specific details on how grants for restocking and replanting will be administered? I want to see the private forestry sector, with its excellent delivery mechanism and value-for-money comparisons, winning adequate support to allow the replanting that is needed for a sustainable forestry sector.

What will the minister do to ensure that the enlargement of the commercial forestry sector, taking account of biodiversity and the enhancement of native woodlands and open space, is moved up the agenda of the regional project assessment committees? That is vital, but so far it seems to be a very low priority for the RPACs.

The previous Executive let down the private forestry sector badly when, in 2006, it ended the forestry grants scheme a year earlier than planned. We therefore look to the new Scottish National Party Government to treat the private forestry sector with more respect and to promote forestry that encourages wildlife. John Scott's amendment refers to capercaillie and Scottish crossbills. I add to that blackcocks and greyhens, which will thrive in diverse forests but are destroyed by the monoculture of massive blocks of Sitka spruce.

I agree with what other members said about the tourism potential of forestry. We must plant a diverse range of deciduous trees as well as conifers because that will benefit the environment, wildlife and tourism. I hope that most members agree that the days of simply planting thousands of acres of Sitka are over and will not be missed. Monoculture in forestry is a bad idea—the Gearraidh na h-Aibhne plantation of western hemlock on the Isle of Lewis was completely destroyed by the pine beauty moth.

Forestry must be planted with markets in mind, whether we are talking about the production of fuel briquettes for biomass, which Jim Hume mentioned, or the production of high-quality paper, for which Scotland already has a good reputation: Time magazine, for example, uses Scottish paper. Pulp and paper mills, such as those that sustained Fort William and Invergordon in the past must be strategically planned and timber transport should be planned to involve sea and rail, so that as little damage as possible is done to Scotland's roads.

I am also interested in alternative types of fencing for forestry. Young trees must be fenced to protect them from deer, but it is possible nowadays to use unobtrusive electric fencing in place of the conventional high fences that can kill birds and are expensive to maintain.

Today's debate has been constructive and welcome. If ministers take anything from it, I hope that they will recognise that the private forestry sector wants to play a full, positive and dynamic part in developing the commercial forestry sector in Scotland, and that it is uniquely well placed to do so. All the private forestry sector wants is a level playing field in accessing the support that is available, and a process that is not bogged down with bureaucracy and red tape. I support the amendment in the name of my colleague John Scott.

Jamie Hepburn (Scottish National Party, Central Scotland)

I welcome the chance to debate the position and significance of commercial forestry in Scotland. Many people throughout the country will not realise the significance of the industry, but the minister and others have set out its importance.

Forestry and wood processing provide thousands of jobs and are worth hundreds of millions of pounds to the Scottish economy. The industry currently produces some 6.8 million tonnes of softwood round timber a year, which is forecast to rise to more than 8 million tonnes a year over the coming two decades. We are currently pretty good at sourcing material from indigenous sources: it is important that we maintain that, given the forecast rise in production. That is one of the reasons why I welcome the Government's commitment to increasing forest and woodland cover within 25 years. There are other reasons to welcome that commitment, to which I will return. As the industry grows and production increases, it is vital that we ensure that more raw materials for the forestry industry are secured by way of greater forest cover.

We should also note that more than 70 per cent of the softwood round timber that is sourced in Scotland is processed in Scotland. Although I welcome the fact that the remainder finds ready markets elsewhere, we should take pride in the large degree of self-sufficiency that exists in the Scottish industry. The fact that the vast majority of timber that is sourced in Scotland is processed in Scotland is good news for the Scottish economy and jobs. The fact that most of the timber stays within our borders to be processed here ensures environmental effectiveness by reducing transport emissions.

The environmental angle is important. Our forests and woodlands are important tools in mitigating the effects of climate change. Crucially, the industry itself recognises the importance of that. The Confederation of Forest Industries estimates that tree planting is now offsetting around 8 per cent of Scotland's carbon emissions. I accept that carbon-emissions offset is not in itself going to win the climate change battle, but it has an important part to play, so the Scottish Government's commitment to increasing forest cover within 20 years or so is important in that regard. The more trees that are planted, the greater will be the carbon-emissions offset. Increasing forest cover is good news not just for the industry but for the environment.

Increased forest cover is good for the physical environment and combating climate change, but it is also good for our aesthetic environment. Scottish Environment LINK has recently contacted members to set out the importance of Scotland's landscapes. It states that the value of good landscapes to local economies is shown in tourism surveys, which consistently reveal that scenery and landscape are a key reason for visiting Scotland. Ensuring better forest cover can go some way towards ensuring more attractive landscapes.

According to the Confederation of Forest Industries, Scotland has 17 per cent forest cover, which compares favourably with the UK figure of 11 per cent, but lags significantly behind the EU25 average of 36 per cent. At one stage, Scotland was almost entirely covered by forest. I am not suggesting that we will be able to roll back thousands of years of human activity, but the Government's important commitment to increasing forest cover will help to create more attractive landscapes in our country and therefore to assist tourism, which is an important part of the national economy in which, of course, forestry also plays a part.

I have not yet mentioned forestry's importance to biodiversity. Only two weeks ago in the debate on the biodiversity strategy, Parliament broadly agreed on the need to maintain Scotland's biodiversity. I think that, this morning, we broadly agree that our forests—and our forestry industry—can also play a role in that respect. As a result, I welcome the Labour amendment. My only hope is that, if and when the amendment is successful, Labour members will, unlike yesterday, not go into hiding when it comes to the vote on the substantive motion.

Karen Gillon (Labour, Clydesdale)

Oh grow up, Jamie.

Jamie Hepburn (Scottish National Party, Central Scotland)

There you go.

I congratulate the Government on securing this debate. Our forestry industry is pretty strong at the moment, but there is scope for growth. After all, the UK currently imports 90 per cent of its paper and much wood-based produce, and the value and cost of those imports amounts to £6 billion. There is no reason why, with continued growth, the Scottish industry cannot replace some of those imports and provide the necessary materials to make many of those products. I am sure that commercial forestry will continue to flourish in Scotland and that the Government's policy of increasing forest cover, which will bring us closer to the European Union average, will play a huge role.

I commend the motion to Parliament.

Cathie Craigie (Labour, Cumbernauld and Kilsyth)

I am pleased to speak in the debate. I support the forestry sector's expansion. As a result of that expansion, we have an opportunity to promote and develop greater public access to our land.

We should remind those who manage forestry land on our behalf that they are doing exactly that: access is as important as planting and harvesting trees, managing the forest for future generations and future needs, creating employment and adding to our economy. It is beneficial not only to the financial viability and future sustainability of our forests and associated land but to the health and well-being of the people who use those areas.

I welcome the Forestry Commission Scotland's growing involvement in managing forests and woodland in my Cumbernauld and Kilsyth constituency. Over the past few years, it has moved from managing what I consider to be large-scale forestry projects to becoming involved in smaller areas close to residential communities. However, it should always be mindful that it cares for some of the most beautiful land and landscapes in our country and, in the case of the Carron valley in my constituency, probably in the world, never mind in Europe. People want to see their lands, forests and woodlands managed to the highest environmental standards and to have access to them for recreational purposes. For those who are unfamiliar with the Carron valley, it is geographically at the heart of Scotland. Stirling claims to be the gateway to the Highlands, but the fact is that Kilsyth, the Kilsyth hills and the Tak-Ma-Doon Road, which leads from Kilsyth to the Carron valley, is the front door. Resting in the heart of central Scotland between Kilsyth, Stirling and Denny, Carron valley forest enjoys an enviable location. As most major Scottish cities are within an hour's drive, it is understandable that people want to visit the area and use the trails and paths for walking and cycling. I want to ensure that we make the most of that advantage by developing what we already have and providing facilities for visitors.

The minister is aware of the Carron Valley Development Group, which came together in 2003 to develop the potential of the Carron valley forest. Those volunteers put a lot of hard work into designing, raising money for and building an ambitious trail. In spring 2006 the group, in partnership with North Lanarkshire Council, Stirling Council and the Forestry Commission Scotland, launched the first purpose-built mountain bike centre in central Scotland. The group then developed a further three trails, which opened in August 2006. Such trails, which were designed to the highest specification and built to take account of future maintenance needs, could be developed throughout Scotland.

However, that partnership appears to be going downhill. It seems to the volunteers and the councils that unless the rest of the partners agree with the Forestry Commission—and unless that organisation puts forward a particular idea—nothing happens. I will write to the minister later this week on this matter; I do not have time at the moment to highlight all the issues, but he knows that last autumn I met representatives of Forestry Commission Scotland and the other partners.

Michael Russell (Scottish National Party, South of Scotland)

I am happy to meet Cathie Craigie to discuss that long-standing problem. I understand that the Forestry Commission holds the same position as I do: if we can help to solve it, we will try to do so.

Cathie Craigie (Labour, Cumbernauld and Kilsyth)

I am happy for the minister to intervene but, although the commission says that it is happy to solve the problems, nothing is happening on the ground. I welcome the minister's offer and will get in touch with his office to arrange a meeting with me and representatives of the Carron Valley Development Group and partner organisations.

John Farquhar Munro (Liberal Democrat, Ross, Skye and Inverness West)

The minister will be very busy if he is going to meet everyone who has spoken this morning. He is very welcome to visit Wester Ross and see the Forestry Commission Scotland's excellent work. I am glad to see—and am encouraged by—the Parliament's support for Forest Enterprise Scotland and the Forestry Commission Scotland.

There is no doubt that the commission is one of our outstanding national assets, and we cannot ignore its tremendous contribution to Scottish life and commercial forestry over the past 90 years. As members have pointed out, it was established a long time ago, in 1919, to reverse the massive deforestation that was caused by the high demand during the 1914-18 war for timber, which was used in the trenches or to make pit props for our coal mines. The commission's remit at the time was to establish an important national strategic reserve of our timber in the event of hostilities recurring.

In fact, the commission was really a massive job-creation exercise that provided much-needed employment in rural areas through the depression of the 1920s and 1930s. The availability of jobs kept young families in the straths and glens, where they supported the economy and the social structure of those remote areas.

The commission also had a great social conscience. For example, after the evacuation of St Kilda in the early 1930s, it housed the island's residents in different parts of the west coast, including Dalmally, in Mr McGrigor's area. He says that not many of those houses exist today, but it was certainly one of the main areas where the St Kildans were housed.

The Forestry Commission also provided many in its workforce with rented housing, which was something new in those days. Some of the houses were attached to crofts and other small agricultural holdings. That is evidenced today by the descendents of the original tenants who are still living on the holdings and happy to be employed in sustainable forestry activity.

Following the 1939-45 war, the commission continued to provide work and new housing for workers to rent. As Mr McGrigor mentioned, whole new villages were built using timber houses, albeit that they were imported from Sweden. Those houses are still in excellent habitable condition, despite our inclement weather and 60 years of use. We should be appreciative for the past efforts of the forestry developers.

The rural economy derives great benefit from planting, management and harvesting of mature timber. Transport companies have expanded to meet the growing demand for timber supplies delivered over long distances to pulp and paper mills, to the Bonawood and sterling board factories and to the sawmills to produce building-grade timber for the construction industry.

As several members have said, the Forestry Commission is today the largest landowner in Scotland and it has been progressive in the use and development of its woodlands for timber, tourism and recreation. However, more needs to be done. We have heard of the developments for outdoor pursuits in much of the forest estate, and they are to be welcomed, but I would like more of its unproductive land to be made available for affordable housing. The commission has done that in the past—it built villages in the straths and glens—so why should it not start the process again?

Michael Russell (Scottish National Party, South of Scotland)

Let me reassure John Farquhar Munro that the commission is keen to enter into discussions with any social landlord who wishes to build houses on any suitable part of the forest estate, particularly if the construction uses wood and includes a combined heat and power plant using wood biomass. That is the way forward, and the commission is desperately keen to ensure that it is part of it.

John Farquhar Munro (Liberal Democrat, Ross, Skye and Inverness West)

I thank the minister for that comment, but I would like the Forestry Commission to be a scheme promoter. It has the resources, and the houses could be built with locally sourced timber. Biomass could be used to heat the homes, so there would be great benefits all round.

As I am in my last minute, I will make a final plea to the minister on something that I have spoken about before. We have previously made a freight facilities grant available to take freight off the roads and put it on to rail. The Forestry Commission should be given a marine facilities grant so that timber from remote areas can be transported by sea. Marine structures are difficult and expensive to establish, so consideration should be given to supporting such an exercise.

Robin Harper (Green, Lothians)

It is particularly important when we debate forestry that our horizons to stretch far beyond our own short lives. The first world war was not the first time Britain and Scotland were stripped of their trees. I can think of an instance in the mid-16 th century when the whole of Fife was denuded of its oaks to build the Great Michael, then the biggest warship in the world.

Here is a lovely story. In the middle of the 16th century, Brasenose College built a new hall and wanted an oak hammer-beam roof. At the same time as the roof was built, the college looked forward two hundred years and planted on its land enough oaks to replace the roof at the time it thought it might wear out—at the maturity of an oak, which is between 100 and 200 years. That is the kind of long-term planning that we will need in a forestry strategy if we want high-quality construction wood and high-quality environments in Scotland.

Today's debate has been extremely interesting and informative, and I am happy to say that I will support all the amendments and the motion. I have just a few comments.

One of the mixed uses of forestry that we have not addressed today involves forestry and farming. Ten years ago, a small group of experts went from Scotland to Norway to find out how forestry and farming are managed there. The findings were interesting, and I recommend them to the minister. I will not go into detail, but one example was mixed forestry and sheep farming, which would be ideal for us in Scotland.

John Scott (Conservative, Ayr)

I should have declared an interest to begin with, but does the member acknowledge that the Scottish Agricultural College has already carried out work on mixed forestry and woodland enterprises at Kirkton and Auchtertyre near Crianlarich? I am sure that he would applaud that work.

Robin Harper (Green, Lothians)

I acknowledge that point—it is a pity that such work is not spreading further.

We have a serious shortage of construction timber in Scotland, and we need to plant for the future. That is evidenced by the fact that wood for one of the best developments in timber-framed housing in the past couple of years has had to be imported from Germany. It is also evidenced by the fact that the designer of the new primary school at Acharacle—one of Scotland's leading environmental architects and not someone who would go for imported materials lightly—is importing wood from Austria because that is what he needs for a high-quality school.

I was pleased to see Jim Hume's amendment, and it would be good for the Government to reflect on the history of Torren Energy and why it had to be taken over. That happened because it had difficulty in selling its product to councils. It was selling a system of heat from wood fuel, and it designed its system for use in council buildings and schools.

I was delighted to hear Rob Gibson's mention of better uses for at least some grass moors. It would perhaps be better to plant them with forestry rather than use them for the annual ritual slaughter of birds for the delectation of foreign visitors. I know that that activity is an important part of our economy, but some of our moors would be better used for trees, which would benefit our economy as well.

Finally, it is a pity that John Scott did not include in his amendment what he said about flooding in his speech, because his comments were sensible. We do not need research: as I have said before to the minister, we could be getting on with planting trees in river catchment areas now.

Jamie Stone (Liberal Democrat, Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross)

I suppose that it might come as a slight surprise to some members that I am speaking in the debate, given that there are not a huge number of trees in Caithness. However, as the minister well knows, there are many in Sutherland and Easter Ross.

Like others, the minister correctly drew our attention to the history: the important date of 1919 and why the Forestry Commission came into being. He mentioned also the 12,000 direct and 14,000 indirect jobs that the forestry industry supports. All of us welcome his commitment to plant more trees and to seek to attain 25 per cent of Scotland's land area planted with trees. His was a good introduction to a consensual debate and, like Robin Harper, I hope that we can coalesce around all the amendments.

John Scott correctly mentioned deep peat planting on the flow lands of Caithness, which is a huge issue. He also introduced a new term to the debate—"hydraulic roughness"—which I will remember. The intervention that I sought to make on him was this: in anticipation of flooding on sloping land, there is no doubt about the important role that strategically placed planting can play in preventing landslips. If trees had been planted where we have seen some of the extensive landslips in recent times, they would not have been as bad.

Jim Hume talked about innovation and spoke from his background about the importance of the product, markets and marketing. Like David Stewart, he referred to the Austrian experience. David Stewart and Jim Hume were correct to say that Austria is far further along than us and is where we should be now. Austria provides the example of the direction in which we should go.

Jim Hume talked about health. I think that we all agree that Scotland's forestry represents a kind of green lung for us all. Many young and old people use forest trails in my constituency. Some people indulge in the incredibly dangerous occupation of mountain biking, to which David Stewart referred. I would not be seen dead on a mountain bike—well, if I were on a mountain bike, I would be dead.

Rob Gibson, who has had to leave us but who was kind enough to apologise, talked about sustainable forestry and the idea of local forestry workers living and working in and around the communities in which trees have been planted. As he said, that would be in deep contrast to what happens under clear felling. What Rob Gibson and John Farquhar Munro said reminded me that, in my childhood, forestry workers' houses stood at Morangie on the outskirts of Tain, but forestry workers no longer occupy those houses.

I draw to the minister's attention the village of Lairg in central Sutherland, which depended greatly on forestry in years gone by, although that is not the case today. There is room for work on that, but I do not doubt the minister's commitment.

Michael Russell (Scottish National Party, South of Scotland)

rose—

Jamie Stone (Liberal Democrat, Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross)

I was going to invite an intervention.

Michael Russell (Scottish National Party, South of Scotland)

The member knows—because I invited him to be there, although he could not be present—that I visited Lairg last summer to talk about ways in which the whole rural delivery service is changing job patterns. However, I remain concerned and I shall be back in Lairg this summer, when I will invite Mr Stone to join me again.

Jamie Stone (Liberal Democrat, Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross)

I look forward to greeting the minister in my constituency. As always, he is welcome.

Jamie McGrigor slightly confused me by referring to a pulp and paper mill at Invergordon, which I do not recall in my time. However, he and others were correct in their sentiments about the Balcas development in my constituency. The first thing to say about Balcas is that we have got there: the innovative plant is being built in Invergordon. It will produce very small wood pellets by a highly efficient method that uses all the tree. Brashings have been referred to. The plant will operate a highly efficient system in which almost everything is used.

I say to the minister that the method by which we reached the Balcas development was not always as easy as we would have liked in the Highlands. My colleague Fergus Ewing would bear witness to that. At times, we nearly went down the wrong road for the sort of plant that we would have at Invergordon, but we got it right. However, a backward-looking exercise would give ministers and the enterprise network room to examine some of the avenues that were previously considered, but that is perhaps for another day.

Cathie Craigie gave an excellent advertisement for her constituency and John Farquhar Munro said that the Forestry Commission was

"one of our outstanding national assets".

He was right to talk about the marine transport of timber, but highly pertinent to my constituency is getting as much timber as we can off our hard-pressed road structure and on to rail. Many people from parties across the political spectrum have referred in the past to that, on which more work has to be done. Given that the railway line moves inland as it goes through Sutherland and approaches Wick and Thurso, timber could without doubt be moved by rail.

The heat and power initiative in Wick was mentioned—I forget by which member. That is a tremendous success story. It is what we should have done years ago and what has been done in Austria and many other parts of Europe. The scheme provides affordable heat and power for families who need such assistance. According to national parameters, the Pulteneytown area of Wick is recognised as an area of need, so the resource is being targeted where it is most needed. As other members said, the scheme's beauty is that it provides a completely sustainable form of energy with the minimum transport—locally grown timber from as close to Wick as it can be obtained is used. If we can replicate the Wick experiment the length and breadth of Scotland, that will be a great success story.

I support my party's amendment and I am sure that we will support all the other amendments later.

Nanette Milne (Conservative, North East Scotland)

The debate is well timed, as it takes place in the middle of Scottish environment week, the theme of which is enabling sustainable livelihoods, and just after the Confederation of Forest Industries (UK)— the forestry industry's trade association—has challenged the Government to unlock the potential of Scotland's forests. The debate has made it clear that that potential is enormous and diverse.

ConFor's chief executive, Stuart Goodall, is striving for greater public recognition of the value and benefits of forestry and I commend him for that. He argues, and we do not disagree, that forestry has a major role to play in tackling climate change, not only by locking up carbon, but by providing the wood that the construction industry is increasingly using as a substitute for concrete and steel and which has significant potential as a fuel, as many members have said.

Biomass generation could contribute seriously to meeting Scotland's renewable energy targets, as Jim Hume's amendment highlights. We are happy to endorse his call for continuing support for the biomass sector and we are pleased with the minister's commitment to continue the biomass support scheme.

I recently visited the Enterprise North East Trust's headquarters in Inverurie in Aberdeenshire, which is heated by woodchip biofuel. I was extremely impressed by the system's efficiency and the building's warmth. Market potential clearly exists for wood fuel and forestry expansion will be crucial to developing that market.

As Stuart Goodall told The Press and Journal in a good article last weekend, the industry is optimistic, as the price of wood from forestry has increased significantly. However, we need to look to the future by increasing the forest area in Scotland to ensure long-term supplies of timber to satisfy the growing demand. As the minister said, wood production is a long-term process.

ConFor also wants to restore the credibility of the industry, which is still in the shadow of the monoculture planting that blighted much of the Scottish landscape in the 1980s and early 1990s—as in the Caithness flow country, to which Jamie Stone referred—and which Jamie McGrigor described vividly. The industry accepts that new forest planting must be of mixed species and must have open spaces for people to enjoy and in which wildlife can prosper. That view is endorsed by organisations in Scottish Environment LINK, such as the Woodland Trust and RSPB Scotland—of which I declare I am a member—which want woodlands to be managed in ways that maximise biodiversity and which caution against tree planting purely for carbon sequestration.

As much of the existing forest is due to be felled, my party is pleased that the Government has promised to raise £15 million a year from the sale of national forest estate to be reinvested in new woodlands, which will be managed in line with the Scottish forestry strategy. We are especially pleased that the Government has firmed up the previous Executive's aspiration to increase forestry coverage from the current 17 per cent to 25 per cent by promising about 10,000 hectares of new planting per annum, most of which will be established through grant aid to the private sector. As we have heard, the industry's profitability depends heavily on partnership between the state and the private sector, and the latter is keen to be involved in developing the industry.

Great concern and despondency were felt when the previous Executive ended the forestry grant scheme prematurely, which in effect ended new planting by the private sector. The welcome new financial support should redress the situation by encouraging the establishment of new forests and not least by assisting owners of agricultural land to diversify into sustainable forestry.

The promised new planting provides an excellent opportunity to correct the damage that was done by the dense and largely lifeless plantations of the past and to regenerate our native woodlands, which are valuable for tourism and rich in biodiversity. As John Scott said, strategic forest planting could play a significant role in flood prevention.

As we have heard from all parties, there is no doubt that forestry is one of the most important industries in rural Scotland. With the increasing number and variety of businesses that use timber, it is at the forefront of sustainability and mitigating climate change. The industry's growth by 39 per cent in the past eight years shows its economic potential. It contributes nearly £1 billion to the Scottish economy and employs many thousands of people in wood production and processing. In the past 15 years, it has achieved £60 million of private sector inward investment.

Many benefits can be derived from our woodlands. They are home to numerous species of insects, plants and animals, including, as we have heard, the Scottish crossbill and the threatened capercaillie, whose survival depends on our ancient Caledonian pine forest.

Thanks to the Forestry Commission, the Woodland Trust and others, our forests have in recent years been increasingly opened up for recreation. Every day, my dogs enjoy walks in the woodlands at Countesswells, near my home. The tracks there are also used regularly by horse riders and cyclists. Many visitors and locals enjoy the sculptures and views in Kirkhill forest, and the Gight Woods, near Methlick, which are managed by the Scottish Wildlife Trust, provide education and enjoyment for many people from the local neighbourhood and beyond. Those are only a few examples from Aberdeenshire; there are many more the length and breadth of the country. As we have heard, Scotland's forests also play host to many sporting events, such as car rallying and the mountain bike world cup.

We are happy to support the motion and the amendments. We want to see the on-going development of forestry, which is already a key industry in rural Scotland, in ways that will increase its biodiversity as well as its commercial value. We look forward to an increasingly confident and competitive industry that is encouraged and assisted by Government support, and we are anxious to hear the details of that.

Karen Gillon (Labour, Clydesdale)

This is another important and worthwhile debate, which has been constructive and, in the main, consensual. It is a welcome recognition of the role that forestry plays in a range of sectors in Scotland, but perhaps most importantly in the conservation of our biodiversity and the mitigation of climate change. Indeed, yesterday, the Rural Affairs and Environment Committee heard how forests can act as a soft engineering measure in tackling flooding in Scotland. That is an issue on which we will want to see some progress made.

As we sit in this fabulous chamber and marvel at the beauty of the wood that surrounds us, we must reflect on the fact that far too much of it required to be imported from overseas because too much of our indigenous woodland has been lost, leaving little for current generations to share. I am interested to hear how the minister and the Government will address that problem.

Rob Gibson rightly mentioned the potential for using timber in housing development. Sweden has taken the lead in that—indeed, I was brought up in a so-called Swedish timber house, which is still our family home. Ikea now seems to be getting in on the act by supplying kit houses. Sweden has exported many good things to the world, including Abba—I could ask Jamie Hepburn, "Does your mother know that you're out?", but that would be churlish—and I am keen to know the minister's views on how timber and eco-friendly housing can play a role in meeting the Government's housing targets. I am also interested to hear how he will work with his colleagues across portfolios and in other departments to make progress on that.

As we develop further opportunities for the planting of forests in Scotland, it is essential that we proceed in a way that is sensitive to the wildlife and biodiversity of any area. I seek assurances from the minister that the new forestry planting strategy will not repeat the mistakes of the past but will avoid sensitive areas that are important for wildlife and that provide a range of public benefits.

Can he assure Parliament that any efforts to combat climate change will not—as other members have mentioned—result in the implementation of environmentally damaging models of forestry? I am thinking particularly of the dangers of planting in peat bog areas.

In relation to the public benefits of forestry, I will focus on two specific issues. First, the minister is aware of my interest in the sale of forestry and woodland to community groups for their management. I welcome the written answers that I have received, which say that he is reviewing the guidance to ascertain whether there are ways in which sales can be made below the current market value. I encourage him to ensure that that happens where it can clearly be demonstrated that there would be community benefit, so that woodlands throughout Scotland can be owned and managed by the communities around them.

The second issue is the use of wood-burning stoves and heating systems in public buildings. In my constituency, groups such as Carbon Neutral Biggar are keen that any new schools that are built should use such systems. Indeed, in opposition, the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Sustainable Growth put forward such arguments in the chamber. There is disappointment that the biomass boilers have been withdrawn from the City of Edinburgh Council's PPP schools project. Obviously, the council has the right to make that decision, but it seems strange that we are not using such major new building programmes as a driver for changing the type of heating systems that are installed, which would be of great advantage for the future. Perhaps the minister will reflect on how the Government could provide greater incentives and more forceful guidance to local authorities and other public bodies to encourage the development of sustainable fuel sources as new buildings are constructed. That would be good for the environment, good for those who would use the buildings and, as other members have said, good for the industry.

Several members have mentioned the importance of forestry to tourism and how we can expand and develop tourism in our forests and wooded areas. Some have mentioned the use of mountain bikes, having attended the mountain bike world cup. I noted that a number of members were offering to chip in to buy Jamie Stone a mountain bike, but I am sure that they did not mean it. Nevertheless, mountain biking has provided an invaluable source of tourism for Scotland, especially in Fort William and the Highlands but also in the Borders, at Glentress. As the facilities there expand and develop, it will become a positive tourist attraction. I am keen to learn how the minister believes that that can be driven forward and used to best advantage.

I find myself in the strange position of supporting a Conservative amendment—again—as well as the Liberal Democrat amendment and the Government's motion. I urge other members to do likewise. This is an important area for Scotland in which the industry, the public sector and the private sector can move forward together. We must do that to ensure not only that Scotland has a sustainable resource for the future and that our children are not left with the legacy of deforestation that we inherited, but that Scotland is in a much better position to face the challenges of climate change that lie ahead.

Michael Russell (Scottish National Party, South of Scotland)

The debate has been consensual, positive and well informed. Those in the forestry sector who are listening to or watching the proceedings will be heartened by that. Members seem to have taken advantage not just of the briefing materials that have been distributed at various stages, but of their own genuine knowledge of and research into the sector and its importance.

We must acknowledge the wide range of players who will be interested in the discussion that we have had today. Those include the Forestry Commission Scotland and Forest Enterprise, in the public sector; the private sector, to which I will return in a moment; and the community sector. I pay tribute to the community sector and acknowledge as a live issue Karen Gillon's point about community purchase and the valuations that are used in such purchase. I am working hard with Forestry Commission colleagues to provide the answer that both she and I want within the state accounting rules. We will do our best to provide that answer.

The environment and wildlife non-governmental organisations are also key players in the sector, and the users of timber—in the processing, building and energy industries—are important. Finally, we should always remember the public interest. The public are deeply involved in the forestry sector for tourism, recreation and health. They are also involved as the consumers of timber products. So, everybody in Scotland has an involvement in forestry.

I know that the messages that the debate sends out will be listened to. Calum MacDonald, the non-executive forestry commissioner for Scotland and the chair of the Forestry Commission's national committee for Scotland is in the public gallery—I am sure that we all welcome his presence here and the fact that he has listened to the debate. Bob MacIntosh, the director of the Forestry Commission Scotland, will also have listened to the debate, as will many forestry workers throughout Scotland who are keen to hear not just what we know, but what we are going to do—both the Government and the Parliament—to encourage their work.

I am slightly critical—which is very unlike me—of one speech this morning. I think that Jamie McGrigor should get out more into our forests and woodlands. If he did that, he would understand that there is an active partnership between the private and public sectors and that there is no attempt to give an unfair advantage to either side. I felt slightly resentful at his implication that there would not be fair and equitable treatment of all those who apply for the SRDP funding. The idea of that funding is to generate new activity in every part of Scotland and by every player. Again and again, we have stressed the need for people to be active in promoting the scheme, including members of the Scottish Parliament. They should not be implying that there will be unfairness, but should be trying to ensure that as many people as possible take part in the scheme.

Jamie McGrigor (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

I think that I said that there has been unfairness in the past and that we look forward to a much more progressive attitude and a more level playing field for private and state-funded enterprises within the forestry sector.

Michael Russell (Scottish National Party, South of Scotland)

I am a great fan of revisionist history and I accept that revisionist history of what was said.

I am deeply appreciative of John Farquhar Munro's speech, in which he reminded us how forestry has been central to the Scottish rural economy, certainly in the 20th century. Robin Harper mentioned the situation before 1919—indeed, he implied that he could remember back to the 16th century, at which I am deeply impressed—and I take his key point about the need for sustainability. We should be mindful of his example of those who use wood but also plant trees.

Let me address some of the detailed points. On the important issue of flooding, forestry has a key role to play, as it has in all land-use activities and indeed in many climate change activities. Climate change is not the core driver for the forestry sector but it is a driver, so I am happy to take on board Robin Harper's point by acknowledging that forestry not only can but must start to play a role. In addition, I was pleased to be involved in discussions this week about moving ahead quickly with demonstration projects so that we can start to do things.

Transportation was another key point. I must express some disappointment that it has been difficult to involve the rail sector in forestry, but there are reasons for that, especially for particular projects in Galloway. However, not enough has happened.

Jamie Stone (Liberal Democrat, Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross)

Will the minister give way?

Michael Russell (Scottish National Party, South of Scotland)

No, I must make progress.

On the shipping sector, the contribution that John Farquhar Munro called for is being made. The Forestry Commission in Scotland currently supports the timberlink shipping service, which removes lorries from roads on the west coast by enabling the timber to be sent by sea. The subsidy for that is just under £1 million a year. There has been some slow build-up of similar services in other parts of Scotland.

I am keen for timber lorries to be taken off the roads if at all possible. The strategic timber transport fund has been highly successful in doing that but it was due to close in December 2008. I am sorry that members suggested that an announcement was yet to be made on the fund's renewal—clearly, they have not been keeping enough of an eye on the timber press—as I announced in December that the life of the fund would be extended. Financial support for the fund will continue until 2011, with a total budget of £15 million over the next three years.

I am grateful to all those who have been involved in projects such as the one at Eskdalemuir, which Elaine Murray and a number of others mentioned. Community involvement in such projects is vital, because they are of high significance to all of us who use the roads in one way or another, including—as was the case in Eskdalemuir—those who walk on the roads.

I conclude by drawing attention to some key messages on important issues for forestry that need to be communicated following today's debate. First, Scotland's wood-using sector is a major long-term success story—

John Scott (Conservative, Ayr)

Will the minister give way?

Michael Russell (Scottish National Party, South of Scotland)

Sorry, I really must finish.

As all Governments—even a Government as good as this one—are transitory, every Government must make a long-term commitment to the wood sector. Although the current Government will not be that transitory—if yesterday is anything to go by, we have a long-term Government—it will eventually change at some time. The sector supports 40,000 jobs in all and provides £760 million of value added to the economy and those figures can grow.

We must remember that imported timber will continue to be needed in Scotland. Some timber that has particular advantages cannot be grown here and must be sourced from elsewhere. However, we need to up our penetration of the Scottish market.

We accept that bioenergy presents a major opportunity, that our small but important hardwood sector can increase and that forest-based tourism makes a significant economic contribution. We also accept that sustainable timber construction—a point that was raised by Karen Gillon among others—can contribute to affordable homes, climate change mitigation and sequestration. Indeed, I am keen that we continue our work on housing by making land available—and possibly by being a player in the way that John Farquhar Munro suggested—and on using wood in building design. Again, I was pleased—although I am sorry that members did not seem to be aware of this—to launch a book on timber construction last month at Napier University's centre for timber engineering.

This has been a good debate. I have been impressed by virtually every speech—as have, I am sure, the forestry sector representatives who have been listening—and I am pleased to be consensual in accepting the Labour and Tory amendments. I am not yet certain whether I can accept the Liberal Democrat amendment because, although it would perhaps do no great harm, its ambition for future biomass projects is less great than ours and it takes no account of the conclusions of the wood fuel task force. However, I will think about the matter further during the course of the day and—as I am always consensual—if I can help in any way to bring about a resolution, I will do so.

I thank members for the debate and look forward to another debate on the issue in future times.

Question Time — Scottish Executive — General Questions

John Park (Labour, Mid Scotland and Fife)

To ask the Scottish Executive whether it will provide an update on the condition of the main cables on the Forth road bridge. (S3O-2243)

Stewart Stevenson (Scottish National Party, Banff and Buchan)

Investigating the condition of the main cables on the Forth road bridge is a matter for the Forth Estuary Transport Authority. I understand that FETA is confident that the current dehumidification project offers good prospects for slowing down or halting corrosion. However, FETA will not know the answer until the results of inspections that are due in 2011-12 have been analysed.

John Park (Labour, Mid Scotland and Fife)

I was pleased to read a couple of weeks ago and to hear again today that it looks likely that heavy goods vehicles will not be banned from the Forth road bridge. The minister will surely agree that it was perhaps inappropriate that the suggestion that they might be banned found its way into the public domain.

I have two questions. First, when all the information on the condition of the cables is available, will the minister make a statement to Parliament on the issue? Secondly, given the need to focus on public confidence no matter the condition of the cables, will the Scottish Government set up information seminars similar to those that were held on the options for the new crossing, to update people in Fife, the Lothians and other appropriate areas on the condition of the cables when that information becomes available? It is important to ensure that we maintain public confidence going forward.

Stewart Stevenson (Scottish National Party, Banff and Buchan)

Mr Park makes some important points, but I must stress that responsibility for maintaining the bridge lies with FETA. I will, of course, stand ready to support FETA in its work and, if it is useful, I will be part of the team that will take responsibility for engaging with local communities and explaining to them the future of the bridge. I will not supplant FETA's responsibilities, although I agree with John Park's substantive point.

Jim Tolson (Liberal Democrat, Dunfermline West)

The minister's reply to Mr Park is interesting, but the matters that he raises are not likely to have any effect for several years. A much more immediate problem for bridge users is that FETA plans to replace the expansion joints on the carriageway next year. Does the minister know how long that work will take and the extent of the delays and disruption that it will cause? What will the minister do to minimise that disruption for my constituents in Dunfermline West?

Stewart Stevenson (Scottish National Party, Banff and Buchan)

Clearly, FETA needs to address the condition of the expansion joints to ensure the continued use of the bridge. The opening of a further crossing on the upper Forth will provide some relief, especially for HGVs, given that 80 per cent of HGVs that cross the Forth already use an upper-Forth crossing. I will work closely with FETA to ensure that Transport Scotland and the Government put in place appropriate measures, such as signage, to mitigate the effects of the closures by ensuring that people have adequate notice to plan their journeys. That is in connection with my wider responsibilities for the road network, albeit that FETA is responsible for the bridge.

Alex Johnstone (Conservative, North East Scotland)

Will the minister undertake to ensure that any announcement or statement that he makes on the matter will cover not only corrosion and wire breakage within the cables but the condition of the anchorage points at either end of the bridge? I understand that there may be cause for concern with the anchorage points, which were the subject of a perhaps speculative press article some months ago.

Stewart Stevenson (Scottish National Party, Banff and Buchan)

As yet, we have no particular reason to be concerned about the state of the anchorage points. Clearly, in looking at the effect of corrosion on the structure as a whole, it is important that we conduct tests to establish whether there are other causes for concern. I am satisfied that FETA is doing the necessary work. We will await the outcome of that research.

Tricia Marwick (Scottish National Party, Central Fife)

I am grateful for the responses that the minister has given, although I think that Jim Tolson was almost expecting the minister to go out and do the work himself.

Members have referred to the quality of the information that FETA releases, which is important. It is vital that all information is managed correctly, so that commuters and those who use the bridges receive it as quickly as possible. Will the minister have a chat with FETA about how it is managing information release at the moment?

Stewart Stevenson (Scottish National Party, Banff and Buchan)

I am always in the business of chatting with people with whom we work. I talk regularly to members of the FETA board and my officials are in regular contact with them. I am sure that appropriate ways of communicating with the communities that depend on the Forth road bridge will form part of our next chat.

Bill Kidd (Scottish National Party, Glasgow)

To ask the Scottish Executive whether it has given any further consideration to the licensing and regulation of Mosquito ultrasonic youth deterrents. (S3O-2179)

Fergus Ewing (Scottish National Party, Inverness East, Nairn and Lochaber)

The Scottish Government has not given any further consideration to the licensing and regulation of Mosquito ultrasonic youth deterrents.

Bill Kidd (Scottish National Party, Glasgow)

Does the minister agree that the indiscriminate use of such devices would penalise all young people, including the great majority who are going about their legitimate daily activities, and that the use of such devices must therefore be controlled, to ensure that it is both justified and proportionate?

Fergus Ewing (Scottish National Party, Inverness East, Nairn and Lochaber)

Plainly, the use of the devices is contentious. Local authorities are best placed to decide what measures should be taken locally to tackle antisocial behaviour. I would welcome representations from Bill Kidd and any other member who wishes to contribute to the national review of our antisocial behaviour strategy, so that we can build up a consensual approach to tackling that serious matter.

Robin Harper (Green, Lothians)

To ask the Scottish Executive whether it has received communications from Western Isles Council seeking an urgent meeting to discuss the Lewis wind farm proposal. (S3O-2251)

Stewart Stevenson (Scottish National Party, Banff and Buchan)

Jim Mather met Angus Campbell, vice-convener of the council, on Monday 28 January to discuss economic development in the Western Isles. He could not comment on the specifics of the Lewis wind farm proposal prior to its determination, but he discussed the socioeconomic challenges that the islands face. The Scottish Government wants renewable energy to contribute to the islands' economy, and Jim Mather has agreed to attend an energy summit in Stornoway on 17 March.

Robin Harper (Green, Lothians)

I understand some of the complications to which the minister refers. However, trust in the planning process, especially in relation to certain developments, often hangs by a thread. Will the minister assure me that, to ensure transparency and fairness in the process, the same opportunity to meet ministers to discuss the Lewis wind farm proposal will be offered to other interested parties, including local communities?

Stewart Stevenson (Scottish National Party, Banff and Buchan)

We await a final determination of the planning application to which the member refers. There has been substantial engagement with a wide range of interest groups on this major development. I am sure that that will continue, as it normally does.

Helen Eadie (Labour, Dunfermline East)

To ask the Scottish Executive why it continues to allow housing developments without sea defences to be constructed on coastal areas where the Scottish Environment Protection Agency has determined that there is a high risk of flooding. (S3O-2217)

Michael Russell (Scottish National Party, South of Scotland)

As the member knows, the Scottish Environment Protection Agency provides information on flood risk through its indicative maps and advice on specific planning applications, but it is for those making the decision to take account of that advice and to consider it alongside all other relevant matters when determining whether planning permission should be granted.

Helen Eadie (Labour, Dunfermline East)

I know that Michael Russell is a robust minister who is not afraid to intervene if SEPA has got something wrong. Will he intervene in a similarly robust manner if he agrees with me that the Scottish Government's reporter has got it wrong in the case of St David's bay, where the reporter has approved a development application without requiring that appropriate flood defences be put in place? By doing so, they have put homes and people at serious risk, despite SEPA's view that the area is at high risk of flooding and that there should be no development there.

Michael Russell (Scottish National Party, South of Scotland)

My robustness is tested in a variety of ways, including by the fact that this is the third time that I have answered the same question from Helen Eadie. I have also had a meeting with her on the subject. I am happy to meet her again and to continue being robust on the matter. I know that she has a strong interest in it, not least because she lives very close to the proposed development. I am happy to discuss the issue with her but, at the end of the day, it is for councils—that included the previous Labour administration in Fife—to make decisions. I will go on being robust in my discussions with the member and I hope that eventually we will reach the end of our dialogue.

Ian McKee (Scottish National Party, Lothians)

Does the minister have information on how many housing developments in areas that are classified as flood plains were permitted during the period 2003 to 2007?

Michael Russell (Scottish National Party, South of Scotland)

I am happy to provide that information to the member. There were a substantial number of such developments, as there always are. Scottish planning policy 7, which deals with planning and flooding, provides a framework for assessing coastal flood risk, so that planning authorities can include appropriate policies in their development plans. [Interruption.] Members seem to find the concept of planning against flooding amusing. No one who is faced with flooding finds it amusing. It is important that all the relevant parts of the debate are involved, so that the right decisions are made. If that had been the case previously, we would not have some of the difficulties that we have inherited from previous Administrations.

James Kelly (Labour, Glasgow Rutherglen)

To ask the Scottish Executive what steps it is taking to support people who suffer from Parkinson's disease. (S3O-2227)

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee East)

The Scottish intercollegiate guidelines network is developing a clinical guideline on Parkinson's disease, which will focus on diagnosis and drug treatment. Publication of the guideline is expected in the autumn of next year. NHS Quality Improvement Scotland is developing clinical standards for neurological conditions. I understand that there will be specific standards for Parkinson's disease. Together, those two initiatives will lead to improvements throughout Scotland in supporting people living with Parkinson's disease, their families and their carers.

James Kelly (Labour, Glasgow Rutherglen)

I am sure that the minister agrees that the work of Parkinson's disease nurse specialists is crucial in managing symptoms and preventing unnecessary hospital admissions. I am sure that she also agrees that there is a national shortage of such nurses, with only 17 covering 10,000 sufferers. Will the minister come back to the chamber with plans to extend that provision, as the current provision is clearly inadequate?

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee East)

I understand how highly Parkinson's disease nurse specialists are valued by people with the disease. The number of specialist nurses has increased in recent years. I am pleased that recently, NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde took on another 3.5 whole-time equivalent Parkinson's disease nurse specialists. That sets a good example to all national health service boards. Another such example is the work of NHS Dumfries and Galloway on developing with the Parkinson's Disease Society a nurse specialist post. Other health boards are looking to do likewise. I encourage all boards to take a lead from boards that are developing nurse specialist posts.

Christine Grahame (Scottish National Party, South of Scotland)

As the minister is aware, I am pursuing the establishment of a specialist neurological nurse post in the Scottish Borders, which would include provision for people with Parkinson's disease. Has the minister been contacted by NHS Borders about the proposal?

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee East)

I am not aware of any such contact, but I will follow up the matter and find out what progress is being made. As I mentioned, the NHS QIS neurological standards that are being developed provide us with an opportunity to consider the role of Parkinson's disease nurse specialists. I am happy to have further discussions with NHS Borders and the member on how to take forward the proposal.

Richard Simpson (Labour, Mid Scotland and Fife)

I thank the minister for the detailed replies that she is giving on this topic. She responded positively to the debate that took place on motor neurone disease—another neurological condition—and said that she hoped that specialist support nurses for neurological conditions generally would be provided. Has she made any progress on that general issue?

Shona Robison (Scottish National Party, Dundee East)

The fact that NHS QIS is developing the clinical standards for neurological conditions shows that progress is being made in that direction. However, I am happy to write to the member with more specific details in answer to his question.

Jim Hume (Liberal Democrat, South of Scotland)

To ask the Scottish Executive what it will do to support and encourage economic development in the south of Scotland. (S3O-2202)

Jim Mather (Scottish National Party, Argyll and Bute)

We place great importance on supporting and encouraging economic development throughout Scotland, including the south of Scotland.

The Government's economic strategy sets out how we will focus on creating a more successful country through increasing sustainable economic growth. The strategy sets out an approach to growth that is cohesive throughout Scotland's regions. Indeed, last week, I invited John Lamont and Christine Grahame to join me at the next textiles sector event, which is scheduled for 18 February. In addition, we will run a south of Scotland economy event, which will include constituency and regional MSPs.

Jim Hume (Liberal Democrat, South of Scotland)

The restructuring of Scottish Enterprise will see the two local enterprise companies in the south of Scotland being incorporated into one structure that will cover the region but have no say in its development and no delegated authority. The local boards meet for the last time in March. Can the minister unequivocally guarantee that a full transition will occur on 1 April, so that economic development will be uninterrupted? Further, does he acknowledge that the new structure cannot simply focus on companies that achieve £1 million extra growth a year? Does he recognise the complexity of the economy and the importance of small businesses to the south of Scotland?

Jim Mather (Scottish National Party, Argyll and Bute)

The process is cracking on, and we have every expectation of meeting that 1 April target elegantly. We intend to ensure that we develop the focus that will be required to drive the economy forward. We hope that, in doing so, we will be able to learn from what has happened in other places, which is why we are running the south of Scotland event. For example, in my constituency and in North Ayrshire, we have included lots of other stakeholders and spread the burden. We want to involve business in the regional panels, and that is what we will do, but we will also involve organisations such as the Food Standards Agency, the Forestry Commission, voluntary sector organisations, the National Trust for Scotland, Royal Mail, the Scottish Environment Protection Agency and Scottish Natural Heritage. We want to share the burden as we develop possibilities and ensure that we arrive at an elegant solution.

Elaine Murray (Labour, Dumfries)

As Jim Hume said, the responsibility for economic development in the south of Scotland currently rests with the enterprise network. Can the minister tell us what organisation will be—in eight weeks' time—the public sector partner in Katalyst Projects, which is the delivery vehicle that was formed to progress the economic regeneration of the Gretna-Lockerbie-Annan corridor? Will it be Dumfries and Galloway Council or the new south of Scotland regional panel?

Jim Mather (Scottish National Party, Argyll and Bute)

If the member had listened carefully to what I said earlier, she would understand that we consider what she is talking about to be silo thinking. We want to bring people together. We want the local authorities and the new Scottish Enterprise south of Scotland region to get together with all the other relevant entities. We are talking about bringing Scotland together, working towards a unifying goal, and using the motivation and the enlightened self-interest of all those organisations to produce a better result for the people of the south of Scotland.

Karen Gillon (Labour, Clydesdale)

To ask the Scottish Executive what value it places on international sporting events being hosted in Scotland and in what way it provides support. (S3O-2220)

Stewart Maxwell (Scottish National Party, West of Scotland)

International sporting events have fantastic potential to showcase Scotland and all that we have to offer on an international stage. The world-class events that we host—both sporting and cultural—demonstrate that we are a dynamic and modern country, and a great place to visit, live, work, study, do business and invest. That is why we fund EventScotland to co-ordinate and provide leadership and support to the drive to secure major events for Scotland.

Karen Gillon (Labour, Clydesdale)

The minister will be aware that the world schools orienteering championships are coming to Scotland in April, which is the first time that any world schools event has been hosted in the United Kingdom. He will, therefore, share my disappointment at the failure of all the agencies over which he has responsibility to provide any support for that event's coming to Scotland. Serious financial shortfalls, in the region of £10,000, are now being faced.

The Government has said that it is open for business. Does that extend to Scotland's sporting young people? Will the minister intervene to ensure that the £10,000 that will ensure that the world schools orienteering championships are held successfully in Scotland in April is made available?

Stewart Maxwell (Scottish National Party, West of Scotland)

We value the work of young people and their involvement in sporting events in Scotland, and we recognise their achievements in representing Scotland in the UK and overseas. That is why we put so much effort into supporting them through sportscotland and local authorities. It is clear that the Government is very interested in international sporting events—that was less so under previous Administrations—but I am not aware of the details of the application process relating to the world schools orienteering championships. [ Interruption. ]

Alex Fergusson (None, Galloway and Upper Nithsdale)

Order.

Stewart Maxwell (Scottish National Party, West of Scotland)

The results of that process would clearly go to sportscotland and other bodies, such as the local authorities. [ Interruption. ]

Alex Fergusson (None, Galloway and Upper Nithsdale)

Order.

Stewart Maxwell (Scottish National Party, West of Scotland)

However, I am happy to look into the matter and respond to the member with full details as soon as possible.

First Minister's Question Time

Wendy Alexander (Labour, Paisley North)

To ask the First Minister what engagements he has planned for the rest of the day. (S3F-492)

Alex Salmond (Scottish National Party, Gordon)

Later today, I will have meetings to take forward the Government's programme for Scotland, and there will be an announcement on the new chair of the Glasgow 2014 Commonwealth games organising committee. That is one of the steps that must be taken to ensure that those games are a resounding success for the whole of Scotland.

Wendy Alexander (Labour, Paisley North)

I am sure that we are all looking forward to that important appointment.

How many schools does the Scottish National Party Government plan to build during this parliamentary session?

Alex Salmond (Scottish National Party, Gordon)

As Wendy Alexander well knows, we have promised to match Labour's school building programme brick for brick, and that is exactly what we intend to do. Far from being able to forecast the future, Wendy Alexander has had difficulties in telling us what has happened with the schools programme in the past. At First Minister's question time on 4 October last year, she said:

"Let me come armed with the facts and figures, which are that the previous Government built in excess of 300 new schools."—[Official Report, 4 October 2007; c 2466.]

Actually, it built 173 schools. Wendy Alexander is not for the first time having difficulty with facts, figures and calculations.

Wendy Alexander (Labour, Paisley North)

We have all learned that defence is usually the First Minister's best form of attack. [ Interruption. ]

Alex Fergusson (None, Galloway and Upper Nithsdale)

Order.

Wendy Alexander (Labour, Paisley North)

I return to the issue. Labour delivered the largest-ever school building programme in this country's history. We built or refurbished 328 schools and promised to build 250 more, 45 of which were already in the pipeline at the election. Last week, the Minister for Schools and Skills tried to claim credit for those 45 schools to mask the fact that the SNP Government has no school building programme. The First Minister has been in government for nine months. When will he commission his first school?

Alex Salmond (Scottish National Party, Gordon)

The budget, which Wendy Alexander did not support yesterday, includes substantial capital uplift for local councils throughout Scotland. I noticed that the word "refurbished" crept in when Wendy Alexander was giving statistics, and I think that the phrase is "Attack is the best form of defence."

Wendy Alexander (Labour, Paisley North)

Let me attack. The First Minister has talked money, but he has not promised 250 new or refurbished schools. In October, he pledged in the chamber, as he has done again today, that he would match Labour's school building programme brick for brick. Why then have the proposals relating to Dumbarton academy and Elgin high school been cancelled, and those relating to Portobello high school and Dunfermline high school been put on hold? If building new schools was an issue for the First Minister in October and he has repeated the brick-for-brick pledge today, why will he not say that his target is to build 250 new schools and bring forward the programme?

Alex Salmond (Scottish National Party, Gordon)

Let us start with the 45 schools, details of which we have announced since we came to office, but let us remember the additional capital expenditure that has been announced for this year's financial programme, as well as the additional capital uplift. [ Interruption. ]

Alex Fergusson (None, Galloway and Upper Nithsdale)

Order, please.

Alex Salmond (Scottish National Party, Gordon)

Let us also remember the consultation on new and better ways of funding our public services, which will finish on 14 March. This is a starter for 10—the not-for-profit distribution method has substantial advantages over the conventional public-private partnership method, the biggest of which is the fact that the profits go back to the community rather than elsewhere, into private hands.

Wendy Alexander (Labour, Paisley North)

The pupils and parents of Scotland want new schools, not lectures in public finance. When it comes to new school programmes, even though the Scottish National Party has done nothing more than complete the programmes that Labour put into development and claim credit for them, the First Minister continues to claim that his party will match brick for brick Labour's pledge to build 250 new schools. Perhaps he would like to explain to the Parliament why, as the Scottish Parliament information centre told me yesterday, no new Government-funded PPP projects have started development since the election.

Alex Salmond (Scottish National Party, Gordon)

Forty-five have already been announced and completed since the election.

I say to Wendy Alexander, as gently as possible, that she is not in a fantastic position to lecture anyone on public or, indeed, private finance. If she had wanted to remove me from office, she had a perfect opportunity to do so yesterday. I can only suppose—from the Labour Party's almost unanimous abstention on the budget—that she wants me to continue in office. In the new mood of consensus, let me say that I want Wendy Alexander to continue in office.

Annabel Goldie (Conservative, West of Scotland)

To ask the First Minister when he will next meet the Prime Minister. (S3F-493)

Alex Salmond (Scottish National Party, Gordon)

I expect to meet the Prime Minister at the British-Irish Council in Dublin in the very near future. Perhaps I should take Annabel Goldie with me, as she seems to be pretty good at reaching agreements.

Annabel Goldie (Conservative, West of Scotland)

There are some offers a girl can refuse. [ Laughter. ]

In 2004, the then First Minister, Jack McConnell, made a statement to the Parliament about the abhorrent abuse that had taken place in residential care in Scotland over a period of decades. The current First Minister addressed the issue in June of last year, when he made particular reference to the report on Kerelaw. This morning, the Minister for Children and Early Years responded to that review, and the Scottish Government now proposes to set up a Scottish truth and reconciliation forum.

Everyone views with revulsion the abuse of children. As I said in 2004,

"when its perpetrators are those who have been entrusted with the care of children, and in whom those children have placed their fragile trust, it is a particularly vile and odious betrayal."—[Official Report, 1 December 2004; c 12392.]

Anything that helps to shine a light through that period of blackness in Scotland's history is to be welcomed.

However well intended the truth and reconciliation forum is, is the First Minister satisfied that the culture of silence that prevailed and which countenanced the continuance of this depraved and awful activity is being addressed effectively? Will the proposed initiative encourage and support people in coming forward and reporting abuse and fears of potential abuse?

Alex Salmond (Scottish National Party, Gordon)

I thank Annabel Goldie for the way in which she introduced her question on an enormously serious subject. I stand by the statement that the Minister for Children and Early Years made to the Parliament this morning, which outlined a well-balanced approach.

I hope and believe that the answer to Annabel Goldie's specific question is yes. The proposals that Adam Ingram announced will help with the atmosphere of openness and disclosure that is necessary if we are to protect our children, particularly those who are most vulnerable.

Annabel Goldie (Conservative, West of Scotland)

Although we all agree that the first obligation is to support victims who have suffered the nightmare of abuse, equally we must be sure that in providing that support we do not inadvertently prejudice or jeopardise any criminal proceedings, because, for victims, justice is as important as truth and reconciliation. Can the First Minister assure the Parliament that he has sought and received advice from the Lord Advocate that that laudable forum will not compromise such criminal proceedings?

Alex Salmond (Scottish National Party, Gordon)

As Annabel Goldie knows, under long-standing convention I am not meant to say whether I am seeking advice, never mind to disclose specific advice. The statement that the Minister for Children and Early Years made carries the support of the whole Government—it is a well-judged statement. The position in the statement is to address the crimes and the behaviour of the past; that does not preclude criminal action, if criminal action is found to be necessary when the matter goes before the normal judicial processes. However, the minister's statement was also designed to address what we must do in the future to prevent such things ever happening again and staining Scottish society.

Nicol Stephen (Liberal Democrat, Aberdeen South)

To ask the First Minister what issues will be discussed at the next meeting of the Cabinet. (S3F-494)

Alex Salmond (Scottish National Party, Gordon)

The next meeting of the Cabinet will discuss issues of importance to the people of Scotland.

Nicol Stephen (Liberal Democrat, Aberdeen South)

A Government press release that was issued this week said:

"a new dental school in Aberdeen is a major priority for the Scottish Government."

The Aberdeen Evening Express said yesterday that the First Minister's plan

"looks like it's been drawn up on the back of a fag packet."

Who is right? Importantly, will the First Minister tell me and members in the chamber whether any students at the Aberdeen dental school will have to pay tuition fees?

Alex Salmond (Scottish National Party, Gordon)

The commitment to the dental school is comprehensive, and it has been long awaited in the north-east of Scotland. I am surprised about two things. First, that when Nicol Stephen was in office he never gave such a commitment, and secondly, that he has not found it within himself to welcome the fact that the first students will start at the Aberdeen dental school later this year.

Nicol Stephen (Liberal Democrat, Aberdeen South)

The dental school is urgently needed—so are more dentists—in the north-east of Scotland, but there is confusion. People cannot apply through the normal university process; the staffing and accommodation are uncertain; and lecturers in dentistry were told that they could be forced to use videolinks to teach their classes from Dundee. However, for all those problems, does the First Minister agree that the biggest issue he needs to tackle concerns the students? Students in Aberdeen will not be allowed to be undergraduates—they must have a first degree already. That means that the student body will be restricted to people who are prepared to undertake eight years of study instead of the normal five, with all the extra costs and extra debt that that involves.

I have spoken today to the university admissions office, which is unable to guarantee that students will avoid tuition fees. The Student Awards Agency for Scotland has said that it will not pay the tuition fees, as the course is a second degree. Will the First Minister take urgent action to get the advice and support for students changed to ensure that they will not pay tuition fees? Will he ensure that those Aberdeen dental students are not disadvantaged?

Alex Salmond (Scottish National Party, Gordon)

I remind Nicol Stephen that this Government is abolishing tuition fees in Scotland. With regard to his detailed questions, Nicol Stephen seems to confuse the transitional arrangements with the long-term position. I would not say that he would do that deliberately, but it is always a suspicion that I have in my mind. He should congratulate the Government on the fact that we will have a dental school in Aberdeen, as opposed to the long years of nothing happening under the Labour-Liberal Executive in which he played a part.

I hope that I can perhaps tempt Annabel Goldie out of the right-wing alliance with the Liberals and the Labour Party on the constitution, and to join me in giving the people of Scotland the right to determine our own future—Nicol Stephen once supported that, but he has reneged on that, too.

Alex Fergusson (None, Galloway and Upper Nithsdale)

I have received a number of requests from members who wish to ask supplementary questions.

Roseanna Cunningham (Scottish National Party, Perth)

The First Minister is aware that the Ministry of Defence this week gave the green light to the sale of both the Defence Aviation Repair Agency at Almondbank—which employs 350 people in my constituency—and DARA Fleetlands to the small Canadian company, Vector Aerospace, for only £17 million. Is the First Minister aware that, less than five years ago, £5 million was invested in Almondbank alone, making the £17 million purchase price look like a bargain-basement price? Will he and his Government join me in supporting the joint trade unions in their continued efforts to ensure the future security of their members' jobs? What can he do to help in those efforts?

Alex Salmond (Scottish National Party, Gordon)

As the constituency member knows, the Government has already been involved in seeking to defend the jobs in her constituency. I welcomed, as did John Swinney, the arrival on site of the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State at the Ministry of Defence to consider the issue. After the visit, we made further representations. I was disappointed that a decision was taken so quickly after the meeting, because I did not see how the parliamentary under-secretary could have properly assimilated all the information that she received on the visit.

I am extremely concerned about a number of aspects, but the underlying concern is obviously job security in Perthshire. I join the constituency member in expressing that concern. The normal provisions and support of the Scottish Government will be in place as we seek to co-operate with the trade unions and the workers to advance and protect their position.

Jamie McGrigor (Conservative, Highlands and Islands)

Is the First Minister aware that the community on the island of Luing in Argyll currently has no lifeline ferry service because of the industrial action affecting Argyll and Bute Council? Does he acknowledge the distress that is being caused to the people on Luing, whose children cannot go to school in Oban, and who have no way of getting off the island? What will the Scottish Government do about that serious situation? What back-up exists for such crucial lifeline ferry services?

Alex Salmond (Scottish National Party, Gordon)

As the member knows, a fixed-link ferry project is being appraised. That will be a matter for the local council in the first instance, but I shall consider the matter from a Government point of view and write to the member about his constituency interest.

Johann Lamont (Labour, Glasgow Pollok)

The First Minister is aware of just how important the private landlord registration scheme is in protecting constituents such as mine from antisocial behaviour and from rogue landlords who operate, at best, on the margins of organised crime. In the interests of brevity, can we take as read the First Minister's usual defence that the current situation is not his fault? Will he focus on how his Administration will progress private landlord registration?

I want to ask two specific questions. Will private landlord registration be a guaranteed part of single outcome agreements with local authorities? What is the First Minister's specific target for the level of registration to be reached by this time next year to reassure my constituents that the issue is a continuing priority for the Executive?

Alex Salmond (Scottish National Party, Gordon)

Let us consider what has happened over the past year. As I understand it, this Government started with 15 per cent registration, inherited from Johann Lamont's party. The figure is now 55 per cent. That seems to me to be accelerated progress over the past nine months of this Government.

The issue will be part of discussions with local authorities on single outcome agreements. I am reminded of the words of the unnamed councillor in Glasgow, who was looking at the general process of the Scottish Government. What did that Labour councillor say? "God bless the SNP Government."

Hugh O'Donnell (Liberal Democrat, Central Scotland)

What actions will the First Minister's Government take in relation to the forecast unemployment of 123 people when the Tenma mouldings company closes in Cumbernauld in April?

Alex Salmond (Scottish National Party, Gordon)

The normal processes of Government to support workers and workforces facing redundancy will move into operation. I assure the member that we will be quite prepared to discuss with him any specific queries on what those processes are.

Keith Brown (Scottish National Party, Ochil)

To ask the First Minister what representations the Scottish Government has made to the United Kingdom Government to protect the legal position of Scottish bank-notes. (S3F-496)

Alex Salmond (Scottish National Party, Gordon)

The Scottish Government was not afforded the opportunity of making representations to the UK Government on its proposal to legislate on Scottish bank-notes issue, as Her Majesty's Treasury made no contact at either ministerial or official level to inform us of what was in last week's consultation document.

The proposals have been buried in a wide-ranging consultation document on financial stability. The Scottish Government—and, I am sure, many others—will respond to that consultation in the strongest possible terms. I know that a wide range of opinion exists, stretching to the former First Minister—my immediate predecessor. This morning, I was delighted to see that he is joining the campaign to save the Scottish bank-notes issue and Scottish bank-notes.

Keith Brown (Scottish National Party, Ochil)

Does the First Minister agree that it is extremely ironic that such an appalling measure has been proposed on the ground of financial stability, given that the failures of the Labour Government and the Bank of England's regulatory regime mean that taxpayers in Scotland are being asked to assume financial responsibility for a share of the £24 billion debts of Northern Rock? Does he think that it is also ironic that the right of Scottish banks to issue notes is threatened by a Scottish Chancellor of the Exchequer and a Scottish Prime Minister?

In defending the rights of Scottish banks to issue notes, will the First Minister also defend the rights of people to use Scottish bank-notes without hindrance in the rest of the UK?

Alex Salmond (Scottish National Party, Gordon)

I remember that I have been invited to sign the Scottish Daily Express petition, which Jack McConnell signed yesterday. I will do that later today.

I hope that the issue can unite the Parliament and Scotland. It is ludicrous to suggest that the Scottish note issue, which has continued since 1695, is a threat to financial stability. I worked in the financial sector for some time. Every 20 years or so the Treasury would come up with a scheme that was basically about grabbing money for the Treasury at the expense of the Scottish financial sector and the Scottish economy. I regard the most recent threat to the note issue as a smash-and-grab raid on Scottish bank-notes. I hope that every member will support Scottish bank-notes, realise the seriousness of the situation and rally to the various campaigns to save the Scottish bank-note issue.

George (Labour, Lothians)

May I tell the First Minister that he is mixing up two issues? The Scottish Daily Express campaign is to make Scottish bank-notes acceptable everywhere south of the border. Will he confess that what he has been saying recently represents yet another of his publicity stunts?

Alex Salmond (Scottish National Party, Gordon)

rose—

George (Labour, Lothians)

I have not finished.

Will the First Minister acknowledge that the real threat to Scottish bank-notes comes not from the Treasury but from independence, when Scottish bank-notes would be replaced by euros?

Alex Salmond (Scottish National Party, Gordon)

It is unfortunate that Lord George has not read the European constitution, which respects traditional banking practice—unlike HM Treasury, it seems. A Clydesdale Bank spokesperson said of the Treasury proposal:

"If this were to go ahead, it would force us to consider whether issuing banknotes would be viable in the future, a position we do not want to be forced into."

When I said that I hoped the issue would unite Scotland, I was—obviously—excluding Lord George Foulkes from such national unity.

However, I have hope for the future. When one member voted against the Scottish National Party budget yesterday I assumed that it was Lord George Foulkes, but he had abstained. He is half way up the road to Damascus.

Michael McMahon (Labour, Hamilton North and Bellshill)

To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government is doing to mitigate the impact of the latest increases in gas and electricity prices on the most vulnerable people in our society. (S3F-509)

Alex Salmond (Scottish National Party, Gordon)

Ministers have met representatives of the energy industry and the Office of Gas and Electricity Markets and given the clear message that they must do all that they can to protect vulnerable consumers. We will keep up the pressure on companies and on ministers in Westminster. We are sending a clear message that we do not want an energy-rich but fuel-poor Scotland.

The Government is investing £138 million in our fuel poverty programmes between now and 2011. For the benefit of members, I say that we are boosting this year's programme and have already delivered more installations of central heating systems in 10 months than the previous Administration did in the entire year 2006-07.

Michael McMahon (Labour, Hamilton North and Bellshill)

I am sure that the First Minister is aware that Scottish Power has ended backcharging for customers in other areas of the United Kingdom and that he shares my view that that is unfair on Scottish customers who will continue to be in debt through no fault of their own. His Minister for Communities and Sport, Stewart Maxwell, agreed to meet Scottish Power to discuss the issue. Has that meeting taken place? If so, what was the outcome? If nothing has changed, will the First Minister intervene personally to address this urgent problem?

Alex Salmond (Scottish National Party, Gordon)

Yes, the meeting has taken place. I will arrange for minister Maxwell to write to the member on the matter. When we are faced by sharply rising fuel costs, we must do all that we can to ensure that energy companies in Scotland match up to their responsibilities to the most vulnerable sections of society. As members know, the administration and regulation of energy companies is reserved to the Westminster Government. That said, no member should be shy about making the point that it would be a huge and disgraceful irony if Scotland were to continue in a situation of energy plenty but fuel poverty.

Robert Brown (Liberal Democrat, Glasgow)

Is the First Minister aware that one of the lessons that has been learned from the free central heating scheme is that elderly people are either turning off their heating systems or incurring excessive bills because they do not know—or, in some cases, sadly forget—how to adjust their system's timings and temperature? The issue is one with which I have some sympathy. Regular checks are needed on the operation of the systems. Will he and his Government work with the gas and electricity companies, and the central heating contractors, to ensure that consumers—particularly older consumers—are properly and regularly supported in making the best use of their systems? I ask that in light of rising fuel prices.

Alex Salmond (Scottish National Party, Gordon)

Yes. The point is entirely fair. I will respond to the request from Robert Brown.

Ross Finnie (Liberal Democrat, West of Scotland)

To ask the First Minister what outcomes the Scottish Government is seeking to achieve through the new GMS contract negotiations with the British Medical Association. (S3F-510)

Alex Salmond (Scottish National Party, Gordon)

We have consistently made it clear, most recently through the "Better Health, Better Care" action plan, that flexible access to general practitioner services is crucial to our vision of a more patient-centred national health service in Scotland.

Like all public servants, GPs strive to offer services to the public in a way that best suits the needs of their patients and recognises the challenges for those at work, those caring for others, and those with geographical challenges in making and keeping appointments. The offer on the GP contract for 2008-09 directly reflects that need for appropriate and flexible access. We continue to have discussions with the Scottish General Practitioner Committee on that important area.

If GPs accept the offer, it would mean additional funding of £19 million in Scotland, including £9.5 million of new money, which will be provided through the spending review, in exchange for around two and a half hours of additional patient access to GPs, per week, for the average practice. I believe—the Government believes—that that represents a fair deal.

Ross Finnie (Liberal Democrat, West of Scotland)

I am grateful to the First Minister for his detailed response in respect of his aims and objectives for flexible hours. However, does he not agree that the current negotiations on extended and more flexible hours, with which and in which his Government has become engaged, will not achieve that aim? Among others, one reason for that is that the negotiations are based on a GP working on her or his own. Does he agree that the outcome that patients need the negotiations to secure is 24-hour care, with a resolution of the current unsustainable out-of-hours care provision?

Alex Salmond (Scottish National Party, Gordon)

We are also looking at out-of-hours care, but the current negotiations are specifically on the issue of flexible opening. I am aware that one reaction is to say that the terms of the UK deal are not tailored to the needs of the Scottish population. In terms of the UK framework, we are anxious that the result is not a breakdown of communications and, perhaps, the imposition of an arrangement. As we do in all our dealings with the communities and representatives of Scotland, we would much prefer to reach agreement in an amicable manner. Certainly, the agreement in Scotland—with the additional funds that are being pledged in Scotland—will be designed to meet Scottish circumstances.

Christine Grahame (Scottish National Party, South of Scotland)

I welcome the First Minister's comments about the additional £9.5 million for GPs should they accept the deal, which is distinct from the situation in England, where GPs will be penalised if they do not accept. What do patients groups say about the negotiations?

Alex Salmond (Scottish National Party, Gordon)

To answer that directly, Jean Turner, who is known to many members and who is the executive director of the Scotland Patients Association, has said:

"Illness does not just happen between the hours of nine and five. There are always going to be emergencies. I welcome this proposal because people do need a more flexible service. Extending doctors' hours has got to be good for patients."

That is a useful quotation to remember. Few would disagree with Jean Turner's response on behalf of the Patients Association.

Margaret Curran (Labour, Glasgow Baillieston)

If the First Minister answers my question without insulting me, I might be in need of a GP service, although I should warn him that if his insult is too gratuitous, he may be in need of a GP service. I am sure that members throughout the Parliament support proposals to improve access to GPs. Will the First Minister give a specific assurance that the current proposals to extend GP hours will not have any detrimental impact on existing GP services? What is the timescale for implementation?

Alex Salmond (Scottish National Party, Gordon)

Of course the proposals will not have an effect on existing services. The services that are being proposed are additional, with additional money. The member will consider that to be a very direct answer. I think that our relationship is blossoming—why else would she, too, have abstained, rather than voted against in the vote on the budget yesterday?

Alex Fergusson (None, Galloway and Upper Nithsdale)

I hope that nobody is in need of a GP after today's First Minister's question time.

Question Time — Scottish Executive — Europe, External Affairs and Culture

Alex Fergusson (None, Galloway and Upper Nithsdale)

Good afternoon. The first item of business this afternoon is questions on Europe, external affairs and culture. Question 1 is from Michael McMahon, who is not in the chamber, I am afraid. Members are already aware of my views on that. We will move on to question 2.

Tom McCabe (Labour, Hamilton South)

To ask the Scottish Executive whether it will honour the previous Administration's commitment to provide funding to ensure an enhanced Scottish presence at expo 2010 in Shanghai. (S3O-2233)

Linda Fabiani (Scottish National Party, Central Scotland)

The planned Shanghai expo will be a huge event and it is important that there is a strong Scottish presence there. Obviously, we expect Scotland to be represented and promoted by the United Kingdom bodies as part of their UK-wide remit, just as they would be expected to represent Scottish interests at other events. On that basis, and on reviewing the commitments that we inherited, we do not see a rationale for an additional contribution from Scotland on the scale that was envisaged.

I have offered UK ministers and ministers from the Northern Ireland Assembly and Welsh Assembly Governments a meeting to discuss the matter further.

Tom McCabe (Labour, Hamilton South)

I can only agree with the minister about the importance of expo 2010 in Shanghai and the fact that Scotland should have a prominent place within it. Expo 2010 is an extremely important event in one of the most vibrant economies in the world, which is perhaps soon to become the most important economy in the world. The rationale behind an enhanced Scottish presence was to ensure that, proportionately, Scotland got more from that important event than other parts of the United Kingdom because of the belief that Scotland contributes more than the rest of the United Kingdom.

On that basis, and given that the exhibition could be critically important to the future engagement of Scottish companies with one of the world's most important economies, I ask the minister to reconsider her decision.

Linda Fabiani (Scottish National Party, Central Scotland)

I am glad that Mr McCabe recognises that Scotland contributes more. That is all the more reason for the UK to play its proper part in the promotion of Scotland, given that it is a UK-wide event and Scotland will be represented by UK bodies.

As far as business is concerned, I am looking at refreshing the China plan, which will outline the Scottish Government's aspirations for engagement with China. It will focus on the areas that are relevant to China in which Scotland has a true competitive edge.

Sandra White (Scottish National Party, Glasgow)

To ask the Scottish Executive what discussions it has had with new European Union member states regarding concerns over human trafficking. (S3O-2189)

Linda Fabiani (Scottish National Party, Central Scotland)

The Solicitor General attended the European Union justice and home affairs council in Brussels on 8 and 9 November 2007, at which the council conclusions on the trafficking of human beings were discussed. Representatives of the new EU member states were also present.

Sandra White (Scottish National Party, Glasgow)

Are there any plans to formalise the role of the trafficking awareness-raising alliance—or TARA—in the implementation of the national referral mechanism, given that the current process is police led, which goes against international best practice? Further, what action can the EU or indeed the Scottish Government take against countries that do not comply—or take action to comply—with the convention against trafficking?

Linda Fabiani (Scottish National Party, Central Scotland)

There are quite a lot of issues in Ms White's questions. I am pleased to let all members in the chamber know—in case not everyone has realised—that the Home Secretary announced in January that the United Kingdom intends to ratify the Council of Europe Convention on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings by the end of the year. The Scottish Government will work closely with the Home Office to ensure that every possible initiative is taken to protect people who come from the EU countries.

There have been some fairly high-level meetings with the Cabinet Secretary for Justice, the Scottish Crime and Drug Enforcement Agency and Strathclyde Police to ensure that all the work that is identified in the action plans will be considered and that specific steps will be taken to ensure not only that we fully comply with the convention when it is ratified but that, at a local level, we do the best for cities in Scotland. Many concerns have been expressed by many members and we have to ensure that the needs of the immigrant communities are well looked after.

Trish Godman (Labour, West Renfrewshire)

During the world cup, women were trafficked to Germany to be used by men. Given that experience, has the minister had any discussions with the relevant UK ministers and local authorities in Scotland to ensure that men are not able to use such trafficked women during, in particular, the Commonwealth games and the Olympics?

Linda Fabiani (Scottish National Party, Central Scotland)

I know that Ms Godman has long been campaigning on these important issues. Discussions about them are going on all the time at official and ministerial level. There was a lot of publicity during that football tournament. I undertake to pass the concerns that have been expressed today to the cabinet secretaries who have responsibility for such issues; at the moment, I am not able to give details of the discussions that have taken place.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

To ask the Scottish Executive whether it will outline its policy on the support of arts festivals in rural and island areas of Scotland. (S3O-2196)

Linda Fabiani (Scottish National Party, Central Scotland)

I have a sense of déjà vu, given last night's members' business debate on traditional music, festivals and arts. As Mr McArthur will know, funding for the arts in Scotland is currently disbursed by the Scottish Arts Council. Once I have set the overall budget, it determines which events and organisations it will award funding to. I am pleased to say that the Scottish Arts Council recognises the importance of local festivals in providing access to the arts, bringing communities together and, as has been apparent in Orkney and Shetland during recent years, providing opportunities for the development of artistic talent and the promotion of local tourism. In 2007, the Scottish Arts Council awarded more than £1 million in support of festivals across Scotland.

Liam McArthur (Liberal Democrat, Orkney Islands)

I thank the minister for her response, much of which I agree with. As she said, the Orkney folk festival is a growing success. She will also be aware of the rave reviews being garnered by the revamped Pier arts centre in Stromness since its relaunch. Orkney now has a truly world-class facility.

Will the minister accept that there is a need to ensure that the festivals, venues and artists that are to be found in the remoter parts of the country receive adequate levels of funding so that they can survive and flourish? Does she recognise, for example, the additional costs incurred by the organisers of the St Magnus festival in attracting world-class performers, particularly orchestras? I take this opportunity to invite the minister to attend the St Magnus festival in my constituency at the end of June. I am sure that she will be hugely impressed by the range and quality of the programme that has been pulled together by Glenys Hughes and her team.

Linda Fabiani (Scottish National Party, Central Scotland)

I am always happy to be hugely impressed, although I cannot make a commitment to attend this year's St Magnus festival at the moment, much as I would like to. As I said in last night's debate, I intend to visit Orkney and Shetland sooner rather than later.

I know that the Scottish Arts Council is considering some of the events that are going on in Orkney, and it will probably write to the organisers soon. I recognise the importance of the cultural events that take place all around the country, particularly in rural and remote areas. The Pier arts centre is a mark of that.

I also take this opportunity to say that if the Lewis chessmen were back in their rightful home, that is something else that could be used for the promotion of rural Scotland.

Alex Fergusson (None, Galloway and Upper Nithsdale)

The question has encouraged last-minute arrivals. I call Mr Gibson.