04/10/2012 Politics Scotland

The main substance of this programme, questions to the First

Minister, he is back from the Ryder Cup in Chicago where there was a

double success, Europe won the Cup, and secondly the Silver putter was

escorted back to Scotland and it will be held at Gleneagles in two

years' time, a referendum date pending for that very year. I

wonder if either or both of this topics will come up in questions,

I'm sure they will want to congratulate me -- join me in

congratulating them in a stunning victory in the Ryder Cup. What

engagements does he have plan for the rest of the day? Take forward

the Government's programme. Then. The victory in the Ryder Cup was an

exceptional achievement for the European team, and there for

everybody in this chamber looks forward ever more to being in

Gleneagles in two years' time to see their victory repeated. Can I

ask how the First Minister is going to make the almost �3 billion worth

of cuts to come up without anybody noticing? The government has set

out its plans in the Budget, as we have done, indeed, for the last

five years. Despite the enormous pressure which Johann Lamont

identify us, we have managed to balance that budget, procured

Scottish services, and introduce a vital social gains such as free

education in Scotland. When I left for America I thought these things

were agreed, largely across this chamber. I am now in a position

where I left from America it was Johann Lamont appearing on the same

platform as Ruth Davison, but she is a leading her party to become

the Conservative Party of Scotland. -- alluding. The problem with the

first minister is not that he is just surprised when he leaves for

America, but that when he is in Scotland he is in denial about what

is happening in the real Scotland outside this chamber. He talks

about securing public services, and that we have free everything. But

he has already brought in to �0.7 billion worth of cuts -- 2.7. The

vulnerable and hard-working families have noticed. They have

noticed. The pensioner who need help to wash, to dress, to feed

themselves, suffering the indignity of just 15 minutes care visits each

day. The family paying more for childcare than their mortgage. The

18,000 Scots denied a place at college. One of the thousands of

working-class students who have had their bursaries cut by �900 per

year. Those people see his cuts and don't see his Scotland where

everything is free and everything is fantastic. Who is going to pay

when he delivers the next �3 billion worth of cuts?

Again, she is correct to say the Scottish budget is under attack

from Westminster, from the last Labour government as well. But the

solution to that fact cannot be, surely, abandoning concessionary

fares or free prescriptions, free personal fairs -- free personal

care, introducing tuition fees, abandoning council tax. However the

working families of Scotland will be benefited from adopting the

policies the Tory party had adopted south of the border. I think she

was deeply wrong to talk about something for nothing society. That

is exactly the language of the Tory Another point of puzzlement is yes,

the cuts have been imposed on Scotland are severe, but they were

set out in the Comprehensive Spending Review. There is no

difference in terms of these things than when we fought the election

last year, and for the local elections this year. Except, of

course, when we fought the election last year and the local elections

this year, the Labour Party were in favour of the free prescriptions,

concession refers, personal care, free education, the council tax

freeze, they were trying to outbid the SNP on these vital parts of

social progress. The question she must answer is how all of us and

has she had this conversion to sweeping away not just be gained

introduced by this government, but the gains of having a parliament

for Scotland. I don't think he listened to what I

said about what is happening to people across the country. The

question we should be asking, he says nothing changes, the question

should be asking is who is paying the price for the benefits we are

all getting horribly from his spending choices? One lesson we

have learnt, it is impossible to outbid the SNP in recklessness, and

what we will do instead is demand serious government making the hard

decisions that so that these people are not paying that price. No

wonder the First Minister thinks he need to -- needs to spend �1

million on spin-doctors to try to spin his way out of this one. It

tells you all you need to know about the First Minister, care

workers losing their jobs, getting their wages cut, but more SNP

spinners hired. These cuts have to be brought in by 2016, already John

Swinney has delayed half the cuts he knows he has to make. Are we

going to know more before the referendum in 2014 where there is

�3 billion worth of cuts going to be made? Or is this government

going to continue to try to calm the people of Scotland and treat us

all as falls? -- con. -- treat us all as false. -- fools. The means-

testing was set out in a document almost 20 years ago. What it said

was there is ample evidence that systems where benefits paid are

more popular and more efficient than those which reserve benefits

solely for the poor. There was page 249 of the Commission on Social

Justice set up by the late John Smith, when Johann Lamont was chair

of the Scottish Labour Party. I don't understand why Labour had

moved away from that a fundamental principle. I hear the cries from

the Labour benches, no, they haven't. If they haven't moved away

from that principle why is she making speeches attacking these

great gains on free education, free health, for the people of Scotland?

The reintroduction of means testing would not be popular but it also

would not be efficient. I agree with that. That is one of the

argument put forward, to hold society together we have to make

short certain things are so important bike free education in

Scotland, the people who are lucky enough to be in a position to make

a contribution through their taxation can see the benefits

socially as well. That is how the whole -- you hold society together.

The introduction of sweeping means- testing it was desirable areas of

society will introduce in efficiency and social division.

Apart -- a point the party recognises, and now is deserting

totally on to the Tory ground, not just of Ruth Davidson, but of Peter

Lilley he first introduced the phrase, as something for nothing

society. The first minister loves strong men

to cut down the reality. The reality is there is a much more

serious debate going on. He says we should have a debate, and he

insults every family across the country who are worrying now about

their children in school, the young people in college and older people

worrying about their care. This man talked about debate and he forces

his education minister to come here and recount a position he had five

years ago. We want to have a debate and test the evidence of where the

balance that he knows should be there should lie. I think I

understand why the first minister thinks everything is free. On

�130,000 pay dear, it spent almost �2,000 per week on hospitality,

gets the taxpayer to spend �1,300 per year for a TV package to watch

the films and sports events he then gets them to pay for him to attend.

The first minister does not live in the real world. He lives in a world

where it is fine to spend �400,000 to rent out a gentleman's club in

Palma, but doesn't worry about the care worker who has had their wages

cut by �4,000 per year. He is not an economist, he is a fantasist. No

wonder, from Hampden Park to the Ryder Cup, George Square to the

Edinburgh tattoo, he gets booed wherever he goes. So much for

equality debate. -- so much for a quality debate! Can I make three

points? The argument we put forward wasn't just put forward in an

election manifesto, we set out our programme for government. I set out

the argument of a social wage and it was done last year with 26th May,

2011, free university education, their attacks on ill health, and a

council tax bill that will not saw, that is a concept of the social

wage. For the sacrifices that all of us make and should be making for

the form of a society geared to our values. We do things differently

here, not because we can, but because we want to and we should be

proud of that. Ian Gray was leader of the Labour Party, his response

was, I agreed Scotland's path see the distant to that of the

coalition at Westminster. There is a fairer, better way and we will

hold our first minister to hour -- to his promises on the social wage,

free personal care, concessionary travel, free prescriptions, and

free education. In the space of the years the Labour Party has been

transformed into demanding that the SNP hold to these policies on the

social wage to be hand-in-glove with the Tory party attacking these

gains. It is not just the reaction of the

SNP took Johann Lamont we should be worried about, let's talk about

reaction to speeches, for example. The phrase, something for nothing,

is badly chosen, George Anderson, what are we doing, do we learn

nothing for New Labour, not since. David Wells, they be used to

endorse policies by free prescription, free prescription and

the council taxes. As the Labour Party becomes the new Tory Party of

Scotland, support which has already diminished, and it will vanish.

Ruth Davidson. To ask the first minister when he

will next make -- meet the Secretary of State for Scotland.

Last year Glasgow university principal warned the funding gap

for the first Minister's policies would cause long-term damage to

Scottish universities. Not only did he refuse to listen, but he quite

publicly slapped him down. And now we start to see the full effects of

the Scottish Government's higher education policy, with all but one

of Scotland's top universities slipping down the world rankings,

and one tumbling out of the top 200 altogether. Universe the principles

like him were right all along -- University. Will he admits his

policies are creating a deepening crisis in Scottish education?

There is general acknowledgement including by all university

principals has gone and the universities of Scotland are the

best funded in these islands by far, at the present moment. The attack

of the Labour Party has been we are over funding university education

in Scotland. As Ruth Davidson should know, in comparison with the

25,000 reduction in university students from England going to

English universities, this year in Scotland we have a record number of

Scottish students going to Scottish universities, a record number of

English students going to Scottish universities, and a record number

of overseas students going to Scottish universities. I would be

wary of quoting the report she cited, it describes the situation

in England as a perfect storm of underfunding. How much better it

would be if every single universe to be visible in Midland would

gladly change places with the university principal in Scotland

who are properly funded and can look forward with confidence to an

Perhaps the first minister has spent too much time in America, to

pay any attention to our schools. But we take the First Minister on a

journey through Scotland's education system. One child in

every five leaves primary school unable to read and write properly.

Our teachers are confused about what they're supposed to do in the

classroom because, as a professor pointed out, there is no clear

leadership or focus in the implementation of curriculums.

70,000 people are now denied a place at further education college

after tens of millions of pounds worth of cuts to their budget. And

shamefully, Scotland's poorest and most disadvantaged students have

seen bursaries cut by 34 %. So, from primary to postgraduate, this

is a catalogue of failure. Will the first minister now do what his

Education Secretary did yesterday and stand in this chamber and admit

that he was wrong? But the at some stage, the Conservative Party will

have to get over this contradiction between constantly calling for

additional expenditure on things that they want to spend it on,

while their government at Westminster is siphoning the

Scottish budget. The comparison of course is how we managed to

maintain public services in comparison with what is happening

in England and indeed Wales at the present bummed. The position of

colleges in Scotland... We are maintaining the student numbers and

full-time equivalents as evidence to the Education Committee

demonstrated this week. I really do think the attack on curriculum for

excellence should stop because it is being greeted with huge

enthusiasm by both the teachers and parents of Scotland and is a

fundamental, well needed reform in Scottish education. I've been

looking at some of it quotes coming in, in terms of the position of

Scotland's universities and I was delighted to see just a few seconds

ago, a quote from Robin Parker talking about the huge investment

the Scottish government is making in our universities over this

Parliament, from this new academic year. In fact, in Europe, Scotland

is one of only a few countries that are investing in higher education.

Fortunately for people south of the border, one of the country is that

there is not as the country of Today, we learned that the former

NHS Lothian chief executive has been given a �100,000 golden

goodbye on top of a very generous package awarded when he left office

following for waiting times and scandals in Lothian. What action

will the first minister take to end the blatant milking of public money

by highly paid officials to leave office following a scandal or

retire and are then be engaged? re-engaged. Professor Barber

perceived his benefits in line with contractual entitlements which a

standard for NHS employees. A member should consider what would

have happened to the Scottish government if we decided to break

that contract and the member should also consider that these contracts

were entered into when the Labour Party were in government in

Scotland. I would like to ask the first minister what issues will be

discussed at the next meeting of the Cabinet? We will discuss issues

on -- of importance to the people of Scotland. Last week, I was

pleased that the Deputy First Minister committed to do more for

vulnerable young children. She talked positively, I have to say,

about building a consensus. I was therefore disappointed to see the

very next day a statement from the government that said we had a -- we

would not even be piloting an extension free Earley learning for

deprived 2 euros. I need him to clear this matter up. It is

important because the Noble Laureate professor has worked out

that the highest rate of return in education is investment before the

age of three. He is one of many experts who support this. Will the

first minister clear this matter up and committed today to follow the

UK government and extend in the education to 40 % of two year-olds,

the ones who need it most, rather than sticking to the 1% that he has

got in his current plans. The plan to move three and four year-olds to

600 hours of Alias education and child care is Superior not just to

the 412 hours which we inherited but to no plans and England which

are for less than that. -- Early Education. I watched the exchange

between two people last week and a repeat the words that we are

willing to consider all plans for the future. But he should carefully

look at exciting developments in terms of family centres in Scotland.

The mention that has been made of them, the fact that we have,

thankfully in the Budget, decided to direct money into in the years

and intervention as a part of policy and see a number of ways in

which we can affect our shared aims, even against the dramatic budget

pressure introduced by his government at Westminster. The I

accept that the work that has been done with a three and four-year-

olds is good progress and the other work that he has talked about his

good progress as well but the best Investment is that made before the

age of three. I know he has given on some of this but �1 invested

then, before the age of three, says �11 later. How want to join in the

consensus. There is a parliamentary motion calling for more provision

for two year-olds, signed by members of all five parties in of

the chamber, including members from his own party which I welcome. I

want to work together but we need more commitment than this. The 30

year-old misses out now, they miss out for ever. If he is not going to

commit to 40 % of two-year-olds, like the UK government, could he at

least agree to work, open up the budget, look for a radical change

so we can do more for those young children? Perhaps at some stage we

would get the acknowledgement that what we are proposing for three and

four year-olds is substantially above what the UK government is

proposing. Also, the understanding that there are a variety of ways

through the family centres I've mentioned, where we can bring about

the desirable aims. As the Member should know, we have set up in this

government, and early years commission which has a substantial

number of experts in this field, as well as people in this chamber, on

it to make recommendations so we can see how to bring about that

improvement that we all want to see. I would say, one of the first

things to do is to allocate the intervention in the Budget which

this Government has done for early intervention for preventative

spending. It has been enormously difficult, given the budget

pressures upon us right now, to do that. That has been done by Mr

Swinney, which gives us the basis to half a debate with action on how

we can affect improvements in the early years. I'm rather interested

however, in one aspect. I agreed that the early years of profound

significance in terms of the future development of our children and our

society. Hence the move to intervention in the Budget. But if

we are going to debate this in terms of saying that everything

that is taking place south of the border must automatically be

matched in Scotland, then it does tend to overlook the whole variety

of benefits and incentives, and the platform event -- education and

health which has been provided in Scotland which is now being denied

to people in England. To ask the first minister what the benefits

will be of Scotland staging the Ryder Cup in 2014? The Ryder Cup...

Order for stop a Ryder cuppers were the biggest sporting events in the

world. As the next host nation, the Scottish economy is expected to

benefit by up to �100 million. In addition to the 45,000 spectators

expected to attend each day at Gleneagles, the television coverage

is expected to reach more than 500 million homes worldwide. That will

provide a unique opportunity to promote Scotland on a world stage

and to reinforce Scotland's place as the home of golf. I thank the

First Minister. As a local MSP, and certainly looking forward to the

tournament coming to Gleneagles and the economic benefits. What steps

will the Government take to ensure that young Scots are given the

opportunity to participate in golf and even to compete in a future

Ryder Cup themselves? It is a hugely substantial point. The key

component of the Ryder Cup has nation agreement means that

Scottish government is committed to funding and his initiative to

deliver a post event legacy beyond 2014. I'm very supportive of that

initiative. I think it is fantastic. Since its inception, over two and

60,000 children have been introduced to golf at school. --

260,000. We are the home of golf. Its initiatives such as this which

will make sure that Scotland is the future of golf as well. Good to

last the first minister whether police officers will have to

perform more administrative duties to cover proposed reductions in a

police staff. We expect the Scottish police a solitary and the

police service of Scotland... We have given a commitment to no

compulsory redundancies among police support staff. The former

police service which was supported by the Labour Party it was --

offered the unique opportunity to improve services. The new service

will work more effectively and bring for 10 at national police

organisations into one organisation. That commitment is very interesting,

given the revelations last week. The First Minister has repeatedly

told the Scottish people fat 1000 extra police officers are on their

streets today. He has denied a report that police officers are

sitting in police stations across got and today, phoning back office

duties. But a leaked document from the Justice secretaries police

reform sub-group reveals a plan to release hundreds of police staff

that will be, delivered through police officers performing basic

administrative duties themselves. Can I ask the First Minister if he

thinks it is good economics to have police officers will earn one third

more than police staff doing their jobs? Will he now admit that he has

not put 1000 extra police officers on our streets but has given

Scotland 1000 backroom at Bobby's? A -- bobbies. Total nonsense. The

position outlined to the committee earlier this year is quite clear.

In my understanding, and I'm quoting Kevin Smith, police

officers will not be put in such roles. I'm confident that cops will

not fill a backroom post. That would be not -- not be good

operational use and making someone redundant would be challengeable.

That the position as set out by Kevin Smith in front of this

Parliament. I do think that she is not on safe ground challenging the

commitment to 1000 extra police officers. After all, it did feature

as a question in the draw one up Lamont speech only last week. --

Miss Lamont's speech. After the Scottish Police Federation tweeted

that it would be a tragedy if Scots politicians became out of touch as

they are in England and Wales, they were reassured by one of the Labour

party's spin-doctors that this was not the Labour policy and about 20

minutes later, they were able to say that Lamont's commitment and

questioning of the 1000 extra police of us has had lasted a mere

30 minutes. If the challenging of our commitment to a 1000 police

officers last a near 30 minutes, how long will Labour's attempt to

remove for education and free health for the police -- people of

Scotland? Does the first minister agree with me that Labour's cuts

Commission, where everything is on the table, could lead to a massive

decrease in bobbies on the beat and of other police staff. And that

this could see our crime levels rise again? I think there should be

some acknowledgement that the commitment to deliver 1000 extra

police officers was met. Despite the pessimism of the Labour Party,

who said it would take 13 years to fulfil that commitment. I believe

with the new Chief Constable of Scotland, it has been at the feet -

- that initiative which bears a large part of the responsibility

for reducing the recorded crime in Scotland to a 37 year low. Given

that we have got benefit to society, what kind of party is it that

actually challenges the effective use of 1000 police officers when it

has reduced crime to a 30 seven- year low? -- 37. But of a Scottish

government will fulfil its commitment to deliver free

prescriptions. Yes! The I thank the First Minister for that response.

The first minister will have noted that his counterpart in Wales, said

earlier this week, we believe it is important that we have an NHS which

is free of the point of delivery. We are not going to change the

policy on free prescriptions. Given that and I run Bevan resigned from

government over the introduction of the Skipton charges, does the first

minister agree that freed restrictions are an integral part

of the National Health Service and Labour in Scotland, by suggesting

their reintroduction, have lost their principles? It is the case

that only one day before, I think it was, that Lamont reinforced her

cuts Commission speech to the Labour Party conference, Carwyn

Jones extolled the benefits free health for the people of Wales. The

point that the Labour Party must answer is twofold. If free

prescriptions and free health is a good policy for the Labour Party to

pursue in Wales, then why it isn't it a good policy for the Scottish

National Party could do this you for the people of Scotland?

Secondly, the question of electoral desirability. It is only a few

months since the Labour Party extolled their commitment to free

health in Scotland. They also extolled their commitment to free

education. Here it is in the manifesto. No price tag and

education. The way the Labour Party is going, they are going to make

Nick Clegg look like a model of consistency! However, this policy

has consequences. Some 15,000 cancer sufferers in England have

now benefited from life extending drugs, not available to cancer

sufferers in Scotland. The First Minister road to pharmaceutical

development companies, inviting them to come and establish new

facilities in Scotland but they are asking, why would become a -- come

to develop medicines in Scotland which cannot be prescribed in

Scotland? Why would we work with conditions in Scotland his

experience of modern medicines is following behind that of conditions

in England? The objections he raised to the drug found in England

13 months ago have now been overcome. Is it not time to offer

cancer sufferers in Scotland the same hope, the same opportunity for

their future as in England? before I read out the complaints in

terms of the special funding arrangements in England, in deed of

complaints from Conservative Members of Parliament, but can I

say to the Member, this question about why should pharmaceutical

companies can do Scotland? Is he not aware that in Chicago last

Thursday, a person announced and now offer a significant investment

in pharmaceuticals and life sciences in Scotland, becoming the

third major investment in that industry in this year alone. This

questioning that Scotland are somehow not seen as the location

force pharmaceutical development and life sciences is belied by the

facts. The Conservative Party should really catch up with the

announcements that are being made. Does the first minister recognise

that there are consequences to his policy choices? Does he recognise

that nursing levels are at their lowest levels since 2005? Work --

nurses are working to fix the waiting list scandal, as told by

the Edinburgh Evening News. Isn't this the reality of the SNP's

choices in government? The reality of the SNP choices in government is

we have protected the revenue budget of the National Health

Service in real terms. One of the commitments the Labour Party

wouldn't make. Jackie Baillie says I'm happy to talk about the SNP

policy free prescriptions. That's correct. There was a time when

Jackie Baillie was pleased to talk about the Labour Party's policy.

That has all changed now. Election commitments which they made last

year at this year have to be dumped. They've been in a headlong flight

to join the Conservative Party, to follow the rod of means tested

benefits. They've betrayed the tradition of the Labour Party over

generations. And why Jackie Baillie thinks that a new Conservative

Party of Scotland will do any better than the old Conservative

Party of Scotland will be a mystery for the Scottish people. Let us

talk about the policy free prescriptions in the knowledge it

is supported by the overwhelming majority of Scotland. That ends

First Minister's Questions. Mr Sam and ending... It was a

pragmatic debate about spending. A there was a fair old degree of