13/06/2013 Politics Scotland

parliament here at Holyrood where MSPs have spent the morning working

on the fine details of the rose for next year's referendum. There is the

continuing controversy over RBS, the issue of healthcare for the elderly

and, as ever, a big debate going on over pensions and welfare provision.

Any or all of those topics could come up when the leaders of the

opposition question the First Minister. Let's cross to the chamber

and see how things are going on with my colleague, Michael McNeil.

Here they're asking about the impact of the Ministry of Defence rules,

changes for procurement of Naval vessels and the impact that will

have on jobs in Scotland. We are hearing an answer at the moment from

the Deputy First Minister. Let's cross and hear what she has to say.

Regardless of the constitutional arrangements. The MoD has recently

placed an order in Korea. So anybody who suggests our own shipyards

wouldn't succeed in the future I think is, as the member suggests,

not being entirely credible in the situation. Before we come to the -

members will wish to join me in welcoming to the gallery the Speaker

of the Queensland parliament, the honourable Fiona Simpson, MP.

APPLAUSE We now move to questions for the

First Minister. Question one, Johann Lamont. Thank you very much. To ask

the first are Minister what engagements he has planned for the

rest of the day. Later today I will be meeting the managing director of

the marketing firm Kira who I am delighted to announce are creating

up to 200 jobs at a in a silt in Glasgow. -- city in Glasgow. After

yesterday's positive employment statistics and last week's sparkling

performance and inward investment, despite a number of challenges and

number of areas and companies and despite austerity from Westminster,

this has been a good news week for the Scottish economy.

APPLAUSE Thank you. Could the First Minister

tell us, apart from the pound, the Bank of England, the NHS, the armed

forces, the monarchy and the welfare state, what has the United Kingdom

ever done for us? Well, I think - is that not more of a question for

those who advocate the continuing rule from London over the Scottish

people? I would think that having rule from London and austerity

budget described by a former Chancellor - I am trying to grasp

his name, Alistair Darling, as madness, in terms of the economic

direction of policy would rather make the case for these economic

fiscal decisions over tax and spending being made in Scotland. I

also think that many people in Scotland would rather like to stay

in one of the 190 countries out of 200 the world free of nuclear

weapons as opposed to having the largest concentration of weapons of

mass destruction in Europe. It is very odd, then, that the First

Minister wants to reassure everybody that everything will stay the same

and that nothing will change. The mystery is, if the UK has so much we

want to share why would we leave it and then ask them to share the

things we have left behind? The truth is - if they're so monstrous

you wonder why they would want to share these things with us anyway.

The truth is his current plan only weakens Scotland. Now his plan is to

enshrine a foreign Government's economic and welfare policies in

Scottish policy without Scots having any say whatsoever. So, my question

to the first MEP is this, he used to say that the pound and the UK

welfare state were bad for Scotland, what's changed? Well, can I correct

Johann Lamont. One of the reasons we want to have independence is so we

can have social justice for the Scottish people. I notice that only

a few weeks ago Johann Lamont said if she could be persuaded of that

point then she would support independence. Let's have a go about

persuading her of that point. One thing independence will guarantee

for the people, that they won't have differentential rates of benefits

across the United Kingdom. I quote from the Daily Record of 4th June, a

reliable source indeed, Scots could get welfare benefits at lower rates

than people in wealthy parts of England under plans being worked on

by Labour. Shadow Chancellor Ed Balls yesterday raised the idea of a

regional cap on welfare opening the door to carations in a range of

social security benefits. Not just will independence free us from the

bedroom tax imposed by a Tory Party, it will free us from Ed Balls plans

to pay people in Scotland less benefits than wealthy parts of

England. First of all, that's not what Ed Balls said. He knows it

well. We have all learned that just because the First Minister says it,

doesn't mean that it is true. The idea that it's possible for this

Government to argue that it will have a greater commitment to social

justice under independence when it's already said it will be tied to UK

policies on welfare until 2020, is completely ridiculous. An

independent experts have said it is impossible to get rid of the bedroom

tax day one of independence if you are going to continue with the

welfare position as advocated by the UK. It's nonsense on stilts and

everyone but this lot know it. However, Presiding Officers, many of

us, maybe all too many of us, remember that young nationalist

rogue in Westminster who when the Tory Chancellor Nigel Lawson

announced a cut in corporation tax was expelled from the chamber for

calling the Budget an obscenity. And now the all too rich irony is that

the one thing the First Minister wants control of, the one thing he

holds firm to, the one thing he won't shift on is corporation tax.

In an independent Scotland corporation tax would be 3p lower

than whatever the Tories set it at and the benefits he reckons, a

massive 0. 07% growth per year, and that is worth 3% margin of error. I

ask again, what happened to that young man who believed in

independence and now advocates independence? Johann Lamont forgot

to mention the thousands of jobs to be created as well. I know the

Labour Party these days doesn't care about jobs and I knew Johann Lamont

wasn't going to ask about it today given the splendid jobs figures

yesterday. I think they're still important to some people in this

country and that's why having a competitive rate of corporation tax

and then collecting it seems like a good idea. Ea: I have been first to

criticise George Osborne for his lack of direction in collecting

corporation tax in this country. However, it has been pointed out to

me that non-payment of corporation tax and other taxes peaked under

Gordon Brown's ten years at the Treasury. I really do think Labour

and of course we know the Labour Party are actively advising people

on tax avoidance for their own donors at the present moment. I

think they're in a poor position to lecture people on tax avoidance.

Let's get to the guts of the welfare report. What Johann Lamont

misunderstands is the administration of a system doesn't mean an ie

departmentical policy within the system. -- identical policy within

the system. We have a joint administration of the student loans

system. But there's two radically different policies in Scotland and

England. In Scotland we have - thanks to the SNP. In England, they

have tuition fees thanks to the Tories and the Labour Party. And to

have more Tuesday in Scotland -- tuition feeses, if in the unlikely

event of the Labour Party getting back to power. Johann Lamont said I

am misrepresenting Labour policy. I am quoting the Daily Record. Now,

Johann la month has got to the stage she thinks the Daily Record is

vehicle letly trying to -- secretly trying to undermain the Labour

Party, I think that would indicate a sense of difficulty within her party

which goes even beyond my expectations. The fact is that Ed

Balls has accepted the Tory spending plans. He has accepted the Tory cap

on welfare. Labour refuse, refuse to say they'll repeal the bedroom tax

and here we have it in the Daily Record, they want to pay poor people

in Scotland less than poor people elsewhere in these Islands. What

sort of United Kingdom is that? That's simply not true. It's only

the First Minister who wants a welfare system which is better and

it's going to be funded by cutting corporation tax by 3p more, it's

complete completely ludicrous. In fact, if it wasn't that this was

about pensions, people's pages - wages, the future of our children we

could laugh at that loud krous -- ludicrous response from the First

Minister. Well prepared as it was, it did not respond to the challenge

at the very heart of his proposals for an independence Scotland, which

is to rely on the goodwill of a state that said oppresses us and we

have to free ourselves from. Of course you see the question we face

is this, and I suspect his own backbenchers and party members may

reflect on this too. Has the First Minister lost his mojo on

independence or does he simply think, and this might be more

accurate, does he simply think that the people of Scotland are mugs? His

plans for the currency, for pensions, for benefits, and for jobs

and mortgages now all hinge on the goodwill of a country we would just

have made a foreign one by voting to leave it. I don't know why you are

saying it's rubbish. The First Minister and Deputy First Minister

have reassured us that's what would happen after independented pence. --

independence. Perhaps SNP backbenchers might want to set up a

breakaway group, SNP for Independence. I think there's one or

two... Can we have a little bit of calm to allow Johann Lamont to

complete her question. As we know, the more noisier it is, the probably

truer the accusation is. The truth is and the First Minister has

acknowledged this and celebrates it, that the UK would control our

currency, our economy, and now our pensions. But perhaps he does have

another plan he isn't telling us, because it's all too evident that

the current plan - it's too evident that the current plan is neither

independence... Order. Mr Swinney. Indeed. Because the fact of the

matter is he must have another plan he isn't telling us because the

current plan is neither independented pence nor credible. --

independence nor credible. First Minister. I was waiting for the big

punchline and it never came. It was interesting it got to the 4th

question before Johann Lamont - a spontaneous reception from the

Conservative Scottish party. Alistair Darling managed a standing

ovation. Can I point out that the - she said it would take goodwill for

the Government in Westminster to accept the shared administration of

the welfare system. The point is that Scotland administers a large

part of the welfare system of England and Wales. I don't think

that's goodwill. That's common sense for the Government at Westminster

and therefore the proposals put forward by the welfare committee.

Let's turn to the very specific policy. One which I think is as more

public currency than any other to talk about the differences between

governing in this place and governing from Westminster. That is

the bedroom tax. We know not just from the Daily Record, which Johann

Lamont wants to disassociate herself from now, but also from Helen

Goodman, shadow cabinet member for Labour under responsibility of the

bedroom tax and she made it quite clear on the daily Politics Show

11th March that Labour has no plans to abolish or reverse the bedroom

tax. Ed Balls said he would accept the Tories entire spending plans

only this week. In contrast this Government will abolish the bedroom

tax if we are elected as the first Government of an independent

Scotland. And not only will we abolish it, we will do it in the

first year of that independent Scotland. Ask the First Minister

when he will next meet the Secretary of State for Scotland? No plans in

the near future. Rooud Davidson morning the Health Secretary

promised people who had been forced to pay thousands of pounds in care

cost for relatives with complex care needs that should have been covered

by the NHS would be appropriately reimbursed. In three years we have

seen the number of people having these costs supported fall by 27%

across country. Can I ask the First Minister why have relatives of some

of the mo vulnerable and desperately ill people in this country been

denied the support to which they were entitled? Well, the guidelines

in terms of continuing care in Scotland have been consistent for

sometime, the goodance was issued in 2008. It took the good practice

recommendations which were put forward by the Scottish public

service ombudsman and what the Health Secretary said and what I

will repeat is if any case in which these guide lines haven't been

followed then of course that situation will be rectified.

Luckily, because of the passage of the patient rights act, the advice

and support services which is operated by the Scottish citizens

advice bureau, care information Scotland, line founded by the

Scottish Government with confidential phoneline and access to

board means there are many routes for patients to look and to

challenge a position that they think is unjust. Can I just say to Ruth

Davidson, yes of course if any individual has not had their rights

according to the regulations in Scotland then that case will be

looked at and rectified. I would much rather live in a country where

77,000 people at the present moment have access to free personal and

nursing care and are cared for as part of the fab brick of the health

service -- fabric of a health service than in a country that does

not have that advantage for its elderly people. Rooud Davidson.

Ruth Davidson. I am sure the First Minister isn't conflating continuing

healthcare entitlement with free perm care on purpose knowing they're

separate and we are not talking about free personal care here. We

are talking about the continuous healthcare entitlement. I am pleased

that the First Minister has acknowledged that the health

Minister held his hands up to the problem today. I believe that's a

start and I thank Alec Neil for that. At up with point in his BBC

interview he said that he thought it was only a small number of people

affected and at another he said he thought we were talking about, I

quote, a few,000 in total. The truth is surely nobody knows how many

people have been affected by this. When the health Minister and the

First Minister asked for those affected to come to them, I say that

the Government needs to be a bit more proactive than that. This First

Minister has a responsibility to find out how many people in Scotland

caring for critically ill relatives have been handing over thousands of

pounds when they shouldn't have been. We need a full audit of every

person in every health board who may be affected either currently or

historically in order to ensure that proper reparations are paid. Will

the First Minister order one? just, because it's a serious subject

for people. Can I take through what actually happens at the present

moment. The guidance as I mentioned in the first answer was updated in

2008. That took account of the recommendations of good practice

from the ombudsman. What happens to people is the - general practitioner

in consultation with team will decide whether an individual is

eligible for NHS continuing healthcare. That guidance states

that the person that takes the lead is down to the complexity and nature

and intensity of somebody's health needs. People are assessed within

the system at the present moment. Secondly, thank goodness for this,

under the patient rights act far from sitting back and not doing

anything about the rights of patients, we passed the patients

right act of 2012 and instituted two additional means of people making

sure that the health service is treating them properly and according

to the guidance. The patient advice and support service for the Citizens

Advice Bureau and also the care information Scotland which is funded

by the Scottish Government which provides that confidential care

line. These are avenues by which people can get the rights ap

entitlement under the nast. But Ruth Davidson's sweeping away of the

importance of the 77,000 people who get free personal nursing care is

not - is exactly on this subject. What happens to people who are

entitled to continuing care within the health service is that the

people and three-quarters of people almost are in hospital in this

position and therefore have no accommodation charges in that sense,

but get help with accommodation charges in nursing homes in a way

that free personal and nursing care doesn't, that is the aspect of the

system. The system is a continuous one. Therefore, what needs to be

done and will be done and certainly will be done is that we will ensure

that the regulations are properly followed, that the opportunities for

patients and individuals and elderly patients and relatives to come

forward on these means if there's anything that's been done contrary

to these regulations then it will be rectified. Not to understand the

system of free personal and nursing care in a society is fundamentally -

to where it doesn't exist, I think is not to understand the importance

of defending that system for the Scottish people. Constituency

question from Neil Finley. It's not been a good or sparkling week for

employment in my area. Can I ask the First Minister what help can be

given to the people in my region now there is consultation over job

losses at a depot. This in April area already reeling from the loss

of 1700 job losses? The sparkling performance was in relation to

inward investment and the Labour Party should accept that the

employment figures particularly for young people in Scotland were very,

very good news indeed. Putting forward a constitution constitution

issue which is a very important one, then what the member should know is

that the Scottish enterprise officials have already been in touch

with a company, the national pace managers spoke yesterday with

representatives to offer support for employees who might be affected by

redundancy. The companies say no decisions have been taken. They also

point to the increase in posts which could be creep ated at other

distribution centres. -- created. We take these matters seriously and

there will be Pace and Ministerial intervention as there has been

substantial intervention in West Lothian to try and secure the

employment and employment prospects of his constituents. That's

something we should jointly do as a parliament just as we should jointly

welcome the substantial indications that the Scottish employment

situation is improving and that youth unemployment in particular has

shown remarkable progress over the last 18 months. Question three.

the First Minister what issues will be discussed at the next meeting of

the cabinet? Next meeting of the cabinet will discuss issues of

importance to the people of Scotland. When I asked before about

divisions at the police, he laughed and said it was creative tension.

Was he laughing when the chief executive resigned in February? He

told me that matters had been resolved. But now we discover that

chaos continued at the heart of our newly centralised police force. Why

didn't he tell this parliament about the resignation of the senior public

leader? I have to say this stinks of a cover-up. Why was this parliament

not informed of the resignation of the authority's chief executive,

just what did he have to hide? quote the chair of the Scottish

Police Authority today. There's continuity at the top of of the

Scottish Police Authority, direction -- we have all been appointed for a

four-year term. The organisation is maturing its relationship with

police Scotland and other stake holders. He points out he's been

before parliament on a number of occasions. I don't think Willie

Rennie should conflate the interim appointments with the perm Nancy of

the Scottish Police Authority and should take the word of the chairman

of the Police Authority who says that these matters are in the

happened and the organisation looks confidently to the future. The other

thing I would say is that when we look at the spectacular success of

the Scottish police service in delivering the lowest rate of

recorded crime for a generation, if we look at the excel Lens of its

performance across Scotland, I think a party forecasting doom and

disaster when all of the justice figures and the effectiveness of the

police in Scotland say otherwise is basically going to be on a hiding to

nothing as these points and arguments are replayed to them in

the months to come. You cannot hide behind operational independented

pence on this. The Scottish Government, as Andrea I didn't

know's letter points out, have been involved every step of the way on

the organisation, on the structure of the new Scottish Police

Authority. The chief executive was going but it was kept quiet. As a

result, we will be without a permanent chief. We have had three

chief executives in just one year. If that's continuity, I don't know

what not continuity is. Why wasn't the recruitment process started

earlier? The First Minister told me that the chaos was sorted in

January. Then she resigned in February. We led a police debate in

March but parliament was not told. Did the Government ask the chairman

to keep the organisation, the - the resignation quiet to avoid

embarrassment? Very precisely, did your Government tell Vic Emery to

keep this quiet? No, well I am not behinding behind operational

independence, I have no knowledge of anyone in the Government suggesting

any such thing to Vic Emery, he says not because in his statement today

he says it changed in personnel are a feature of most Mergers and reform

programmes. The issue of operational independence is actually not

something to hide behind. It's something of fundamental importance.

The operational independence of the Police Service is of huge importance

in a democratic society and by definition even more important that

the Scottish Police Authority has to have operational independence. Vic

Emery points out in his quote today, by the end of this month will

appeared before the justice committee on four occasions, there

will be ample opportunity for Willie Rennie to Putney conspiracy theory

that comes that's assuming he remembers to turn up this time.

Question four. Christine Graham. Thank you. To ask the First Minister

whether the Scottish Government has been in contact with the UK

Government regarding illegal surveillance activities in Scotland?

We are clear that people have the right to communicate without the

fear of unlawful sur vail apes by the state. Following coverage of

access to US intelligence Scottish ministers have sought assurances

from the UK Government. The cabinet Secretary for justice wrote to the

Foreign Secretary on Tuesday of this week both to acknowledge the

statement which was made by MrHague on Monday, but to ask for further

information for the benefit of this parliament. I thank the First

Minister for his answer. Can I ask if the reply also from MrHague will

be published. However, what is the kufrnt oversight system for

surveillance in Scotland and has there been consideration of changes

to the system in the future? I refer in terms of the future work to the

evidence that the Deputy First Minister gave before the revanity

committee. But can I share with Christine Graham the points that the

cabinet Secretary for justice made to the Foreign Secretary. Kenny

MacAskill said you will appreciate I wish to be satisfied the rights of

people in Scotland have been hundred held. A -- upheld. I would be

grateful for further information about the approach you are taking to

this investigation and progress that's been made to provide

necessary assurance in relation to compliance with the law. In straight

answer to Christine Graham's question, of course that reply will

be published and we would expect, although it's a matter for the

relevant parliamentary committee, that the committee of course could

question on that evidence and further pursue the matter if they

choose. Jackie Baillie, question five. What steps the Government is

taking to improve the detection of cervical cancer? Well, the earlier a

cancer is detected the easier it is to treat. We know that the screening

is the best way to detect cervical cancer at its earliest stage. Every

woman in Scotland between 20-60 years of age is invited to be

screened every three years. Information leafletsish ufed with

each invitation contain information on the symptoms and advice and

seeking medical advice if the symptoms are present. This week is

cervical screening awareness week and the message from this Government

and I am sure from the chamber is that all eligible women in Scotland

should find out more about cervical screening so they can be informed as

possible about the benefits of such screening. Can I absolutely

associate myself with the First Minister's response, early detection

is extremely important. Does he not also agree that securing swift

follow-up treatment is also key, unlike England the Scottish

Government has cancer waiting targets for initial treatment, but

when it comes to follow-up treatment there is some evidence that suggests

that patients are waiting longer to be seen but this is not recorded.

Does the First Minister therefore believe that this hidden cancer

waiting list is acceptable? I was hoping that on this issue given its

importance, given this is cervical cancer week, that the chamber could

speak with one voice and Jackie Bailey could avoid seeing every

issue as a potential issue for political division in a service

which should unite this whole chamber. As Jackie Bailey should

know the early detect cancer programme which looks - considering

the future inclusion of additional tumour groups, there are excellent

results in terms of the cancer treatment waiting times. For

goodness sake, just for once, let's unite in seeing the importance of

this condition and supporting the efforts of those who put it forward.

Question six, Alex Johnston. Ask the First Minister how much it would

cost annually for an independent Scotland to raise benefit payments

to enable that the Scottish Government considers -- to a left

that the Scottish Government considers appropriate? Changes we

think are necessary in the context of an independent Scotland when this

chamber and this parliament gains control over social security, but I

think we should reflect on the changes we have already had to make

as a result of the imposition of some of these welfare changes from

Westminster. The attempt to cut council tax benefit by 10% which

would have affected 560,000 people across Scotland, his constituents,

my constituents, luckily avoided by the joint action of CO2 SLO and this

Government in taerms of making up that amount, that cost 40 million.

The fund to boost the emergency loan fund as a result of the impact of

the welfare changes being imposed from Westminster and of course the

additional �8 million going to the advice agencies so people suffering

from the policies being imposed by colleagues at Westminster can get

the help and advice they need. These are points in mitigation. The two

policies we have already announced for an independent Scotland will

also offer fairness and justice to the people of Scotland. I note the

First Minister's careful answer, but still it does not account for the

fact that members of his front bench team and particularly his

backbenchers are making promises to many people in Scotland about what

would apparently happen to benefits and welfare should Scotland become

independent. It is absolutely essential that the First Minister

take the opportunity to lay out which of these promises he intends

to keep, which he believes are merely on the hoof commitments, and

what the cost will be because if this cost is substantial the

additional transfer of wealth required within the Scottish economy

is something everyone should be aware of before they vote on

independence. With the commitments we have made in terms of abolishing

the bedroom tax will be �60 million a year, moving away from the

earnings disregard and giving parity and justice to women in Scotland

will cost in the region of �60-80 million a year. We have made these

commitments already. Can I say that looking at this argument the

imposition of deep unfairness in terms of the Westminster

Government's attitude to these things, the plunging of tens of

thousands of more people in Scotland into relative poverty, reversing, I

believe as these changes will do, the progress that's been made in

child poverty in Scotland, of all the flimsy basis on which the union

and the alliance with the Labour Party will stand, that is the

flimsiest of them all. People who vote for independence will vote for

social justice and progress in that Scotland. Thank you. That concludes

questions to the First Minister. Exchanges on the issue of welfare

provision, right now and potentially post-independence and in the interim

period also extremely serious but also thorough going exchange on the