18/04/2013 Politics Scotland

welcome to the Scottish parliament here at Holyrood. This afternoon,

MSPs will be debating the legacy of Lady Thatcher in Scotland. There is

a commissioned report out from the Scottish Labour Party on their

proposals for further powers in the Scottish Parliament. We will see

what comes up from that. The main subject of this programme is

questions to the first Minister. finance secretary was just answering

a question on oil. Joanna Lamont and neighbour is asking about

engagements. This afternoon, the Scottish parliament will debate the

legacy of Margaret Thatcher. I was a schoolteacher throughout her time in

office, and as a teacher, I saw first-hand how young people had

their hopes and aspirations extinguished. I remember the

challenge of trying to motivate teenagers who thought that studying

was a waste of time because there were no jobs for them. No one in

this chamber wants a return to those days. The first Minister pledged

that every 16 to 19-year-olds would have a job or training available to

them. Youth unemployment in Scotland in the last year has declined by a

third from 25% to 17%. That is still far too many, but I think it is a

substantial achievement over the last year, and the 16 to 19-year-old

guarantee, along with apprenticeships in Scotland, is part

of that success. APPLAUSE I'm not sure if that means the first

Minister has or has not achieved his goal. He promised that no young

person should be left behind, and who could disagree with that? Can

the first Minister tell the chamber how many 16 to 19-year-old s do not

have a place in education or training? The guarantee is to make

an offer to 16 to 19-year-old s. I think Labour MSPs should reflect on

what is happening elsewhere in terms of the UK government, in terms of

what is happening to young people who are being forced to work for no

which is unparalleled across these islands, is a very significant part

of the offer to young people. I would say that the reduction in use

and ploy meant is a substantial success, which every single member

of this chamber should recognise as such and take pride in the fact that

the parliament, through some of the initiatives that we are taking, is

making a real difficulty -- difference to the issues that affect

our society. You can say that there are still far too many young people

unemployed, of course there are. But not to recognise a reduction of that

extent in a single year certainly has something to do the initiatives

taken by this Parliament in the 60 or 70% increase in apprenticeships

in Scotland, in the youth training guarantee for 16 to 19-year-old s, I

think is to deny the reality that significant moves made by this

government, this Parliament, are resulting in benefits to the young

people of Scotland. First of all, we know that if the figures had gone on

the other direction, he would not have taken responsibility for bad

news. He would not have taken responsibility for bad news. The

second point, and a very serious point, and I am thinking again about

these young people that I taught in the 1980s. Unemployment of young

people in Scotland is disproportionately higher than the

rest of the UK. The first Minister doesn't seem to know the answer to

the question I asked. But can I tell him that in private he does know,

because under the Freedom of information, we have established

that schools development in Scotland has identified more than 7000 school

leavers who are known to be looking for training or work but have yet to

find a place. They have lost more than 7000 -- 17,000 school leavers.

They don't know what 17,000 school leavers are doing or where they are.

And if you don't know where they are, how do you prevent them and

protect them from becoming the long-term unemployed that we know

suffered over the last year? So in that context, what are the first

Minister's pledges worth when a guarantee now has become an offer,

and an offer has not been delivered? The employment rate of 16

to 24-year-old s in Scotland is now 56.7%. That compares to the UK of

49.7%. An impairment rated 16.1%, comparing with the UK level of

20.6%. By any standard, by any standard whatsoever, that is a

substantial success against the most difficult economic climate. Joanna

Lamont says that we take the credit for that. I think that when you've

usually increase -- when you hugely increase the benefits, you are

entitled to take satisfaction in the improvement in the situation facing

young people in Scotland. I can tell her in terms of the destination of

people leaving school, which we have measured and measured exactly over

the last few years, we now know that in the destination of people leaving

school for 2011 to 2012, 80 9% of youngsters go to a positive

destination. -- 89 percent. Just reflect for a second what that

means. Not only has there been over the last year as substantial

improvement in young people getting jobs and apprenticeships, getting a

start in life after the recession, but the destinations of our school

leavers are more in the good times than when Labour were in charge of

this Parliament. So by any level, by any measure, can she not find it

within herself to say, something really important is happening here.

Perhaps we should follow the apprenticeship programme which is

proving such a success. Perhaps the issue of guarantee has something to

be said for it in helping young people who are on the tough end of

life. Lenders and isn't it something for this entire Parliament to

welcome? It has resulted in a substantial improvement which has

affected the lives and welfare of ten serves thousands of young people

in Scotland. -- tens of thousands. It is interesting that he can find

lots of figures to trade with me, but he can't answer the question

about the 7000 young people without education and training, and the

17,000 people that we don't even know where they are.

One of the lessons we are reflecting this week, one of the lessons I

learned as a schoolteacher, is that when politicians talk to each other

and trade figures, they ignore the reality of what is happening to

communities across Scotland. We cannot allow that to happen a game.

And I ask the first Minister not to change and give us figures about the

bits he is happy with, but to listen and think about what his own agency

is saying, and what is happening to some of our young people. Because we

know that one in every six school leavers is either out of work or

training, or we don't know what their statuses. And the problem for

this Government is it starts with the slogan, but then it cuts

officers, cuts college places, and denies the truth. The first Minister

thinks that politics is about process and good news stories. It is

not. It is about taking hard choices and changing peoples lives. He talks

to bolster his argument about 25,000 apprenticeships, but he gets to that

figure by calling 10,000 people who are already in work for six months

and apprentices. He cuts college funding... I am asking the first

Minister to think about doing the hard stuff. He cuts college funding,

but tells the parliament it is going up. And now we know what he knew,

that there are 17,000 school leavers who have simply disappeared,

according to the Government. Please, in this week of all weeks, will the

first Minister learn that lesson, put down the slogans and start doing

his job? I know that she doesn't like these

figures, but perhaps she could reflect on the fact that I just gave

her the figure for school leavers reaching positive destinations,

something we have now identified. And it shows us not just a recovery

since the recession but also better than when Labour were in power.

During that question, there was something she said that was

particularly interesting. She said or tried to suggest that the reason

that the 16,000 to almost 26,000 apprenticeships wasn't a real figure

because the percentage of people in work for six months was high. The

percentage of apprenticeships going to be then work for six months is

lower than it was when the Labour Party when office. In other words,

there are more people now in the 26,000 than there was as a

percentage when the Labour Party were in office, so how on earth can

it be presented as anything with a semblance of an argument. I think it

is important to learn the lessons, and the key lesson I would learn

from the years of Margaret Thatcher is that political parties to go into

coalition with the Conservatives and campaign in Scotland are going to

result in exactly the same fate as the Conservative party, and she

believes that she can campaign hand in glove, we are better together,

and people in Scotland would draw the obvious conclusion about the

politics and the direction. She and her party will pay the high price.

That is a certain conclusion that first Minister next meet the

Secretary of State for Scotland? Later today. A few days ago, Sean

McLoughlin was sentenced to ten years for homicide. He should have

been in jail rather than being free to stab Robert Brown repeatedly. He

had over a year still to serve of his most recent centres, but had

been released early under the Government's automatic early release

scheme. The first Minister promised in both his 2007 and 2011 manifesto

to end automatic early release, yet no legislation has come before this

chamber, and there is no hint that any is due. There was no sign of it

when he introduced another bill. If he had acted earlier, Robert Brown

could still be alive. Why is the first Minister refusing to fulfil

the promises he has made to protect Scottish communities? Can I just

point out in terms of fact that when we revoke the automatic early

release, which was introduced by the Conservative party, it could not and

would not apply to retrospective cases, and I don't think anybody has

ever suggested that. So the question that I have just been asked is

factually wrong. Unless she is saying that she would argue that it

be introduced for retrospective cases. If that is the case, perhaps

she should say that to the chamber. But the party which introduced the

vision that she's complaining about, doesn't recognise the extraordinary

achievement in having the lowest level of recorded crime in 30 years

in Scotland, is very poorly placed talk about individual tragic

examples when the implications of the policy she is suggesting would

not apply retrospectively. Presiding officer, I fully accept it was the

Conservative government who presided over early release, but the Scottish

government has had six years and done nothing. It is not good enough.

The first Minister promised the people of Scotland that if the SNP

were put into Government's they would end automatic early release.

He has a clear majority in this chamber. He has cross-party support.

So why not act? So far, this Government has found time in the

parliamentary schedule for a debate on a wall which happened ten years

ago, for which this department has no responsibility, countless debates

without vote at all. This matters. A girl was attempted to be raped at

knifepoint by one gentleman when she was in a wheelchair. He is due to be

released soon. This is not a situation that anyone wants. The

first Minister has promised us twice that he will get this done. Will he

bring forward the necessary Perhaps she should re-think and

look carefully when introducing such subjects in terms of how a

question would or not apply. We have make our position clear on

this. The review instructed us on how

that should best be done. The idea that a criminal justice record,

which is achieved at the lowest level of recorded crime in 30 years,

is something which should not be proclaimed from this Parliament, I

think is a very, very strange one indeed. Perhaps the Conservative

Party would find something to learn from the confidence that the police

service of Scotland has in the policies of this Government,

compared to the lack of confidence that the police service has in the

lack of policies being evoked from London at the present moment. To

suggest, for what reason I don't know, that a debate on Iraq was not

a sensible and proper thing to this Parliament to be debating, given

the impact it's had on tens of thousands of people across this

country and hundreds of thousands of people elsewhere, I think is a

remarkable conclusion to draw. Of course Parliament should debate

this rightly and properly. If we look at the mistakes of the past,

many which were committed by Conservative Governments, then

perhaps this Parliament has the proper powers and will not repeat

them in the future. I have a constituency question from Gordon

MacDonald. Thank you. There are a number of companies involved in the

production of computer games. Is the First Minister aware of the

proposals by the European Commission to investigate the tax

release offer by the UK Government? Does the First Minister agree these

are vital to support this dynamic sector? Will the Scottish

Government make reputations to the UK Government and the commission to

ensure these reliefs are not threatened? It is an important

point. I am aware of it. It is an important sector which employs some

600 people in Scotland. That is why the Scottish Government, alongside

the industry itself, pressed the UK Government to introduce these tax

breaks. Now the UK Government has accepted. It is a good thing and we

will work with them to put a compelling case to the commission.

The sector for commercial affairs is writing to the UK minister for

creative industries on this subject. Question number three. To ask what

matters will be discussed? Matters of importance to the people of

Scotland. I was pleased the bill published today expands education

for three and four years olds to match that of those in England. Two

year olds will be left behind. At this late sense will they see sense

and provide nursery education for 22,000 two year olds in Scotland?

welcome the welcome for the bill and to recognise the importance of

the 600-hour commitment. Having inherited in 2007, 212 hours. The

600-hour commitment is hugely important to families across

Scotland. As gently as I could I have shieded about the reality. I

have a range of views from experts in the field which suggest there

are serious questions to answer. Therefore, I think it is important

that as we move forward to providing this level of nursery and

childcare provision, that we do so on a quality basis that makes a

difference to the lives of young people. I accept this is only the

start of a process of direction, which I think is hugely important

in the future of this country. I hope he will accept that the

assurance we are giving on statutory binding and quality in

Scotland has many things to be said for it, in comparison to the lack

of standards and the lack of quality happening elsewhere.

Investigating the First Minister's claims from his documentation

published this morning, what the First Minister has omitted to tell

us is that rash shows in Scotland have been poorer than in England

for the whole time that he's been First Minister. So, he shouldn't

lecture anyone any more about that. The reality is that this week,

thousands of parents across England are queuing up for 15 hours of

nursery education for their two year olds. Scottish parents and

Scottish children are being denied this opportunity by this Government.

So rather than settling for this timid Children's Bill, will it will

bold and match England on two year olds? He is being incomplete in his

question, that the Scottish ratio is one to three. That is the same

as in England. It is moving to one to four in England. Our ratio is

has been one to five. The English one is moving one to six. I thought

this chamber would like to hear the whole picture, as this chamber will

want to hear the views of Professor Nutbrown who carried out the review

into the UK Government's strategy and is a leading critic of that

strategy, who has said watering it down there threaten quality.

Childcare may be cheaper, but children will foot the bill. He may

want to list -- listen to the director of the unit. "I don't

think we have... What we know of the evaluation of the two-year

pilot is unless it was of good qualify it did not make a

difference." I could give a range of other quotations. "it will be a

recipe for disaster for children. The quality of provision will be

lower. There'll be less one-to-one care. "as we look at comparisons

elsewhere, let's be aware of the deficiencys which are being

examined in the system which he is proclaiming by the experts in the

field, including the lady in charge of the original proposal. Let us

see that there is sense in some of the actions we are taking in

Scotland, including the binding guarantee of ensuring the quality

and seeing the childcare nursery provisions of one of a range of

planning partnerships for people and the family centres which are

designed to make sure that early intervention is as good as we can

make it to ensure the future of our young people. To ask what

assessment the first lt minister has made of Scotland's public

finances? Last week the balance sheet was published. It shows

Scotland is in a stronger position than the UK. Take one example - tax

free receipts per person has been higher in Scotland for each and

every one of the last 30 years. Thank you for that answer.

Yesterday's figures showed that Scotland has higher employment and

lower unemployment than the rest of the UK. Does he agree the misguided

economic policies of the UK Government are the greatest threat?

And it would allow us to build further on this progress.

Well, earlier this session, it was suggested that we only talk about

things like youth employment and unemployment when there are reasons

to see success and initiatives are being made. Can I say that the only

time I get asked about general employment and unemployment by the

UK parties is when the Scottish figures are worse than that of the

UK. That was a substantial bet that I wouldn't be asked about the

general level of employment and unemployment, given the substantial

success indicated by the figures this week. I do think that although

recovery from the session is of course a substantial and exacting

process, the largest rise in employment for 12 years is

something which will perhaps be regarded as a success by the

unionist parties and coalition in this Parliament, but the people of

Scotland will see that as part of the process of Scottish recovery. I

know a lot of people will see it as part of the argument for seeing all

of the levers of economic control under the ages of this Parliament,

so we can turn that improvement into a real and lasting recovery.

The First Minister published Scotland's balance sheet at the

weekend. In it, it states it does not consider wider liabilities. Can

I ask the First Minister, which wider liabilities have been

ignored? Can he quantify them? assets for that matter. It is a

stock take. One is a flow, one is a stock. Assets and liabilities. I

hope that is an answer to the question.

Question number five. Elaine Murray. What progress has been made on

changes to the improvement programme? As I am sure she knows

the Government is making record levels of investment in the

improvement programme. A key part of that record investment. Deliving

new systems. Edinburgh Glasgow and the Hay Market tunnel. Network Rail

has confirmed an important point that it remains confident the route

will be electrified by 2016, as planned.

I thank the First Minister for his re ly. However, industry sources

quoted in Scotland on Sunday 31st March state that the industry

experts state that the first phase may not now be finished until 2019.

That is three years later than he is claiming. Which estimate does

the First Minister actually agree with? The Transport Ministers or

the industry experts? She was referring to the front-page article

of 31st March, 2013, which is perhaps why David Simpson, the

manage wrote on the 15th April. That is later than the first

article. Mr Simpson rejects the asserted delays and says that is

not the view Network Rail would make and are confidence of

completing the projects between the two cities for 2016. I think, given

that the gentleman took the trouble and time to write to Scotland on

Sunday to make that cex, I do think Elaine Muray could have -- Murray

could have read the letter. Some Labour sources seem to think that

the regulated asset base, borrowing from Network Rail comes out of the

sky and it has nothing to do with the Scottish Government, can I

Murray says she knows that. It is significant on a per capita basis

our investment is double the equivalent committed for 2014 by

England and Wales. �632 per capita, compared to �326. That is not just

in terms of the electrification but the substantial improvements which

are taking place across the country. That seems a great investment on

the future rail of Scotland. Well, this morning the minister for

young people announced recipients of an investment. In addition, I

can confirm they will invest a further �10 million in strategic

funding partnerships. Bringing investment of �30,000 over two

years for organisations which provide crucial support for

families sms I can see Liz Smith smiling at that announcement. In

her press release she will take the credit for forcing the Government

to make that announcement. Given the financial rigours being

imposed by our party colleagues in Westminster that strikes me as a

big success for the third sector intervention fund.

First Minister, I am glad you know I will try and take the credit for

that. Notwithstanding today's welcome announcement the Scottish

Government will be aware that over 400 children's chartstys and groups

like the Scouts have subjected bids. This has forced a delay in the

allocation of funding. Will the First Minister acknowledge this

causes an unacceptable uncertainty for the strategic funding of these

bodies and may jeopardise the future of some of the smaller

charities? I think that the announcements have been welcomed

today and the increase in funding. Perhaps she should reflect on why

there is such a huge demand for these services at the present

moment and wonder why so many of the third sector organisations are

feeling it necessary to introduce and intervene in the areas of

social welfare which have been deserted by the Government for

these matters. Let us try and end this session on a note of consensus.

It is a good thing that the �20 million has been announced. It is

an excellent thing that a further �10 million has been announced. It

is a fantastic thing that that represents an increase in funding

in the budgetary position, which I am sure she will agree for all

sorts of reasons, is highly constrained at the present moment.

That note of consensus - let's end that session.