19/06/2014 Politics Scotland

summary paper today. We have had a big speech from John Swinney at a

conference in Edinburgh saying exactly the opposite, of course. But

as always, questions to the First Minister is the main subject of this

programme. The local government minister is on his feet answering a

question from the local minister Alex Johnson on Mr Bean collections.

We have also had -- missed rubbish bin collections. A full 30 minutes

of questions to the First Minister with the leader of the Labour Party

Johann Lamont leading the floor. There will also be questions from

the Conservative leader and the leader of the Liberal Democrats and

the Scottish Parliament as well. We know that we can expect a question

on the proposal for a written constitution for Scotland. What

engagements does the First Minister have for the rest of the day? Could

the First Minister give me an honest assessment of how our schools are

doing? It is probably better to give the assessment on attainment. Page

six, performance has improved against all ten of the measures.

Page 18, attainment improved by 4% from the measures S4 level between

2004 and 2013. The vast majority of the improvements in attainment have

been made in the last five years. I am glad the First Minister

mentioned that report, because we should look at it in detail. Audit

Scotland's report does paint a slightly different picture. It said

international comparisons showed that the academic performance of

Scotland's pupils is static at best and in relative decline to others at

worst. The report said, quote, in recent years international

attainment surveys have divided evidence that Scotland's educational

attainment levels relative to some other countries are falling. To

emphasise the point, later in the report, it repeated: Scotland's

performance levels relative to other countries are also falling. Can the

First Minister confirm that that is what Mike audit Scotland said. I

gave the two quotes from this report. One says attainment improved

by 4%. It then goes on to say the vast majority of the improvement in

attainment have been made in the last five years. The reason for

saying that is that the last internationally recognised study had

the 2012 figures. The previous study when the Labour Party win power,

the 2012 figures. The previous study when the Labour when Scotland's

international position was declining across all of the ranges, the last

study showed that Scotland's position had remained the same. That

is the first time that decline under Labour has been reversed in the

attainment study. That is why I suspect the account commission

report pointed out that the vast majority of improvements in

attainment had been over the last five years. So I don't know if

Johann Lamont find it embarrassing that the international comparisons

that she cites show that the educational position was declining

when the Labour Party we npower, but the last five years, attainment

levels have improved. Isn't that a substantial credit to the pupils and

teachers of Scotland? Their commitment to a school system under

the most difficult circumstances of West state induced austerity that

they have managed to bring on such a performance?

We should of course congratulate every parent, child and teacher, but

they deserve to from this Government. He doesn't respond to

the points I make about what the Audit Scotland report says. In the

original report, they said, and I quote, comparing similar Lovell is

of qualifications with other countries in the UK identifies a

much slower pace of improvement for Scotland. The report went on, and I

quote, the pace of improvement as overall levels of internment have

only improved marginally. And why could that be? Between 2010-2011 and

2012-2013, education spending reduced by ?184 million in real

terms, 5%. Can the First Minister confirm that that is what Audit

Scotland said, and confirm what he is doing about it? Before we slip

away from the reality that the international performance was

declining when Labour were in power, and how attainment has been

improving the last five years and how attainment has been

improving the last with the SNP in power, let's not slip away from that

important point. But I know that the Labour benches want to see it

re-emphasised. Let's turn to the finance available. It is certainly

true that real spending on education has declined in this three years of

the study, and they put the decline at 5%. That is hardly surprising,

because real spending available to Scotland from Westminster declined

by 4.1% over that period of time. And if you exclude health, we

believe we have to protect the health budget for very obvious

reasons, for our commitment to the National Health Service, then the

decline in Scotland's spending is much greater

reasons, for our commitment to the National Health Service, then than

five cent, significantly greater than 5%. Does Johann Lamont not

realise that declines in spending are reality of Scotland's fate under

the austerities measures continued are reality of Scotland's fate under

the austerities measures by her colleagues, as she put it yesterday,

in the Conservative Party? APPLAUSE

These of course are the so-called colleagues who supported the budget

in 2010 to 2011, a budget which was apparently the next best thing to a

Tory budget itself, so we don't need any lectures on that. The First

Minister has ignored the comment that I identified in that report.

But of course the excerpts which I have just read out were in Audit

Scotland's original report before the Scottish Government got their

hands on it. In the final report, those criticisms disappear, because

the Scottish Government and want the public to know. The decline in

standards taken out. The fact that the rest of the UK...

The decline in standards taken out. The fact that the rest of the UK is

improving faster than Scotland taken out. In the craft report, the truth

about our schools was in, but in the final report it was watered down --

in the draft report, the truth was in. We want to know who took that

decision. Four is it not the case that the first casualties of this

government is truth? And isn't it the case that, just as with anything

else, the First Minister doesn't trust the people of Scotland with

the truth? The most remarkable decline in

standards is the decline in standards Joe of Johann Lamont's

standard of questioning. But these accounts rely on the statistics, and

the statistics show that Scotland's performance was declining when she

was a minister. She is jointly and severally liable for that decline,

and the attainment has improved since the SNP came to power. That is

a substantial achievement under the circumstances of austerities. Johann

Lamont doesn't seem to like the fact that she described the Tories as her

colleagues. If she doesn't like it, then why did she say it yesterday?

Even more important, the problem for Johann Lamont is when she is

standing shoulder to shoulder hand in glove with the Conservative

Party. standing shoulder to shoulder hand

in glove with the There is no point in trying to complain when people

point out that she calls them colleagues.

in trying to complain when people point out The next thing we know,

she will be calling them comrades! The price that they will pay for

their association with their colleagues will be a high one

indeed, and it will be one of the arguments which takes Scotland

forward to a yes vote this coming September. Question two. Order!

To ask the First Minister when he will next meet the Prime Minister.

No plans in the near future, but I think the comrades outfits just sums

up the question. This Davidson in red today!

I don't get many compliments, but I will take somewhere I get them. The

First Minister was asked if his office had done any work on setup

costs of an independent Scotland beyond the white paper, and the

answer was no. Can you answer the same question this week. Has any

further work being done by the Scottish Government on how much it

would cost to set up any newly independent Scottish state? What was

said in the committee is correct. Our work was contained in the

committee chapter six in chapter ten of the White Paper. That is the

situation, and I will be happy if she wants to pursue the point to

look at some of the calculations that were made in chat is six and

ten and explain the basis. Perhaps the more elucidation of this point,

the less this briefing, that was the word in the Sunday Post. They had

mis-briefed. Nobody in the First Minister's office would never

mis-brief! We know that in 2012 he ordered work to build a cobber

offensive overview of the institutions, costs and staff

numbers required in the event of independence. Just last year, the

Deputy First Minister actually confirmed that that work was under

way, telling a Commons committee: We are doing a substantial piece of

work on some of this just now. Suffice to say it covers not just

running costs but it covers the issues around setup. But last month,

the First Minister's official spokesman said there was no

overview, no documents, just, and I quote, e-mails and jottings. But a

week after the chief economic adviser said he had done no work, we

read reports that the Government is rushing out figures to paper over

the cracks. So the people at the top of this government tell us that work

has been commissioned, then they say it hasn't. They say the work is

substantial, but then they say it isn't. They say it will be published

before the referendum, but then they say it won't be. The people of

Scotland have to know what is going on.

What is going on is Ruth Davidson is waiving the Daily Telegraph and

pretending it is an independent publication. I did describe it as

the house journal of the Labour Party, but as we now know, it is a

joint house journal of the comrades. Just to give an illustration of how

far-fetched that report was, the Daily Telegraph said on page four,

interesting it was on page four, if they had more confidence it might

have been a headline. They said Scottish government officials had

met Professor Patrick Dunleavy. I met him last week. Do you think of

the Daily Telegraph had real information that they could display

to the public, they would say that officials had met? I met him! Two

weeks ago, at question time, in answer to Ruth Davidson, I said, the

professor is a man I want to meet, and I did it. And I now know exactly

why the Treasury were engaged in mis-briefing about the work. He

described it to me as the three problems, as he puts, with the

Treasury figures. Firstly, they said 180 public bodies would be major

departments, which they are not. His estimate was applied to the chaotic

way in which the last Labour government established new

departments, and none of us would want have the chaos of the Labour

Party visited on an independent Scotland. That is why Professor

Dunleavy accused the Treasury of being bizarrely inaccurate and

misplacing his work and overstating it by a factor of 12. It may be that

the permanent secretary for the Treasury describes bizarrely

inaccurate and exaggeration by a factor of 12 as a mis-briefing of a

statistic. I think the people of Scotland will look at that and draw

the conclusions that the Unionist cabal, the commonest is, are engaged

in trying to exaggerate the costs of an independent Scotland because they

are aware that the yes campaign is gaining ground, and will carry us to

victory this coming September! APPLAUSE

ready to welcome the world. Yesterday, there were BBC reports

about so-called phantom accommodation advertised on online

booking sites. What will the First Minister do to ensure the that no

games visitors are duped in this way? These matters are under

investigation. Measures are being taken to ensure the offering of

accommodation to the many visitors would be as we like it to be. That

is a separate matter from defaulting, but nonetheless

important in terms of Scotland's reputation. Ourselves, our

colleagues in Glasgow Council and the games organising committee are

fully aware of the dangers of this to our reputation. On the range of

preparation for the games, these Commonwealth Games are the best

prepared and hopefully going to be the best run games certainly in

recent history, perhaps in overall history. We are working our hardest

to make sure these games are appreciated from people across the

Commonwealth as affect bash a spectacular festival. What issues

will be discussed at the next meeting of the Cabinet? Issues of

importance to the people of Scotland. This goes from bad to

worse. The First Minister has been able to estimate the cost of his

policies that he likes down to the last three decimal places. But on

setup costs he can't even give us a quarter of a billion either way. Is

he saying that there is nothing in the Telegraph report that is true

about his decision to set up a report on the costs of setting up

independence? Is that the case? Nothing in the Telegraph newspaper

is true about that report being commissioned? My strong advice.

Somebody says to try the weather forecast for the horoscopes. It says

that officials met Professor Patrick Dunleavy. They were with me. I met

him. The reason I pointed this out to Ruth Davidson is if the Daily

Telegraph had an insight into the meeting with Professor Patrick

Dunleavy and had known what had gone on and had known I was there, do you

think they would have suppressed the information that I was at a meeting

if they had the slightest idea what they were talking about? The word

nonsense was used by Willie Rennie. That is a very good word to use as

far as that report is concerned. Excluding the weather forecast, as

far as the Daily Telegraph is concerned as well. This is exactly

why the people of Scotland are worried that this Scottish

Government is refusing to look at the downsides of Independence. That

is why they are concerned. Order. Let us hear Willie Rennie. The First

Minister still doesn't have a clue about setup costs. On the radio,

John Swinney had 13 attempts and still could not answer the question.

Last week, two Cabinet ministers said it was impossible. They have

tried to tell us on these benches that never has a country be more

prepared for the transition. He thought he could get away with it

but has been caught red-handed. The First Minister laughs, but the First

Minister will not be laughing on the doorsteps when people asking this

question. They want to know the costs of setting up an independent

Scotland. Is he going to give an answer? I think a Liberal Democrat

at the present moment should not talk to people about the reaction on

the doorsteps. The fact that Willie Rennie's question received more

support from the Labour benches than Johan Lamont's perhaps suggests that

the -- a degree of desperation. At some point, Willie Rennie should

read the white paper. It looks insubstantial detail about the

position of one of the four departments that Professor Patrick

Dunleavy identified as having to be created in an independent Scotland

and that is the Foreign Office and international relations department.

As he will know, it looks in great detail about the 5000 offices that

the Foreign Office has internationally. We know from their

recent statistics that they are worth ?2.9 billion. That is in

recent accounts. Scotland will be entitled to an asset share of that

asset. We identify that in the White Paper and look at international

comparisons and estimate 70 or 90 embassies will be required. The

costs of acquiring the overseas properties will be more than met by

our share of the overseas assets. Also, the running costs will be less

than we contribute at the moment. I am sorry I have gone on to quote the

detail, but it is the detail that he was asking for. If he reads the

White Paper, he will not have to ask me for it. To ask the First Minister

how people in Scotland can benefit from a written constitution? Well, I

think a written constitution provides an underpinning and a basis

for everyday life. I don't think it should be regarded as something

other than that of fundamental importance. Scotland should be no

different from the modern practice throughout the Commonwealth. It can

embody our values as a nation regardless of which political party

is in power. It can set out the right and aspirations of our

citizens. And give a firm underpinning to the fundamental

principle that in Scotland the people are sovereign. How does he

view the contrast between the proposals for sovereignty from the

Yes campaign with those against independence? Alistair Carmichael

said last week, when he was summing up, any additional powers are

something that take you into the realm of political debate, as

opposed to the guarantee the Scotland act powers offered. The

biggest problem for the parties against independence is that there

is not a single power they can't guarantee will be devolved to the

Scottish parliament if there were to be a No vote. Given the track record

of promises from the Conservatives, do they really think anyone in

Scotland is going to believe the joint possession of the comrades

when Alistair Carmichael says nothing can be began indeed? Little

wonder the comrades Alliance is built on such shaky foundations. To

ask whether Scotland would introduce a local income tax? We have brought

to an end the era of 50% increases in council tax bills which happened

under previous administrations. We want to develop a fairer and more

progressive tax based on the ability to pay. It is right this

consultation takes place after the referendum. That was an interesting

answer because he didn't mention the local income tax which he mentioned

to the newspapers in interviews and on radio. Does he still intend to

set the local income tax rate at 3p? What you said in the manifesto is

that over the period the next parliament we will consult on a

fairer system to replace the council tax. By the next election, Scotland

will have more powers over income tax. That is up perfect summary from

our manifesto. We explain what we are doing and the timescale. We

intend to bring about a change to make sure the taxation of Scotland

is based on the ability to pay. I think I can count five positions

from the Labour Party. Some people are saying sex. It depends on

whether or not they support a council tax freeze or not. When we

come to this consultation, I am certain the Labour Party will be

first to bring for word their ideas. Will the First Minister promise to

keep the local income tax rate a secret until after the referendum? I

promise that we will... We will implement the manifesto commitment

we made which has served us pretty well with the Scottish people.

Rather better than the Conservative Party managed. To ask the First

Minister what the Scottish Government's responses to the

National football survey finding that 62% of respondents were in

favour of lifting the ban on alcohol at football matches? The 2014

National football survey which was carried out on behalf of of the SFA

covers several issues. Police Scotland have confirmed that at this

stage they are not minded to seek a relaxation of the controls over

alcohol at football matches but are engaged in considering this matter.

Isn't it the case that Scotland has moved on significantly since the

alcohol ban was imposed over 30 years ago? Isn't it time we reviewed

the ban? Would it not be possible to list it on a trial basis and still

maintain the good representation of our national game? We want to ensure

that there are all fans enjoy our national sport in a safe

environment. The act from 2012 is having a positive effect on

offensive behaviour which has been reduced by a quarter. Police reports

described 27% of those accused as being under the influence of

alcohol. Police Scotland are not minded to seek any relaxation of the

controls of alcohol at football matches. But 27% of those accused

were under the influence of alcohol. I have written directly to every

senior football club in Scotland on this issue. I have met with the

chief constables on this is you. -- issue. Given the open-mindedness the

First Minister has and the progression we have seen in the many

decades since the ban was first introduced, could I ask him to

consider a pilot project at one grand with some of the protections

in place at other countries round-the-world trip this has been

shown to act, so we can see if this is one way we can bring in revenue

to the clubs that we have around the country? I will describe exactly

what my response was. I said that Police Scotland are not at this

stage minded to seek a relaxation. They are engaging with interested

parties in reviewing this. We will take the direction of the police.

Anyone arguing for this would have to take into account that although

the number of offences is falling, and that is a welcome sign, and I

think that is partly because of the legislation passed, nonetheless, 27%

of the offences were committed by people who were under the influence

of alcohol. That figure should tell us that whatever discussions take

place, we have to have an approach that understands alcohol is a major

contribution to disorder and offensive behaviour in society and

at football matches. When the police review this, they will have that in

mind and will do absolutely nothing that would make the reputation of

our game of football any less good than it is at the present moment.

They would do nothing to render the experience of ordinary fans at

football matches and subject them to an increase in offensive behaviour.

We are making significant improvements. We have to bear this

in mind as we move forward. We end First Minister's Questions. From

schools to football and independence. If you haven't had

enough of politics for today, let's hand you over to the Daily Politics.

held who are over the age of 90 than under the age of 40. House of Lords

when over half are over the age of 70, you get the measure of the

challenge of how much we need to pull thefrom the 19th century into

the 21st century. In As we know, Nick Clegg's plan and

dragged everyone involved down. The real problem with Lords reform is

that it is like an obstacle course and there's a lot of obstacles. All

of the parties agree they should be reformed, and they put that in their

manifestoes, but they could not agree how much and what kind, and

when they tried it, it did not work. Then there's the problem that some

of the Lords do not agree with their own parties on reform and the Lords

do not tend to vote for their own