29/03/2012 Politics Scotland

A warm welcome to the Scottish parliament here at Holyrood, where

MSPs have been debating the environment on motions from the

Green Party. The main subject of this programme is questions to the

First Minister. And what has this got to do with it? I would not be

surprised if Mr Salmond does not face some gentle teasing from his

opponents about 80 party held at the house with multi-millionaire

lottery winners who ended up donating money to the SNP. He says

that they were old friends, long- standing nationalists, and in any

case he bought his own tea. We will cross to the chamber. We have just

got general questions in the chamber just now. The presiding

officer has just welcomed some guests in the gallery, some

applause from the members, so now we are straight to First Minister's

Questions. Johann Lamont. And I as the First Minister what engagements

he has planned? I will be meeting Fergus Ewing, the Energy Minister,

and I'm delighted to tell the chamber that figures this morning

show that we are smashed the Government's target to meet 31% of

Scotland's electricity demand from renewables in 2011. They are

reaching no less than 35%, an extraordinary achievement for

Scotland. I should also form the Chamber that participating in the

UK COBRA meeting to discuss the tankers drivers dispute, we will be

holding a resilience meeting to ensure that sensible contingencies

are in place to deal with any eventuality. I want to reinforce

those on calling for cool heads. I welcome the ACAS talks which are

taking place tomorrow. I would urge both sides to resolve a dispute for

which no strike dates have been called. The priority surely

preventing a strike, not issuing and wise advice about jerry cans. I

think more government preparation is what is required to promote calm

and orderly behaviour in the population at large. You're an Le

Monde. Thank you very much, presiding officer. It was reported

this week that seven out of 10 primary school pupils are

succeeding in numeracy, yet by the time they are at secondary school,

two years later, nearly six out of 10 are failing. Why is it that so

many of our secondary school children do not have basic

accounting skills? First Minister. Two aspects of the statistics have

been released are due to be stressed to the chamber. The

statistics show the dramatic, extraordinary effect of curriculum

for excellence in our primary schools. These are incredible

statistics, in which the teachers, pupils, parents of Scotland should

be celebrating these very substantial statistics, when the

curriculum for excellent has been introduced, and it is showing

marvellous results. It should be remembered that as far as secondary

schools are concerned, the target in terms of the 40% that has been

widely reported is a measurement as to where pupils are expected to be

at the end of S three, not just during S two. But I would have

thought the statistics indicate that surely we are on the right

track in introducing curriculum for excellence, something I would hope

we can all welcome. I do not think the statistics indicate any such

thing, and indeed it has been said that Mike Russell's claims of

improving numeracy skills were due to the curriculum for excellence

were wrong, as it is too early for the curriculum to have had any

impact. We may wish to reflect on that. This is a serious issue.

Perhaps I can explain this in a way the First Minister might understand.

If you buy a second-year pupil in Scotland, the odds of you hitting

the standard required up 3-2 against. That might be good odds if

you want to win a few bob at Musselburgh, it is not so good for

those of us who are parents sending our children to school under the

SNP. In 2003, Labour introduced a cap of 20 pupils for every English

and maths class to raise numeracy and literacy standards. The First

Minister dropped that pledge. Does the First Minister agree that

Scottish pupils are now paying the price for that mistake? First

Minister. I really do nothing that is the way to treat this

extraordinarily serious subject. I mean, firstly, we should not

downgrade the achievements in the primary school. I mean, what the

survey showed, the first survey, and the survey itself is an

indication of national performance in numeracy. We never had the

statistics before. In all the years of Labour-Liberal administration,

we did not even choose to measure this. So when we have measured it,

let's at least have the grace to congratulate our teachers and

particularly the pupils of Scotland, showing that 99% of primary

numerate for pupils and 90% of Primary 7 pupils were performing

above expected levels. In anyone's terms, however it his car collided,

that is an exceptional result. Now, if I could just -- correct on the

figures in secondary schools of 42% and of pupils were performing well

or very well at the level which must be met at the end of s 3, and

another 26% were ahead of that level. I know that is not

necessarily be shortened version that was reported, but that is what

the statistics show. Now, what I would say about that these three

things. One, it is right to measure these things. If you do not have a

measurement, how on earth can you base the standards against

anything? Secondly, these are substantial indications that

curriculum for excellence is providing extraordinary results

were the work and dedication of our teachers in primary schools.

Thirdly, we have challenges in secondary schools, but let's not

exaggerate what the statistics mean, and let's continue on the path of

introducing curriculum for excellence throughout Scottish

education so that the exceptional performance in primary can soon be

replicated in our secondary schools as well. The First Minister says I

should take this question seriously. It is about time he took his job

seriously and answered the question. The thing about statistics is you

do not select the ones that make you feel good about yourself, which

the First Minister has done. You have, in government, response to

what the statistics tell you, and the statistics tell you that you

have got five-2 against being numerate in secondary school in

Scotland. That should be a spur to action, not a scurrying about for

some justification which already indicated is a nonsense. Now, I

know the First Minister and I might not agree on education policy

generally, but I'm sure we can agree there's nothing as negative

in politics as a promise not kept. So let's look at the promises he

made to Scotland's parents and pupils. A nursery teacher for every

promise, not delivered. Maintain teacher numbers, promised, not

delivered. Class sizes of 18 or fuel for primary, promised, not

delivered. The curriculum for excellence that he talks about,

promised, but not delivered. And today, two guaranteed hours of PE

every day, promised, now promised again, and still not delivered. I

make that... Order! You should understand what you promise and the

failure to deliver it he wants to make a difference to people in

Scotland. The reality is... The reality is, on the First Minister's

record, I would make that 0 out of five of the First Minister, and I

could go on. Let me explain to him that education is a priority for

every parent in Scotland. Does he not understand there is nothing

cruel than making promises to children you have absolutely no

intention of keeping? First Minister. There is nothing dafter

than making these things up, if I may say so. In her question, she

managed to say that we had made a pledge for two hours of the four

every day! I'm afraid that she should read things better. What she

also said we had made a pledge of a nursery teacher for every child!

Not even the Scottish National Party have made such pledges,

although I do think it indicates that both numeracy and literacy are

probably very important in this chamber, as well as in Scottish

classrooms! The pledges of the SNP government are judged by the

Scottish people, and at last year's election, as deputy leader, she and

her party were found sadly wanting. There are a lot of young people

sitting exams in the near future, and as a teacher we advise them to

answer the question. The First Minister again failed to do that!

This last week, of course, his Health Secretary was bottom of the

class, and despite his protestations, this week the

Education Secretary, Mike Russell, has the dunces cap. Now, we found

out last Thursday that the First Minister will deny the truth until

he is confronted by it. What a shame it is that the gallery in

this chamber is not big enough to seat the 30,000 second-year pupils

his government is failing innumeracy alone. While he waits

for Scotland's future to be decided in a referendum in 1,000 days, the

future of young Scots is being determined today. So in the spirit

are being held for, if the First Minister... If the First Minister

cannot keep his own promises, can I offer him one of ours? Will he, as

a matter of urgency, bring in specialist teams into our schools

to help our children learn how to count? References to last week's

First Minister's Questions, references to people not having

blankets in hospital. If you look at the statistics that I have

detailed to the chamber, somebody who made such elementary and

appalling blunders in asking a question should not start talking

about Dunne's's caps and start talking about that anyway. --

dunces caps. I'm answering those questions as best as anyone could

possibly interpret them. I'm not responsible if she cannot think of

the right questions. So Ruth Davidson now, the Scottish

Conservative leader. No plans to meet the Secretary of State in the

near future. Ruth Davidson. line Le Monde has just rightly

raised a string of failures from the SNP government on education

which will result, by the end of this Parliament, in a generation of

schoolchildren failed by the SNP. The government's and so, apart from

attacking the critic, is that curriculum for excellence will

solve all the problems. That was a plane directly attacked by teaching

unions yesterday as not credible. - - claim. The Education Secretary

became even more blase, dismissing these worrying mass failures has

the same as they have been for the last few generations. -- maths.

What a depressing lack of ambition! It is the First Minister are

satisfied that Mike Russell's answer is good enough? Well, as I

mentioned, this is the first time that such a survey has been

conducted in Scottish education. The conducting of the survey is a

sign of our commitment to drive up standards of literacy and numeracy

in Scottish schools. But can I just repeat to Ruth Davidson what I said

earlier, that the figures that she should consider are these

exceptional figures in primary education, where curriculum

excellence has been introduced. Let me repeat them, 99% of primary four

pupils are performing within or above expected levels. That strikes

me as a substantial, good and excellent performance. The survey

also indicates that we have challenges to meet in terms of

secondary education but it allows us to hope and believe that

curriculum for excellence is going to help in that process. That is

something supported by Scotland's largest teaching union, the

Educational Institute of Scotland, who are strong supporters of

curriculum for excellence and see the value perhaps because they have

got so many members in primary schools. Finally, I was struck at

the Conservative Party conference by... He says I was not there!

Neither was anybody else, by the looks of it! But I was struck by

Ruth Davidson's pledge, in terms of the Labour Party, Scotland's expect

us to work together, and we are with the Labour Party. That is the

truth of it. The two and two Independence Party's united in

negativity and nihilism. There was no attempt there to address the

massive drop of in standards that are failing our secondary school

pupils, which is why the agency has said that curriculum for excellence

being a sticking plaster was not a credible position. Last week the

Education Secretary was forced into a U-turn, because teachers know

that their schools are simply not ready to deliver the new exams.

They have been turning a deaf ear to them for months. And it is not

just teachers. Shares of university courts are deeply unhappy about

plans for university governments. - - governance. One of our most

respected educationalists, Lindsay Paterson, warning that teachers are

being failed in their training, many not competent enough to teach

mathematics. That is 15 months after the Government's own report

said the same thing. Amid this growing chorus of criticism, we

have an education secretary who is arrogant enough to think he knows

better than the educational experts, better than the universities,

better than the college students, and is magisterially dismissive of

school teachers. Is it not time that the First Minister got on top

of his Education Secretary, called him into his office, and demand

that he stop failing Scotland's I'm going to have to decline that

particular invitation. If I may. I didn't think it was Brody, I

thought it was don hoe who was trying to get to the Tory

conference, and then he got turned down. The serious issue - in terms

of what the determination in the survey that's been conducted, since

Ruth Davidson seems to guard my answers with some scepticism and

Mike Russell's with some scepticism, the Tories don't have a single idea

on Scottish education. Scotland has a national resource that other

countries can only envy, national surveys and a trusted way of

assessing national standards. When the SSN finally said the new

development and resources are there for support for teachers, they are

a formidable contribution to teaching and learning. Their survey

which indicates the excellence of results in primary schools and not

even Ruth Davidson is going to deny that, is part of a process of

driving up standards in Scottish education. We have the ability to

do that against the most extraordinary funding cuts against

Westminster, the greatest in living memory is a single achievement of

this Government. Finally, on a day, and this will be the first and last

time I quote the Daily Mail in this chamber, the Daily Mail front-page

says of the Westminster Government "passtys, petrol and the politics

of panic" is the headline. It is not right for any Tory Government

to lecture this Government about incompetence. The First Minister

will be aware of the situation of the Elgin platform operated by

Total in the North sea. What discussions have been had with UK

ministers and industry representatives regarding

contingencies for gas supply. I ask if he'll join me in welcoming the

safety of hundreds of workers that should have been in place? I'm glad

the last part was put into the question because all of us should

welcome the safe evacuation of personnel from the Elgin offshore

platform. Members will wish to be aware that the Scottish Government

officials have been in regular contact with tp total, as well as

the UK Government about this ongoing incident. A Governmental

interest group was meant to monitor the incident attended by marine

Scotland and on behalf of the Scottish Government with the

representative of the Secretary of State for Energy, the Health and

Safety Executive and the Maritime and Coastguard Agency. The group

will meet on an ongoing basis. The Scottish Government, through marine

Scotland, is of course responsible for the marine environment.

Therefore marine Scotland scientists are intending to review

any environmental implications which thus far are minimal but

nonetheless we shouldn't underrate the seriousness of this incident.

We'll remain in close contact with the primary responders about the

incident. We have made it clear to Total and others, the Government

will continue to inassist in any way we can and we are insisting on

the transperson si of any information.

Spooking of working together and speaking of protecting our people,

will you join me in condemning the change of the approach now being

taken by the Ministry of Defence now under the Tory-led coalition

which is now saying they will not accept liability for the radiation,

whereas the previous Labour Government did. Reflecting the

concerns of my constituents, will the First Minister request an

urgent meeting with the Prime Minister and demand that the

polluter pays principle is applied and honoured urgently to address

the concerns put to me by my constituents. It's really important,

First Minister, that you do this meeting personally to add your

voice to the many voices that are coming from the whole of my

constituency and right along the coast, indeed Rod Campbell has even

written on the matter. I think we should treelt this -- treat this

matter seriously. There is insistence on the

regulations in terms of environmental clean-up and the

polluter pays principle being properly reflected. We should allow

the processes to take their course. Discussions are not at an end yet,

but the suggestion of intervention personally be the Prime Minister I

think it may well reach the stage where that is required. I don't by

any means rule that out and I think it's necessary that, and perhaps

Helen could reflect on this herself, that we approach this issue in a

way that reflects the seriousness for the residents concerned and

indeed for the Scottish environment and insist as a Parliament that the

proper principles of polluter pays are properly reflected in the

action to come. THE SPEAKER: Question three. Willie

Rennieny. What issues will be discussed at the next Cabinet

meeting? Issues of importance to the people of Scotland. Proposals

were described in the Bill as a dog's breakfast ah poison pill and

dangerous. He had six red lights. Then last week, he decided to

support the Scotland Bill. What has been the major change to the Bill

that we've missed? What's changed? Well, I've been struck by some of

the comments I've heard from the Liberal Democrats. As I understood

it, the six things we were suggesting as improvements to the

Scotland Bill, they were always or have been Liberal Democrat policy

somewhere. So I mean, I can understand the political debate,

but as far as I understand the Liberal Democrats' position, they

are celebrating the fact that they haven't managed to implement their

own policy. Maybe that's the nasty effect of their senior partners in

the coalition who must be an increasing and daily embarrassment

for Willie Rennie and his colleagues. Of course, that is the

principal reason why he has so few colleagues in this Parliament. But,

can I just say that I think the Scotland Bill has been overtaken by

events. I think very shortly, the people of Scotland will have the

opportunity to transform our circumstances and I very much

believe we will seize that I can understand why the First

Minister may be a wee bit reluctant to tell us. He was satisfied, and

this is it, two reviews, over three years, and a major concession,

listen to this, on dental hygienists. He's some negotiator, I

have to say. If he tears up his red lines like this on deefloution, how

will he manage on independence when he has to negotiate with the rest

of the world -- devolution. The Scotland Bill is a major step

forward. These powers are coming soon. Can the First Minister tell

me how he plans to use the stamp duty power and what will be the

first capital projects that will benefit from the new borrowing

powers? Well, I don't think capital budgets are a strong point for the

Liberal Democrats at the present moment, given that the Government

cut the Scotland Government budget by 30% and it's only the strength

and ingenuity of John Swinney that found the strength to increase the

capital budget. Let me return to the issue of where Willie Rennie

stands. I know he stands over there, he just doesn't ask the questions

very well. Only a few seconds ago, the chamber was being electrifyed

with a demand for the double devolution of the crown estate

commission. That was one of the things we suggestsed that this

chamber which incidentally voted overwhelmingly for that policy

should be in the Scotland Bill. As far as I understand it, Willie

Rennie's position is not putting iten in the Scotland Bill, is not

an embarrassment for the Secretary of State for Scotland who's meant

to believe nit, not a comment on the Westminster Government for not

accepting the verdict of their own Parliamentary Committee that should

be devolved, but a comment on the SNP Government who want it there.

It's exactly why when it comes to referendum, people will vote for a

situation where we take the future of our country into our hands and

I'm not dependent on liberals and Tories in Westminster.

Gill Pat terson. I ask the First Minister what

discussions the Scottish Government's had with the UK

Government on alcohol pricing? continuing and have had extensive

discussions and ministerial and official level with the UK

Government. Scotland is somewhat ahead of the game in taking bold

action to tackle alcohol misuse. Last week's news that the UK

Government is moving on to that ground I think is extremely welcome

indeed. I thank the First Minister for the

response and welcome the Scottish Government's leadership on this

issue. As he will be aware, Scots drink a quarter more than their

counterparts nearly in England and Wales, fuelling higher levels of

alcohol related harm. Indeed, the total cost of alcohol misuse to

Scotland is estimated to average �3.6 billion every year. Does the

First Minister agree that it's important to find consensus on such

an important cause? Does he like me find it difficult to understand and

quite frankly pathetic that the only party continuing to impose

minimum pricing is the Scottish Labour Party?

Well, it's a perfectly normal question. As I understand it, not

all of the Scottish Labour Party supports minimum pricing.

Joanne Lamont leads the party as a whole, but the party represents at

Westminster, as I understand it from last Friday's statement, are

in favour of minimum pricing. We have a situation where the Scottish

Parliament and Westminster in England are in favour of it, but

there are parties against it where our difficulties of alcohol are

even greater where they are in England. I really do think that fld

require all of Joanne Lamont's numerical and literacy skills to

resolve this particular dilemma. Further more, can I welcome the

fact that in the space of only a few weeks, we have convinced UK

Government ministers that hitherto unbreakable legal obstacles that

they saw preventing the introduction of minimum pricing

have somehow magically disappeared. I suspect there are a few other

legal obstacles that will magically disappear when the people of

Scotland indicate the determination on a variety of matters.

Richard Simpson. Could I add to Gill's comments by

saying that while Scots do drink 23% more, they do so at exactly the

same price as England pays for its drinks. The position of the

Scottish Labour Party is that we remain very sceptical of minimum

unit pricing, but does the First Minister accept that where there is

validity o our greatest concern, which is the wind fall profits of

over �100 million, in UK terms likely to be over �1 billion and

this mainly to the supermarkets, and that the unintended

consequences of this wind fall, the dangers of which have been pointed

out by the Institute for Fiscal Studies, is important and therefore,

will he look again at the fact that this party, despite its scepticism,

is offering to make this a unanimous policy, provided the

Government agrees to claw back the entire wind fall profits. Sorry, as

I understand if Labour Party's position, they were against the

health induced levy on the major supermarkets as well. So if we are

now having another change in policy, then of course I welcome that. Can

I say to Richard Simpson, it would be far better just to gracefully

accept that Labour are going to have to get on board their minimum

pricing argument. I suspect in terms of your own embarrassment,

the sooner you get to that position, the better.

There we have it. We have come to the close of the coverage of First

Minister's questions, to borrow a phrase from Ruth Davidson, it

seemeded as if Mr Salmond was magisterially dismissive. He was on

good form with Joanne and Ruth. On the close of the issue of alcohol

particularly and also managing with Willie Rennie to have the changes.

The Scottish Government's backed down on demands with regard with

regard to the Scotland Bill. Mr Salmond was pointing out that these

were advanced by the Liberal Democrats, a successful turning

around of the argument as far as Alex Salmond was concerned.

Throughout the discussions there, we had a series of substantive

issues of concern to the Scottish people, not least of course the

situation facing the North Sea platform where there have been

problems with Mr Salmond offering to assist and insist on publication