22/02/2012 Scottish Questions

Hello and a warm welcome from Westminster for the February

edition of Scottish questions. With all of the things that has been

going on, there is no lack of interest in Scottish politics at

Westminster. And a mixed bag of questions for Michael Moore, the

Scottish Secretary, on inquiries on the economy, training and benefits.

No prizes for guessing the topic MPs wanted to start on - those

talks on an independence referendum. Order, order, questions to the

Secretary of State for Scotland. With permission I will answer

questions 1, 8 and 10 together. The First Minister and I met on Monday

13th February to discuss a referendum on independence. The

Prime Minister, First Minister and I had a meeting on 16th February

when we discussed the need for any referendum to be legal, firm and

decisive. It is in everyone's interest both governments work

together. The Scottish Government of the most resolute defenders of

the Barnet formula are against the other nations of the United Kingdom.

At the beagle of Scotland vote yes in a referendum on independence, do

not think the Barnet formula should apply to the nation's debt? He I

don't envisage Scotland will become independent from the United Kingdom,

I think we are stronger together and weaker apart. But it does touch

on a fundamental issue about sorting out what the basis of that

independence might look like. Questions the SNP have failed to

answer. Will the Secretary of State confirm both his and the

Government's commitment to a single, none leading question in the

referendum on Scottish separation, just commit a simple yes or no

reply? The fundamental issue about independence and that is what we

must resolve. We must have a legal and decisive independence

referendum. Could he clarify whether he has had conversations

regarding Antarctica and whether it is true of the last Government

simply forgot to deal with Antarctica and the British

territory there? And what is his position in making sure we reserve

control of it? She highlights an important part of the world which

it is important that we as the UK Government have a role to play in.

Can I point out to her, through the Scotland Bill which is passing

through the Lordships House at the moment, we are delivering the

biggest transfer of powers to Edinburgh since the Act of Union.

We are tidying up some of the inconsistencies of the devolution

settlement. They met with the First Minister and the Prime Minister

offered a proposal for an enhanced devolution. But failed to spell out

what it might be. Can the Scottish Secretary tell us what he envisages

a package of devolved financial powers might look like? Would it

include corporation tax, income tax, and Riggott levee? What does the

Scottish Secretary think a package of enhanced devolved powers might

look like? It is incredible the SNP want to stand up and ask a question

about further devolution, when they have not set out what the

fundamental principles of independence might be. New think

they would have had some clear ideas on it. It is a constructive

answer because it failed to answer the question entirely. There is no

detail about what the Prime Minister proposed. Is that because

there is no detail? Is it because it was there to capture a day's

headlines? Or is it to cover their embarrassment -- cover the

embarrassment of this Government which did not cover in the debate

in the Commons last year? He has a bit of itchy talking about a lack

of detail when they cannot spell out what the current situation

would be in an independent Scotland, what the national debt and might

look like, how we do with pensions, financial regulation? We must make

the most fundamental decision in Scotland's future in a clear cut

and decisive way. The debate about devolution will be ongoing and I am

looking forward to being part of that. My Right Honourable Friend

has spelt out the absence of detailed from members of the

Scottish National Party in this house. I wonder in the

opportunities he has had, has he impressed upon the First Minister,

his unequivocal obligation to explain to the people of Scotland,

not just the process of independence, but the consequences

of it, the costs of it and the length of time it would take to

implement? He highlights some very important central issues about this

debate over independence. I believe Scotland is stronger as part of the

United Kingdom and United Kingdom is strong because Scotland is part

of it. From financial issues, our place in the world on the strength

of our defence. There are unanswered questions from the SNP,

which they must address. This is a question about the number

of 16 to 24 year-olds not in education.

The number of 16 to 19 year olds are estimated to be not in

education, employment or training in Scotland in 2010 was 36,000.

I say to the Secretary of State, because there is another important

element to the question I asked, it is up to 24 year-olds. These are

the hardest hit and we don't want to see that lost generation. In

rural localities like his and mind, policies to get young people back

into work will depend as far as the private sector is concerned, on

small and medium-sized enterprises. These businesses are suffering

severely and the pressure upon them is not enabling them to create jobs.

Does he understand we meet Task Force Tiger mentality to deal with

youth and young people unemployment? What can I say, the

statistics of to 24 is something my officials are working on. They are

not published, but I look forward to getting the data for him and

other members in the house. On the fundamentals of the economy, I

agree with him we need small and medium-sized businesses to be given

the ability to grow and that is why we are putting pressure on the

banks to lend to them. And also for the young people we are dealing

with, a sure we support them. That is why the use contract is

fundamental. A billion pounds to make sure people get more places

and work experience to help employers to take people on. It is

a kind of action that will help people get on to the jobs market.

He rightly mentions the use contract which comes into effect in

April. Does he agree it is imperative the Scottish Government,

the British Government and employers in Scotland work together

to ensure young people get the opportunities and are not

distracted by scoring points against each other but work

together for young people? I agree with him and I would point out

working with members across this house, over the last six to eight

months I have held meetings and seminars around Scotland, focused

on youth unemployment, bringing together employers, young people,

Scottish Government agencies and UK Government agencies. In March in

Dundee we will have a national convention with the Secretary of

State for work and pensions and John Swinney, so we can take this

agenda forward together. I don't think anyone in this house is

complacent about youth unemployment and the plight of young people

trying to find work in trying economic circumstances. I welcome

the joint initiative of the National Convention taking place in

March next month, but can I press the Secretary of State on what

outcomes he expects from that convention? And if he will welcome

the initiative the Scottish Government has taken to ensure a

place for every young people aged 16 to 19 in Scotland in work or

training or education? It is absolutely right, Scotland's two

Government's work together on this terrible problem which existed

under the last Government and continues. We are addressing their

using everything we can to help young people get experience,

training and get jobs. We will work hard on all of those and at others

wish to work with us, we will welcome that. Can the Secretary of

State tell the House how many young Scots have lost their jobs since he

was appointed to his in a 2010? should remember the economic mess

that we inherited from the Labour Government. Since then we are

fixing the deficit, seeking to rebalance the economy and to ensure

we have sustainable growth. The youth contract, work experience and

all of the support we are giving is vital to ensure we get a young

people back into the workplace. notice the Secretary of State

struggled with that answer somewhat! There is one statistic he

should be familiar with. Since his Government's scrapped the future

jobs fund, 23,000 jobs have been lost in Scotland. That is over 400

jobs every week for young people, whilst he has become the Tory's man

in Scotland. We are in the midst of the youth unemployment crisis and

the Secretary of State for Scotland has been posted missing. In

contrast, Labour took direct action Truda futures jobs then, delivering

over 10,000 real jobs for young people in Scotland. Can the

Secretary of State tell us what plans he has, any ideas at all

about how to take direct effective action to tackle youth unemployment

in Scotland? As ever, she wishes to leave behind have a horrible mess

her Government left for us to fix. She cannot escape that reality, or

the fact youth unemployment rose under Labour. We are investing �1

billion in the use contract, which will enhance the number of work-

experience places, provide additional support for employers

taking on young people and has provided the Scottish Government

with additional resources. I have been working with colleagues and

others to do everything we can to tackle this terrible problem.

This is a question about human trafficking into Scotland.

The Government's is inquiring into human trafficking in Scotland in

line with the ongoing implementation of the Schumann

trafficking strategy we've launched in July 2011. -- human trafficking

strategy. He will have seen the main

recommendation a new human trafficking Bill for Scotland. It

would solve the problem of implementing what we have signed up

to in the EU, if we did it across the UK. Can I remind him and other

interested parties to come to the all-party meeting next Monday in

rooms seven and maybe take some advice? Mr Speaker, if I am

available I will be delighted to attend. Does he agreed that the

field of human trafficking were cut ordination between involved

agencies is so critical if we are to provide real solutions is

another policy best tackled at UK level? I agreed, the UK is able to

bring great weight on behalf of Scotland to this issue. It is also

an issue where we have been able to work with the Scottish Government,

demonstrating that the two governments on issues of great

importance can work together on a day-to-day basis.

This is a question about credit ratings in Scotland.

This Government has taken the hall Hardy United Kingdom benefits of

record low interest rates. What estimates has the Secretary of

State made of the extra debt interests that would have to be

paid by an independent Scotland were it not to benefit from a

triple A rating? He raises an important point about how an

independent Scotland would fare he and they are issues about the track

records of the Government, the pension arrangements, national debt

and so much more they need to take into account. It is in the gift of

the Scottish Government if it wishes to ask for a draft of what

it might look like, so far they have not done so. What analysis has

the Government under taken into the impact of a low credit rating in my

constituency and more widely in Lanarkshire in the event of

Scotland's celebrate -- separating from the rest of the United

Kingdom? I recognise the challenges that face his constituents and

those of so many in Lanarkshire and elsewhere. I stick to a basic

belief that a manager and Scotland are better as part of the United

Kingdom, much stronger than they would be if we went our separate

Will he emphasised to the First Minister of Scotland that the

uncertainty caused by the referendum is causing a growing

number of companies to pause their investment decisions until they get

clarity as to which direction Scotland is going to travel?

honourable friend is going to the issue of when the debate takes

place. She we should get on and do this. We should have this decision

about Scotland's place in the UK sooner rather than later. I cannot

understand why we should have the weight the best part of three years,

with all the economic uncertainty generated, until we get that

decision. Does the Secretary of State not understand that it isn't

the credit rating score but the cost of servicing government debt

that matters? Japan has a much higher net debt and its score pays

less interest on government bonds in the UK. It is your that counts

and not the triple-A rating. Would he now stop this ridiculous

scaremongering? With the honourable gentleman seriously suggesting that

the triple-A status has no bearing on the interest rates we pay? He's

got to wake up and make sure they answer some of the fundamental

questions that are at the heart of this debate and which they are so

far ducking. STUDIO: This is questions about

plans for a benefit cap in Scotland. I think he is seeking to group this

question with numbered well. seek to answer this question with

number 12. The chairman of the work and pensions Select Committee, who

is a regular attender at Scottish Questions, has suffered a fall. I'm

sure we all wish her well in her recovery. My right honourable

friend the Secretary of State for Scotland and I are in contact with

ministers in the Department for Work and Pensions on a range of

issues concerning welfare reform. Is it not clear that if the

nationalist government in Scotland have control of welfare policy

they'd be no benefits cap in Scotland, despite widespread public

support? I think what is clear is that the Scottish National Party

make a proposition for independence without explaining to people how

benefits at current levels would be paid in the future and where that

With the average income in Scotland being �419 per week, does the

Minister not agree with me that a benefit cap of �500 a week is a

reasonable and sensible level? agree that this is a reasonable and

fair measure. Constituents in constituencies like mine cannot

understand how the party opposite and the nationalists are promoting

that the benefit cap should be higher than �35,000. Is not the

truth on the benefit cap that the household of �418 that was quoted

by the previous question that, if they had six children, like my

constituents have, those children have to be cared for. They would

also receive child benefit. So the comparison being given is not fair.

What is going to happen when the discretionary housing payments

actually run out? What I think the honourable lady should do is to

listen to her honourable friend from Leeds West, when she says that

if Labour are to be taken seriously on any issue, they have to pass the

test of fiscal credibility. On this issue that is a very relevant point.

The honourable gentleman will not be aware that I have the highest

percentage of single women in any constituency in the country. What

is he doing to help these women? This is not a joke, it is serious.

There are single women in this country who are struggling. What is

his party going to do to help them? What this government is doing is

tidying up the mess which his government left, which has placed a

single women and lots of other people in a perilous financial

position. STUDIO: This is a question about public expenditure

for Helensburgh. It shows that the level of public expenditure in

Scotland was �10,165 per head for 2010 to 2011. Last week at the

breakfast table, my wife and I were talking about public expenditure in

Scotland. When suddenly Korolev and-year-old son, Thomas, asked, is

Alex Salmond a goodie or a baddie? -- when suddenly hour 11-year-old

As ever, the goings-on at his house sold breakfast table are a thing of

national interest. We look forward to further updates in due course.

When his son get the chance to meet with the First Minister, he will be

delighted by the conversation he has. But the important point is he

should know that he wants to get England separate from Scotland, we

don't. The Secretary of State will know that not one ounce of UK Steel

has been used to build a new Forth Road Bridge. Isn't it shameful that

29,000 tonnes of steel can be shipped 12,500 miles from Shanghai,

but not 33 miles from Lanarkshire? The honourable gentleman's

commitment in Lanarkshire and the steel industry is well known. As

his anger is understood. It is a matter that was devolved to the

Scottish government and it is for them to answer. In welcoming the

additional per capita expenditure represented by the �100 million

investment in the sleeper services, would the Secretary of State agree

that this is a good example for the Westminster and Hollywood

government's to work together, more effective at -- than it is working

separately, and what he sees the opportunity to call in the likes of

Richard Branson, Pete Waterman and others with entrepreneurial skills

to CBE can re-establish Motorail services now that the sleeper

services are secured? My right honourable friend is right to

highlight the important investment we have committed to the sleeper

services, for which she has been an undoubted champion over a long

period of time. He is right to stress that we need to look at

innovative ways to develop those services. I look forward to

discussing his idea further. Speaker, as at 3rd April 2011, in

Scotland there were 4800 in work families benefiting from the

severely disabled child aliment and with child tax credit above the

family limit. There are 5000 severely disabled children in these

families. The Prime Minister has told this house on 14th December

and again on 25th January that his government will not be cutting

benefits for disabled children. Given that almost 8000 children in

Scotland will be losing �1,400 a year with the child tax credit

changes, does the Minister agree with me that the Prime Minister is

playing ball and clearly does not understand his own policy? What I

agree with is the fact that the government is not making any

savings at all from these changes. Savings from abolishing the adult

disability premiums and changes in the child rate will not return to

the Exchequer. The savings will be recycled into higher payments for

more to see -- for more severely disabled people. There are far too

many noisy, private conversations Would the Minister agree with me,

and with my constituents, that in matters of disability payments for

the sea -- for severely disabled children and all other payments

from taxpayers' money for people who are most in need throughout our

country, we are better raising money together and working together

as one United Kingdom. The severe disability premium and all other

benefits are clearly set out by the United Kingdom government. The

Scottish National Party have failed to set out how we single benefit in

Scotland would be paid for post independence, if it was ever

achieved. STUDIO: This is a defence related question.

I spoke to the Parliamentary Under- Secretary of State for Defence on

this issue. As was confirmed on Monday, there are no current plans

to change the status of Defence munitions beat. There is a need to

maintain beef until the torpedo has been converted to a single fuel

system, when the need for specialist facilities may lack. The

conversion programme is expected to be completed around 2018. It is one

of the largest employers in North Ayrshire. It is wholly dependent on

Ministry of Defence contracts. Would he ensure there is a

ministerial visit from the Scotland Office to the facility, to find out

about more that is the mayor with a view to ongoing representations for

future contracts to the Ministry of Defence? I am pleased to be able to

confirm that the Secretary of State for Scotland will be pleased to

visit that facility. STUDIO: This is another question

about the financial consequences of independence.

I will answer questions 11 and 15 together. The Scottish government,

but the Scottish Government has failed to set out what independence

would mean for Scotland. This government is clear that Scotland

is stronger for being part of the UK, and the UK is stronger for

having Scotland within it. Does my right honourable friend agree with

me that instead of Scottish politicians focusing on

independence, that they should look in these difficult economic times

to stop depending on one industry in the North Sea and instead

looking to create a broader industry sector that will look for

economic support for the rest of Scotland? She is right. Our primary

concern has to be to ensure we get the economy on the right track. By

fixing the deficit, by rebalancing the economy and making sure of

sustainable growth then we will do that. We should be getting on and

resolving this issue of independence so we can remove the

uncertainty it causes. Order, still far too much noise. Mr John

Would the Minister agree that in the areas along the border between

Scotland and England, there would be many and necessary financial and

regular -- regulatory costs to both sides of the border, and in extreme

cases they could be problems with border control. I'm not

contemplating Scotland becoming independent. I am confident

Scotland will vote to stay within the UK. But there is a central

issue. If we were to become separate, some of the issues

surrounding Europe, including the Borders issue, I think the issues

are absurd as he does. Has the Secretary of State consider the

recent study by the National Institute of Economic and Social

Research? Even informing the sterling so with the UK, a separate

Scotland would experience volatile public finances, inherent debt at

either 70 to 80 % of GDP and face tougher constraints on levels of

tax and borrowing than being an equal participant in fiscal union

with the UK. I have study the report and the honourable gentleman

puts his conclusions succinctly. These are. The SNP have failed to

answer. STUDIO: That is all we've got time for. Because of the Easter

break, the next Scottish Questions is and now for nearly two months.