Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
First Minister's Question Time
Johann Lamont (Glasgow Pollok) (Lab): To ask the First Minister what engagements he has
planned for the rest of the day.
The First Minister (Alex Salmond): Sadly, we had confirmation early this morning that
a 62-year-old man fell from the Taqa Harding platform in the North Sea during maintenance
activity. He was transferred to Gilbert Bain hospital but, unfortunately, has passed away.
I know that the whole chamber will join me in expressing our sincere condolences to the
family, friends and colleagues at this distressing time.
Johann Lamont: We on this side add our condolences and recognise the importance of ensuring that
people who go to work are kept safe when they are there.
Standard Life has made plans to leave Scotland if Scotland leaves the United Kingdom. How
many more companies need to leave Scotland before the First Minister admits that a yes
vote would be a disaster for Scottish jobs?
The First Minister: Let me quote exactly from the question-and-answer session at the Standard
Life annual general meeting today. "How many people do you employ in Edinburgh/Scotland?
What would be the impact on jobs of moving your HQ?
We have made no decisions to move any part of our operations from Scotland at the current
time as a consequence of the constitutional debate. We are proud of our Scottish heritage
and believe that Scotland is a good place from which to run our business and compete
around the world." Standard Life then says that it has contingency
plans "if this does not continue to be the case".
Our submission would be that Standard Life will find Scotland a good place to do business,
as it finds the 10 countries around the world in which it does business. That will happen
first and foremost because of the excellence of the staff. Its prime asset is the 5,000
people who work for it in Scotland, who are the strength of the company and what has made
it successful. Secondly—this matters to some of the points that Standard Life has
made—the Scottish Government puts forward the concept of a shared currency and regulatory
framework, which are exactly the sort of things that Standard Life has been calling for.
Given that statement about the importance of Scotland as "a good place from which to
run our business and compete around the world", can the chamber not unite in having confidence
that an independent Scotland—indeed, Scotland under any constitutional framework—will
be exactly that?
Johann Lamont: Only in Alex Salmond's world is what Standard Life said today represented
by what he has just said. A tried and tested path: denial, deception, delusion. [Interruption.]
The Presiding Officer (Tricia Marwick): Ms Lamont, "deception" is not acceptable in the
chamber.
Johann Lamont: It certainly is not. It is not acceptable in real life, either. Standard
The Presiding Officer: Ms Lamont, it is not acceptable in the chamber. Continue.
Johann Lamont: Standard Life employs 5,000 people in Scotland. It is worth nearly £250
billion and 90 per cent of its customers are in the rest of the United Kingdom. Now, Standard
Life is actively making plans to leave Scotland if the First Minister gets his way. No amount
of bluff, bluster and bullying from Alex Salmond can change that fact. Will the First Minister
admit that, if Scotland leaves the United Kingdom, people's jobs will leave Scotland?
The First Minister: Let me get this right for Johann Lamont: the bluff, bluster and
bullying apply to George Osborne, who is the Tory chancellor that she is in alliance with;
what Standard Life is saying is what I have read out.
Johann Lamont says that she does not believe what I say, but I was reading out exactly
from the question-and-answer session at today's AGM. Standard Life is pointing to the fact
that it wants Scotland to be "a good place from which to run our business
and compete around the world", as it competes in 10 countries at the moment.
We are putting forward the view that Scotland is going to be a good place from which to
run business. We can do that because of the propositions that we make, which are that
we will have a currency union and a secure regulatory environment. Above all, Standard
Life depends on the skills and assets of its staff—they are what make and have made Standard
Life a successful company. The Scottish Government has put forward a
viewpoint of what we believe to be in the best interests of Scotland—that is a logical
and rational argument. Is Johann Lamont really making the case that Scotland is not going
to be a good place to do business? That is what this hangs on. The evidence tells us—and
it is substantial evidence—not only that it will be a good place to do business, but
that an independent Scotland will be a more competitive place to do business.
Johann Lamont: It is precisely because Scotland is a good place to do business that we want
it to stay strong in the United Kingdom and in the currency union that we have. The First
Minister must explain why he wants to change something that works.
Of course, it is not just Standard Life that we are talking about. The Royal Bank of Scotland—the
bank that the First Minister used to work for and the bank that he encouraged to do
the deal that made it go bust—[Interruption.] The Presiding Officer: Order.
Johann Lamont: We have all seen the letter that the First Minister wrote to Fred Goodwin
telling him to go ahead with the deal. The Royal Bank of Scotland has said that uncertainty
is damaging its fragile business. Standard Life is planning to leave Scotland, and RBS
is shedding Scottish jobs. When the First Minister said that he "didn't mind" Thatcher's
economics, he really was not kidding. Is it not the case that Alex Salmond's plans would
do more damage to Scotland than even Margaret Thatcher?
The First Minister: Only somebody who believes that Scotland is not "genetically programmed"
to make political decisions could possibly come up with that concoction of nonsense.
Let us take it apart piece by piece. First, we have been here before: Standard
Life has expressed concerns in the past. In 1992, the managing director of Standard Life
wrote to every employee saying that any constitutional change would be damaging for the business
and would cost jobs. However, by 1997, it had changed its mind as experience had shown
that constitutional change could offer a secure business environment. Johann Lamont should
remember that other people have been convinced by experience and evidence that Scotland is
genetically programmed to make political decisions. Johann Lamont mentioned other things. I point
out that there has been a range of statements across the financial sector. Ross McEwan stated
that the Royal Bank operates in 38 countries and that an independent Scotland would make
it 39. Just a few days ago, the Barclays chief executive described independence as a matter
for the Scottish people to decide. He said: "we think we can make it work either way as
a bank." Martin Gilbert, of Aberdeen Asset Management,
said: "If it did happen, it would be neutral for
Scotland's financial services industry." Major figures recognise that the operations
of their business in an independent Scotland could be highly successful.
When we were faced with businesses who had concerns and doubts, the answer of those supporting
constitutional change was to demonstrate by evidence and experience that Scotland would
be more successful. That is what was done in the past; that is what will be done with
the independence debate. The onus is on Johann Lamont to say that she
believes that Scotland is capable of making political decisions. If she does not believe
that—she seemed to deny that in a debate earlier this week—the whole basis on which
we have come so far with this Parliament is being denied. As we have demonstrated our
ability to run so many of Scotland's affairs—better than they have ever been run from Westminster—so,
too, will we demonstrate our ability to run our economy and the other great issues for
which an independent Scotland would be responsible. Johann Lamont: Yet more quotes from the First
Minister—somebody must have been up all night googling "Alex Salmond is right." I
just hope that they were paid for that. The issue is far too serious for the First
Minister to debate by making cheap points, including on the significance of what Standard
Life is saying. BP has warned that independence will damage Scotland; RBS is being damaged
by the uncertainty that Alex Salmond is causing even now; Standard Life is planning to leave
Scotland if there is a yes vote; and the workers on the Clyde are warning that there will be
no shipbuilding after a yes vote. The First Minister can selectively quote all
that he likes. He can rewrite people's words and try to mislead the people of Scotland
all that he can. However, the reality is that more jobs would go than went at Ravenscraig,
more jobs would go than at Bathgate, more jobs than at Linwood. If there is a yes vote,
is it not the case that we will need to rewrite the song—[Interruption.] If there is a yes
vote, is it not the case that we will need to rewrite the song: "Standard Life no more,
RBS no more, shipbuilding no more, the Scotland we love and fight for no more"?
All that, for Alex Salmond, is a price worth paying. [Applause.]
The Presiding Officer: Order.
The First Minister: Does Johann Lamont not recall that what she has just quoted—Bathgate,
Linwood, Lochaber no more—were put out by the no campaign in 1979, a campaign that she
supported because she was against devolution? Scotland did not get a Parliament, and guess
what happened? Bathgate, Linwood and Lochaber all closed.
Of course, if Johann Lamont had not supported the no campaign in 1979, she could have said
that that was all Tory scaremongering, but now we are saying that it was not just Tory
scaremongering, because Johann Lamont was a no voter in 1979. She agrees with the tactics
that Scotland has grown out of over the past 20 years. We have seen through the scaremongering.
If we had not seen through it, we would not now have this Parliament.
I say to Johann Lamont that Scotland will go on to prosperity and more equality through
independence. It will not be "our business no more"; it will be "Labour no more". [Applause.]
The Presiding Officer: I call question 2—[Interruption.] Order.
Ruth Davidson (Glasgow) (Con): I add our condolences to those from the whole Parliament to the
family of the worker from the Taqa platform who was tragically killed.
To ask the First Minister when he will next meet the Prime Minister.
The First Minister (Alex Salmond): No plans in the near future.
Ruth Davidson: This morning, 5,000 people throughout Scotland woke up to hear that,
in the event of a yes vote, their jobs might move south. The chief executive of Standard
Life, David Nish, said that he had started to establish companies outside Scotland to
operate in the event of independence. The firm stresses that it is not telling people
how to vote; it is just making calm and rational preparations for what happens when a country
in which it is operating is broken up. Standard Life has just told us its plan B. Why will
the First Minister not do the same?
The First Minister: I will read Ruth Davidson something that was written in the past:
"The Scottish life insurance industry has emerged, in recent weeks, as the business
sector most publicly tormented by even a hint of home rule. The biggest players, led by
Standard Life and Scottish Widows, even resorted to ill-judged letters to staff warning of
the grave consequences for jobs of any slippage from the status quo."
That was written by the commentator Alf Young about the 1992 election campaign. What was
the worst thing about that aspect of the campaign? It was the Conservative Party, which was exploiting
the fears of business and trying to translate them into opposition to constitutional change
in Scotland. However, by 1997, people had seen through that tactic.
I have read what Standard Life actually said today. It said that it wants security in having
a competitive business environment—I have read it out to the Parliament—and that Scotland
would be "a good place from which to run our business
and compete around the world" in the 10 countries and jurisdictions in which
Standard Life currently operates. From the position of the Scottish Conservatives,
can Ruth Davidson not express the confidence that we can create that good competitive place
to do business, so that our highly successful companies can grow their staff in an independent
Scotland?
Ruth Davidson: The First Minister does not understand that when David Nish tells people
how independence would adversely affect his business, and when the Royal Bank of Scotland
says that independence would hurt its credit rating, that is not a conspiracy. When BP
says that independence would threaten its business and when Asda says that independence
would put up prices, that is not a conspiracy. When the austerity-hating, Nobel prize winning
left-wing economist Paul Krugman says that a currency union without shared Government
would be "very dangerous", that is not a conspiracy. When the Canadian central banker Mark Carney
says that it is necessary to give up sovereignty to have a currency union, that is not a conspiracy.
However much the First Minister might like to protest, when the Chancellor of the Exchequer,
his opposite numbers and the permanent secretary to the Treasury say that a currency union
with a foreign country would not be in the interests of the rest of the UK, that is not
a conspiracy, either.
Mark McDonald (Aberdeen Donside) (SNP): Yes it is.
The Presiding Officer: Order.
Ruth Davidson: People explaining how independence would affect them, the country, their business
and their customers is vital to the debate, and the Scottish National Party should not
dismiss those voices or shout them down. Standard Life has said that jobs could go
in an independent Scotland if it is not given clarity on five major issues. What can the
First Minister tell the company's employees today that he could not tell them yesterday?
The First Minister: I make it quite clear—so that there is no room for misunderstanding—that
there is no conspiracy among the range of people and companies that Ruth Davidson mentioned;
the conspiracy is the work of the Conservative Party and the other scaremongers who want
deliberately to misrepresent what is being said. The classic example is the comments
of the poor governor of the Bank of England—who made a judicious speech in Edinburgh a few
weeks ago—being incorporated with the Chancellor of the Exchequer's political statements against
monetary union. I have already read out what the chief executive
of the Royal Bank of Scotland said. I heard him on the radio this morning, and what he
said is a million miles from Ruth Davidson's attempted incorporation of his comments in
her political argument. He did not say what she suggests. What else has been said is on
the record. Perhaps we should follow investment to tell
us what is actually going on. I noticed from last week's papers that
"Standard Life Investments is reported to have agreed a £75 million joint venture acquisition
and development deal" with Peveril Securities for a site in St Andrew
Square in Edinburgh. Standard Life Investments described the deal as
"a first-class long-term investment for our partners."
That is what is going on in the Scottish economy. The chancellor's attempts to undermine confidence,
which go back to 2011, have failed, as will Ruth Davidson's.
Ruth Davidson asks who supports our proposition for a currency union. A huge range of people
do, including Jim McColl, Tony Banks, Dan MacDonald, Sandy Adam, Martin McAdam and Ivan
McKee—key businesspeople who signed a letter to The Scotsman. In "Future Scotland: Macroeconomic
and Fiscal Sustainability", the Scottish Council for Development and Industry said:
"The UK is an optimal currency zone and a sterling union would minimise economic disruption."
Dr Jim Walker and the banking and business finance partner of Tods Murray, Rod MacLeod,
support our proposal. A range of people do. Above all, the Scottish people do—by a significant
majority, they think that our proposal is right.
Can I think of anyone else who supports our idea for a currency union? Jackson Carlaw
does. Not only is he a supporter of it, but he will be "manning the barricades" in support
of it. I love giving Ruth Davidson the benefit of the doubt; I am sure that, when Jackson
is on the barricades, Ruth and I will be standing there right alongside him.
Alison McInnes (North East Scotland) (LD): The First Minister will be aware that, last
week, in response to investigations by Education Scotland inspectors and the Care Inspectorate,
it was announced that the independent Hamilton school and nursery in Aberdeen would close
immediately. This week, primary pupils started attending classes at Braeside, but following
the Hamilton school and nursery's closure, future provision for pre-school children remains
in doubt. Will the First Minister update us on progress? Will he undertake to ensure that
everything possible is done to find a place for the nursery children and to minimise disruption
to families at this difficult time?
The First Minister: I thank Alison McInnes for her question. She knows that Aberdeen
City Council and the Scottish Government are working together closely on the issue. As
of last night, more than 50 places had already been secured for the nursery children. I know
that because—as Alison McInnes understands—Government ministers were faced with the reports that
they were faced with, there was no reasonable alternative to the action that was taken with
Hamilton school. Alison McInnes has my assurance that we will
continue to work closely with Aberdeen City Council to ensure minimum disruption. A rapid
and effective response was made for the primary school children; we will seek minimum disruption
for the nursery children, too. The closure of Hamilton school has affected the children,
their families and the staff. Everyone is doing their utmost to ensure minimum disruption
and—as with all decisions that have been made on the issue—to ensure that the children's
welfare is uppermost in everyone's minds.
Jim Eadie (Edinburgh Southern) (SNP): To ask the First Minister what support the Scottish
Government is providing to food banks in order to help tackle the impact of United Kingdom
welfare reforms.
The First Minister (Alex Salmond): In total, we have put in place more than £258 million
of funding over the three years from 2013-14 to 2015-16 to mitigate some of the cost and
the impact of the UK Government's welfare changes. That help is aimed at some of the
most vulnerable in society and at tackling the worst impact of the cuts. Let us remember
that research in December found that food banks believe that the cuts are the root cause
of the massive increase in the numbers who are using their services.
We will continue to work with local authorities, third sector partners and others on how best
to ensure that those who use food banks have access to appropriate advice and support.
I have asked the Poverty Alliance to carry out more research into food poverty in Scotland.
Jim Eadie: In the week when Scotland's largest food bank ran out of food, does the First
Minister agree with the Moderator of the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland, the Rev
Lorna Hood, who said, "This is not right"? Is it not an affront to the dignity of tens
of thousands of our fellow human beings that they are forced to rely on such services?
Is it not shameful that the only thing that prevents children from going to bed hungry
is the charity and good will of others? Is it not the measure of a just society that
we resolve to tackle and eradicate the poverty that exists in Scotland?
The First Minister: I agree. Any politician who visits and supports a food bank is caught
in the horns of a dilemma of two minds. There is admiration for the solidarity that is shown
by those who work in food banks and volunteer to help their fellow citizens in a time of
extremity. However, there is also the clear understanding, which is shared by food bank
volunteers, that it is disgraceful that we are seeing in 21st century Scotland the spread
of the necessity to help our fellow citizens who are in distress. Both those aspects should
be taken forward in policy—the solidarity, which helps people, and the determination
to eliminate the necessity for people to rely on food banks in 21st century Scotland.
Jackie Baillie (Dumbarton) (Lab): I could not agree more with the First Minister. He
will be aware that referrals have been made to food banks instead of grants being made
available from the Scottish welfare fund, over which he has control. That is happening
when the welfare fund is substantially underspent—only a third of it was spent in its first six months
of operation. Last week, the minister projected an underspend of millions. Will the First
Minister consider an urgent review to ensure that the welfare fund better supports those
who are in crisis, which would negate some of the need for food banks?
The First Minister: It is under review. When I visited an Edinburgh food bank a few weeks
ago, people said exactly that the review and the co-operation with local authorities are
enabling better provision under the welfare fund.
Jackie Baillie has often said that the welfare fund is undersubscribed, but it is clear that
the series of mitigation measures that the Scottish Government and local authorities
have put in place will not be undersubscribed. New mitigation schemes have been set up and
the reality is that more and more is being claimed from them as time goes on.
Another reality that Jackie Baillie will face at some stage is that, even with the best
will in the world and with the £258 million of mitigation measures, we cannot cope with
the full extent of the welfare cuts that are being borne down on many sections of Scottish
society. Given that reality, she will at some stage have to reconsider her incredible position
not that Scotland could not run welfare provision, but that it should not run welfare provision.
The reality is that it must run welfare provision.
Roderick Campbell (North East Fife) (SNP): To ask the First Minister what the Scottish
Government's position is on the recent increase in reported incidents of ***.
The First Minister (Alex Salmond): There are many troubling aspects. We know that a high
proportion of rapes are never reported to the police. The increase in reported incidents
may in part be because victims have more confidence in the police and are therefore more willing
to come forward and report crime. What is more, Police Scotland has made tackling
*** a key priority for the new service. The Crown Office has improved the way in which
it handles ***, with the creation of the national *** crimes unit—a team of specialist
prosecutors to ensure that these cases are given the best available consideration and
preparation.
Roderick Campbell: Whatever the reasons for the increase in recorded incidents, given
the current constraints on public finance, can the First Minister advise what funding
is available from the Scottish Government to ensure that agencies that assist alleged
*** victims are properly financed and resourced?
The First Minister: There are now 14 Scottish *** crisis network centres located throughout
Scotland. They will receive funding from the Scottish Government of £700,000 each year
during 2012 to 2015. *** Crisis Scotland will receive £244,000 of Scottish Government
funding a year, which will enable a strategic approach to tackling *** and *** assault,
and will also support the 14 *** crisis centres. We are also providing for a *** advocacy
pilot. That grant will be for a *** crisis advocacy service, which supports victims through
their contact with the criminal justice system. We are supporting the *** crisis helpline,
which will receive £260,000 of Scottish Government funding a year from 2012 to 2015. That helpline
offers free and confidential support and information for women and men who have experienced ***
violence.
Ken Macintosh (Eastwood) (Lab): To ask the First Minister, in light of the evidence given
by the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Wellbeing at the Public Audit Committee on 19 February
2014, how long confidentiality clauses have been included automatically in NHS settlement
agreements. (S4F-01917)
The First Minister (Alex Salmond): Compromise agreements were introduced in 1993 and, while
confidentiality clauses have often been used in those agreements, there is no obligation
to do so. However, there is understandable concern that the inclusion of a confidentiality
clause within the standard template produced by NHS Scotland's central legal office in
2009 could be encouraging their use. That is why Alex Neil announced this morning
that confidentiality clauses are to be removed from the standard template and health boards
told that the presumption must be against their use. Alex Neil has also made it abundantly
clear that no clause whatever can ever prevent an NHS employee from raising any concerns
that they have on patient safety.
Ken Macintosh: I thank the First Minister for his remarks and for the tenor of his remarks.
Is he aware that, according to freedom of information requests that I have lodged, in
2007-08 there were four compromise or settlement arrangements in the NHS in Scotland at a cost
of £130,000? That figure has risen every year since—to six, to eight, to 17 and,
in 2012, to 110, at a cost of more than £2 million. Last year, the figure was 143, at
a cost of £3.5 million. Now that we discover that every one of those, except one apparently,
has a confidentiality clause, does the First Minister still maintain, as the health secretary
tried to do at the Public Audit Committee, that this is an historical problem, or does
he recognise that it is one of his own creation?
The First Minister: Given that Ken Macintosh thanked me for the way in which I responded
to his first question, he should accept that the health secretary has consistently said
that he is looking at the issue; he trying to find the reasons for the spread of confidentiality
clauses, how that can be best sorted in the interests of patient care in Scotland and
how we can ensure that all parts of agreements reconcile with the absolute right of an NHS
employee to raise any concerns that they have on patient safety.
The Government introduced the Patient Rights (Scotland) Act 2011, which established the
confidentiality helpline. Alex Neil announced this very morning at the Royal College of
Nursing conference a further move to make it absolutely clear to health boards that confidentiality clauses should be removed
from the standard template and that the presumption should be against their use. That seems to
me to be a range of measures that demonstrate this Government's commitment to allowing people
within the health service to report their concerns without fear or favour.
Chic Brodie (South Scotland) (SNP): To ask the First Minister how the Scottish Government
will ensure that all sectors of sport are equipped to handle cardiac arrests by participants
and spectators.
The First Minister (Alex Salmond): Heart disease and the treatment of cardiac arrest remains
a clinical priority for NHS Scotland, which wants not just people who participate in sport
but everyone to have access to the best possible care as quickly as possible.
Substantial investment in heart disease services has reduced Scotland's premature death rate
from coronary heart disease by 43.6 per cent in the past 10 years. On Monday, the Cabinet
Secretary for Health and Wellbeing announced that we are investing £100,000 to increase
the number of public-access defibrillators in Scotland. That will benefit sports participants
as well as the wider community.
Chic Brodie: A campaign that is backed by Arrhythmia Alliance, the Professional Golfers
Association and PGA European Tour aims to have one defibrillator at each of the 3,000
golf clubs in the United Kingdom and Ireland by the end of 2014. In this exciting year
for golf in Scotland, will the Government work with the campaign to persuade every golf
club in Scotland to install such a device?
The First Minister: As Chic Brodie knows, this afternoon the Minister for Commonwealth
Games and Sport and I will meet Bernard Gallacher to hear more about the campaign to increase
access to defibrillators throughout Scotland. Of course, Bernard's recent experience has
highlighted the lifesaving potential of public access to defibrillation. I look forward to
learning more about the campaign and I know that all members will welcome the fact that
someone is using their adverse personal experience to promote a campaign that can bring great
benefits to all the people of Scotland.