SCOTS Project - www.scottishcorpus.ac.uk

Document : 1244
Title    : Scottish Parliament: Official Report (27/03/03)
Author(s): Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body

Copyright holder(s): Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body: © Scottish
Parliamentary copyright material is reproduced with the permission of the
Queen's Printer for Scotland on behalf of the Scottish Parliamentary
Corporate Body.

Text

Session 1 (2003) 
Scottish Parliament

Official Report  

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
27 March 2003 
CONTENTS

Thursday 27 March 2003

Debates

CLOSING THE OPPORTUNITY GAP FOR OLDER PEOPLE
Motion moved—[Ms Margaret Curran].
Amendment moved—[Mr Kenneth Gibson].
Amendment moved—[Mr Keith Harding].
The Minister for Social Justice (Ms Margaret Curran)
Mr Kenneth Gibson (Glasgow) (SNP)
Mr Keith Harding (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
Ian Jenkins (Tweeddale, Ettrick and Lauderdale) (LD)
Trish Godman (West Renfrewshire) (Lab)
Kay Ullrich (West of Scotland) (SNP)
Bill Butler (Glasgow Anniesland) (Lab)
Mary Scanlon (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
Donald Gorrie (Central Scotland) (LD)
Colin Campbell (West of Scotland) (SNP)
Mr David Davidson (North-East Scotland) (Con)
Paul Martin (Glasgow Springburn) (Lab)
Alex Neil (Central Scotland) (SNP)
John Young (West of Scotland) (Con)
Dorothy-Grace Elder (Glasgow) (Ind)
Christine Grahame (South of Scotland) (SNP)
Sarah Boyack (Edinburgh Central) (Lab)
Ms Sandra White (Glasgow) (SNP)
Robert Brown (Glasgow) (LD)
Mrs Lyndsay McIntosh (Central Scotland) (Con)
Linda Fabiani (Central Scotland) (SNP)
The Deputy Minister for Enterprise, Transport and Lifelong Learning (Lewis
Macdonald)
GREAT NORTHERN PARTNERSHIP
Motion debated—[Elaine Thomson].
Elaine Thomson (Aberdeen North) (Lab)
Brian Adam (North-East Scotland) (SNP)
Mr Tom McCabe (Hamilton South) (Lab)
Richard Lochhead (North-East Scotland) (SNP)
Sarah Boyack (Edinburgh Central) (Lab)
The Deputy Minister for Social Justice (Des McNulty)
QUESTION TIME
SCOTTISH EXECUTIVE
A82 (Tarbet to Inverarnan)
Adoption
Agriculture
Air Services (Glasgow to Barra)
European Maritime Safety Agency
Ferry (Ballycastle to Cambeltown)
Housing
Less Favoured Areas Support (Crofting)
Nursery Schools (Consultation)
Police (Fife)
Racial Prejudice
Schools (Class Sizes)
Scottish Borders (Economy)
FIRST MINISTER'S QUESTION TIME
British Sign Language (Interpreters)
Cabinet (Meetings)
Entitlement Cards
Forth Estuary Transport Authority
Prime Minister (Meetings)
Schools (British History)
MOTION OF THANKS
Motion moved—[Mr Jack McConnell]—and agreed to.
The First Minister (Mr Jack McConnell)
Mr John Swinney (North Tayside) (SNP)
David McLetchie (Lothians) (Con)
The Deputy First Minister and Minister for Justice (Mr Jim Wallace)
John Young (West of Scotland) (Con)
The Minister for Parliamentary Business (Patricia Ferguson)
The Presiding Officer (Sir David Steel)
DECISION TIME
 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
27 March 2003 
Scottish Parliament

Thursday 27 March 2003

[THE DEPUTY PRESIDING OFFICER opened the meeting at 09:30]

Closing the Opportunity Gap for Older People

The Deputy Presiding Officer (Mr George Reid): Good morning. The first item
of business today is a debate on motion S1M-4064, in the name of Margaret
Curran, on closing the opportunity gap for older people, and two amendments
to that motion.

Tommy Sheridan (Glasgow) (SSP): On a point of order, Presiding Officer.

The Deputy Presiding Officer: I will finish the introduction, Mr Sheridan,
and then I will call you.

Those members who wish to contribute to the debate should please press
their request-to-speak buttons now.

Tommy Sheridan: I have already informed the Presiding Officer's office that
the Scottish Coalition for Justice not War has asked for the observance of
a minute's silence today at 11 am in memory of all those who have been
killed so far in the conflict in Iraq. No disrespect is meant to any member
who is speaking at that time, but some members will observe a minute's
silence then.

The Deputy Presiding Officer: We have no wish to diminish the feelings of
people on the subject, Mr Sheridan, but there is a public demonstration
throughout Edinburgh and I suggest that the appropriate place to observe a
minute's silence is with the people of Edinburgh. We will come to that at
the appropriate time. I call Margaret Curran to speak to and move the
motion.

09:31

The Minister for Social Justice (Ms Margaret Curran): This is an historic
moment for the Parliament—although I think that I have said that in most
of the debates in which I have spoken, which have been historic for one
reason or another. However, this truly is an historic moment, as it is the
last debate in this session of Parliament—it is a great privilege to
speak in it. It is particularly appropriate that we are focusing on older
people, because that signals the importance of that area of work and of
that key group in our population, not only to the Executive—which I will
talk about in my speech—but to the Parliament.

Undoubtedly, the debate will, by definition, be wide ranging and will cover
many areas, such as investment in and the quality of services, the need to
create new opportunities and the quality of life in our local communities.
Of course, fundamentally, we need to listen to the voices of older people.
However, it is significant that we have framed the debate around closing
the opportunity gap, because social justice has been at the top of
Scotland's agenda in the past four years. This final debate should reflect
that.

When the Scottish Parliament was established, levels of poverty and
exclusion were a blight on our country. I would not like to disappoint
Keith Harding in my last formal speech from the podium—I really should
rant about the Tories at this point, but it seems too early in the morning
for that and I might save my passion for a wee bit later, if he will
forgive me. [MEMBERS: "Oh!"] There is an offer that he cannot refuse. I
will leave my condemnation of the Tories until later in the debate.

I want to talk about the significant steps that the Executive is taking to
consign the Tory years and poverty to the past. We have shown our
determination to close the opportunity gap, so that those who are most at
risk can make real choices and make the most of the opportunities that our
society should present to them.

Mr David Davidson (North-East Scotland) (Con): I am delighted to be
speaking to Margaret Curran in this, the last meeting of the Parliament in
this session. Does she think that the Chancellor of the Exchequer has the
same objectives as she has, given that he is taking £5 billion a year out
of the pension funds? Can she explain that away?

Ms Curran: That question gives me a pleasurable opportunity to say that
perhaps the best thing that has happened to this country in the past five
years has been Gordon Brown's prudent economic approach, which has led to
unparalleled investment, unparalleled opportunities for our older people
and a level of income for older people that the Tories could never have
dreamed of. I am more than proud to celebrate the achievements of Gordon
Brown. That is not bad: two minutes into my speech and I am ranting.
Self-awareness is a great thing.

The Executive has shown its determination to close the opportunity gap.
Often, as I have debated with my colleagues on the SNP benches and with
Lyndsay McIntosh, who may not be taking part in the debate today—

Mrs Lyndsay McIntosh (Central Scotland) (Con): Oh, but I am.

Ms Curran: Yes, she is. We have debated poverty on many occasions in the
Parliament. Those debates have been robust, enjoyable and thorough, but
they have often tended to focus on children and young people—quite
properly, because we know that we need to strive to prevent children and
young people from falling into poverty and exclusion. It is important that
we do that to break the poverty cycle.

However, it is also important that we do not do that at the expense of
understanding the impact of poverty on older citizens and the need to
improve services and direct resources for that key part of the population.
It is appropriate that today's debate focuses on how we have begun to close
the opportunity gap for older people. If I have one theme, it is: much
done, still more to do. I am sure that members are familiar with that
theme, because we have made significant achievements but recognise that
there is still some way to go.

We have moved many people out of poverty and provided them with the means
for a better life. We are ensuring that, as people get older, they can
continue to enrich Scotland with their skills, experience, energy and
enthusiasm. Our vision is to ensure that every person beyond working age
has a decent quality of life. Therefore, our long-term goals are to ensure
that older people are financially secure, to increase the number of older
people who enjoy active, healthy and independent lives and to help older
people to access opportunities and choices that our society offers to
everyone.

We must think of older people not only in terms of their needs, but in
terms of what they can offer. Too often in the past, we have regarded
elderly citizens as passive recipients of services, but we should encourage
elderly citizens to be proactive in shaping the society around them. At
present, 1.7 million Scots are over 50. That significant proportion of our
population makes an invaluable contribution to the cultural, economic and
social fabric of the nation. I will talk more about that later.

As people get older, a range of support is necessary to allow them to
continue to play a full and active role in society. Along with the United
Kingdom Government and other partners, we aim to provide that support. Two
weeks ago, we announced with the Department for Work and Pensions that,
between 1996-97 and 2001-02, 80,000 pensioners were lifted out of relative
income poverty and 170,000 were lifted out of absolute income poverty. That
is a fall in the proportion of pensioners living in income poverty from 29
per cent to 20 per cent in relative terms. In only five years, that must be
regarded as a major success.

Given the improvement in overall economic conditions, and with
medium-income figures rising by 19 per cent, those are particularly
encouraging statistics that underline our commitment to provide financial
security. By April, the minimum income guarantee will ensure that no
pensioner will have to live on less than £102 a week and pensioner couples
will receive £155.80 a week. From August 2003, the new pension credit will
provide extra assistance for pensioners living on low and modest incomes.
We will ensure that, for the first time, pensioners with savings are
rewarded for their thrift.

All pensioners have the benefit of the £200 winter fuel payment and the
over-75s receive free television licences, which are currently worth £112
a year. Furthermore, we are working with the Department for Work and
Pensions, local authorities and the voluntary sector in the partnership
against poverty. That group is focused on improving the uptake of social
security benefits available to older people throughout Scotland.

Not all older people are pensioners and it is essential that we take
advantage of the experience, knowledge and skills of the over-50s work
force. The employment rate for the over-50s is improving. In 2002, it stood
at 64 per cent, but that is still below the average for working-age people
in Scotland, which is 73 per cent. We want to close that gap to give older
people the opportunity to get back into work and to use their skills. That
can often mean giving people advice and training them in new skills. Great
Britain schemes, such as the new deal 50 plus, can and do help older people
to find their way back into the workplace. So far, 11,500 jobs have been
found on that scheme in Scotland.

We can also record our achievements with initiatives that not only improve
the quality of life for older people, but have the added benefit of
reducing daily living expenses. The Scottish Executive is committed to
ensuring—as far as is reasonably practical—that people will not live in
fuel poverty within 15 years. We are on track to achieve that commitment.

I refer back to the bad Tory years—they were not so long ago that we
cannot remember what it was like when people were living in damp, cold
houses and could not afford to pay their bills. Our commitment to
eradicating fuel poverty and to having it within our grasp is probably one
of the Executive's most significant achievements.

Fuel poverty exists as a result of a number of factors—income, fuel costs
and the energy efficiency of the home. We are taking action on all three
factors. We have talked about the increasing prosperity of our older
people. The UK Government has reduced VAT on domestic fuel and we have made
great strides on energy efficiency. Through the central heating programme,
around 18,000—

Mary Scanlon (Highlands and Islands) (Con): We have all received a briefing
from Help the Aged this morning. Given the work that the Executive has done
on fuel poverty, does the minister agree with Help the Aged that 58 per
cent of Scottish pensioners are classified as living in fuel poverty and
that that figure is rising?

Ms Curran: I have not seen the Help the Aged briefing and I am wise enough
not to endorse figures that I have not seen. Let me make our position
abundantly clear. We have said that fuel poverty cannot be turned around in
a year or so, but we have a long-term commitment to its eradication. No
Government has ever made that historic commitment before. I know that the
organisations that work on fuel poverty have said that that is a
significant achievement and have congratulated us on our commitment to
eradicate fuel poverty.

One of the most significant emblems of that commitment has been the central
heating programme, which we have debated in the chamber before. It will be
a lasting testament to the significant work of the Executive that older
people have central heating in their homes that they would not have had
before. Nearly 10,000 pensioners in Scotland have central heating because
of the Executive's work. The Tories abandoned them and we did not.

Mr Davidson: Transco is heavily involved in delivering, on behalf of the
Executive, the central heating programme for pensioners and others.
Representatives of Transco have told me twice in the past six months that
there are 2,500 too few technicians and that the programme cannot be
delivered because the Executive is not training people. Moreover, does the
minister agree that it was astonishing that Iain Gray said yesterday that
unemployment in the older age group is going down when the fact is that
those people are being forced to go to work because they cannot afford to
live without working?

Ms Curran: My God, it will be quite a debate if the Tories are going to
start defending the unemployed. The Conservatives are experienced in issues
relating to massive levels of unemployment. I will take no lectures about
unemployment from them.

Success brings its own challenges. Because we have economic prosperity and
many opportunities, we require more skilled people. The construction boom
in Glasgow is just one example of that. We need to keep training the
engineers to deliver the central heating programme, but I am reliably
informed that we are on target to deliver the work force that is required
to install the central heating. Although the entire programme will be
completed by March 2006, local authorities will complete their part of the
programme by April 2004, which is two years earlier than planned. That
means that the programme cannot be in that much disarray.

The warm deal contributes to energy savings. Our programme for government
target to insulate 100,000 houses by March 2002 was achieved almost 18
months ahead of schedule. There are now 137 more energy-efficient homes.
New building standards that were enforced this month mean that Scotland now
has the highest mandatory standards for energy efficiency for new homes in
the UK.

Taken together, the measures will provide, on average, annual savings on
bills of £290 for those aged over 60 and £350 for those in local
authority housing association properties. The measures are not just about
saving money; they are also about having a warm, dry home. We all know the
contribution that that makes to closing the opportunity gap.

On another front, if older people are to maintain active social, cultural,
educational and working lives, it is essential that public transport is
available, accessible and affordable. Last year, Iain Gray and Lewis
Macdonald introduced free local off-peak bus travel for more than 1 million
elderly and disabled people throughout Scotland. Again, that is an historic
commitment and a key delivery for the Scottish Executive.

Mr Kenneth Gibson (Glasgow) (SNP): Will the minister give way?

Ms Curran: I must press on, as I do not want to run out of time. We can
pursue some of those issues later.

Helping our older people to be more active is part of our strategy to
improve their overall quality of life. Our efforts in that regard begin
with listening to older people to find out what they want. In the past,
once people became less able to manage for themselves, it was felt that the
best solution was for them to go into care. From listening to older people,
we know that they often prefer to live independently in their own homes.
Earlier this month, we announced £200 million of funding during the first
year of the supporting people programme, which is another major progressive
delivery of support services. That new policy for housing support services
will make all the difference for older people and others in enabling them
to stay in their own home rather than having to go into care. Around
100,000 people are likely to be helped.

Vulnerable people will be given the assistance that they need to keep their
home, live more independently and feel secure. It will not matter whether
they live in a flat, a house, sheltered accommodation or a hostel, whether
they live on their own or share, or whether they own their home or rent
from a landlord. The care-and-repair scheme for elderly and other
vulnerable people allows improvements, repairs and adaptations to be made
to their homes.

We are closing the opportunity gap for older people not only in their
individual households, but in the community, because that is what older
people's organisations tell us that we must do. We must ensure that the
needs of elderly people are centre stage in all our policies.

Safety is an important element of our regeneration agenda. Older people
must be safe and must feel safe in their own communities. It is not
acceptable that there is an effective curfew on older people in their
communities, where they do not feel that they can use their own streets at
night. If there is one aim that we must pursue, it is that elderly people
can reclaim their own communities and live properly and safely in them.

That is why Jim Wallace has provided record numbers of police to deal with
violence, drug crime and housebreaking. We have introduced youth courts and
fast-track hearings to tackle youth crime and have introduced more than
2,000 additional closed-circuit television cameras to help to prevent crime
and to make our communities safer. At the other end of the spectrum, we
have provided support to Age Concern Scotland's elder abuse project. We
have also committed £20 million to rolling out my proposal for the
community wardens scheme and £10 million to other community-based
initiatives that will allow us to contribute to safer communities.

We know that good health and quality of life go hand in hand. Promoting
good health for Scots of all ages has been a top priority for the
Executive. By encouraging older people to improve their diet and to take
regular exercise, we can help them to avoid debilitating illnesses and to
retain their independence for as long as possible. We have some way to
go—there is no doubt about that—but recent statistics are encouraging.
Between 1997 and 2001, deaths per 100,000 for under-75s from coronary heart
disease fell by 25 per cent. In that age group, deaths from stroke fell by
16 per cent and deaths from cancer fell by 4.8 per cent over that period.

Last week, Malcolm Chisholm launched the health improvement challenge
paper, which sets out a framework for action. It focuses on the key risk
factors, all of which affect older people. We are determined to accelerate
the rate of health improvement and to reduce health inequalities by
improving the health of our most disadvantaged communities, because we know
that that will impact on the opportunities of older people.

Last month, along with many colleagues from the Executive, the First
Minister launched "Let's Make Scotland More Active: A strategy for physical
activity". We will encourage older people to participate in physical
activity, so that they can play a part in that strategy. The healthy eating
and healthy living advice line and website should make it easier for older
people to access information.

One of the Executive's most significant policies has been the introduction
of free personal and nursing care for people aged 65 and over. The
Executive has taken away the burden of financial worry from more than
75,000 pensioners. That means that they can be confident that they will get
the level of personal care and support that they deserve, which will give
them dignity and security. A critical part of creating a fairer Scotland is
that we ensure that free personal care delivers and works. The Community
Care and Health (Scotland) Act 2002, which the Parliament passed,
represents a major step forward in improving the arrangements for community
care in Scotland.

Older people rarely need the services of just one agency, but it is at the
boundaries between agencies that we have perhaps faced difficulties in the
past. Older people do not particularly care which agency provides a
service, but we must ensure that all the agencies meet their needs. In
community care, we have been making major strides towards integrated
responses by implementing the joint future agenda. That agenda is about
better local integrated services and about how the national health service
and local authority resources should be used jointly. Older people in some
areas are already benefiting from better and faster assessments, access to
a wide range of services from a single entry point and more co-ordinated
responses to their general needs. Those benefits should be available more
widely and, by April 2004, we will be applying the same principles to all
community care.

We should always be careful not to stereotype older people, because their
needs and issues extend far beyond basic care and support. If we are
sincere about valuing our older people, we must provide the conditions that
allow them to play the active role that I talked about.

Johann Lamont (Glasgow Pollok) (Lab): The minister mentioned stereotyping
older people. Does she agree that the experience of older women can be very
different from that of older men? Given their work patterns when they were
younger and their lack of a pension, older women are more likely to be low
paid and are certainly more likely to be carers. In my constituency, there
are many grandmothers looking after the children of drug-abusing parents.
Does the Scottish Executive have a strategy to address the specific needs
of women pensioners, who may be among the most vulnerable of our older
people?

Ms Curran: I thank Johann Lamont for introducing another theme that is dear
to my heart. In the equality strategy, we have now recognised that age is
itself a key determination. We have to join up our understandings of gender
discrimination and age discrimination. We have categorically stated that
that must be mainstreamed across all policies in the Executive. It is
important that all ministers, holding all portfolios, are engaged in
elderly-related issues. They must understand the distinct experiences that
women have had in their working lives and through their caring
responsibilities and they must understand the impact that those experiences
have later on in women's lives. The experiences of women from
ethnic-minority communities can have their own particular dimension. We are
on the cusp of delivering sensitive services that meet the needs of
different groups, but there is no doubt that the inequality of women shows
itself as much within the elderly section of the population as it does more
generally.

The lifelong learning strategy is significant for ensuring that elderly
people get their fair opportunities. I emphasise the need to ensure that
digital inclusion extends to the elderly population. We have committed
ourselves to providing public internet access points to ensure that elderly
people, too, can access the web. Age Concern Scotland is working with us to
identify target venues that may be particularly geared towards older
people.

One of the most significant aspects of my work lies in recognising the
contribution that elderly people make, through volunteering, to services
provided for other people. Often, it is elderly people who run lunch clubs,
for example. That breaks down the stereotypes around older people. We must
ensure that older people get their fair share in our voluntary sector and
volunteering strategies.

We recognise that older people in rural communities face particular
challenges. The report of the rural poverty and inclusion working group
highlighted the issues around poverty and social exclusion for older people
living in rural areas. It is important that we pursue those issues.

Listening to older people is a key plank of our approach. If the Government
does not listen to the people, we often get the policies wrong. If we work
in partnership, we can move towards much more radical policies. There is
some evidence that we have done that. Frank McAveety set up and chairs the
older people's consultative forum, which provides a basis for partnership
working with older people, who can tell us about the barriers that they
face, the additional opportunities that they want to have and how they want
to contribute. I am sure that they laugh at Frank's jokes and that the
meetings are most entertaining, but the forum allows us to develop an
agenda for taking forward that partnership working.

This is the last Executive debate of this first session of the Scottish
Parliament and, as I said, it is appropriate that we are discussing the
needs of elderly people and the real, practical changes that we have
introduced to lift standards of living and to raise opportunities for them.
We have demonstrated that, with the proper resources and the right action,
it is possible to make a real difference to people's quality of life. We
are not complacent, however, and we recognise that much more needs to be
done. It is with great pleasure that I now conclude my last speech as
Minister for Social Justice in this session of Parliament by moving,

That the Parliament welcomes the Scottish Executive's commitment to close
the opportunity gap for Scotland's older people by building first-class
public services and developing initiatives in health, transport and other
priority areas, which will support older people in living healthy, active
and independent lives.

09:53

Mr Kenneth Gibson (Glasgow) (SNP): That was a nice, cheery speech from the
Minister for Social Justice. She is obviously demob happy, and I do not
intend to lower the tone too much in my speech.

There are 944,000 people of pensionable age in Scotland—about 19 per cent
of the total estimated Scottish population. By 2026, there will be about
1.3 million people of pensionable age, or approximately 27 per cent of the
total Scottish population. Life expectancy stands at 72.9 years for men and
78.2 years for women. As was recently reported, those figures are, sadly,
among the lowest in western Europe.

Despite the advances that have been made, of the 641 mainland parliamentary
constituencies in Britain, 10 of the 20 poorest are in Glasgow, so there
are certain areas of health inequality still to be addressed. That will
take not just years but generations. A majority of people of pensionable
age are female, because of women's longer life expectancy. As a result,
many of them will live alone and will consequently suffer high morbidity
rates.

We would all agree that many of the attitudes held by some people in our
society towards older people must change. Jess Barrow, head of policy at
Age Concern Scotland, said:

"Some of the ways we treat old people we just would not accept for any
other section of society."

Unfortunately, the European Union is not due to implement anti-ageism
legislation until 2006. A recent King's Fund guide found that ageism is
difficult to identify because people are not used to having to recognise
it, given the lack of anti-discrimination legislation that is related to
age, unlike that which exists for race or gender for example. However, more
than half of Scots believe that

"this country treats older people as if they are on the scrap-heap"—

and almost half believe that

"old people in this country are considered to be a burden on society."

Ageism, or discrimination against older people, may not consist of
deliberate sentiments against older persons, but may involve them being
patronised through ignorance of their need to be treated as fairly as
everyone else. The Executive has set up an equalities strategy, the older
people's unit and the older people's consultative forum, and it is great to
see the forum's chair, the esteemed Frank McAveety, here today. However,
more must be done to reverse the deep-rooted social acceptance of
patronising and discriminatory behaviour towards older people so that we
treat them with the respect that they deserve.

Age discrimination occurs because a low value is associated with older
people's lives. The idea exists that older people had their chance and that
their quality of life, as an older person, is not worth saving as much as
that of a younger person. Some people believe that older people are a
burden to others, such as their family or friends or the NHS.

Many older people do not face only discrimination as a result of their age.
They may also suffer from multiple problems due to age and
disability—indeed, they may face discrimination on the ground of
disability. As Ros Levenson, author of "Auditing Age Discrimination: A
practical approach to promoting equality in health and social care"
stated:

"Tackling age discrimination is too low on the agenda for many health and
social care organisations. But ageism is a serious equality issue."

I am pleased that the minister touched on that matter.

Of course, the majority of older people are fit and healthy and should not
be thought of merely as a burden on the NHS. Health is one area of older
people's lives in which they are likely to encounter both positive
discrimination—for example, exemption from prescription charges—and
negative discrimination, such as age limits for transplant services in the
NHS. Executive targets for reducing the incidence of cancer, heart disease
and stroke apply only to those below the age of 75. In the words of Maureen
O'Neill, the director of Age Concern Scotland, that approach will "entrench
these inequalities". My colleague Kay Ullrich will explore the impact of
health care on elderly people in greater detail, as it is an important
issue for older people.

Some initiatives are proactive, but they will not make a difference until
other problems in the care of older people are rectified. One
survey—"Hard Times: A study of pensioner poverty" contained the following
message from an older person:

"Thank you very much for my free TV licence but I would really like to have
my cataracts done so that I could see the television."

A quarter of suicides occur in older people, although they make up less
than a quarter of the general population. Ninety per cent of those
concerned had serious depression and most visited their doctor in the three
months prior to their death. That may indicate that general practitioners
are not taking the mental health needs of older people seriously. I
encountered that problem, especially in the treatment of depression, in a
previous life. When older people who are suffering from depression visit a
doctor, they are often given older drugs such as tricyclic antidepressants,
which can dope and slow down older people, making them more liable to falls
and so on. Younger people, who tend to work or have families, receive drugs
such as selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, which cost 20 times more
per day than the drugs that are given to older people. I encountered that
apartheid in primary health care on many occasions before I was elected to
the Parliament, which may want to examine that issue.

Long-stay hospitals have closed in favour of treating older people in the
community, and that is to be welcomed. Implementing the joint futures
agenda to provide more seamless care between the NHS, local authorities and
community and social care has reduced the number of delayed discharges. As
the minister indicated, the Parliament has introduced free personal care
for the elderly and the regulation of care services in Scotland. However,
although welcoming the progress that free personal care is making in local
authorities, a recent Age Concern Scotland report argued that there was a
continuing need to publicise it and to provide clarity about the policy.
The report found that there is a postcode lottery in available care places
and that waiting times for care provision vary. Its authors were also very
concerned about long-term funding.

Scottish Care, the Executive and the Convention of Scottish Local
Authorities need to renegotiate funding for private care homes, before
older people who require care become the innocent victims of the crisis in
funding in community care. Their human rights may be breached. As Tessa
Harding, head of policy at Help the Aged, states:

"Homes have to be closed with care ... if the Human Rights Act is not to be
breached ... Where are these residents to go? There is already a major
crisis in the care home sector and few areas have spare capacity."

Bedblocking remains a problem. Some 2,798 patients are awaiting hospital
discharge, 239 of whom have waited more than 12 months. If the Executive
does not find it acceptable for people to wait more than 12 months to get
into hospital, why is it acceptable for them to wait more than 12 months to
get out? In addition, the number of people receiving a home-care service
has declined since 1999 by 7,357, and the number of residential care places
has fallen from 16,300 to 15,150, which is a decline of 1,150.

An issue in which many MSPs have been interested in the past few years is
that of Scotland's carers. There are approximately 626,000 carers in
Scotland and about one in six is over 65. Two thirds of carers look after
elderly people. It is therefore vital that we take on board the
considerations of older people and carers and end the opportunity gap for
carers, older people and older carers.

Benefit provision for Scottish older people, which is reserved to
Westminster, is necessary to reduce and prevent poverty. Two thirds of
pensioner households do not claim state benefits—of course, some are not
entitled to them—but an estimated 57 per cent require some form of state
benefit. Unfortunately, almost a quarter of those who are eligible do not
claim. Indeed, 50,000 pensioners who are entitled to the means-tested
minimum income guarantee do not claim it. Each person who has not claimed
it is really entitled to an average increase of £18 in their weekly income
at present, which would raise their pension levels to more than £90 on
average—that was the amount that Age Concern stated was necessary in
2001. The minimum that we can guarantee is an admission that the basic
state pension is inadequate to live on. Pensioners might not collect
benefits because there might be a stigma attached to claiming them among
older people, but it is also likely that the process is time-consuming and
confusing for some of our older people.

Mr Davidson: Does Mr Gibson agree that it would be far better to raise the
basic pension level, including the amount of money that people have to
apply for through the bureaucratic system of means testing? That would
avoid the problem that many pensioners face of having to work their way
through a system that is bureaucratically inclined, favours the employment
of even more civil servants and does not get the money to where it should
go.

Mr Gibson: I believe that the basic pension should be raised. However, I am
astonished that the Conservatives did not address that issue when they were
in power. They decoupled the relationship between earnings and pensions.
[Interruption.] As Frank McAveety has just shouted out, they had only 18
years in which to address the issue. We are all aware—except those on the
Conservative benches—that pensioners gained no favours during the
Conservatives' 18 years in power.

An Age Concern members' survey said:

"Ageing persons do not welcome complicated forms to fill in—

as Mr Davidson rightly said—

"What they hope for is minimal fuss when they find themselves obliged to
call in financial help in these matters."

In 1999, a Scottish Executive survey of older people's needs and services
found that there was a lack of knowledge about services and how to access
them and that that was a major reason for unmet need. People tended not to
approach social services for help and advice, and information did not
appear to be readily available to them.

The Executive has produced a welcome document, "Are You Over 50?", to serve
as a guide for older people to the service provision that is available to
them, but it does not go far enough. A more widely publicised campaign for
benefit take-up in Scotland is required. Alice Jarvie of SeniorLine in
Scotland states that calls to SeniorLine

"reflect older people's confusion about exactly what they are entitled
to."

That is particularly important, because changes to the way in which
benefits are paid are to be implemented next month. Benefits are reserved,
but education about them is not. Pensions are also reserved to the
Department for Work and Pensions, but pensioner poverty, which is an
important issue for Scottish older people, is devolved.

Minimum income benefits should enable pensioners to have a reasonable
standard of living, but benefit take-up problems continue to be rife. Women
who are over the age of 65 are less likely to have an occupational pension,
because of career breaks for children. The fact that women are likely to
live longer through retirement means that they experience particular issues
relating to poverty. Today, fewer than half of people of working age
contribute to a non-state pension. As members are all well aware, there is
a £27 billion hole in pension provision in the United Kingdom, because of
the volatile nature of the pensions market. I am sure that the
Conservatives will focus heavily on that issue. I must contradict the
minister, as I do not believe that current Government policies have helped
to produce stability in that area. That is ominous for the future,
especially as the Scottish Executive's social justice annual report showed
that it had failed to increase the number of working-age people who
contribute to a non-state pension, which is milestone 20 of the 2002
report.

Poverty and the number of pensioners who live in poverty are major issues
of concern. Relative poverty is the issue that we should debate, in common
with other European nations. I will not argue that case, as I have very
little time left.

The Scottish Executive stated:

"the poorest families have experienced real increases in their living
standards since 1996/97."

On the contrary, a study on Scottish poverty by the Joseph Rowntree
Foundation, which was published just a few months ago, concluded that in
the seven years between 1994 and 2001,

"the overall sense is one of little change".

Given that I am running out of time, I will jump ahead in my speech to an
issue that has not been mentioned a great deal. I am sure that my
colleagues will discuss poverty at some length, but I want to make a point
about fuel poverty. I have some concerns about the Executive's line on fuel
poverty. Four weeks ago, the minister issued a press release that said that
some 20 local authorities had finished their central heating programmes.
One of those local authorities was Glasgow City Council, which will not
finish its programme for three years. When I pointed that out to officials,
they said that the minister would release a retraction, but that has not
happened. We must be concerned about spin on that issue.

The Conservatives quoted a figure on fuel poverty. I, too, have a figure:
25 per cent of our pensioners live in a household that is cold enough to
put residents at risk of hypothermia. There is still a long way to go.

Older people are more likely than younger people to worry about being
mugged or robbed. Although we know that older people are less likely to
suffer from crime, fear of crime can be as much of a problem as crime
itself. Forty-six per cent of people who are over 65 believe that crime in
their area has got worse during the past two years. Between 7 and 10 per
cent of older people are victims of some form of abuse, often from family
members. The Parliament has not touched on that issue in recent years, but
we should examine it, especially in light of the alarming information that
Age Concern has provided, which indicates that reports of abuse of the
elderly have increased by 400 per cent in the past year. Although that
increase might be the result of greater awareness, it is a serious
concern.

I would also like to discuss transport, but I have only 30 seconds left, so
I will not.

The Deputy Presiding Officer: You actually have about two minutes, Mr
Gibson.

Mr Gibson: In that case, I might mention it after all. Half of those in the
over-65 age group live in households with no car, whereas the corresponding
figure for all households is only a quarter. Thirteen per cent of over-65s
said that they could not use public transport because of illness or
disability. In 2000-01, less than 16 per cent of Scotland's bus fleet had a
low floor and only 12 per cent had any kind of disabled access. Half of the
pedestrians who were killed on UK roads were over retirement age.

The Executive has introduced free local off-peak bus travel for older
people, but there should be a coherent national concessionary fares scheme,
as exists in Wales, so that older people are entitled to the same level of
free travel no matter where they live or where they are travelling to. That
would reduce confusion about concessions, which can catch older people
short. In addition, reregulation of the bus service would help elderly
people, particularly those in outlying communities.

We are all aware that age discrimination in employment can start at the age
of 40. I am marginally over that age, although I will probably be the
youngest member to speak in the debate.

My final point relates to our raison d'être. From a nationalist
perspective, we find shocking the level of poverty in this country. If we
look at the standard of living of pensioners in most other European
countries of comparable size, it is clear that they get a better deal. That
shows that nations can look after their own people if they have control
over their own economies, benefits and taxation systems. Those nations are
clearly the most prosperous and pensioners in Luxembourg, Sweden and
Austria are all certainly better off than those in Scotland. The answer for
Scotland's pensioners, as for Scotland's young people and the middle-aged,
is independence.

I move amendment S1M-4064.2, to leave out from "welcomes" to end and
insert:

"notes that life expectancy in Scotland is among the lowest in the
developed world; further notes that Scottish Executive health targets
entrench age inequalities; accepts that ageism is a reality in modern
Scotland and must be countered; is aware that 25% of Scottish pensioners
live in poverty; acknowledges that more coherence to the concessionary fare
scheme is required; seeks more flexibility in delivering the central
heating programme; desires that the postcode lottery of free personal care
places be ended; recognises that older people have a vital part to play in
our democracy; is concerned at continuing reductions in the value of the
state pension in real and relative terms; demands that the closure of final
salary scheme pensions be addressed to prevent future generations of older
people being left with low incomes, financial insecurity and dependent on
means-tested benefits, and believes that to address the needs of older
people in Scotland the Parliament needs the full powers of an independent
sovereign state."

10:10

Mr Keith Harding (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con): At the outset, I should
perhaps declare an interest as I fall into the category of older people and
my opportunity gap may well deteriorate in the near future. Having said
that, I am absolutely delighted that the minister is present today. I will
do my best to match the passion that she promised me.

I shall not patronise older people by lecturing them on which opportunities
they should pursue. It is not the job of any politician to patronise older
people with half-price tennis lessons or whatever the flavour of the month
happens to be. Older people are more able than politicians are to decide
such issues for themselves.

However, we need to ensure that older people are free to choose their
opportunities. They must be free from Government discrimination against
them. Sadly, over the past few years, older people have faced substantial
discrimination as a result of Government policy. Older people do not want
patronising assistance; they want dignity. The fact is that the Government
has eroded the basic needs and expectations of pensioners, without which
talk of opportunity means nothing.

Older people need to know that they can save for a pension without the fear
that they are wasting their money. Gordon Brown's raid on the pension funds
is a £5 billion per annum stealth tax on pensioners. That loss of
hard-earned pension deprives current and future pensioners of the
opportunity of a comfortable retirement. Gordon Brown's hand in the
pensioners' till is depriving older people of real opportunity. Pensioners
need to keep the money that they have saved, for their dignity and for
other opportunities. They need to know that, if they make modest savings,
they will keep £1 of every £1 that they save.

The so-called pension credit is about to be introduced, which will extend
means testing to over half of all pensioners. With time, that proportion
will increase further because the credit will be linked to national average
earnings while the basic state pension will continue to increase only with
prices. Means testing is humiliating to pensioners. It cannot be right to
extend means testing to such a huge proportion of the pensioner population.
People may say, "So what?" but the effect of the proposed change will be
that a typical pensioner who has an annual income of £6,000 will, in
effect, face a marginal tax rate of 40 per cent, which is equivalent to the
rate for higher-rate taxpayers. For every extra £1 of pension or savings
income, Gordon Brown will claw back 40p, so the pensioner will end up only
60p better off before income tax is taken into account.

Mr Gibson: Does Mr Harding accept that the situation is actually worse than
that? Once people go over the threshold, not only will they suffer a
marginal tax rate of 40 per cent but they may also lose council tax rebate
and housing benefit, such that the marginal rate of taxation can be as much
as 88p in the pound for those with smaller occupational pensions.

Mr Harding: I agree. I was just about to make that point, more or less. It
is unfair that a pensioner on a modest but average income faces a marginal
tax rate of 40 per cent but a pensioner on double the income will be able
to keep £1 of every £1 saved before tax.

Furthermore, why should people save at all? If the average pensioner will
receive only 60p before tax of every £1 saved, it is no wonder that so
many people will now not bother saving. The Government has created a
climate in which savers are discouraged and punished and the effect is to
deny pensioners opportunities.

The Government takes with one hand and gives back something with the other,
but older people need to know that the national health service will care
for them should they become ill. Waiting lists and waiting times have
steadily increased over the past three years, even with the increased
levels of funding from the Scottish Executive. In the period ending
December 2002, 14,769 more people were on the waiting lists than in March
1999, 83,494 fewer out-patients were seen than in March 1999, 21 per cent
fewer out-patients were seen within nine weeks and 12,700 fewer elective
in-patients were seen.

Older people are discriminated against by the health system. Age
discrimination occurs directly and indirectly through policies aimed at
shortening length of stay in hospital, as older patients take longer than
average to recover from surgery or illness. Age discrimination in health
and social care must be rooted out to ensure that the most vulnerable are
receiving the care that they need and are entitled to.

In the Executive's social inclusion strategy "Social Justice ... a Scotland
where everyone matters", which was published in 1999, the Executive
committed itself to increasing the number of older people taking exercise
and to reducing the rates of mortality from coronary heart disease and the
prevalence of respiratory disease.

However, the Executive's policies are failing the most vulnerable. The
Joseph Rowntree Foundation reveals that the standardised mortality rates
among the 10 per cent most deprived local areas are double those of the
least disadvantaged 50 per cent.

Older people also need to know that care home places will be available for
them should they require one. However, the current care homes crisis has
seen Scottish Homes and the Kirk admit that they will have to start closing
their homes if the Executive does not meet the deficit that exists between
the funding that care homes receive and the real cost of care. I am pleased
that that issue has been resolved for the current year but it will still be
a concern in future.

Older people need to know that suitable and appropriate housing is
available for them. The Executive maintains that it is committed to the
transfer of council housing to community ownership. However, Labour in
local government has failed the council tenant. Much of Scotland's public
housing is still crumbling, and new investment is desperately needed.
Mismanagement has led to large rent arrears for councils that are
subsequently unable to provide the funding for repairs. For example, before
the approval of the transfer of 81,000 houses in Glasgow to Glasgow Housing
Association last April, more than 50 per cent of rent collected serviced
existing debt. The total bill for repairs was estimated at £1.3 billion. I
hope that that situation will now be resolved.

In 1980, the Conservatives introduced the right-to-buy scheme. No policy
introduced since then has done more to lift the vulnerable out of relative
poverty in Scotland. Thanks to successive Conservative Governments, the
rate of home ownership is more than 60 per cent today, compared with only
35 per cent in 1979. Scottish Office research in 1997 showed that 21.5 per
cent of the homes that had been bought since 1980 under the right to buy
had subsequently been resold on the open market, and that improvements,
including the installation of central heating, had been made to the vast
majority of them. That shows that national schemes such as the central
heating programme would not always be required if more homes were
owner-occupied.

Ms Curran: I am not sure whether either Mr Harding or I will be back in the
next Parliament but I would not like to miss another opportunity to have a
duel with him.

Mrs Lyndsay McIntosh (Central Scotland) (Con): Yes—strip to the waist.

Ms Curran: Let us not get carried away.

I know that the Conservatives were committed to the right-to-buy policy
but, as ever, their approach was half-baked. There are now many people in
Scotland who bought their houses under essentially false pretences, because
the Conservatives encouraged people to buy irresponsibly. They did not
point out to people their responsibilities for repairs to and maintenance
of their houses. People were confused about that and there is now a major
problem for people who do not have the income to maintain and repair their
houses but who were encouraged and given inflated opportunities to purchase
them. That was, as ever, a highly irresponsible policy and approach from
the Conservatives.

Mr Harding: That is absolute rubbish. Whether people can afford repairs to
and maintenance of their properties should be assessed by the mortgage
lenders, which determine people's ability to fund a mortgage. The minister
should take that into account. What is she doing to give people additional
assistance?

Ms Curran: We have just changed the criteria for the private sector grant,
which is predicted to rise from £40 million to £60 million in the coming
years.

Mr Harding: That is just another consultation document.

The Executive has done little to assist in the provision of houses adapted
specifically for elderly and disabled people, especially those in rural
communities who doubly suffer from the lack of suitable housing. We would
encourage local housing providers to provide adapted houses for older and
disabled people through grants. We would also put in place a requirement
for providers to make available for sheltered housing a minimum of 5 per
cent of any new development. To increase rural housing stock, we propose to
relax planning guidelines to allow the building of affordable homes for
sale on the periphery of rural communities.

The Executive's warm deal initiative is a continuation of yet another
Conservative policy—the home energy efficiency scheme—and was
introduced in July 1999 to promote energy efficiency measures to less
affluent families. The home energy efficiency scheme was very successful
and assisted three million homes. Under successive Conservative
Governments, the percentage of UK households with central heating rose from
60 per cent in 1981 to 90 per cent in 1997-98.

Indeed, many pensioners who have benefited from the Executive's central
heating programme might have already been set to benefit, either from
refurbishment schemes through the landlord or from new investment from
transfers to community ownership. The Executive needs to take further
measures to ensure that those who are eligible to benefit from the
programme are given as much help as possible to follow that through. At
present, there is a worry that the take-up rate among the elderly is too
low and, given the disruption that the installation of a central heating
system might cause, the Executive must articulate exactly how it will
improve that rate.

Older people also want to be safe. The 2000 Scottish crime survey showed
that just over 10 per cent of over-60s were worried about being assaulted.
By 2002, 24 per cent of Scottish old-age pensioners were afraid to leave
their homes at night and one in five of them feared that they would be
mugged if they went outside. Since 1997, there has been a 24 per cent
increase in recorded incidents of violent crime, a 9 per cent increase in
the level of vehicle crime and a 23 per cent increase in the number of
drug-related crimes.

It is time to reclaim our neighbourhoods from the criminals who destroy
communities and imprison fearful people in their homes. Older people should
be able to walk through their communities free from the fear of crime. To
make people feel safe, we must have a fully supported, fully manned police
service, which would provide effective neighbourhood policing and give
crime-ridden areas a constant and visible police presence. Our police
officers should be backed up by a legal system that is able to dispose of
criminals appropriately and efficiently, a prison service that
rehabilitates and a youth justice system that prevents youngsters from
reoffending.

Consideration should be given to increasing the single occupancy discount
on council tax to 50 per cent for single older people. Furthermore, we
should address age discrimination in the job market by allowing older
people the option of signing away their rights under normal employment
regulations other than basic health and safety regulations. That would
encourage employers to recruit more people from that age group. However,
such ideas are for the future.

We acknowledge that the Executive is committed to closing the opportunity
gap. However, although some worth-while initiatives have been introduced to
address the situation, a great deal more needs to be done.

I move amendment S1M-4064.1, to leave out from "by" to end and insert:

"but notes that its policies are not working, care homes are having to
close due to a funding crisis, waiting lists and times are rising, more
older people feel insecure in their homes and there is an insufficient
level of provision of appropriate housing for older people and considers
that, if the Chancellor was to abolish his punitive stealth tax on pension
funds in the forthcoming budget, the opportunity gap for older people would
be greatly reduced."

10:23

Ian Jenkins (Tweeddale, Ettrick and Lauderdale) (LD): I welcome the
minister's speech, especially the references to rural deprivation and rural
exclusion. After all, transport and access to facilities are of massive
importance to older people and the need is especially acute in rural areas.
Before I go any further, I should declare an interest. Like Keith Harding,
I am old, and I am retiring—voluntarily, this time. Indeed, I am now
retiring for the second time.

Getting old is a rite of passage. When we reach our 50s, we suddenly start
receiving Saga brochures. We resent them at first, but then we start
looking at the rather attractive holidays that they offer. However, I have
to say that I am not so keen on the advertisements for incontinence pads
and things.

Then, at 60, we become eligible for the winter heating allowance. We all
think, "I don't want that". Yesterday, I received an e-mail informing me
that, the day after I retire, I am allowed to have an old people's bus
pass, because the age of eligibility has been reduced from 65 to 60. I now
come into that category. The next thing that I have to look forward to is
my pension, and then the telegram from the Queen—or perhaps it will be
the King by that time. I do not think that I will last that long anyway.
Those are the rites of passage.

We have stereotypes of old age. Bob Hope was asked what it felt like to be
81 and he said that he did not feel anything much until about noon, and
then it was time to go for a sleep. When George Burns was in his 80s, he
said that he had reached the stage when putting his cigar into its holder
was a bit of a thrill.

The image of older people has changed. We are surrounded by examples of
positive aging, which is the phrase that is used in one of our briefing
papers. I remember attending a party for an old lady who was 90. One of her
two equally elderly relatives said that the only thing that was wrong with
Tina was that she was man mad. The other day, I sat at a dinner with a
local dignitary who is about 85 and who gave up his 500cc Norton only a
couple of years ago. My mother was 97 yesterday and played competitive
bridge until about three years ago. I am holding up one of her most
treasured possessions—a T-shirt marking one of her three wins, after she
was 80, in the wee stinker crossword, and that is a crossword and a half.
In our constituencies, we are all surrounded by silver surfers and line
dancing.

It is fair to say that a good start has been made, as the minister said.
That was acknowledged at the beginning of the two most recent pieces of
correspondence that I received from Help the Aged and Age Concern, which
both acknowledge that the Scottish Parliament has made a great and positive
contribution in improving older people's lives. Those lobbyists refer to
the central heating initiative, the warm deal, the concessionary fares
scheme and the introduction of free care for the elderly. As MSPs, we know
that none of those schemes has been introduced without individual
anomalies.

Mary Scanlon: Will the member give way?

Ian Jenkins: I will give way to young Mary.

Mary Scanlon: I appreciate that very much and I am sorry to be contentious,
as Ian Jenkins has been nice enough to give way.

I must have a different Help the Aged briefing from the one that Ian
Jenkins has, because the second paragraph of my briefing says:

"Current government pension policy means that in the long-term the
situation will get worse rather than better."

I wonder where all the positivity comes from.

Ian Jenkins: I will find the document later. I do not want to stop right
now, but I assure the member that the words are there. Mary Scanlon refers
to Westminster pension policy, but I am talking about the Scottish
Parliament.

Mary Scanlon: I was talking about Scottish Executive policy.

Ian Jenkins: No, the member did not say that.

The substantial policies that I described affect the fabric of the way in
which many people live their lives.

It is important to improve information for the elderly. One of the briefing
documents says that, in implementing the heating policy, the Eaga
Partnership and others provided benefits advice. People who received that
advice benefited hugely from understanding better their welfare benefits.
Increased awareness of, and information about, benefits for older people is
important.

Help the Aged's document says that the initiatives are a recognition of the
value of older people, on which we must build. In our self-interest, it is
important for politicians to value older people, because we must remember
that more than 1 million voters are over 60 years old and that they form a
quarter of the voters on the electoral roll. That group is much more likely
to vote than other sectors of the population are, so we had better listen
to it. We are supposed to be a listening Parliament and we have projects
such as better government for older people and the Elder Voice in the
Borders, which involves elder champions. We must listen to older people,
otherwise we—or rather, other members—will be in electoral trouble.

That sector of the population has enormous clout in our country's economic
life because of its spending power and the talent that it brings to the
marketplace, the volunteering sector and other strands of economic life. In
those wider terms, we must recognise older people's value to society as a
whole. As members have said before, the fabric of our society depends on
the voluntary sector in its professional sense and for its volunteers. In
communities throughout the country, older people volunteer and are the
mainstay of many clubs and societies that enhance our community life by
creating interest and self-esteem in our communities and bringing music and
sport to them.

I suspect that it is true of all political parties that many activists in
our constituencies are close to, or over, retirement age. I remember an
instance from the time that David Steel was last elected, when an old chap
of about 92, who was a good party member, came to help at the election and
ended up driving the old people to the poll. I promise members that that is
a true story.

Today, we are debating the opportunity gap for older people. I agree with
the lobbying organisations that the health and social services provisions
for older people are high on the political agenda. I do not want to turn
the debate into one about the health service, but I want to address one
aspect that seems to be hugely important in a debate about opportunity
gaps.

It is vital that audiology services should be at the top of our list of
priorities. As members know from their postbags, there is a massive wish to
expand the provision of high-quality hearing aids, which to most people
means digital hearing aids. We cannot have a serious debate about closing
the opportunity gap for older people if we allow older people to live their
lives deprived of a sense that allows them to function fully. We have the
means to improve their lives immeasurably and we need to make arrangements
for those means to be provided.

One of the interesting statistics that I have read highlights the
proportion of older people who are carers. Kenny Gibson mentioned that. We
must turn our attention to providing proper respite facilities for the
individuals whom they care for, to allow the older carers some respite from
their undoubted burdens. Frank McAveety knows that I am interested in this
subject. In saying that to him, I also congratulate him on having come to a
solution with the care home people.

When we talk about respite facilities, I put in a plea for day care
centres. I am connected to the Broomhill day centre in Penicuik. I hope
that ministers will give serious consideration to making day care centres a
statutory provision so that local authorities have to support those
centres. To do so would address the voluntary nature of those vital centres
and bring them from the edges of provision into the centre. Providing in
any other way the facilities that are offered by day care centres would
cost social services or the health service much more.

Our attention should be focused on the areas of education and lifelong
learning. We must make it easier for people who have taken early retirement
from a strenuous job, or who have been made redundant, to access
opportunities for a change in employment, even in their later years.
Supportive employers do not discriminate on age-related grounds. B&Q, which
has famously established a policy of taking on older people, has benefited
from that policy not only in publicity terms but by gaining the skills and
experience that older people can bring to the workplace.

We are aware of current and forthcoming skills shortages across the
country. We must ensure that training programmes are made available that
will allow older people to qualify for the jobs that become available. We
are short of tradespeople of all sorts and we are short of carers. There
are desk jobs, for which people simply require training, and jobs in areas
in which posts have traditionally gone to young people, such as catering
and tourism.

There is no logical reason why things should be set in aspic. Colleges and
training boards must make their programmes flexible, so that people can
enter them without having to undertake five-year courses or do big blocks
of stuff, but can get back into the workplace and feel useful and not
excluded.

I hope that there will come a point in the McCrone agreement when the
stepping down arrangements that are part of the agreement, but which have
not yet been fully facilitated, come into operation. Those arrangements
would allow teachers to ease out of full-time posts without damaging their
pension rights. They could act as a model for other employment areas.

Lifelong learning opportunities should be provided for older people on a
personal level. Older people come together for social reasons in clubs that
are established to improve physical well-being and provide recreational
activities such as bridge and painting. Older people are becoming
interested in computing and working on the web. Such opportunities are
increasingly becoming available in libraries and village halls, as well as
in the homes of older people.

Activities that encourage fitness and broaden the mind have knock-on
benefits for individuals and for society through the sense of well-being
that they create. We save on other services as a result of people being
fitter and happier in their ordinary lives.

I was going to mention pensions—

The Deputy Presiding Officer: You do not have a great deal of time, Mr
Jenkins.

Ian Jenkins: There is a sense that pensions and benefits are a Westminster
matter, but Scottish ministers must be interested in them and make their
views known. There is a loss of faith in the whole pensions apparatus that
will affect many people who are currently in work, but who will become
older people, if they are lucky.

I want to conclude philosophically. I was an English teacher and am
inclined to turn to poetry, much of which deals with older people. T S
Eliot's "The Love Song of J Alfred Prufrock" features an individual who
feels that he has not made much of his life. He has measured out his life
with coffee spoons and recognises that he is never likely to break with
convention. He says:

"I grow old ... I grow old ...
I shall wear the bottoms of my trousers rolled."

Jenny Joseph is intent on throwing over the traces:

"When I am an old woman I shall wear purple
With a red hat which doesn't go, and doesn't suit me.
And I shall spend my pension on brandy and summer gloves".

Dylan Thomas is even stronger:

"Do not go gentle into that good night,
Old age should burn and rave at close of day;
Rage, rage against the dying of the light."

However, my favourite poem in this context and for this occasion is the
long poem "Ulysses" by Tennyson. The old king is tired of a dull life and
determined that he must go for one last adventure. He says that he feels
that he must go. He cannot stay making laws for people—he mentions doling
out

"Unequal laws unto a savage race".

He says:

"I cannot rest from travel; I will drink
Life to the lees"

and adds:

"all experience is an arch wherethro'
Gleams that untravell'd world ...
How dull it is to pause, to make an end,
To rust unburnish'd, not to shine in use!"

He continues:

"And this gray spirit yearning in desire
To follow knowledge like a sinking star,
Beyond the utmost bound of human thought ...
my purpose holds
To sail beyond the sunset, and the baths
Of all the western stars, until I die."

He says that he will go out

"Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will
To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield."

As I prepare myself to sail into the sunset, I thank all my colleagues and
friends from all parties and make it clear that I will be forever grateful
to my constituents in Tweeddale, Ettrick and Lauderdale for giving me the
opportunity to serve in this historic Parliament.

10:37

Trish Godman (West Renfrewshire) (Lab): Yesterday, when I said to my
comrade, ally, colleague, and indeed sister, Johann Lamont, that I was
going to speak in the debate, she immediately said that she hoped that I
would declare an interest, which I do declare, as I am an older person. As
it is the final plenary session, I will not say what the minister said to
me this morning when I said that I was going to speak.

Colin Campbell and John Young have reminded me many times that, as Winnie
Ewing is not returning after the election but I am, I will be the mother of
the house. I will be pleased to be the mother of the house and follow
Winnie Ewing. Perhaps I have experience to speak on the subject.

I am proud of the Scottish Executive's efforts to make the lives of older
people more tolerable and secure. Free central heating, free personal care,
free local bus travel—which is soon to be increased to free bus travel
around Scotland—much-improved pensions and free television licences for
those who are over 75 have been introduced.

However, I want to turn to older people who are activists in our
communities in elderly forums. There are two such forums in my
constituency—one in Erskine and one in Inverclyde, which I share with
Duncan McNeil. Such people play a key role in campaigns for better pensions
and safer communities and generally making life much more tolerable,
although sometimes I wonder whether they make life more tolerable for
politicians—each time that I see them, they do not miss and hit the wall,
as they say. In the best sense, they are the trade union movement for older
people; more than that, they engage actively with councillors, MSPs and
MPs. We should listen attentively to those wise and sometimes sharp-tongued
representatives of older people.

One of the finest of those representatives whom I have met was Jack Jones,
who fought with the International Brigade in the Spanish civil war and went
on to become the general secretary of the Transport and General Workers
Union. I assure members that no minister dared to pull the wool over the
sharp eyes of that senior citizen.

How do we define older people today? The minister mentioned the new deal 50
plus, which recognises that there are 50 year olds who are not working. For
me—at the old age that I am—50 is not old; it is still young. There is
a lot more to do.

It is right and proper that we care for older citizens, but what about
those who are thrown on to the scrap heap in their 50s? No doubt members
would be unhappy—they would be appalled—if their constituency parties
told them, "You are too old at 50. A 21-year-old is keen to do this job and
we think that they could do it better than you." That happens too often
nowadays in all kinds of industries. In many occupations it makes sound
economic sense to recruit, employ and retain older people. If we cannot
appeal to employers' altruism, we should point out to them that they could
do much worse than employ older people. As Ian Jenkins said, companies such
as B&Q and Asda purposely employ older people, because of—among other
things—the confidence that it gives to customers when they seek advice
and help.

Much more needs to be done. It is absurd and hypocritical for people to
argue for longer working lives, as they are doing in another place, when so
many in their early 50s see only a life on social security payments and no
prospect of change.

By all means support, respond and react to the genuine and legitimate
concerns of elderly forums, Age Concern Scotland and other voluntary
organisations, but at the same time let us do all that we can to ensure
that people lead full working lives with good terms and conditions of
employment.

10:42

Kay Ullrich (West of Scotland) (SNP): The debate, as we all know, coincides
with the day that some of us head off into retirement and will ourselves
soon be labelled as older people.

Anyone who was at Sir David Steel's dinner for retiring members last night
would have to concede that we wrinklies still know how to party. By the
sound of Ian Jenkins's speech, I do not think that he has been home yet.

Helen Eadie (Dunfermline East) (Lab): Ian Jenkins made a point about Saga.
Does Kay Ullrich know that that stands for sex and games for the aged?

Kay Ullrich: I shall move swiftly on.

Four days after the election, I will be the proud possessor of, in one
hand, my state pension book and, in the other, my Strathclyde bus pass. The
world will, of course, become my oyster.

I do not expect to feel or look any different when I become 60 on 5 May,
but I suspect that I will be treated differently. All the statistics
indicate that I will experience age discrimination. It is important that
this Parliament addresses the fact that age discrimination exists
throughout our society.

Carers have been mentioned. Those people save the state £3.4 billion a
year through their dedicated commitment, but what does the state do when
they reach retirement age? It cancels their entitlement to invalid care
allowance—no matter that thousands of pensioners remain often the sole
carer of their adult disabled children. It is also worth noting that many
pensioners now care for their elderly parents. Why does the Westminster
Government choose to remove that benefit at the very time that a family's
income is reduced because of retirement?

I will take a quick look at age discrimination in the health service. In
hospitals around Scotland, older people are shunted from ward to ward and
from bed to bed. That is done to make room for more acute patients. In
1999, there were about 1,800 delayed discharges. Today, at the end of the
parliamentary session, there are more than 2,500. That is an increase of
almost 40 per cent. The situation was bad in 1999, but it is even worse in
2003. To add insult to injury, those elderly people are commonly described
as bedblockers, as if they deliberately languish in inappropriate acute
wards in hospitals. We can and must do better.

Among the most disturbing reports on care of the elderly are those that
reveal that up to 20 per cent of pensioners in hospitals are malnourished.
The reason for that is simple—there are not enough nursing and auxiliary
staff to assist frail elderly people to eat their meals. My mother was in
such a situation, but, luckily, after a few days, another patient alerted
me to the fact that my mum's meals were being removed untouched. That is no
way in which to treat the elderly population. Those people have worked hard
all their lives, they have put their bit into the public kitty and they
have every right to be cared for with dignity and respect when their
working lives are over.

The Parliament has the power and the will to improve the quality of life
for the growing number of older people. We have shown that through what I
consider to be the greatest achievement of the first four years of the
Parliament—the introduction of free personal care for the elderly. We can
all be justifiably proud of that achievement.

This is my last speech in the Parliament. I feel honoured and privileged to
have served in the first Scottish Parliament in almost 300 years, but now
is my time to say goodbye. I have made many friends from all parties and I
will truly miss all members—I will even miss Duncan McNeil's cheery wee
face.

Mr Duncan McNeil (Greenock and Inverclyde) (Lab): Thank you.

Kay Ullrich: As I am not as literate as the English teacher who preceded me
in the debate, and as I am Ayrshire lass, I will end by paraphrasing Robert
Burns. Nae man can tether time or tide; the hour approaches, Kay maun
ride.

10:48

Bill Butler (Glasgow Anniesland) (Lab): I give my good wishes to the
members who are leaving, but I hope that this is not my last speech in the
Parliament.

The debate is an important one. My constituency of Glasgow Anniesland has
the second highest proportion of retired citizens in Scotland and I have no
hesitation in supporting the motion because I know that people in my
constituency have benefited from the policies of the Labour-led Executive.
Those policies recognise people's needs in areas that are fundamental to a
civilised quality of life, which is every citizen's right.

From the bare statistics, it can be seen that the Executive, working in
partnership with our colleagues in Westminster, has begun to make
improvements to the life of retired citizens. The higher state pension, the
winter fuel allowance and, from next autumn, the new pension credit will
result in an average gain of £1,150 a year for such citizens. Those
reforms are not the be-all and end-all; they are only the start of the
process of making an impact on pensioner poverty. In absolute terms,
pensioner poverty has fallen by 69 per cent and, in relative terms, it has
fallen by 31 per cent, but the present situation is still an indictment of
our society and illustrates the work that remains to be done to repair the
18 years of Tory destructiveness.

I contend that the Executive has made real achievements, which are a good
beginning. I will focus on a number of initiatives that the Labour-led
Executive has set in train and which I know, from talking to my
constituents, have made a real difference. One such initiative was the
decision to introduce free local off-peak bus travel for pensioners and
disabled people from October last year. In partnership with councils all
over Scotland, that policy has benefited more than a million of our fellow
citizens. In my view, the £45 million that has been invested in that
scheme is money well spent. It is a practical example of socialism in
action.

I am delighted that my party has pledged to extend that scheme so that it
encompasses the whole of Scotland. I hope that the people of Scotland allow
us to develop the policy in the Parliament's second session. That is a
logical development, and will prevent the teething problems that the
present scheme has encountered, which many colleagues and I have raised in
this chamber. Those teething problems were caused mainly by an overly
bureaucratic and inflexible application of the guidelines relating to the
scheme's boundaries.

The second area that I want to touch on is the work in progress on the
series of measures that have been set in train by the Executive to combat
the wholly unacceptable situation of older people being forced to endure
life in cold, freezing homes. Westminster has played a part by reducing VAT
on fuel from 8 per cent to 5 per cent, but the Executive has put in place
the central heating programme and the warm deal. The result of that
innovative approach is that, since April 2001, more than 10,000 pensioners
throughout Scotland have received free central heating. As one of my
constituents, who is perhaps a little older than me, said, "This is an
absolute boon."

I am pleased that it is my party's clear intention to produce a situation
where, by 2006, no local authority or housing association tenants, or
anyone aged 60 or over, will have to live in a home without central heating
or adequate insulation. For senior citizens who had to endure freezing
homes during the Tory years of cuts and a lack of proper funding for local
government, that is real progress. It is an example of socialism in work.
Meeting the basic individual needs of people young and old is a
prerequisite for the creation of a better society.

We are always advised not to quote Aneurin Bevan, but I am going to go
against that advice, because he put it much better than I could, to the nth
degree. In his book "In Place of Fear" he said:

"There is no test for progress other than its impact on the individual. If
... policies ... do not have for their object the enlargement and
cultivation of the individual life, they do not deserve to be called
civilised."

That was true in 1952 and it still applies today.

Free eye tests and TV licences, free personal and nursing care, better
housing and an improving national health service, with an extra £3.2
billion to be invested over the next five years, are all worthwhile reforms
that impact beneficially on individuals.

Tommy Sheridan: Does the member agree that the very socialist he mentioned,
Aneurin Bevan, would have opposed tooth and nail the increased means
testing that has been imposed on pensioners in this country?

Bill Butler: Let me put it this way: all those things do not represent the
revolution that some of us may hope for, but they add up to a beginning,
which will create a revolution in the quality of life of so many of our
fellow citizens. As a socialist, one deals with the situation as it is,
with the material conditions as they are, and not with what one might wish
they could be in the most perfect possible situation. That is my contention
and what I, as a reformist socialist, believe in.

I commend the Labour-led Executive's motion, which mirrors its approach
over the past four years. That approach is palpable evidence of a good
beginning and is worthy of continued support.

10:54

Mary Scanlon (Highlands and Islands) (Con): This is an oddly sad day, when
we say goodbye to Kay Ullrich, John Young, Dorothy-Grace Elder, Ian Jenkins
and, of course, that grand matriarch of Scottish politics, Dr Winnie Ewing.
When I was in Shetland at the weekend, people said, as they do wherever I
go in the Highlands, "How's Winnie doing? She used to come up here so
often." One thing about proportional representation in European elections
is that everyone knew that Winnie was the member of the European
Parliament. Her reputation will continue.

We have heard so much about social inclusion in recent years, particularly
in relation to older people. Many of the soundbites sound very good. Free
personal care is free if one can get it. It is free if one can get out of
hospital, as Kay Ulrich said. It is also free if one can wait long enough
for it. Free personal care is free once someone has had a long wait for an
assessment—up to 12 months, but sometimes longer. It is free once the
care plan is drawn up, but the care plan can take several months. The care
plan should not be a wish list; it should be the basis for the care and
support that someone receives.

What is free, however, is the watered-down version of the care plan that
gives someone the free personal care that the councils can afford and not
the free personal care that is outlined in the care plan. I do not think
that there is an MSP in the chamber who has not had someone visit their
surgeries to say, "Here is my care plan and this is what I get." It must be
the responsibility of Parliament to ensure that the legislation to which we
sign up is in good faith. I sat through all the meetings of the Health and
Community Care Committee, many of which Kay Ulrich contributed to and, in
good faith, we thought that free personal care would be quite different
from the free personal care for which people have to fight today.

Week by week in the Highlands, families are fighting for care for the
elderly. A lady came to me last week and told me that she was forced to
take her mother out of hospital and care for her at home. I saw her mother
walking along the road and it was a tragic sight. That was reality, unlike
the soundbites that we often hear from the Executive.

I have in my hand a pack from Aberdeen City Council. It is addressed to my
colleague David Davidson and dated the end of October last year, which was
four months after the implementation of free personal care. It says:

"The Eligibility Criteria for Community Care Services Review Group have
been considering the revisal of the eligibility criteria and have made
comparisons of the eligibility criteria with other local authorities,
particularly those of Fife Council".

When the Parliament passed free personal care, we all assumed that there
would be consistent standards throughout Scotland, but instead we have a
pick and mix. Highland Council has already tried to change the eligibility
criteria for free personal care to say that people in the Highlands should
be more ill before they receive it. The same situation exists throughout
Scotland. Thankfully, the motion lodged by the social work convener at
Highland Council was voted down. However, we must ensure that when we pass
legislation in the Parliament, every council in Scotland has the same
commitment to it.

Whoever sits on the successor Health and Community Care Committee after 1
May must make a commitment to monitor the implementation of free personal
care, but I ask the minister, too, to make that commitment. I do not doubt
his good will, but I believe that he has a serious monitoring role to
ensure that pensioners throughout Scotland get consistent access to free
personal care.

The Deputy Minister for Health and Community Care (Mr Frank McAveety): Does
the member accept that the legislation is clear and that the guidelines
provided indicate that people should be assessed for free personal care and
then allocated such care according to the services of local authorities?
Does she also accept that there is no need for local authorities to
introduce waiting lists because the resources and the legislation exist, as
is right and proper?

Mary Scanlon: Yes. In fact I have found the minister supportive when I took
information to him and highlighted my concerns. We all have a
responsibility to do that where local authorities are writing their own
guidelines that are quite different from the legislation we pass in
Parliament.

The Aberdeen City Council pack to which I referred mentions high priority,
medium priority and low priority. The council also admits:

"You may be placed onto a waiting list for the provision of some
services."

It also says:

"we are unable to guarantee a particular type or level of service will
always be available."

At least Aberdeen City Council is honest. I am happy to pass on the pack
from the council because its implementation is not the same as the
guidelines that were set by the Parliament. However, I must ask whether the
council has heard of free personal care. There is no mention in the
document of the free personal care provisions that were passed by the
Parliament. I am pleased to hear the minister's commitments in that
regard.

Free personal care should be applied consistently throughout Scotland.
There should not be postcode provision. It should not be dependent on
individual councils' priorities. As Kay Ullrich said, the number of beds
blocked is over 2,700. When the Scottish Parliament was set up, however,
only 1,700 beds were blocked. From his time on the Health and Community
Care Committee, the minister will remember when Professor Mary Marshall
told us that the condition of elderly people deteriorates considerably when
they are held in hospital and are given inappropriate care.

Lewis Macdonald knows a lot about free bus travel, but I will tell him
about the situation in the Highlands. Someone who lives in Nairn can travel
to Inverness, Fort William or Wick for free, but cannot cross the boundary
into Grampian to go to Forres or Elgin. Many people in Nairn have a greater
commitment to those two towns than they do to what they might term the wild
west of the Highlands. In response to a parliamentary question on this
matter that was asked by David Davidson, Lewis Macdonald said:

"The decision on whether to offer this benefit, however, is for the local
transport authority to make in relation to each particular
scheme."—[Official Report, Written Answers, 18 February 2003; p 3010.]

I understand that, but the minister cannot stand in this chamber and say
that there will be free travel for the elderly and leave it to local
operators to decide what is free and what is not free.

Dr Sylvia Jackson (Stirling) (Lab): Can I take it that, in order to ensure
that the scheme is a national scheme, Mary Scanlon will be voting Labour in
the election?

Mary Scanlon: No chance. I realise that Sylvia Jackson is desperate for
votes, but she should not come chapping on my door.

Although, as Ian Jenkins said, pensions are a Westminster issue, I will
mention the fact that Help the Aged's briefing, in a section entitled
"Creating Tomorrow's Pensioner Poverty Today", criticises the stakeholder
pensions. It also says that 72 per cent of final salary schemes have
stopped accepting new members, that there is a £27 million black hole in
pension provision and that the state pension is diminishing in value.
According to Help the Aged, things are not getting better for pensioners;
they are getting worse.

11:02

Donald Gorrie (Central Scotland) (LD): On behalf of the young at heart,
regardless of age, I would like to discuss employment and volunteering.

I should probably declare an interest in that, if I make a persuasive
speech about the need to employ older people and am successful in the
election, Jim Wallace might give me a job.

None of us thinks that anyone should have to work after the normal
retirement age if they do not want to. However, we should be far more
flexible in helping people to continue to work longer if they want to and
are up to it. Winston Churchill was a pensioner when he led Britain to
salvation in the 1940s. [Applause.] The Conservative members who just
applauded might not like my next example as much, but Gladstone was in his
80s when he took on the establishment to try to secure Irish home rule. He
used to speak for one, two or three hours on the subject in Parliament. I
assure members that I will stick to four minutes, however.

Closer to home, I mention our two oldest members, Winnie Ewing and John
Young. They have long and distinguished records of public service in
Scotland, which have continued right up to the present time. Age is no
impediment. We should do more to change people's attitudes.

If we are of a pensionable age and wish to continue, there are three tests.
First, are we physically up to what we want to do? Secondly, do we continue
to enjoy it? Certainly, I do, as do many other members; I go home happily
if I have contributed a little to some local issue and helped constituents.
If I have nudged the parliamentary process to support some cause I am
interested in—even if I have just annoyed a Government department—that
has been a good day. Thirdly, we need honest advice from our nearest and
dearest as to whether we have lost the plot.

In other words, health, enjoyment and still being mentally up to it are the
important factors. The Executive could lead by example; it could have much
more liberal employment policies to allow people to continue working. In my
brief time as an MP, I tried to help people who were losing their jobs at
the Scottish Office, allegedly because of their age, although they were
very keen to continue. We should also encourage Scottish employers to be
liberal and flexible as regards employing older people.

The other aspect is volunteering. Again, we do not wish to compel people to
volunteer; it is their choice. However, many people feel inhibited from
volunteering, and we could do far more to inform them. For example, there
could be a simple rule that all charities and voluntary organisations had
to have a two-page summary of their activity, which would be part of the
monitoring process, but would also be available on the web and in paper
format in local libraries. People could then find out about voluntary
organisations that they could work for. We could also give more training to
help people. The fiercest and most determined organiser of voluntary
activity I know is over retirement age, and two of the most valuable
treasurers I have known have also been of that age. Treasurers are probably
more valuable to an organisation than anything else. Therefore, if we can
help local organisations to attract and train volunteers and to become
better known, we will have done everyone a great favour.

Ian Jenkins finished his excellent speech with my favourite piece of poetry
about Ulysses going on one more voyage. As a politician hoping to get into
one more Parliament, he has expressed what I feel. I am happy to leave it
at that.

11:08

Colin Campbell (West of Scotland) (SNP): I suppose I must declare an
interest. When I was coming up the road, David Davidson told me that he
supposed that I would be speaking today. I asked, "Why is that?" and he
replied, "On grounds of antiquity."

No one has tried to define older people. It is funny—the young people in
the gallery probably think that older people are 30. When someone is 30,
they think that old is 45, and when they are my age, they might think 80.
When I am 80—as I fully intend to be, God willing and weather
permitting—I shall think that 95 is old.

Age is partly a state of mind, as other members have commented; I must
admit that it is also a state of deteriorating body. That said, there are
many older people who are far fitter, mentally and physically, than young
people. Although there is a common condition among older people known as a
senior moment—alternatively, a CRAFT moment, which I will explain later
but cannot possibly say here—such fleeting seconds of forgetfulness are
not the exclusive province of older people. I suppose that the only
definition has to be chronological. I have been in denial on this for
years, but my imminent departure has forced me to face up to it.

What is the opportunity gap? People are prevented from working beyond a
certain age, and are not selected for jobs because they are too old. We
should follow the example of the United States, where people work as long
as they want to and as long as they are fit and well for the job. That is
what Donald Gorrie said, and I agree. Older people who lose their jobs in
their 50s or early 60s are not getting retrained quickly enough. For those
who do not want to leave, or who are not at the end of their salary career,
that is a demoralising experience.

I have looked at Age Concern Scotland's manifesto for the forthcoming
election. It highlights a number of points that Age Concern feels to be
worthy of consideration. Those include defects in service delivery in the
national health service, in care services, in housing, in support from
voluntary services, in consultation and in transport.

I will focus, however, on the need to ensure that enterprise and lifelong
learning policies are fully inclusive of older people's needs. That means
that vocational retraining must be readily accessible everywhere for
everyone, where they need it. Non-vocational studies and courses must be
available for people who no longer wish to continue to work. The two
benefits of that are, first, that it enriches those people's
lives—people's lives should be as rich as they can be for as long as
possible.

Helen Eadie: I have a 101-year-old constituent who is going to learn
computing at the Bowhill centre in Cardenden. I am sure that Colin Campbell
will join me in recognising the real value that that represents.

Colin Campbell: I could not possibly disagree with Helen Eadie in this
instance. That is just great and really good to know.

The second benefit of people taking non-vocational courses after they leave
work is that they can share their life's experience with the other people
on the course, and with the staff. Not only does that educate other people,
it is good for their own self-esteem.

To give the people in this nation the best possible lives, we need to
control all the levers of power. To discuss this in a devolved Parliament
that is devoid of power over income tax, social security, pensions and the
economy is a bit like whistling in the wind. To close the opportunity gap
for older people—and indeed for all our people—Scotland needs to
release the great wealth of Scotland for all the people of Scotland. That
can be done only by delivering independence. That is why I joined the
Scottish National Party—that is why we all joined our party—and that is
why our party will be here until after independence day.

And now for my valedictory paragraph. Unlike Ian Jenkins, who used to be an
English teacher, I am an historian to trade, and there will be no poetry in
this. It has been a responsibility, an honour and a privilege to serve in
the first democratically elected Scottish Parliament. Its cross-party
committee system, with its pre-legislative scrutiny, proves that a
one-chamber assembly can work. The consensus that is arrived at in the
committees and often, on the really good days, in the chamber, represents
the very best of Scottish politics. More than that, although we disagree
radically on a number of things—not least independence, over which we
will argue until independence day—we conduct our political lives
tolerantly and with mutual respect, so much so that foreign
parliamentarians have been beating a path to the Parliament since we
opened, to see how we do it so well. Sometimes, we do not get enough credit
in this country for what we have achieved. The Parliament is a bit like a
prophet without honour in his own country. Somebody once said that
devolution is not a destination, but a process. The inevitable outcome of
that process will be independence for this nation. I am proud to have
played my part in that process on behalf of all the people of Scotland.

11:13

Mr David Davidson (North-East Scotland) (Con): I am sorry that Mrs Curran
is not in the chamber at the moment to get something back—we heard a good
lecture from her earlier. I have no declaration to make for the debate,
unlike some of my colleagues. If we ever wish to look for value for money
from the older generation, it was John Young in the karaoke bar last
night.

I am amazed at the Executive's hypocrisy in securing this debate at the
last possible moment of the session. It could not have got the debate in
any later if it had tried. That is how much the Executive prioritises the
needs of our older generation, and that is the signal that it is sending
out. The Executive should be ashamed that it has taken so long to bring
this subject to the chamber.

Under the Labour Government, particularly under Gordon Brown, there has
been an increase in stealth taxes that cannot be avoided. Those taxes hit
pensioners and those who are not on benefit particularly badly. This is the
new poverty trap, and it puts people just above the benefit level. Savings
have been attacked. The savings index is down, which does not bode well for
the future, so God knows how we will pay for taxes, pensions and so on in
future.

Gordon Brown has singled out the one area in which people can be
self-reliant: the tax on the pensions system. People save up and want to be
proud and have their independence and dignity, as Keith Harding rightly
said. The Labour Government has destroyed that in the interest of getting
money into the pot, regardless of where it comes from. That is a scandal
that the next—Conservative—Government will have to address. We have
little doubt that that will not be too far in the offing, despite Lewis
Macdonald's smirking. I say to him that merely giving people bus passes is
no substitute for giving them choice and dignity in their old age.

The new poverty zone has taken a lot from our older generation. We are all
knocking on doors at the moment, and we all speak to older people. What do
they talk to us about? They talk about the cost of government, their lack
of purchasing power with the money that they have left, how they have to
eke out a living, and how their pensions have not increased in line with
inflation. Yet, council after council has inflicted massive council tax
rises in the past six years. There is not a council in Scotland that has
done anything to reduce council tax increases to the level of inflation.
Aberdeenshire council, where I live, has managed to put it up by 63 per
cent in a few years.

Who do those increases hit worst of all? They hit those who do not have an
opportunity to earn a living and whose pensions are eroded. It is a fact of
life that the stock market goes up and down. However, the value of those
annuities that were meant to mature in the past two years has probably gone
down by 40 to 45 per cent. People's hopes, aspirations and savings have
been destroyed, and the Labour Government does not recognise that.

It is amazing—Mrs Curran has actually come in to the chamber. Once again,
she is not giving her whole-hearted attention to a serious debate.

Ms Curran: That is not fair.

Mr Davidson: It is perfectly fair. Mrs Curran brought this debate, late, to
the Parliament and she should sit here and listen, particularly since we
had lectures from her this morning.

Free personal care is a joke. The document that I gave to Mary Scanlon is
proof positive that the councils of Scotland do not have the Scottish
Executive's support in delivering free personal care. About eight councils
have issued public policy statements in which they state very clearly that
there is no national scheme. Instead, there is postcode availability of
free personal care, which is a disgrace. The amount of money that the
Parliament has received to spend has gone up and up, but what do we see for
it? As far as the older generation is concerned, we do not see a great
deal.

I am pleased that the Scottish Executive has rejected the Office of Fair
Trading report on pharmacy services. I give the Executive credit for that
and am glad that I was able to help Frank McAveety through some of the
technical issues involved. In this case, at least, the Executive has
managed to get the answer right. I am pleased that people in rural and
suburban communities will now be able to access pharmaceutical care. I
declare that I no longer have any interest in community pharmacy.

The Executive has been late to the table on this subject: it could not have
scheduled this debate any later. That is a clear signal to the pensioners
of Scotland that they are not in the front line of the Scottish Executive's
concerns.

11:19

Paul Martin (Glasgow Springburn) (Lab): Like other speakers, I pay my
respects to the retiring members and wish them the very best. I look
forward to my retirement—hopefully, in 29 years' time, after a career
serving as the MSP for Glasgow Springburn.

Credit should be given to the Executive where it is due. Like other
members, I am sometimes critical of the Executive, but I commend it for its
response to the pharmacy report. It has listened to the wide range of
members' views. The pharmacy issues are very important to the older people
in our communities as pharmacies provide a valuable service and the
Executive has taken that into consideration.

I see this debate as an opportunity to promote many of the services that we
have delivered. I also see it as an opportunity to consider how we improve
older people's experiences in our communities. I put on record my
appreciation of the army of home helps and care workers and other key staff
who provide a valuable service in supporting the older people in our
communities. I also give recognition to the alive and kicking project in my
constituency, which provides a valuable service to the elderly.

The experience of many of my elderly constituents appears to be patchy,
particularly when they have inquiries about council tax, utilities, housing
benefit or other issues to which members have referred. Older people face
what is almost a web of secrecy about how their inquiries are dealt with. I
ask the Minister for Social Justice—I make a constructive point
here—whether she will consider a one-stop-shop approach to support
elderly people with the inquiries with which they encounter difficulties.
As a Glasgow MSP, the minister will be aware of some of the council tax
inquiries that our elderly constituents have and the difficulties that they
face with how such inquiries are managed. We have many examples of
one-stop-shop approaches in our communities and such an approach to support
the elderly with their inquiries would be a way forward.

I referred to the alive and kicking project. The ethos of that project is
that one is never too old. The project has set up an informal dating
agency—if any retired members are interested—and many of the people
involved have married later in life, such as Rose and Benny Walker, the
founder members of the project. Their ethos is that one is never too old
for many of the activities in which they are involved. That is the kind of
ethos that we should develop in the Parliament. We should not allow our
elderly people to be confined to day rooms and day facilities. They should
be involved in the kinds of activities that the project has developed over
the past 20 years. I put on record my appreciation, as the local MSP, for
the hard work that has been done. I plead with the Executive to consider
investing in and developing such services.

The main thing is to ensure that we build on that for the future. Shortly,
I will be joined by children from St Stephen's Primary School in my
constituency. As Colin Campbell said, those are the young people who see us
all, perhaps including me, at 36 years of age, as old guys. We should lay
the foundations to ensure that when those pupils are older, services are in
place to ensure that they will have a good life in their later years.

11:24

Alex Neil (Central Scotland) (SNP): Like many other members, I take the
opportunity to wish those who are retiring today all the best for the
future. I particularly say a word or two about my colleague Winnie Ewing,
because she has the unique record of having served in three Parliaments.
She opened this Parliament—the first democratically elected Scottish
Parliament—and she has been not only a great parliamentarian and patriot,
but has become an icon for the people of Scotland. I congratulate her and
wish her all the best.

I could go round the chamber singling out many other people, but I want to
mention only one other person. We should put on record our gratitude for
the huge contribution that Henry McLeish made to the introduction of free
personal care for the elderly. We wish Henry all the best in the future.

As one of the younger speakers in the debate—

Christine Grahame (South of Scotland) (SNP): I was waiting for the joke.

Alex Neil: For members who were not here, I mentioned in yesterday's debate
on the economy that I read the Toothill report way back in 1962, while I
was in my pram. I received a query from the official report, which asked me
to clarify what I was flicking through in my pram. I hope that the official
report keeps a copy of that note for future reference.

I want to discuss the pensions crisis that we face in Scotland and in the
rest of the UK. Before I do that, I want to underline the points that have
been made about the threat to our pharmacies. For many older people, the
pharmacy is the focal point. It is not only where they collect
prescriptions; in many cases, it is where they meet their friends. They
often rely on the local chemist for advice, which might be on a variety of
local issues, as well as on their health. We must unite in fighting any
threat to our local pharmacies.

Mr McAveety: I will keep the member up to speed with events. Yesterday, we
announced that we have rejected the OFT recommendation and that we value
the role of community pharmacies across Scotland.

Alex Neil: I was just about to congratulate Frank McAveety on doing that.

Mr McAveety: I just like to hear it twice.

Alex Neil: As far as older people—and many others—are concerned, the
other great institution is the local post office. It is regrettable that
the threat to urban and, in the longer term, to rural post offices is still
with us. That is of major concern to older people.

I turn to the key issue of pensions. Many of the aspirations that Margaret
Curran outlined in her speech are aspirations that we all share, not just
for those who are retired at the moment, but for those who will retire in
the years to come. A key prerequisite—the fundamental principle that must
be fulfilled before anyone can genuinely enjoy their retirement—is the
guarantee that they will get a decent weekly income on which to enjoy it.

Any pensioner who lives on, or near, the poverty line and who relies on a
pittance of a pension—the minimum income guarantee is more minimum than
income—cannot enjoy their retirement, mix with their friends, go for a
pint or do the things that people want to do when they have the time to do
them. One of the most disgraceful measures that the Thatcher Government
introduced was the breaking of the link between the annual increase in the
pension and the increase in earnings rather than prices. If that link had
been maintained, many pensioners would be up to £30 a week better off than
they are.

Alex Johnstone (North-East Scotland) (Con): Does the member accept that, at
the time at which that link was broken, the historical perspective
indicated that pensioners had been at a massive disadvantage because that
change had not been made earlier?

Alex Neil: The bottom line is that the breaking of the link between the
pension and earnings has cost pensioners about £1,500—at today's
prices—every year. The same is true of the Christmas bonus, which, to be
fair, the Tories introduced. Initially, it was worth £10, but now it is
worth only £1.25—about 10 per cent of its original value.

I have not had time to develop all the other aspects of the pensions
crisis. My basic point is that paying lip service to the pensioners is
fine, but if it ain't matched with resources, that is all it is—lip
service. We must guarantee that every pensioner has a decent income, so
that they can enjoy their retirement.

11:29

John Young (West of Scotland) (Con): A couple of weeks ago, my
six-and-a-half-year-old granddaughter asked me, "Have you ever met Queen
Victoria?" I sort of looked at her and asked, "Do you not mean the Queen?"
She said, "No, Queen Victoria." I must admit that I think that she was put
up to it.

One important thing that has not been mentioned in the debate so far is the
lack of communication between the elderly and the young. For a number of
reasons, there was far more communication between the old and the young 30
or 40 years ago, when large numbers of people were employed in the same
firm and people came through apprenticeships. Apprentices would start quite
young and would be in contact with people who were in their 30s, 40s, 50s,
60s and even beyond.

I started as an office boy at 16 years of age. In those days, it was not
possible to be promoted beyond an office boy until it was seen whether the
call came for national service at the age of 18. I recall that our office
had not only the likes of myself who was 16, but two men who were over 70
years of age. One of them was the head clerk, who had started as an office
boy in the same firm when Queen Victoria was in the last few years of her
reign. There was that mix between the young, the middle-aged and the old.

Under national service, a large chunk of the male population saw that mix.
The 18 and 19-year-olds had to meet corporals and sergeants who would be in
their 20s, 30s and 40s. Because all those things have largely disappeared,
a type of division has occurred.

We set down certain age markers, such as 60 and 65, but we should bear it
in mind that at the beginning of the 20th century only about 60 people in
this country were reckoned to have reached 100 years of age, whereas today
almost 6,000 people are reckoned to come within that category. Again, world
heavyweight boxing champions such as Jack Dempsey tended to retire at 31
years of age. In the past few years, people such as Riddick Bowe have
fought for the same title at 45 years of age. Colonel Glenn, who was
latterly a senator, went back into space at 77 years of age. We perhaps
require new markers for age.

I think that it would be useful if a future Scottish Parliament reserved
eight seats. Four would be for people over 65 years of age who would be
appointed for one year on a rotating system. The other four seats would go
to people under 21 years of age, again for one year only on a rotating
system. That would be a useful exercise, which could be done outwith the
mainstream elections.

We have heard all sorts of contributions today and I thank Donald Gorrie
for his kind remarks. I think that the next Parliament should establish a
poet laureate and Ian Jenkins would be the obvious man for that job. It
might be a new departure to have such a thing in a Scottish Parliament.

Finally, a number of years ago in the United States, the Republican and
Democrat parties recognised the value of what they called grey power as a
huge voting block. There is the possibility that grey power in this country
will become more organised as a voting block that any politician ignores at
their peril. If a mass of grey-power people come together, they will be
able to decide the outcome of not only Scottish Parliament elections, but
Westminster elections.

On that happy note, it remains only for me to thank everybody for their
kind wishes for the future. I have no intention of simply putting my
slippers on, or of watching the afternoon television and all that sort of
nonsense. I hope to participate in politics in another direction. I will
perhaps consider writing up my experiences of the first four years of the
Scottish Parliament.

I was one of the few Conservatives who wanted a Scottish Parliament when we
had the declaration of Perth in the 1970s. One man who I am sad to see did
not make it here is Brian Meek, the Edinburgh town councillor and
journalist. Brian is a fund of knowledge and has been a staunch supporter
of the Scottish Parliament, but he is still languishing down the road at
Edinburgh City Chambers. Perhaps he will make it here yet.

I thank members very much. I have made good friends across the political
spectrum. However, members have not seen the last of me. I will pay the
occasional visit to Edinburgh and I may even lead grey-power marches down
to Holyrood if members do not behave themselves. Be warned. [Applause.]

11:34

Dorothy-Grace Elder (Glasgow) (Ind): Many visions have floated across our
radar today. My favourite, and the point at which I really got the giggles,
was when Alex Neil referred to reading various documents while in his pram.
My vision was of Alex Neil sitting in his pram, dribbling mush down his bib
and thinking, "I have got to like mush. When I grow up, I think I will go
into politics." A bonnie fechter is Alex Neil.

I am glad that Margaret Curran and Frank McAveety are the two ministers in
charge today. The three of us have been sandwiched together in the east end
for the past four years and, putting all party politics aside, both of them
have co-operated with good heart and good grace on constituency issues, and
have been friendly and kind at all times. Yes, even Frank McAveety—I had
to put that on the record.

I am one of those leaving the Parliament, but I am certainly not retiring,
even if it is my silver wedding anniversary this year. I will retire when
someone nails down my box—be there. Campaigns will go on, especially the
chronic pain campaign, which is one that affects older people. I know that
Mary Scanlon and others who have been loyal to that campaign will continue
it, as will the interest of members across all parties.

I will get to the nitty-gritty of age. I am old enough to remember when the
Registrar General for Scotland produced a report entitled "The population
of Scotland broken down by age and sex". Obviously we could take our pick
which we wanted to be broken down by, fellow parliamentarians.

I am not sure what we mean when we talk in this debate about "older people"
or "old people". By the standards of the Bundestag in Germany, everyone in
the Scottish Parliament is older or old, even our youngest member who is
still in his 20s. Recently, a girl of 19—a member of the Green
party—was elected to the Bundestag.

Although talent occurs at any age, it is a formidable combination when
talent is united with experience. I am terribly sorry to see some members
leaving today, especially the unique Winnie Ewing. We are losing our
mother, and that is awful for the Parliament.

The minister briefly referred to unemployment among older people. A survey
by Silicon Research Services stated that agist discrimination begins at 35
nowadays. That is what was found in a survey of several thousand people.

Those of us who have marched together have tackled all forms of
discrimination over the years. I know many faces from those past days. We
marched against racism and sexism, but we have yet to tackle the last big,
horrible ism and that is ageism.

The Eden Brown employee survey of October 2001 showed that employees found
discrimination at work on the basis of age was much more common than
discrimination on grounds of gender or race. We can see clearly why that
is—there is legislation on race and gender discrimination.

In 1996, Mr Blair promised in writing to the campaign against age
discrimination in employment that he would legislate against age
discrimination. Strangely enough, after the election, he did not and it has
been worked on a voluntary basis, which most certainly has not worked with
employers.

An NOP survey found that half of employers had work forces with fewer than
10 per cent of employees over age 50 and 10 per cent of employers had no
employees aged over 50. That is a disgraceful waste of human life and I am
sure that everyone in the chamber will agree on that and agree that we have
to move against ageism in future, whether the subject is devolved or not.

I will leave the chamber with some final thoughts. What is the Executive's
own employment policy? One Executive document states that it does not
usually employ people who are over 60, while the next reassures everyone
that the Executive is against all forms of discrimination, including age
discrimination. As a result, I ask the minister to spell out in his
summing-up whether the Executive truly sets a good example or whether it
debars people who are over 60.

I think that it should be illegal for any employer to ask someone about
their age. I adhere to the view of Joan Rivers, who calculated her age
according to the Hollywood movie star school of creative mathematics and
then said anything she damned well liked about it. She was quite right,
too. In fact, I recommend everyone to count their age in dog years.

I thank all members who have been friendly, co-operative and civilised over
the past four years.

Ms Curran: I am sorry to intervene in the final minute. However, I want to
put on record my recognition of Dorothy-Grace Elder's hard work both in the
Parliament and in the east end of Glasgow. I had been debating whether to
intervene on other members but, given my proximity to Dorothy-Grace and the
work that we have done together in the east end of the city, I wanted to
record on behalf of myself and Frank McAveety our recognition of her
efforts.

The Deputy Presiding Officer (Mr Murray Tosh): You do not need to respond
at great length, Ms Elder.

Dorothy-Grace Elder: Oh, go on.

The minister's comment was exceedingly kind. I know that she will work on
and perhaps take on the Carntyne incinerator case. If I can help with
anything, I certainly will. I have found out in politics that what counts
are individuals, irrespective of party. Margaret Curran has been a staunch
supporter of people when they have needed help.

I want to finish by thanking the people who really created this Parliament
from scratch: the staff. We have been privileged. They have possibly had
custody of the brain throughout; indeed, fronted by our marvellous security
staff, they have done everything possible in every department for us. To
all of them I say, goodbye and good luck. [Applause.]

11:42

Christine Grahame (South of Scotland) (SNP): I send my best wishes to all
the retirees, in particular Dorothy-Grace Elder, whose passion and wit I
will miss, and Dr Winnie Ewing, who was my political mentor for many years
and remains so. I also give my best wishes to Ian Jenkins, who has been my
sweet and dear adversary—or perhaps I have been his. I will cheer him up
with the news that, in a recent questionnaire, Borders schoolchildren
thought that I was a member of the Liberal Democrats. I have obviously
mentioned them once too often.

Listening to the debate, I have been wondering who these older people are.
Colin Campbell was quite right: it all depends on one's position on the
timeline of life. I think that I am pretty young, although I am sure that
lots of people think that I am no spring chicken and wonder why I am still
here. Well, I intend to be here for a very long time.

For the purposes of many organisations, older people are classed as those
who are over 50—which takes in my sweet young man Alex Neil. More than 1
million people in Scotland are over 50—indeed, one can hear them casting
their votes based on what we have or have not done for them. Age Concern
Scotland's slogan is "Age counts". We should all watch the ballot boxes to
find out how politicians have let down Scotland's elderly.

We are not monotypical; we are all different and difficult and have all the
usual virtues and vices. We are not simply older people. For example, my
father is 88 on 1 April. He e-mails me his message list, but even that does
not guarantee that I will come back with the right type of cabbage. He is
truly an individual.

As we grow older, we rely more on public transport. To quote a famous film,
I do not think that we should rely on "the kindness of strangers". We need
public transport and a reliable health service and have to know that, when
all is done, there is proper nursing care. As far as transport is
concerned, mobility is at the heart of keeping one's health, psychological
well-being and friends. Free bus passes might be all right, but they work
only in one's own area. Someone in Penicuik can go to Leadburn, which is a
couple of miles up the road, but if they want to go to Peebles, they must
pay £4.50.

The Deputy Minister for Enterprise, Transport and Lifelong Learning (Lewis
Macdonald) rose—

Christine Grahame: I will take the minister's intervention in a minute. I
hope that he is on his feet to announce that the Executive will make the
scheme national, as we have suggested all along. We are behind Wales and a
national scheme is needed.

Lewis Macdonald: I would have been delighted to announce that had my
colleagues not made such an announcement some weeks ago. Having caught up
with that fact, Christine Grahame will want to pay close attention to the
matter. The difference between our commitment to a nationwide scheme and
whatever the SNP has to say is that we will deliver our scheme.

Christine Grahame: The minister got there—better late than never. At
least the scheme has got there; some buses do not get there. There is no
point in having a free bus pass if no buses operate. In Galashiels in the
Borders, Meigle Street loses all its buses on 31 March. Many elderly people
who live up the hills will have nothing after that and they will knock on
Scottish Borders Council's door. The bus services for those who live in
Ladywood in Penicuik stop at 7.30 pm. People are supposed to be in bed with
their knitted bedsocks on and are not supposed to be out gallivanting,
doing internetting business and meeting friends.

Many older people are frightened to go into hospital because they think
that doing so will make their health worse. Their operations might be
successful, but they might catch infections while in hospital. My colleague
Kay Ullrich mentioned a situation that I saw when my mother was terminally
ill in hospital two years ago. Food trays that are put in front of patients
have cups with lids that older people cannot open and the trays are taken
away before the food has been eaten. Not a nurse is in sight to help those
people to eat their meals. Some kind of resolution has been reached to the
nursing home crisis, but elderly people and their families have been put
through trouble in thinking that elderly people would be decanted and
shifted like bits of furniture.

Growing old is not always a happy prospect, but I intend to grow old
disgracefully. I will take a line from a poem that Ian Jenkins quoted: I
shall "learn to spit".

Ian Jenkins: I think that Christine Grahame does that well already.

Christine Grahame: I also intend to hone my skill at drinking malt while
gardening.

There is fun at 50—I know, I have been there; there is sex at 60—I hope
so, I am going there; there is sin at 70, and I am looking forward to it;
and at 80 and 90, there is upholstery. If members want to know the answer
to that conundrum, they should read a previous speech of mine.

11:47

Sarah Boyack (Edinburgh Central) (Lab): I am tempted to say, "Follow that."
I will try not to.

It is appropriate that the last main political debate of the session is
about what the Parliament has done to try to improve older people's quality
of life. In her opening speech, Margaret Curran made wide-ranging comments
about what the Executive has done. I will focus not on a range of issues,
but on how much more we need to do on the key flagship policies that define
what the Parliament has done for older people and on the contribution that
older people make in my constituency. It will probably be tough to cover
those subjects in four minutes, but I will have a go.

In considering how to improve the key flagship policies that are delivered
throughout Scotland, I asked my intern, Beth Shatzel, to undertake
questionnaire work and to talk to older people in my constituency. Week in,
week out in the Parliament, we debate policies endlessly, but how do those
policies feed through to people? How do they know that those policies are
being implemented?

We examined the three key policies of free off-peak local bus travel, free
care for older people and free central heating. Through Beth Shatzel's
work, which I followed up by attending many meetings of older people, it is
clear that those policies have massive support throughout my constituency.
Many older people have benefited from those policies, but many are still
unaware of them. In the Parliament, we talk about the policies as if they
were implemented at the flick of a switch, happened yesterday and are
straightforward. We must communicate to older people what we have done in
the Parliament, engage them in those discussions and talk to them about how
to improve those policies.

When I talk to people in my constituency, just about every older person
whom I meet is delighted about free off-peak local travel on buses. People
have used it from day one—they have been delighted to get out there.
People are not only using the scheme, but are massively aware of it. We
have been hugely successful in making people know about free off-peak local
travel on buses.

There is less awareness of what free care for older people means in
practice and, as I said, it is incumbent on MSPs to communicate what
policies mean in practice. Many older people whom we talked to had had free
central heating installed, but many of them were suspicious about it. I was
struck by the fact that they did not believe that it was going to be free.
We have debated the issue in the Parliament—we know that free central
heating is provided free and that the scheme is real. However, a lot of the
older people whom we talked to thought that there was a catch; they thought
that the scheme was something like a time-share. They said that bits of it
would be free, but that they would have to pay for the installation or that
there would be a catch further down the line and that 10 years hence they
would have to pay for it.

It is important that we do not simply talk about those headline policies
but take on the job of communicating them personally. A lot of flak has
been directed at the Executive for the money that it has spent on
advertising. As an ex-minister, I know that that is partly because a lot of
that money used to be UK money. The Scottish Office did not have that money
in its accounts and one of the benefits of devolution is that, when that
money came to Scotland, we were given the choice about how to spend it.

I defend to the last the right of our Executive to spend money on
publicity. I want every one of my constituents to know that they deserve
and will benefit from free central heating. I have visited several old
people's houses and have seen the difference that free central heating has
made to their quality of life. I was struck by the fact that those old
people no longer have to live their lives in their sitting rooms; they can
be comfortable in their bedrooms and bathrooms as well. Those are basic
things that the Scottish Parliament has done to make a difference and we
should defend them to the last.

Although we have made a big difference in this parliamentary session, I
would be the first to say that there is a hell of a lot more that we want
to do in the second session. I would love to be in the Parliament then to
extend those policies and to take them further forward.

It is important that we do not see older people only as receivers of
benefit or policies from the Scottish Parliament. Older people put a huge
amount back into our constituencies and communities. As a local MSP, I am
proud of the work that older people do in my constituency. They demand my
support on planning issues, on sourcing grants and on getting the local
authority to give them more support. They also demand my support in getting
new facilities built and in the fundraising that is needed to staff the
facilities.

Many of the groups on my patch are run by older people, often for older
people. It is important that we acknowledge that in today's debate, which
is about closing the opportunity gap. The Scottish Parliament is making its
contribution to that aim not only by spending money on older people, but by
working with older people. We are making the work that older people do go a
lot further—we should celebrate the work that is done by thousands of
older people in every constituency across Scotland.

I will finish by saying that we have done a huge amount to make a real
difference to the quality of life for pensioners and older people across
Scotland. For the past year and a half, I have been involved in the Pennell
trust—[Laughter.] I am going to regret saying that. The initiative is
about women aged over 45 to over 105. Older people make up a huge number of
the population of Scotland and we all know that we are all moving towards
old age. We can be proud of what the Parliament has done so far, but I
accept that there is an awful lot more than we still want to do. There are
a lot of radical ambitions for the second session of the Parliament. I
fervently hope that we will have a Labour-led Government to let us deliver
those radical ambitions.

11:54

Ms Sandra White (Glasgow) (SNP): The minister said at the beginning of her
speech that we have to listen to older people. The SNP does that and when
we do so the one issue that is raised all the time, particularly by
pensioners, is the state pension.

The state pension gives single people £75.50 and a couple £120.70 a week.
There is the minimum income guarantee, but surely if it is described as a
minimum the Government must be saying that a top-up is necessary. That
means that the state pension is far too low. We must get to European
levels—in Germany and France, the state pension is 11 per cent of the
gross domestic product, whereas in the UK it is 4.3 per cent. The Scottish
Parliament cannot get away from the fact that the state pension is far too
low.

Today's debate is about closing the opportunity gap. One way of doing so
is, as others have suggested, to encourage and allow people who want to get
back to work to do so. We know that age discrimination legislation will
come into force in 2006, but I am worried that most employers and people in
Scotland do not know about it. When I attended a conference in Glasgow on
the subject a couple of weeks ago, Scottish employers' lack of knowledge of
it was mentioned time and again. Wales and England are far ahead of us on
the issue. One reason for that is that we are not promoting the legislation
enough. I think that it was Iain Gray who replied to my questions on the
matter, for which I thank him. He mentioned the publication of a booklet
called "Are You Over 50?" How many of those booklets have been produced?
Where are they being distributed? Who is taking them—employers or the
general public?

Ms Curran: If we do not have that information to hand for the debate, I am
sure that we can provide it to the member. We will ensure that she receives
it.

Ms White: I thank the minister. I have spoken to old-age pensioners and
groups and they ask about the publication when I mention it, but nobody
seems to know exactly where it is distributed.

Will the Executive promote an advertising campaign on television or
somewhere else that deals with age discrimination? It is important that the
public at large and employers know about the forthcoming legislation. We
all know that older people—by which I mean those who are 50 or older
rather than necessarily 70 or 80—contribute a great deal to society. They
want to get back to work. Alex Neil mentioned pensions. Some people who
have private pensions in particular will be forced to go back to work. We
want to give them a choice. They should be treated fairly.

I mentioned choice. I commend the SNP's amendment, especially the final
words, which are:

"to address the needs of older people in Scotland the Parliament needs the
full powers of an independent sovereign state."

The Deputy Presiding Officer: We proceed to winding-up speeches. We are a
little bit behind the clock.

11:57

Robert Brown (Glasgow) (LD): This has been a high-quality debate worthy of
the Parliament. Its tone is a suitable curtain-raiser for the tone with
which we should go into the election.

I join colleagues in thanking for their service senior friends, allies and
opponents who are retiring from the Parliament. In many ways, they
symbolise the contribution that older people make to our society throughout
Scotland. Many members have already been mentioned, but I will single out
John Young and my colleague Ian Jenkins. I became a councillor in Glasgow
in 1977 when John Young was the council leader. He was the best orator in
Glasgow District Council and is a nice man. Through his endeavours, he has
contributed to the quality of public life throughout Scotland.

Ian Jenkins made the best speech in the debate—it was erudite and had
feeling, compassion and gentleness. The quality that John Young and Ian
Jenkins have in common is gentleness. They have other qualities—for
example, the mugging of David McLetchie by Ian Jenkins in the earlier days
of the Parliament sticks in all our memories—but they behave without
bitterness, rancour or nastiness, which is to be commended in the
Parliament.

In summarising the debate for the Liberal Democrats, I will make three
general points. First, I thank Age Concern Scotland, which, as has been
said, gave us the briefing before the debate. I also thank all the other
large and small voluntary bodies throughout Scotland that contribute so
much to our society. They plug gaps in statutory services and provide
lifeline comfort and hope to many people. They give the Parliament the
benefit of their practical experience and are often the unsung heroes,
possessing all the virtues that we would like our country to have.

Secondly, despite the snipers, the denigration and the bitchy detraction,
the Parliament and the Executive have been great reformers. Legislative and
administrative achievements over the past four years are impressive and
stand comparison with the achievements of any Government of the past. More
than 50 acts have been passed, many of which are significant social
reforms, such as the Adults with Incapacity (Scotland) Act 2000, the Debt
Arrangement and Attachment (Scotland) Act 2002 and the Freedom of
Information (Scotland) Act 2002. Free central heating provision is the
single best achievement of the Parliament and, as Sarah Boyack and other
members have said, it is very relevant to the needs of old people in this
country.

Many members have mentioned the third issue that I want to mention. Like
other people, older people are citizens who benefit from the general health
of our society. Quite possibly, they make the most significant contribution
to the voluntary sector, which I mentioned earlier. Of course, they have
children and grandchildren, some of whom will have benefited from, for
example, the student settlement that we achieved in the early days of the
Parliament.

I mention as an example the Glasgow Old People's Welfare Association, which
runs clubs, residential homes and other facilities throughout the city. The
association makes an enormous contribution to the quality of life of many
people. It has an unbelievable 2,000 volunteers and is led by a formidable
lady called Sheena Glass. It has a total lack of central support or
bureaucracy, but her style and personality goes right across the
organisation and all the good work that it does.

Another example is a pensioner group in my home area of Rutherglen,
although admittedly the group has shrunk in numbers in the past few years.
It is led by a lady who I thought was probably dead long since; she is
still the chair. She is kept going by the responsibility that she feels for
the older people in her group. I might add that almost all of those people
are younger than she is—she must be in her late 80s or 90s at least.

I remind the chamber of the last part of the Executive motion, which refers
to

"services ... which will support older people in living healthy, active and
independent lives."

That is the target of all our efforts. That is the attitude behind the
transport concession and free personal care. The transport concession will
probably be the most popular action that the Parliament has taken, because
it helps people to get out and about without financial concerns. It is
talked about on the buses—I hear people talk about it all the time and it
is very much welcomed. As Christine Grahame said, that facility must be
matched by the availability of services when they are required. Buses that
run on an hourly schedule in the evenings—they cannot always be relied on
to come and sometimes leave people stranded at cold, dark bus stops—are
not a recipe for social inclusion. We must look for new and imaginative
ways in which to bridge the service gaps.

I commend to the Parliament the safe stations initiative, which Strathclyde
Passenger Transport Executive operates in Paisley. I had the opportunity to
visit that project recently. A control centre monitors almost all the local
stations within the Strathclyde network and there is an interactive help
button at the stations. The initiative is important and I would like it to
be extended throughout Scotland. Pharmacies, post offices and pensions have
been mentioned. Those are also important issues.

I will finish by mentioning the fact that, a couple of years ago, I
attended a 100th birthday party—that is probably symptomatic of my
growing age and the people whom I happen to know. The party was held at the
Overtoun park bowling club in Rutherglen. Until fairly recently, the
gentleman concerned walked a mile each day up and down to Fernhill—not an
easy hill to walk up—to play bowls at the club where he still regularly
wins medals. As a concession to age, he stopped walking back up the hill
about a year ago and now takes the bus.

That is an example of what we all want for older people in our society. We
want to see healthy, active and independent older people who lead happy and
useful lives. That is what the debate is all about. That is what all of us,
throughout the various parties, are in various ways trying to achieve. If
we can make some contribution—I believe that the Parliament has—towards
reaching those objectives, our existence here over the past four years will
have been worth while.

12:03

Mrs Lyndsay McIntosh (Central Scotland) (Con): Members should not let the
white hair fool them—I am the baby of the contributors in this debate. It
gives me a great deal of satisfaction to be closing for the Tories in the
debate—and the boss ain't here.

I give the chamber my apologies for not leaving promptly. Members may
wonder why I say that. I should explain that I had apologised to the
minister and the Presiding Officer because I expected to have to leave for
a radio engagement at lunch time; however, that engagement was cancelled
because of the war. On that note, I record my support for our troops abroad
and wish them safety and godspeed. I also apologise for my short absence
earlier. That was a consequence of a weak bladder—something that is not
confined to the old.

I restate briefly where the Conservatives stand in our approach to the
debate. We are committed to a health service that is universal in its reach
and available to everyone, wherever they live—it must be available free
at the point of need, regardless of ability to pay. It must be high quality
and apply the highest professional standards and techniques that are based
on the latest knowledge. It must put the needs of the patient first as the
paramount consideration.

Keith Harding touched on justice issues, which are the cause of one of the
greatest insecurities that people in Scotland feel. Those issues affect
minorities in our society disproportionately, especially older people. We
believe that it is time to reclaim neighbourhoods from the criminals who
destroy communities and imprison fearful people in their homes. People
should be allowed to walk through their communities free from the fear of
crime—God knows, they have earned that.

On social justice, Keith Harding mentioned, as I have done in the past,
that the Conservatives introduced the right-to-buy scheme in 1980. No
policy that has been introduced since then has done more to lift the
vulnerable in Scotland out of poverty.

On transport, concessionary schemes and their extension to cover peak times
are all well and good, but they are no flipping use if the level of service
and the access to it are not sufficient.

Mr McAveety: Will the member take an intervention?

Mrs McIntosh: Happily.

Mr McAveety: Will she happily tell me who initiated the deregulation of bus
services in the 1980s?

Mrs McIntosh: I concede that point and that the Executive has done well in
introducing the concessionary travel scheme, but there are areas in which
the scheme does not work as well as it might. For example, I am regularly
assailed, through correspondence, by a gentleman—a senior citizen, no
less—in a suburb of Cumbernauld called Banton, who harangues me to try to
get better bus services in his area. In that area, people in their 80s and
90s have to wait for buses that, in their opinion, come on the basis of a
calendar, not a timetable.

Cathy Peattie (Falkirk East) (Lab): The member is absolutely right about
bus services, but was not it the Tories who deregulated those services,
which is what causes such problems for her constituents and mine?

Mrs McIntosh: I do my level best to ensure that the member's constituents
and those in the more southern part of Central Scotland get the chance to
travel to Falkirk.

Mr Gibson: Will the member take an intervention?

Mrs McIntosh: Of course, but I ask Mr Gibson what is up with his tie.

Mr Gibson: I have never been able to tie it properly; I cannae ride a bike,
either. [Laughter.] That is actually true—it is one of my many failings.
In fact, I am still working on tying my shoelaces. To return to more
prosaic matters, I ask Lyndsay McIntosh whether she and her group will
support Kenny MacAskill's member's bill, which aims to reregulate bus
services.

Mrs McIntosh: In a word, no. However, I can give the member a suggestion
for his shoes—get Velcro fastenings, dear.

I agree whole-heartedly with the comments that have been made about skills
for the over-50 work force. I know many old people, some of whom are
sitting not too far from me, who have a lot to contribute—they ain't done
yet.

As the minister is aware, the central heating programme has not been an
unalloyed success and there are little problems here and there. It would
not be fair to portray the scheme as blemish free. The minister also
mentioned youth courts. The Criminal Justice (Scotland) Bill was
strengthened by our amendments and I pay tribute to my colleague Bill
Aitken for lodging them. The minister also mentioned that there are more
police. That is happening slowly, but there is safety in numbers.

Robert Brown: Will the member take an intervention on that point?

Mrs McIntosh: What is this—get me day?

Robert Brown: Given that police numbers in Scotland are at their highest
ever, how many more police does the member want? What is her target?

Mrs McIntosh: Police numbers are not at their highest.

Gender equality is dear to the minister's heart. Significant lifestyle
changes are now possible, but, in my grandmother's day, regardless of
whether someone was working or retired, their life was pretty much the
same, as Johann Lamont said. Nowadays, the situation is a bit less
difficult, because people can change their lifestyle as they reach the
silver-tide era. However, matters are different in our ethnic minority
communities and we should pay attention to that.

The speech by Kenny Gibson of the tie was one of the most thoughtful that I
have heard in four years and I pay tribute to him. My mother, too, often
comments, "I don't want a free television licence; I want my cataracts
done." She sat for months and months and had me phoning up to get an
appointment. Here is a difficulty that members might want to think about in
future: why do we not invest in technology to manage time and appointments?
That could help many people. Our older people may be able to take up some
of the cancellations.

Kenny Gibson also mentioned respect, career breaks, pensions and transport.
Of course, there was Keith Harding's speech as well, much of which I have
repeated. There is no doubt about it—means testing demeans the silver
tide of voters.

The Deputy Presiding Officer: You have one minute.

Mrs McIntosh: Oh boy. In that case, I pay tribute to previous contributors
Trish Godman, Kay Ullrich, Bill Butler, Mary Scanlon and Donald Gorrie.
When Ian Jenkins mentioned Tina I was truly nervous. I thought that he had
heard about last night and Dr Sylvia Jackson and me. That was worrying.
What a lovely speech Colin Campbell made. I will leave it to him to tell
members what a CRAFT moment is. John Young should believe me when I say
that we will communicate at some stage in the future.

I have one or two comments, for which I crave the Presiding Officer's
indulgence.

The Deputy Presiding Officer: We are behind time already.

Mrs McIntosh: Indeed we are.

However unwillingly, I shall be making way for an older person. I leave it
to others to make the comparisons. However, there is life in this old dog
yet. They used to say that life begins at 40. When I got there, they had
bloody raised it to 50. At this rate, I will never catch up.

It has been my privilege to serve in this first session of Parliament. I
never sought a place in history, but it comes with the territory and is a
humbling prospect. I have made many, many friends across the parties. I
should tell members that Mike Russell did not send me a Valentine's card
and I was disappointed.

Alex Johnstone: Did the member send him one?

Mrs McIntosh: No, I did not. He signalled his intention up to me.

Colleagues across the parties in Central Scotland were strangers who became
friends. I am sure that there are many more friends that I have yet to
make. No matter what the circumstances of our departures today—to
pastures new or out to grass, and whether assured of success or
disappointed by the outcome—I send all members every best wish.

12:12

Linda Fabiani (Central Scotland) (SNP): All I can say is that I hope that I
am not retiring—I hope that I will still have my job after 1 May.

I thought earlier that I should say something about colleagues across the
parties who are retiring; they will all be sadly missed, but they will just
have to take my word for it. I hope that my actions have showed how dearly
I hold them all, because I feel that if I start to say anything I will just
get upset and make a complete and utter fool of myself, so I will not do
it.

One thing that Colin Campbell said really struck home; I will paraphrase
him. He talked about age being a state of mind, which is absolutely true
because, until today, I had not thought of those colleagues as people who
were older—I exclude from that Duncan Hamilton. Members have stood up and
said that they are retiring, but they are colleagues I have thought of
merely as my contemporaries—age has not come into it at any time until
today, when they all stood up and stated how ancient they were, and that
they were all going off into the sunset.

It struck me that I am getting on a bit as well. Much to my shock, I saw
that there was an Executive document called "Are you over 50?", which is a
guide to services for older people. I was thinking, "I'm nearly there
myself", then Sarah Boyack talked about an institution for women who are
over 45.

Sarah Boyack: I am deeply grateful that I have been allowed an
intervention. I referred to the Pennell Initiative for Women's Health,
which is a group that was set up to promote older women's health. I
apologise for my earlier slip of the tongue, which I hope will be corrected
in the Official Report.

Linda Fabiani: I thought that Sarah Boyack would appreciate that
opportunity, but I still have a wee bit of difficulty with being elderly
because I am over 45.

I do not know whether it is the same for other members, but I recently
started getting Saga Magazine sent to me every month here in Parliament.
Only when I heard Helen Eadie clarifying what Saga is did I think that I
should perhaps have thrown the magazine in the bin. However, I thank Colin
Campbell for kindly gifting me his Saga pen to remember him by.

To return to the reality of the debate—older people's place in
Scotland—the minister rightly cited the developments that Parliament has
implemented on behalf of older people. The minister also said that nobody
should have to live on less than the state pension and the minimum income
guarantee. However, Sandra White rightly said that the existence of the
minimum income guarantee is proof that the pension is not enough to live
on. Furthermore, there is a big problem with people not applying for the
minimum income guarantee and not taking up their full benefits.

Another member—I cannot remember whom—referred to the fact that there
are local initiatives that involve giving people welfare benefits advice.
For example, I think that the Eaga Partnership does that when its staff
visit people for the central heating programme. We should consider giving
such advice nationally. We should be able to tie all the different
initiatives into the fundamental question of whether people have enough
money to live on; it should not be difficult to include that in every
initiative for older people.

The minister made it sound as if the land of milk and honey had arrived
during the past four years, but I am sure that she would be the first to
admit—Bill Butler referred to this—that we still have a long way to go.
I agree that changes have been made, but it is a sad indictment of our
society that we still have a long way to go.

Free personal care was referred to. I am extremely proud of the fact that
it was the Parliament rather than the Executive that forced the issue on
free personal care. Everyone in the Parliament has something to be proud of
in that respect. However, there are problems with free personal care, which
Mary Scanlon highlighted. She was right that we have all had constituency
problems involving free personal care not working in the way that everyone
thought that it would and, indeed, in the way that Parliament intended it
to work.

Transport and travel were also referred to. Kenny Gibson and I were curious
about why Lewis Macdonald rather than Des McNulty will close the debate for
the minister, but we were not long into the debate when we realised why.
Members started to let slip the fact there was to be a big announcement on
national concessionary travel—I think that Dr Sylvia Jackson eventually
blew the gaff and stole Lewis Macdonald's thunder. Again, I think that the
provision of national concessionary travel is a triumph for a viable
Opposition and the Parliament because the Executive has been forced to
admit that the localised concessionary travel policy has not worked and
that concessionary travel must be rolled out nationally. I look forward to
hearing the proposal's being formally announced.

Keith Harding said something important when he said that what elderly
people require is to be treated with dignity rather than to be patronised.
I tried to imagine anyone trying to patronise my colleagues Kay Ullrich and
Winnie Ewing; if someone did try that, I think that they would be quickly
told something. Keith Harding also showed a bit of a nerve in saying much
of what he said about what the Tories did in their years in Government, but
there was also much truth in what he said; for example, about stealth taxes
on pensioners and the raid on pension schemes. Those were valid points on
matters that are storing up big problems for the future.

Mr Harding also went on about the how the right to buy was the most
wonderful thing that had ever happened to alleviate poverty, but he will
not be surprised to hear that I do not agree. On the minister's
intervention on the right to buy, I do not like the suggestion that someone
who happened to buy their council house was too stupid to realise that
doing so would have implications.

Johann Lamont: Does Linda Fabiani agree that one of the big issues around
the right to buy was that it made logical sense for people to buy their
council house because rents were so high because they were not
appropriately supported? Does she agree that people who bought their
council houses did not think about how they would maintain and repair their
houses after they had bought them? The problem was not that people were
stupid, but that council housing and the right to buy operated against
ordinary working class people. Linda Fabiani accepted that point in
committee.

Linda Fabiani: I thank the member—I get the point.

That problem also exists in the private sector. If we consider all
tenements, it is not only ex-council houses that have problems with repairs
and maintenance. When I was a housing professional, I often came across a
problem for elderly people in relation to the right to buy, which was that
the families of elderly people would buy their parents' council house on
their behalf, but the family situation would change. I have had in my
office many times elderly people who were homeless because their families
had disenfranchised them. The right to buy did not really protect the
elderly.

I am running out of time, but I cannot leave the debate without saying
firmly that the only thing that can really make a difference for the
elderly of our country is to give us the powers that would truly make a
difference. A viable independent sovereign state could make its own
decisions about how we treat the elderly. The Organisation for Economic
Co-operation and Development estimates that the 21 most developed countries
give 7.4 per cent of their GDP to their state pensions—this country gives
only 4.3 per cent, so we have nothing to be proud of. Roll on independence
and the opportunity to change that and many other things.

12:21

The Deputy Minister for Enterprise, Transport and Lifelong Learning (Lewis
Macdonald): As we have heard today, people's priorities and interests might
change as they grow older, but that does not mean that they stop being
active, interested and involved. Today's debate has provided clear examples
of that.

Older people are the backbone of families and communities. They give of
their experience, knowledge and time as carers, volunteers, community
activists, parents and grandparents. The term social capital is very
relevant to what older people have to offer. Those who write off people
once they reach a certain age are making a serious and significant mistake
and the Scottish Executive has acknowledged the huge contribution that
Scotland's older people want to make and the resource that they represent.
Older people want to be valued and they want access to opportunities, jobs
and services.

The Scottish Parliament has rightly worked to ensure that older people have
the health and care services that they need. I welcome the tribute that
Alex Neil paid to Henry McLeish for his part in introducing free personal
care for the elderly. However, sometimes the concentration on such matters
can lead to the assumption that they are all that elderly people are
interested in and that the entire age group is in need of care. That is
patently not true and the key to a policy for successful aging in the
decades to come is that we recognise the extent of the role of older people
in our communities and society.

People of all ages have talent and ability to offer. For example, older
people have an excellent record in business start-ups and often outdo their
younger competitors. As has been mentioned in the debate, many employers in
Scotland have come to recognise the benefits of having a diverse work force
and the gains that can be made through the experience and maturity that is
represented by older workers.

In the past four years, employment levels for older workers have risen
faster than they have for the work force as a whole. From 2006, age
discrimination in the workplace will be unlawful, which will build on the
current code of practice on age diversity in employment. The age positive
campaign aims to raise awareness among employers through a series of events
that are planned throughout Scotland in May and June, and with an updated
code of practice on age diversity, which Iain Gray has launched. The change
in attitude that is required is a key challenge and the legal change that
will ensure that the rights of older people have the same protection as the
rights of other sections of society is important in that regard.

Being able to get out and about is key to making the most of everything
that is available to people in their communities. As has been said by a
number of members, public transport plays an important part in many older
people's lives. In rural areas, especially, public transport can be a
lifeline and that is why we are investing significant funds in our rural
transport initiatives. I am sorry to have to disappoint Linda Fabiani, but
I will not be making any new announcement today in that regard. However, it
is well known—other than on the SNP benches—that Iain Gray announced
some weeks ago that any future Administration in which Labour is involved
will create a national concessionary fares scheme.

The rural transport fund and the rural community initiative offer real
benefits to older people who are unable to access the bus services to which
concessionary fare schemes apply. For example, I recently visited Peebles
in Ian Jenkins' constituency to launch the new community minibus that the
Tweeddale Association of Voluntary Organisations is operating as part of
that rural community transport initiative. The new minibus will enable many
older people who would otherwise find it difficult to get out to access
services and to visit friends and family.

Alex Neil: One issue that has been raised by many of the minister's
colleagues is the Tory deregulation of buses. Will there be a commitment in
Labour's manifesto to the re-regulation of buses?

Lewis Macdonald: I am delighted that Alex Neil has given me the opportunity
to respond on that matter, because yesterday morning I shared a platform
with Kenny MacAskill at an election hustings on transport matters. Kenny
made it quite clear that the SNP's commitment to re-regulation is one that
will give local authorities the power to regulate buses if they so wish.

I must tell Alex Neil, as I told Kenny MacAskill yesterday, that that is
precisely what the Transport (Scotland) Act 2001 already created through
the measures that allow quality contracts to be introduced. I am sure that
the SNP will catch up with us in due course, and that it will become aware
not only of what we intend to do, but what we have already done.

On September 30 last year, we introduced free off-peak bus travel for all
elderly and disabled people in Scotland. One million retired people
throughout Scotland have experienced the benefits of that scheme, which
makes a key contribution to providing access for older people to services
such as health care, education, welfare and jobs. It also contributes to
the greater involvement of elderly people in the general life of the
community.

We are committed to further enhancement of concessionary travel. This
morning, I met the chairman of the Scottish Pensioners Association to draw
attention to the equalisation of age eligibility for concessionary travel.
From Tuesday 1 April, 125,000 men aged between 60 and 64 will be able to
benefit from the same free concessionary travel that is currently available
to men of pensionable age.

Dorothy-Grace Elder: No one doubts the minister's sincerity, but I would
like an answer to my earlier question. What is the Executive's position on
employing people who are over 60? Does it include a complete cut-off at age
60? Some literature seems to indicate that it has, while other literature
says that the Executive is not age discriminatory in the least.

Lewis Macdonald: I will come back to the point that Dorothy-Grace Elder
raises. It is certainly a matter that I shall seek to address, but there
are one or two other points that I want to respond to first.

The introduction of age equalisation is only one more step. As I said, we
have already made it clear that those on the Executive benches intend, in
the next Parliament, to create a single national free concessionary travel
scheme for pensioners and people over 60 throughout Scotland. To make that
possible, we have made available significant funds, which have already
amounted to nearly £100 million a year.

Beyond that, we are also committed to working with the UK Government to
improve access to transport for disabled people, including disabled elderly
people, in Scotland. Last May, we established the mobility and access
committee for Scotland to allow disabled people to feed in their views on
transport issues and to suggest early practical improvements that could be
made. Robert Brown mentioned the safe stations initiative in the
Strathclyde area, and many other such initiatives are already under way.
The mobility and access committee for Scotland will assist us in spreading
that best practice.

Learning and lifelong learning are also areas of great interest to older
people. In February, Iain Gray launched our strategy for lifelong learning
to highlight those matters. Gaining new skills and new knowledge is a
lifetime opportunity; it is not an opportunity only for young adults, as
was once the view. That is why our strategy emphasises the lifelong
approach—we want everyone to be able to access learning that is most
relevant to their needs.

The internet is just one of the latest tools that people can use to gain
new knowledge and access to the internet is clearly something that can be
highly beneficial for older people. I was interested in Helen Eadie's
comment about the 101-year-old who was learning those skills. We are
committed to ensuring that by 2005 everyone will have access to the web
through public internet access points within a mile of their homes in urban
areas and within five miles of their homes in rural areas. That will create
an additional 1,000 new internet access points, and 450 venues are already
in place. We are working with Age Concern Scotland to identify and target
venues that could be of particular benefit to older people.

As I said earlier, health care is not the only thing that matters to older
people, although it does of course matter: many of us will need to be
looked after at some time in the future, so we must ensure that when that
time comes the necessary services are available to make that possible. That
is why the Executive introduced free personal and nursing care, a decision
that was welcomed by Help the Aged and many other organisations. There are
issues to be resolved in the implementation of free personal care, which is
why we are assessing its progress rigorously and have committed £250
million over two years to achieving it. Through the monitoring group, we
and our partners will ensure that those implementation issues are addressed
effectively.

In the health service, delayed discharge is an issue that is of particular
interest to older people. Last year's data clearly show that we are
succeeding in reducing the figures for delayed discharge. I look forward to
the latest figures being announced later this week, and to finding out
whether we have continued to make an impact on them, as I suspect we have.

The matter of access to information has been raised by a number of members,
including Paul Martin, Ian Jenkins and Sandra White. We are committed to
ensuring that older people have access to information. The "Are you over
50?" booklet has been widely distributed through job centres, libraries,
general practitioner surgeries, citizens advice bureaux and older people's
organisations. It is a product of the Department for Work and Pensions and
is aimed at ensuring that people have access to the information that they
need.

The one-stop shop idea that has been mentioned is very positive, and it is
something that can be built upon. Access to good and accurate information
is vital and through the Executive's publications, its website and the work
that we are continuing to do with elderly forums, we are addressing the
best ways in which to make information available to people when and where
they need it.

I am pleased to confirm Frank McAveety's success this week in resolving the
problem of fees in the care home sector. We have delivered an additional
£130 million of public funding to that sector since July 2001 and I am
glad that the threat of blocking the access of elderly people to care homes
has been withdrawn, and that care home operators will work in partnership
with local authorities.

Community pharmacies have been mentioned. For those who missed it, Frank
McAveety's recent announcement was that we will not accept the
recommendations of the Office of Fair Trading; in Scotland, we will retain
community pharmacies and will give them the protection that they need,
because we acknowledge their importance in providing services to older
people.

Dorothy-Grace Elder asked about the Scottish Executive's position as an
employer. Sixty is the standard retirement age for the work force, but that
position is under review and we expect a report on the subject to come out
in the course of the next couple of months.

Johann Lamont: As somebody who comes from a profession in which people
cannot wait to get a package and to get out early, I find the notion of
people wanting to work beyond their retirement age a bit strange. Does the
minister agree that some of the issues around employment beyond the age of
60 relate to the fact that people have poor pensions and do not necessarily
have the resources to do the many interesting things that people wish to do
in old age? That is why work might offer a better alternative for them.
Although we should argue against age discrimination, we should also talk
about people having the right not to work after 60.

Lewis Macdonald: I support the view that people should have the right to
choose. If people choose to continue working for Scottish ministers longer
than they must, then who are we to stand in their way? The ability of older
people to choose whether to work will be important for all of us.

Scots of all ages want opportunities to be active and to participate. We in
the Executive are determined to remove the barriers that prevent that,
particularly in transport, lifelong learning, enterprise, housing, health
and care. At the beginning of the Parliament, we said that things would get
better for older people: they have, and there is a range of ways in which
things have got very much got better, including free concessionary travel,
free personal care and free central heating. They will continue to get
better, but more must be done. That is why we need to work together with
our partners in the voluntary and private sectors and throughout central
Government and local government to ensure that we deliver services for
older people. We want to make Scotland an even better place to live for
people of all ages—that includes those who retire from the Parliament
today.

Great Northern Partnership

The Presiding Officer (Sir David Steel): Our final item of business this
morning is the members' business debate on motion S1M-4020, in the name of
Elaine Thomson, on the Great Northern Partnership and social inclusion
partnerships.

Motion debated,

That the Parliament commends the work done by the Great Northern
Partnership (GNP) in Aberdeen; notes that the GNP plays an important role
in improving quality of life and extending opportunities for those living
there, especially the community of Middlefield, and further commends social
inclusion partnerships across Scotland for empowering local communities.

12:35

Elaine Thomson (Aberdeen North) (Lab): I am pleased to introduce the debate
today, which is almost our last debate.

The Great Northern Partnership is one of 48 social inclusion partnerships
that were formed to address social exclusion in Scotland. Social inclusion
partnerships come in all shapes and sizes; some are based on geographical
areas and some are thematic. The GNP is a geographic SIP and is unusual
because it is in an archipelago that is made up of four islands that are
all in the northern part of Aberdeen. The four areas comprise: Middlefield;
Printfield; Alexander and Hayton; and Ferrier and Sandilands. However, all
share the same problems of social exclusion and a combination of high
unemployment, poor skills, low incomes, poor housing, high crime, poor
health and high rates of family breakdown. That combination of disadvantage
not only causes deprivation but has an impact on the ability of communities
to exercise their full citizenship rights and to participate fully in wider
society.

Aberdeen is a city with almost the lowest unemployment rate in Scotland,
and it has higher than average incomes. Compared to many areas of Scotland
it also has better health. Therefore the situation of those communities
that do not share that prosperity is made all the more difficult. In
Middlefield, which is the largest of the areas and which is in my
constituency, the health statistics are sharply different from those for
the rest of the city. Those statistics put that area in the worst 10 per
cent in Scotland.

Characteristics of the GNP areas are a high number of children and young
people and a higher-than-average number of single parents. Some 53 per cent
of children in Middlefield are living in households with benefit-dependent
parents—that is double the percentage of families with children living on
income support in the rest of Aberdeen.

However, over the past four years the GNP has begun to address many of
those issues. It has very high levels of community involvement in each of
the four areas that make up the partnership. The aims of the GNP are to
work to improve the social, economic and physical environment of those
areas and to bring together effectively all the different agencies and
organisations that can help to change them. Crucial to everything is
ensuring that those who live in the GNP areas are involved—that
communities are consulted and listened to—so that people in those
communities are empowered through participation and training to take on
leadership roles. It is important to ensure that they play a central part
in identifying priorities and developing strategies for the many different
types of work that the GNP undertakes. The aim is to restore and promote
people's sense of citizenship and pride in where they live.

A high proportion of community representatives are involved at all levels
of the GNP. Sixteen out of 28 board members—55 per cent of the total
membership—are community representatives, four from each area. All but
one of the sub-groups of the GNP are chaired by community representatives.
I acknowledge the immense amount of work that people from those communities
have contributed to the GNP, and I acknowledge the work of others,
including local councillors such as Councillor Gordon Graham, the current
vice-chair of the GNP, who stood in as chair before the new chair, Dawn
Galashin, was appointed.

When I asked what difference the GNP makes, Dawn said that it

"Makes it better for local folk to make decisions and the ability to
challenge agencies providing services within the area. We also have the
ability to make funding decisions at a local level".

There are many different areas in which the GNP and all the other agencies
involved are beginning to make a difference—for example, in tackling drug
misuse. The level of drug misuse is high throughout Aberdeen, but it is
higher than average in the GNP areas. The GNP set up a people's jury to
consider how the quality of life for individuals and families in
communities that are affected by drugs can be improved, which led to a
specific GNP drugs plan. The GNP is now a member of the Aberdeen drug
action team, ensuring that projects and strategies reflect accurately the
particular issues that GNP communities face. There are projects such as
"Give Kids a Chance", a community referral scheme that aims to divert young
people away from drug and alcohol misuse.

The GNP is also working with other organisations, such as Aberdeen Drugs
Action, to provide an outreach service. This weekend, a group will travel
to Preston to see an innovative needle-exchange programme.

The activities of the GNP reach out into many different areas, such as
health and providing support for parents and young children. Middlefield is
well known for possessing a "healthy hoose", which is staffed by nurse
practitioners who provide advice and help on a range of issues, from
healthy eating to encouraging breast feeding and providing better local
access to general practitioners. That is complemented by other projects
such as Healthy Roots, which aims to turn disused allotment land into
community gardens. The project has recently got its lease and it will move
on to a new phase.

Early intervention is seen as vital; the GNP works to reduce teenage
pregnancies and cases of low-birth-weight babies. The "baby, think it over"
project uses realistic baby models with microchips to bring home the
reality of the responsibilities of early parenthood. Addressing the needs
of children with special needs is also important, as is working to close
the opportunity gap that exists for so many children.

The important new community schools work with many of the GNP projects.
Some exist at primary level and others, at primary and secondary level,
will be rebuilt or refurbished over the next few years.

The disparity in opportunity between areas cannot be overemphasised. The
rate of pupils moving on to higher and further education varies from just
over 10 per cent in some areas to over 90 per cent in others. That makes
the presence of the University of Aberdeen and of communities and children
working to encourage higher rates of participation all the more important.
Also in Middlefield is the learning house, run by Scottish Enterprise,
which is complemented by learning projects elsewhere. It provides access to
learning for families, and is building the confidence of people who have
often had negative experiences of school.

I could mention many other aspects of the work of the GNP. However, the
role of the great northern partnership and other SIPs is vital in promoting
social inclusion. I am delighted that it will share in the £60 million
that the Scottish Executive has committed to social inclusion partnerships
this year. That will involve communities, ensure that all the different
agencies in the public and voluntary sector work together in a holistic and
cohesive way, improve life and widen opportunity in Scotland's less
advantaged communities. I commend the contribution that the GNP has made
and continues to make.

12:42

Brian Adam (North-East Scotland) (SNP): I lodged an amendment to the motion
and I am delighted that, in her speech, Elaine Thomson referred to the role
of the community representatives within the GNP.

I am also delighted that she talked about the healthy roots project. As the
former councillor for Middlefield, I had considerable involvement in
setting up the project, during Middlefield's previous existence as a
priority partnership area. I was the author of the scheme to turn a disused
allotment area into what I hope will become a successful community
business. Sometimes such projects take time to gestate and it has taken
almost eight years for the project to get to the point that it has reached.
Nevertheless, it is a welcome development.

I commend the work that the community representatives of the GNP have done.
They undertake a huge amount of work for the areas that they represent. I
know most of the people in Middlefield, having worked with them for quite
some time. I pay tribute to Paula Mann, Paul Calder, Helen Holland and
Ernest Chapman, who are the community representatives, and to Councillor
Kevin Stewart—they all champion the Middlefield area. Their counterparts
in Fersands, Printfield and Alexander/Hayton in Tillydrone also do sterling
work for their communities.

However, their work is handicapped by the policies of the Executive. Some
members might be disappointed by my saying that, particularly as this is to
be the last debate in this parliamentary session. However, my experience of
the SIPs and their predecessor organisations is that they are used as cash
cows by councils and other agencies. Before the GNP starts work each year,
it has to pay 2.5 per cent of its grant—a little more than £20,000—to
Aberdeen City Council in support charges. Furthermore, this year it will
have to spend in excess of £200,000 out of a total grant of less than
£900,000 to pay for its support team. The moneys for the support team and
the council payments, which swallow up almost a quarter of the grant, are
not being used to deliver any services to the communities, and the worst is
yet to come.

Earlier, I talked about the GNP being used as a cash cow. I would be happy
if the money were being used to enhance services in Middlefield,
Printfield, Fersands and Alexander/Hayton, but it is often the case that
the GNP subsidises city-wide services, which should be funded from the
mainstream budgets of the council or other agencies. I am happy to give
some examples of that.

The safe and sound project aims to improve the quality of life of
disadvantaged children. The project is provided with £20,000 from the
council, sure start Scotland and Grampian Primary Care NHS Trust, and
£6,000 from the GNP. Representatives of the GNP assure me that, although
it provides 23 per cent of the money, the GNP areas do not get 23 per cent
of the services. Other areas that do not pay for those services get the
bulk of the support from that money.

The children's services training and assessment centre receives about
£140,000 from various sources and almost £28,000 from the GNP. As part of
the Scotland-wide work of the Aberlour Child Care Trust, its aims are to
provide opportunities for training and qualifications in working with
children and families. Although that is admirable work, the funding for
other areas of the city comes from mainstream funding, whereas the funding
for the GNP work comes from the GNP's budget. Why is that?

The GNP is set to give £5,000 to the business support group, for which
other funding will come from mainstream sources. The GNP is set to hand
over £30,000 for early intervention schemes in education. In reality, that
money should come from mainstream funding. I could give a whole series of
examples.

SIPs are supposed to enhance services in socially excluded communities.
Elaine Thomson highlighted exactly why the GNP is needed in Middlefield in
her constituency. However, the money is being used to support services
across the board within the city. Many of the activities that the GNP's
resources are being used to supplement should receive mainstream funding.

The Presiding Officer: Please move to a close.

Brian Adam: I am just about to do so, Presiding Officer.

Rather than duplicate the administrative functions of other public and
voluntary sector agencies, we could better empower communities such as
Middlefield, Alexander/Hayton, Fersands and Printfield, and their
representatives, by direct funding of local voluntary organisations.

12:48

Mr Tom McCabe (Hamilton South) (Lab): I welcome the motion and I
congratulate Elaine Thomson on securing a debate on SIPs as the first
session of our Scottish Parliament draws to a close. It is difficult to
imagine a more important topic for discussion as we close the first,
historic, four-year session.

Communities throughout Scotland have been inspired by the opportunities
that SIPs have afforded them to influence and develop services. They have
been amazed that, when given the opportunity, ordinary people can make real
and substantial changes within their communities.

Solid examples of the work that has been done by the north Hamilton and
Blantyre social inclusion partnership are emerging. I recently attended the
opening of an information technology centre in Burnbank and a changing
places community conference that highlighted the various initiatives under
taken by the SIP. When one witnesses at first hand the enthusiasm and the
genuine achievements of that local partnership, it is impossible to doubt
the contribution that it has made to my local community.

In recent weeks, the Scottish National Party has delivered a slap in the
face to all those people who have worked so hard to establish the
priorities of their communities and to make addressing them a reality. Only
a fundamental misunderstanding of the nature of the willingness and
enthusiasm that exists in deprived areas can lead to the production of the
kind of policy nonsense that the SNP has produced in the past few weeks.

Alex Neil has spoken about social inclusion partnerships being stuffed with
people in suits. The reality is that the partnerships are full of
enthusiastic local people who know the shortcomings of their communities
but are determined to grab the opportunities available to deal with those
shortcomings.

We should be clear about what divides responsible politicians from the
nationalists. We believe in social inclusion; they believe in slogans. We
believe in independent communities; they believe only in independence.
Social inclusion partnerships have empowered some of the most deprived
communities across Scotland. People are grateful for that opportunity. I
hope that that opportunity continues to be afforded to them over the next
session of the Scottish Parliament.

12:50

Richard Lochhead (North-East Scotland) (SNP): What a joy it is to follow
Tom McCabe's positive contribution. However, it is a pleasure to speak in
today's debate. The first members' business debate in the Parliament was on
the fish processing industry, which is an Aberdeen issue, and the last
members' business debate is also on an Aberdeen issue. It is a pity that no
Tories, Liberals or members of parties other than Labour and the SNP have
turned up for the debate.

One reason why many of us are in the SNP is because we know that Scotland
is a rich country, yet it has so much deprivation. That is the case in
Aberdeen. It is a cruel irony that Europe's oil and gas capital has
substantial pockets of deprivation. Clearly, it is a ridiculous situation
that Aberdeen should have pockets of deprivation that are surrounded by
such wealth.

One of the difficulties is that Aberdeen's wealth masks the deprivation
that organisations such as the GNP try to tackle with the help of the many
people who assist them. It is probably harder to be on a low income in
Aberdeen than just about anywhere else in Scotland because people have to
live alongside some of the wealthiest areas in the whole of Scotland. The
price of property in Aberdeen is way beyond the means of many people in the
GNP areas.

We need to reduce the obstacles that prevent organisations such as the GNP
from getting more public funding and Government assistance. One such
obstacle is the way in which the Scottish Executive's public funding
formulas do not recognise Aberdeen's deprivation, which is masked by the
average wealth statistics for the area. There must be a further
disaggregation of the statistics that the Scottish Executive uses in
allocating public funding so that such areas of deprivation are identified.
Aberdeen currently loses out on a lot of public funding because of the
formulas that are used.

I was given some examples of that when I met representatives of the GNP a
few months ago. The GNP cannot apply for the Executive's better
neighbourhood funding because Aberdeen's level of deprivation is not
recognised. The GNP was able to apply for only a tiny amount of the cash
that sportscotland made available for sport and social inclusion because
the formulas do not recognise Aberdeen's deprivation. The deprivation is
hidden by the area's relative wealth, which comes from the oil and gas
industry. I was also told about the pots of cash from Communities Scotland,
for which the GNP cannot apply because Aberdeen does not qualify.

I mention those Government funding formulas, but I am not pleading a
special case. There are genuine concerns about the impact of those formulas
on our ability to tackle deprivation in north-east Scotland and Aberdeen. A
few months ago, Margaret Curran announced that a slice of lottery funding
would be put aside for deprived areas because many areas of Scotland were
losing out on their fair share. Lo and behold, there was not one penny for
north-east Scotland and Aberdeen. Once again, the formulas that were used
did not recognise the deprivation that exists in Aberdeen.

As Elaine Thomson mentioned in her speech and as Brian Adam has explained,
Aberdeen has a desperate need for that cash. Organisations such as the GNP
must be allowed to apply for it.

Mr McCabe: The member seems to be making an argument for refining social
inclusion partnership funding, yet the SNP's policy is to abolish such
partnerships. Which is the SNP's policy?

Richard Lochhead: Brian Adam has outlined the SNP's position. My point is
that organisations such as the GNP cannot even get access to the funding
that is currently available for tackling deprivation. The successors to
social inclusion partnerships will have the same problem unless we change
the fundamental issues that prevent deprivation in Aberdeen from being
tackled.

Elaine Thomson also mentioned the drugs problem in the GNP areas. There is
a massive drugs problem in Aberdeen, yet we get the second lowest level of
funding in the whole of Scotland because of the perceived wealth of the
area. Today's press tells of people who have committed crimes so that they
can go to jail and get treatment for drug abuse because they cannot get it
by any other means. It all comes back to the same issue of the funding
formulas denying cash to the projects that are trying to tackle deprivation
and deal with massive social problems in areas of Aberdeen.

It is important that we have some clear measurement of the success or
otherwise of the initiatives that are trying to tackle deprivation in
Scotland. Where exactly are we after four years of the new Parliament? Do
we know if we have moved forward or if Aberdeen is relatively better or
worse off under the Executive's policies? I argue that we have not moved
forward under the first four years of the Scottish Parliament.

I also argue that we have to get real powers so that the Parliament can
make a real difference in tackling deprivation in Aberdeen and elsewhere
and that we need a change of Government because we have had four years of
wasted opportunities to tackle deprivation. Scotland has not moved forward.
We know that the overall statistics show that poverty is increasing. We
have to have a change in the Government and we need more powers for the
Parliament so that we can change Aberdeen and elsewhere for the better.

12:56

Sarah Boyack (Edinburgh Central) (Lab): I am happy to congratulate Elaine
Thomson on securing the debate. I think that I replied to the first
members' business debate in the Parliament so it is probably appropriate
that, as a back bencher, I speak in the final members' business debate of
the session.

Elaine Thomson's motion should be supported. It makes two key points. It
recognises the good work that has been done in Aberdeen by the GNP and it
acknowledges the importance of SIPs throughout Scotland. Tom McCabe made
the important point that SIPs are doing good work. Without SIPs, who would
be focusing on and pulling together some of our most disadvantaged
communities in Scotland? SIPs are a vital way of helping local communities
advocate for themselves the kind of changes and support that they want from
local facilities.

I recognise the concept of a strong and economically powerful city with
pockets of severe deprivation and social exclusion. The purpose of SIPs is
to try to give those communities a voice so that they are not isolated and
left apart in a sea of affluence.

Brian Adam: Will the member take an intervention?

Sarah Boyack: I will when I get into my discussion.

Many communities in my constituency in Edinburgh, which is one of the most
prosperous cities in the United Kingdom, experience such social exclusion.

SIPs give local people the chance to shape their communities themselves and
to engage with local institutions of the state, whether council
departments, the police or health organisations. Abolishing SIPs would take
away that power of advocacy and the opportunity for social empowerment.

Brian Adam: We probably agree on the analysis of the source of the problem
but we disagree about the solution. Will Sarah Boyack comment on the
proportion of the funding made available through SIPs that is used up in
duplicating administration? Is that the best way of empowering communities?
Does she not agree that the best way is to encourage existing local
organisations rather than to set up new ones?

Sarah Boyack: I think Brian Adam misunderstands the purpose of SIPs and the
way in which they operate. I have yet to be lobbied on that issue, although
voluntary organisations and charitable groups are speedy in beating a path
to my door when they think they do not have enough money. The key issue is
that SIPs add to local communities and give them a voice.

Elaine Thomson has talked about an area-based SIP, but I want to highlight
the work of the Edinburgh youth social inclusion partnership, which is a
thematic partnership. It cuts across some of our most disadvantaged
communities and ensures that the voices of young people are heard by those
who make policy and decide on local services. As a local MSP, I am keen to
support the work of that SIP.

Part of that work is ensuring that there is a dialogue between young people
and the people who provide facilities. I have recently been at discussions
on leisure facilities and transport. It can be quite challenging to be
approached, as I have been, by young people who have a list of ideas about
areas in which they want local services to improve. It is our job as
politicians to see how we can improve the facilities that those young
people depend on. Although that can be challenging, it is part of the
overall approach to delivery of social justice throughout Scotland.

SIPs do not duplicate local services—they change them. They challenge
local service providers and act as an advocate for local people and,
particularly in my patch, for young people who would otherwise be totally
excluded.

It is easy to label young people as troublemakers who create problems.
However, we need to do a real job of work by examining the problems that
they experience. They are vulnerable; in my area, they are often not
allowed to use local sports facilities or cafes—indeed, they cannot
afford to use them—because a very small number create problems. As a
result, they are all labelled as troublemakers or as people who create
hassle. That is not the case, and it is important that our local youth SIP
challenges such views. Although young people are seen as threatening, they
are the biggest group of victims of crime. Their voices must be heard by
policy-makers, but that would not happen if it were not for the local youth
SIP, which pulls together or changes the work that the police, social work
and local communities carry out.

That is not duplication; instead it is an essential part of the armoury
with which we can tackle social exclusion, give the most vulnerable and
socially excluded people in our society a proper voice and ensure that
local services do not ignore their needs. That is why I support Elaine
Thomson's motion and the work of the youth SIP in my constituency. I want
to see more rather than less of that kind of work. The SNP is making a big
mistake with its commitment to abolish SIPs.

13:01

The Deputy Minister for Social Justice (Des McNulty): One of the number of
points that Brian Adam got wrong in his speech was his claim that this is
the last debate. I understand that there will be a further debate later
this afternoon.

The Presiding Officer: Modesty prevents me from commenting on that.

Des McNulty: I begin by pointing out that this is the final members'
business debate. I know that the Presiding Officer and Tom McCabe were very
much involved in setting up the system of members' business debates right
at the start of the Parliament. The debates have been a very considerable
success. They have promoted a series of worthy causes; indeed, speaking for
myself, I am very pleased by our progress in getting speedy justice for
asbestos sufferers. Duncan McNeil and I have promoted their cause in
various members' business debates.

Members have raised issues on behalf of interests in their communities or
on behalf of people who had cases that needed to be highlighted. In many
cases, the debates have drawn further responses from the Executive. As a
result, they have proved to be an important vehicle for getting issues
discussed and action brought forward. They are an adornment to this
Parliament that we can be proud of.

I congratulate Elaine Thomson on securing this debate and on highlighting
both the work of the GNP and the SIP programme itself. Evaluations clearly
show that the GNP has progressed well, is operating strategically and has
an excellent record of community involvement. Indeed, for the reasons that
Elaine Thomson pointed out, it can claim to be community-led in many ways.

I shall address some of Richard Lochhead's points later, but when we
consider how we can assist deprived communities, we should take a genuinely
consultative approach to the matter. The Scottish Executive or local
government should look for bottom-up solutions that suit a local
community's particular circumstances, rather than adopt top-down policies
for a city such as Aberdeen. People in a local area experience its problems
at first hand, but are also in a good position to assess the area's
relative advantages or any different opportunities that it might present.
The great virtue of the SIP system is that it allows local people to
influence what goes on and how resources are spent in their community to
suit their best interests.

Brian Adam: I readily acknowledge that that is the intention. In as much as
success has been achieved, the SIP programme has been a success. However,
will the minister deal with the amount of SIPs' money that is spent not on
services or duplicating services, but on duplicating administration? I made
a point about that. What is the capacity of councils and other bodies to
use that money beyond the areas covered by a SIP?

Des McNulty: I will deal later with that issue, which is important in
considering the transition that lies ahead as SIPs move towards community
planning.

It is important to highlight some of the GNP's successes. In identifying
the strategic priorities of health, early years, youth, education and
community learning, and employment and enterprise, not only did the
partnership identify the key priorities but it adopted a strategic approach
to improving services in the local community with the aim of achieving
significant change.

Elaine Thomson and Brian Adam mentioned several projects that have achieved
such change. The youth advice and information project provides young people
with advice, information and a referral service. The young film-makers
initiative, which involved 156 participants during 2001-02, has engaged
with young people. Projects such as the Fersands and Fountain mini family
centre and the St Machar parents support project bring communities and
agencies together to address early-years initiatives in the context of
social inclusion. The healthy roots initiative involves local groups and
voluntary and public sector agencies working together to transform a large
unused site in the middle of Middlefield. It brings together worthwhile
activities, such as growing healthy food, improving the environment for
wildlife and promoting recycling.

SIPs must be about more than individual projects. The projects must work
together toward the aim of improving the quality of life in their areas. A
strong argument can be made that SIPs must not become islands in a city
such as Aberdeen. Links with the way in which the city is governed must be
closer. Linking SIPs into the community planning partnerships in the city
and saying that the city's government and all the agencies that are
involved in governing and delivering services in the city must take on
board how SIPs operate are positive steps.

Brian Adam: Will the minister give way?

Des McNulty: I will finish my point.

The Presiding Officer: Technically, the minister is in his last minute.

Des McNulty: We are progressing links so that the experience and skills
that have been gained through the way in which the SIP has worked can be
shared. We want to develop better engagement between the SIP, Aberdeen City
Council, Grampian NHS Board and other agencies that provide services.

Richard Lochhead has repeatedly focused on funding formulas not only in
relation to SIPs, but in relation to a variety of issues. Honesty is
required. Funding formulas deliver outcomes. Does Richard Lochhead argue
that money should be taken from one area and delivered to another area? If
so, he should say where that money should be taken from and give the
criteria for delivering it to another area.

In Aberdeen, we have done the opposite of what Richard Lochhead says we
have done. We have identified areas of disadvantage and put in resources.
Through the GNP, we have sought to deliver significant improvements in
those more deprived communities. We are achieving that and significant
progress has been made.

SIPs perform a valuable role throughout Scotland. Last Saturday morning, I
attended a SIP event in my area that brought people together to consider
the range of activities that voluntary agencies have provided in Clydebank.
I know of many people who have SIPS in their area and who have had similar
experiences.

SIPS are a way of bringing people together and of identifying what can be
taken forward and what can be delivered. There are abundant examples of the
good work that SIPS have done not only in Aberdeen but elsewhere in
Scotland. SIPS are worth protecting and developing. We are moving forward
to a point at which SIPS become a critical element in community planning
and what we have learned up to now in the SIPs can be progressed in that
context.

The Presiding Officer: I close the last members' business debate of this
Parliament.

13:10

Meeting suspended until 14:30.

14:30

On resuming—

Question Time

SCOTTISH EXECUTIVE

Agriculture

1. Tavish Scott (Shetland) (LD): To ask the Scottish Executive when it last
met representatives of the agricultural industry and what issues were
discussed. (S1O-6711)

The Minister for Environment and Rural Development (Ross Finnie): I met
representatives of the agricultural industry on 17 March. The main topics
for discussion at recent meetings have been implementation of the
agriculture strategy and the European Commission's proposals for reform of
the common agricultural policy.

Tavish Scott: Does the minister accept that environmentally sensitive area
status is extremely important for those parts of Scotland that have such
designations? Does he accept that the consultation being undertaken by his
department gives an opportunity to review not only the three options
outlined in the consultation paper but a fourth option, namely the
rolling-on of ESAs to ensure that, in a smooth transition, land management
contracts can be introduced while the benefits of the ESAs are not lost to
those farmers and crofters who have them?

Ross Finnie: I certainly accept that the consultation includes three
options. Clearly, the purpose of the consultation process is to get
considered and detailed responses, particularly from those areas currently
under ESA designation, and to allow members to put their point as to what
might be a better and preferable course of action. It is perfectly
legitimate for the people of Shetland to take that course.

Mr Adam Ingram (South of Scotland) (SNP): Did the minister's discussions
cover the proposals of the Scottish Agricultural College to centralise its
educational facilities in Edinburgh? Would he care to reflect on the folly
of closing the most popular campus, at Auchincruive, with its most
appropriate rural setting, in favour of an expensive city location?

Ross Finnie: I regret to say that the representatives who were present with
me at the meeting found that the discussion on the agricultural strategy
and, more important, on CAP reform, did not allow time for that important
item to be discussed. I have made it clear—particularly in the evidence
that I gave to the Rural Development Committee on Tuesday—that several
very important questions need to be asked about the report that the board
of the SAC has adopted. In particular, we must question some of the
underlying assumptions that have led to the conclusions. I made it clear to
the committee that that was a legitimate and proper course of action, and
that my department and I have been querying some of the bases on which
those conclusions and recommendations have been made.

Alex Fergusson (South of Scotland) (Con): Last week, when answering a
question from my colleague David Mundell, the minister was unable to assure
the Parliament that a suitable scheme for the uplift of dead stock would be
in place when it becomes illegal to bury such stock on farm. Following his
discussions with industry representatives, is he able to update the chamber
on any further progress that has been made on that issue? Can he guarantee
that any farmer who buries dead stock on farm after April will not be
prosecuted if no suitable scheme is in place?

Ross Finnie: I am unable to give the firm assurance that I might have
wished to give following our discussions, but we continue to make much
better progress than we have made in previous months. I remain confident
that, following the discussions that are now taking place with the
Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and the other devolved
Administrations, we will have a national scheme. As for prosecution after 1
May, I very much hope that that will not be necessary.

Police (Fife)

2. Mr Keith Harding (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con): To ask the Scottish
Executive when it will next meet representatives of Fife police board.
(S1O-6712)

The Deputy First Minister and Minister for Justice (Mr Jim Wallace): The
Executive is in contact with representatives of police authorities and
joint police boards on a regular basis. However, no formal meetings are
planned with representatives of the Fife police authority before the
elections.

Mr Harding: The minister will be aware that the number of recorded crimes
and offences in Fife has got much worse during the four years of this
Administration. Can he explain why the Executive's justice policy is
failing in Fife?

Mr Wallace: I do not accept the basis of Mr Harding's question. He will
find that in Fife, as in other parts of Scotland, police numbers are at
record levels. In Fife, there were 920 officers on 31 December 2002,
compared with 835 in June 1999. By my reckoning, that is an increase of
more than 10 per cent in the number of police officers over the
parliamentary session.

We are also allowing more support staff to be engaged, which frees up
officers for front-line duty. With regard to the funding that has gone into
Fife, the level of grant-aided expenditure there will rise by more than the
national average in each of the next three years. This year, there will be
a rise of £44.4 million, which will rise to £57.8 million in 2005-06.
Those are generous settlements by any stretch of the imagination, and they
allow the chief constable of Fife constabulary to deploy additional
officers to promote effective law and order policies in Fife.

Helen Eadie (Dunfermline East) (Lab): The minister may have noticed the
newspaper reports concerning the recent violent and vicious attack on the
Rev David Adams, minister of Trinity parish church, as he was garaging his
car late one evening. It was a particularly nasty attack, as the assailants
used a Stanley knife on the minister. I have expressed my concern to the
chief constable of Fife constabulary about staffing—

The Presiding Officer (Sir David Steel): I am concerned that there must be
a question.

Helen Eadie: I would be grateful if the minister would advise me whether he
is aware that there are 400 fewer police officers in Fife than there are in
Tayside, which has a population only 35,000 greater than Fife. I am very
concerned about the level of policing in Fife.

Mr Wallace: I express my profound sympathies to that particular victim of
crime. As I suspect that there may be outstanding legal issues and the
matter may be sub judice, it would not be proper for me to make further
comment. The Administration has a good record of putting victims of crime
far more to the fore than has ever been the case previously.

On what Helen Eadie says on funding and on the number of police officers, I
have indicated that the number has gone up. She will be aware that there
has been a review of the GAE for all police authorities to take into
account their levels of activity and arrive at a fair distribution of
resources that takes account of changes. As a result of that, Fife will
receive an increase greater than the national average over the next three
years.

Housing

3. Karen Whitefield (Airdrie and Shotts) (Lab): To ask the Scottish
Executive what action it will take to ensure decent standards of housing
for all. (S1O-6742)

The Minister for Social Justice (Ms Margaret Curran): The Executive is
committed to eradicating poor-quality housing. Last week, I announced the
recommendations made by the housing improvement task force to improve
quality in the private sector. Today, I am launching a consultation paper
that sets out our proposals for a new quality standard for all social
housing. I am determined to stamp out poor housing and to give people homes
that are fit for the 21st century.

Karen Whitefield: Does the minister agree that initiatives such as the
regeneration of housing of Petersburn, in my constituency, and the
introduction of improved rights for tenants in all social rented housing
are making a significant, positive contribution to people throughout
Scotland? Does she agree that we must ensure that those same rights are
extended to people who rent in the private sector and that we should offer
them the same level of protection and a guaranteed minimum standard of
housing?

Ms Curran: I am not quite sure of the area to which the member
referred—it is perhaps a surrounding village in her constituency.
[MEMBERS: "No."] Not quite, apparently. I am sure that if it is a
surrounding village in Karen Whitefield's constituency, its regeneration is
in very good hands.

The member makes an important point about the rights of tenants in the
private sector as well as in the social rented sector. The Executive has
made great strides in the past four years to oversee the social rented
sector. We have now completed the jigsaw by reviewing the situation in the
private sector, and the recommendations of the housing improvement task
force contain a package of measures to take us forward in that regard. That
applies particularly to standards and a review of the tolerable standard
will be going out to consultation. The members of the task force worked
very hard to produce a robust package of measures.

Mr Jamie Stone (Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross) (LD): The minister
will know that I have pursued the issue of the level of improvement grants
before. There have been endless delays over introducing the new, increased
improvement grant for private homes. Will she give an assurance that the
delays will be stopped forthwith? Although there will be means testing, if
the pot of money stays the same, we may end up with longer waiting lists of
very needy people. Will an increase in funding be considered by the
Scottish Executive?

Ms Curran: I recognise that there have been delays in implementation. That
is because the test of resources has involved a detailed package of work.
The matter is being examined at the moment, and the new grant should be
ready for implementation as soon as the new parliamentary session begins.
However, the member will know that we have changed the funding system for
the private sector from borrowing consents to grants, as I announced in
November. We estimate that that will lead to an increase in resources from
£45 million to £60 million. Therefore we believe that that sector will be
considerably boosted.

Mr John Home Robertson (East Lothian) (Lab): I know that the minister
shares my concern about the desperate shortage of decent, affordable rented
housing in many parts of Scotland. I am particularly concerned about the
6,000 people who are stuck on the waiting list for council houses in East
Lothian. Is she aware that East Lothian Council has already started to work
out plans to borrow so that up to 2,000 houses for rent can be built under
the proposals that she announced, I think last month? Is she further aware
that we are looking forward to welcoming her in East Lothian shortly to
discuss those plans further?

Ms Curran: My visit to East Lothian is outstanding. I recognise that I made
a public commitment to making such a visit and I promise that I will do my
best to get there in the next few days.

The announcement of the prudential regime is of particular benefit to
councils such as East Lothian. Its announcement means that there is a real
opportunity to increase investment in housing in Scotland and to deliver
the supply of affordable housing. We now have a complete package that will
address the fundamental issues of housing in Scotland. I look forward to my
visit to East Lothian because I believe that people there are positive
about my announcement, so I expect a warm welcome.

European Maritime Safety Agency

4. Ms Sandra White (Glasgow) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive what
action it is taking to support the relocation of the European Maritime
Safety Agency to Glasgow. (S1O-6716)

The Minister for Enterprise, Transport and Lifelong Learning (Iain Gray):
As this is a reserved matter, the Executive liaises closely with the UK
Government about supporting this case.

Ms White: I presumed that the minister would have been aware of the letters
between the Executive and Neil MacCormick MEP, who asked it to support the
relocation of the agency in Glasgow. Is the minister aware that Greece,
which is another contender for the siting of the agency, has set up a
website to support its bid? Should the Executive not liaise with
Westminster or the European Parliament to set up such a website to promote
Glasgow's bid?

Iain Gray: The Executive has been involved in the preparation of materials
to support the bid. We have also mobilised the Executive office in
Brussels—an arm of the Scottish Executive—and I believe that officials
there have been in contact with MEPs to promote the bid. We would certainly
be happy to consider further materials or ways to support it.

Glasgow would provide an excellent base for EMSA. I understand that Genoa,
Lisbon, Nantes, and Piraeus have made other bids. However, even an
Edinburgh boy such as I knows that Glasgow can readily see off that
opposition.

Phil Gallie (South of Scotland) (Con): I welcome the minister's assurance
that measures are in hand to present a case for Scotland and Glasgow on
this issue. Does he agree that there is plenty of good material for that,
especially because of the engineering experience in Scotland and the
contribution that coastal communities have made to our merchant navy over
many years? Will he drive home that point with his Westminster colleague,
because there can be no finer setting for the new European Maritime Safety
Agency than Scotland and Glasgow?

Iain Gray: I am happy to accept Mr Gallie's welcome for my first answer and
to agree with the further points that he makes. I will take steps to ensure
that cognisance is taken both of those points and of the point that was
made about websites.

Nursery Schools (Consultation)

5. Alex Neil (Central Scotland) (SNP): To ask the Scottish Executive
whether it will consider extending the statutory consultation requirements
for the closure or merger of primary schools to nursery schools.
(S1O-6704)

The Deputy Minister for Education and Young People (Nicol Stephen): The
Scottish Executive would consider extending the statutory consultation
requirements for the closure or merger of primary schools to nursery
schools, were it not for the fact that those statutory requirements already
apply to nursery schools.

Alex Neil: I thank the minister for his reply. Will he ensure that all
local authorities, including South Lanarkshire Council, abide by the
statutory requirements? I remind him that he has only five weeks to do so
before the Executive changes.

Nicol Stephen: I will.

David Mundell (South of Scotland) (Con): Does the Scottish Executive have
plans to change the statutory consultation requirements for the merger or
closure of primary schools, especially in rural areas? The present
procedures do not take into account the impact on local communities of
closures of the sort that Dumfries and Galloway Council is planning.

Nicol Stephen: We have no such proposals in this parliamentary session.

Adoption

6. Janis Hughes (Glasgow Rutherglen) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive
what action it will take to improve adoption levels. (S1O-6731)

The Minister for Education and Young People (Cathy Jamieson): The Executive
is committed to improving the life chances of looked-after children. Phase
1 of our adoption policy review recommended improvements in the recruitment
of prospective adopters, post-adoption support and decision-making
processes. Phase 2 of the review, which I announced last week, will examine
the legal options to provide stability and security for children, whether
through adoption or other forms of permanent placement.

Janis Hughes: Does the minister agree that one of the most difficult
aspects of the adoption procedure is the length of time that it takes. Will
she assure me that the review will consider speeding up the procedure, to
lessen the anxiety caused to prospective adoptive parents?

Cathy Jamieson: I am aware, from correspondence from a number of colleagues
and representations made by adoptive parents, that one of the difficulties
is the length of time that the processes can take. I am therefore committed
to ensuring that the review will examine that. It is also important to
recognise that, from the child's point of view, we must ensure that the
processes meet their needs, particularly where young children are
involved.

Mrs Lyndsay McIntosh (Central Scotland) (Con): Does the minister agree,
particularly in the light of this morning's debate, that older, more mature
couples would be welcome to apply for adoption and that our chosen children
deserve the opportunity of a better home?

Cathy Jamieson: I would certainly like us to ensure that the prospective
adopters are matched with the needs of individual children. Many children
who are currently looked after in the system and who could benefit from
adoptive parents are slightly older than the children whom people would
traditionally look to adopt. I would encourage anyone who thinks that they
could offer a home to those children to make the inquiries and consider it
seriously.

Ferry (Ballycastle to Cambeltown)

7. George Lyon (Argyll and Bute) (LD): To ask the Scottish Executive what
progress has been made on the Ballycastle to Campbeltown ferry tendering
process. (S1O-6737)

The Deputy Minister for Enterprise, Transport and Lifelong Learning (Lewis
Macdonald): A tendering process for subsidy to reinstate the service has
not attracted any bids so we are now seeking to identify alternative means
of reinstating the service within the tender criteria.

George Lyon: I thank the minister for clarifying that matter. There is deep
concern in Kintyre that despite the Scottish Executive offering £5 million
in subsidy over the lifetime of the five-year contract for the route no
ferry company has bid for it. I seek his assurance that every effort will
continue to be made to talk to ferry companies, including Caledonian
MacBrayne, to ascertain whether any interested parties are out there. I
also seek an assurance that the contract on offer will be reconsidered if
the current process fails, with a view to tendering again the future.

Lewis Macdonald: I share the concern that George Lyon has expressed to
secure the service, to which we are committed. In that regard, because of
the failure of bids coming forward, we have approached a number of shipping
companies that we believe could conceivably run the service. We have
inquired whether there are grounds on which we might be able to make that
service happen with their support. It would not be appropriate to go into
the names of those companies at this stage, but George Lyon should rest
assured that every company that we believe is capable of running the
service will be talked to about that matter.

Clearly, if the process fails, ministers would be required to look at what
other process could be adopted in order to make the service happen. We want
to explore every avenue and we will leave no stone unturned in the current
tendering process and criteria to get that service in place.

Mr Duncan Hamilton (Highlands and Islands) (SNP): On positive alternatives,
is the minister aware of the success of Neil MacCormick MEP in convincing
the European Commission to treat peninsulas in the same way as islands for
the provision of additional public service obligations? If so, will he
consider having additional routes from Campbeltown, not just to Ballycastle
but to the central belt, using the same rationale that we have used in
Cowal?

Lewis Macdonald: I confirm that we have talked to the European Commission
and have won the case that mainland-to-mainland routes are acceptable for
PSOs. That is something that my colleagues and I have been proud to carry
forward. It has been important in allowing us to proceed with arrangements
both on the Gourock to Dunoon and Tarbert to Portavadie routes. Our focus
at this point has to be on the Campbeltown to Ballycastle service, as we
have outlined. As I said to George Lyon, we will explore every option to
deliver that service before we consider further alternative options.

Air Services (Glasgow to Barra)

8. Mr Duncan Hamilton (Highlands and Islands) (SNP): To ask the Scottish
Executive what the current position is on the future of the air service
between Glasgow and Barra. (S1O-6703)

The Deputy Minister for Enterprise, Transport and Lifelong Learning (Lewis
Macdonald): In a parliamentary answer to Alasdair Morrison on 20 March, I
announced that Loganair had been awarded the contract for the Barra to
Glasgow air service for 2003-04 and that we would tender a new contract
from April 2004 to March 2006.

Mr Hamilton: On behalf of the people of Barra, I ask the minister to
confirm that the two-year extension to the review period is simply a stay
of execution rather than a long-term commitment to the route. Will he take
the opportunity of the additional two-year review to guarantee that the
Scottish transport appraisal guidance will be met in full before any
ultimate decision is taken? I asked him that yesterday and he refused to
answer.

Lewis Macdonald: I would not want to talk down the Scottish transport
appraisal guidance, as it is a very useful way of assessing transport and
economic impacts. I expect that the appraisal criteria that STAG contains
will be among the things that are considered in the next two or three
years.

We want to take a wider look at the future of air services to Barra. For
example, we want to consider social inclusion and access to health
services. The local MSP, Alasdair Morrison, and the local council,
Comhairle nan Eilean Siar, raised such issues with me—as did the
community on Barra—when I visited the island in January. We want to
examine those larger issues, so we will consider not only transport
appraisal, but other relevant forms of appraisal.

Less Favoured Areas Support (Crofting)

9. John Farquhar Munro (Ross, Skye and Inverness West) (LD): To ask the
Scottish Executive whether it will work with the Scottish Crofting
Foundation to undertake an investigation into the effectiveness of the
current less favoured area support scheme in delivering support to crofting
communities in less favoured areas. (S1O-6741)

The Minister for Environment and Rural Development (Ross Finnie): The less
favoured area support scheme is kept under review to ensure that it is
effective in delivering support across the whole of Scotland's less
favoured areas. Officials will work with the industry working group, of
which the Scottish Crofting Foundation is a member, to review the
implementation of the 2003 scheme.

John Farquhar Munro: If the investigation determines that the current less
favoured area support scheme is not delivering effective support, will the
minister consider introducing a more appropriate funding structure?

Ross Finnie: The whole purpose of the review will be to determine whether
the scheme has been effective. I expect that, as a result of the meetings
of the working group, proposals to change the scheme will be produced, if
necessary, and that such changes will be put forward to Europe, so that the
scheme can be amended for the following year.

Mr Alasdair Morrison (Western Isles) (Lab): I thank the minister for
meeting me earlier in the week to discuss the less favoured area support
scheme. I seek an assurance from him that officials from Western Isles
Council will be involved in the forthcoming discussions on the scheme. I
know that the minister is well aware of the excellent work that the
council's crofting committee has done in that important area of
agricultural support.

Ross Finnie: I am happy to confirm to the member that it will be extremely
helpful for the working group to have the advice of the Western Isles
Council's crofting committee and its input into our review of the matter to
which he and John Farquhar Munro have referred.

Mr Jamie McGrigor (Highlands and Islands) (Con): Will the minister tell me
why the less favoured area support scheme is not benefiting crofters in the
most severely disadvantaged areas of the Highlands and Islands as much as
it is benefiting farmers in areas of Scotland with richer agricultural
land? Is not the main point of the less favoured area scheme to help those
who are in the less favoured areas?

Ross Finnie: That point is self-evident. The difficulty that Jamie McGrigor
has is that 83 per cent of Scotland's agricultural land is defined as less
favoured area land. I do not believe for a moment that he is suggesting
that it would be beneficial for Scotland to have a reduced amount of less
favoured area land, but that is the inference to be drawn from his
question. The scheme has been designed to be hugely beneficial to
Scotland's agriculture as a whole. It is an agricultural scheme that
delivers support. As I have indicated in my responses to Alasdair Morrison
and John Farquhar Munro, the review group will keep under review the issue
of whether any adjustments are necessary.

Scottish Borders (Economy)

10. Christine Grahame (South of Scotland) (SNP): To ask the Scottish
Executive what measures it has taken to promote the economic well-being of
the Scottish Borders. (S1O-6709)

The Minister for Enterprise, Transport and Lifelong Learning (Iain Gray): A
wide range of policies promotes economic well-being. Scottish Enterprise
Borders is taking action in line with the direction and priorities that are
set out in the Executive's "A Smart, Successful Scotland". The Borders
local economic forum allows for the co-ordinated delivery of local economic
development activities.

Christine Grahame: As the minister is aware, the draft bill for the Borders
rail link was lodged this week. Given that the Borders has suffered a net
loss of 500 jobs since Labour came to power and that the modest projection
is that even a partial reinstatement of the line to Galashiels would result
in the Borders gaining 900 jobs, does he accept that the business case for
the railway is staring him in the face? The railway should simply now be
built. At a stroke, that would secure the economic well-being of the
Scottish Borders.

Iain Gray: As Christine Grahame knows well from previous exchanges, we are
keen to see progress on the matter. However, the business case is not
staring me in the face because it is not yet with the Executive. I was
pleased to see from this week's press that the Waverley rail partnership is
making progress—it is about to submit an interim case, which I believe
will be with the Executive in the next few days. Next Monday, we enter the
period during which it will not be possible to progress that case, but I
assure Christine Grahame that the matter will be in my diary for 2 May.

Ian Jenkins (Tweeddale, Ettrick and Lauderdale) (LD): Does the minister
agree that, although there are real problems in the Borders economy, there
are also real grounds for optimism? The population of the Borders is
increasing; the railway is on track; broadband is coming; the Scottish
Public Pensions Agency has been established at Tweedbank; farming and
tourism are in the process of recovery; there are positive developments in
health service infrastructure—

The Presiding Officer: I am interested in the Borders, but I would like a
question.

Ian Jenkins: Does the minister agree that none of those things—apart
perhaps from the railway—seems to interest Ms Grahame, who prefers to
launch lightning raids on the Borders, looking for trouble and fanning the
flames before beetling back to Edinburgh to issue inflammatory press
releases, which are peppered with half-truths and misinformation?

Iain Gray: I can only agree. I take this opportunity to pay tribute to Mr
Jenkins's far more constructive approach both to representing his
constituents and the interests of the Borders and to the proceedings of the
Parliament. He will be sorely missed.

The Presiding Officer: I call Margo MacDonald.

Dorothy-Grace Elder (Glasgow) (Ind) rose—

The Presiding Officer: A case of mistaken identity. I call Margo
MacDonald.

Margo MacDonald (Lothians) (Ind): And I was going to say something nice
about you, Presiding Officer.

The Presiding Officer: Let us hear from the right independent.

Margo MacDonald: On the regeneration of the Borders economy, will the
minister explain why the Executive has chosen to transfer 270 Scottish
Natural Heritage jobs to Inverness rather than to Galashiels? Inverness has
a booming economy—this week, only 48 houses were for sale on the market
in Inverness. Galashiels is on the opposite side of the economic coin.
Further to that, will the minister assure me—I think that I speak for
Angus MacKay, Susan Deacon and the other Edinburgh MSPs—[MEMBERS: "Oh!"]
They do not mind. They are broad minded. Perhaps other members should try
to be so as well.

The Presiding Officer: I know that it is the end of term, but let us have a
question.

Margo MacDonald: The question is about the policy of moving 270 jobs. I am
in agreement with those other MSPs that I mentioned. I do not agree with
the transfer of those jobs in this way at this time. Will the minister
assure me that, after I have seen his colleague Ross Finnie tomorrow, the
policy will be put on ice?

Iain Gray: The connection between Margo MacDonald's question and the
original question is the 200 civil service jobs at the Scottish Public
Pensions Agency that were relocated from Edinburgh to Galashiels. I
understand that the decision to which she refers is extremely difficult for
those who work in SNH to accept. We must work hard to ensure that there is
alternative employment for those who cannot move to Inverness. I understand
from her question that Margo MacDonald is meeting my colleague Ross Finnie
tomorrow, so I do not think that it would be proper for me to comment
further.

Schools (Class Sizes)

11. Michael Russell (South of Scotland) (SNP): To ask the Scottish
Executive what proposals it has to reduce class sizes. (S1O-6701)

The Minister for Education and Young People (Cathy Jamieson): In response
to the national debate on education, we indicated that we would bring
forward proposals to reduce class sizes and to improve pupil-teacher ratios
at critical stages such as primary 7, secondary 1 and secondary 2,
particularly in maths and English.

Michael Russell: How? How much will it cost? Where will the Executive get
the money from?

Cathy Jamieson: When this Administration comes back in May, we will
introduce fully costed proposals. Those proposals will stand up to
scrutiny, unlike the SNP's proposals, which crumbled at the first hard
question.

Johann Lamont (Glasgow Pollok) (Lab): Does the minister acknowledge that
the size of classes is not the sole factor in determining educational
achievement in our schools? In my constituency, the schools with the
biggest classes are often those that are highest achieving. Given the
minister's commitment to addressing the central issue of inequality in
education, will she support initiatives such as the nurture initiative in
my constituency, which allows for intensive and close support for some of
our most vulnerable children whose broader social needs have to be
addressed so that they can access education?

Cathy Jamieson: I take on board the point that Johann Lamont has raised. Of
course class sizes are important, but we also need to ensure that resources
and support are provided so that we can close the opportunity gap. Many
schools have used their resources creatively and have worked hard to
overcome the barriers that exist for disadvantaged pupils. I always welcome
examples of good practice and like to see it spreading throughout
Scotland.

Tommy Sheridan (Glasgow) (SSP): Three months ago, I asked the minister how
much she estimated it would cost to lower class sizes to a maximum of 20 in
the primary and secondary sectors. Three months ago, she said that she was
working on it. Does she know yet how much that would cost?

Cathy Jamieson: I refer the member to the answer that I gave to Mr Russell.
We will not make proposals that are not properly costed. We will make
proposals that stand up to scrutiny and we will deliver in the same way as
we have delivered on reducing class sizes for the first three years of
primary education.

Mr Brian Monteith (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con): If I may say so, Presiding
Officer, you are wearing a rather fetching purple tie—rather like
Hibernian Football Club's second colours.

Further to Tommy Sheridan's question, is the minister aware that, when
class sizes were reduced to 20 in California, the results included many
classrooms with 40 or more children and two teachers, patchy attainment and
the hiring of teachers without proper qualifications to meet the demand for
additional teachers? Is that what the minister wants? Does she agree that
what matters most is teaching quality in Scotland?

Cathy Jamieson: Teaching quality is very important and I am aware of the
research to which Mr Monteith refers. It showed that, in some areas, there
were advantages in reducing class sizes, particularly for the kind of
pupils that Johann Lamont referred to. However, it also highlighted some of
the dangers. We have to ensure that we do not fall into the trap of doing
the wrong thing in an attempt to raise standards. That is why we will make
proposals for those critical stages where we know that there are problems.
We will focus on maths and English because we are committed to raising
standards of literacy and numeracy. I am sure that Mr Monteith in his very
fetching tie will agree with that.

A82 (Tarbet to Inverarnan)

12. Fergus Ewing (Inverness East, Nairn and Lochaber) (SNP): To ask the
Scottish Executive whether the A82 between Tarbet and Inverarnan is an
urgent priority for improvement and should be included in the next round of
trunk road improvements in 2003-04. (S1O-6705)

The Deputy Minister for Enterprise, Transport and Lifelong Learning (Lewis
Macdonald): We recognise the traffic pressures on that length of road and
have announced that a route action plan should be put in place as part of
the £20 million investment in the rural trunk road network that we
announced last week.

Fergus Ewing: That answer shows that fudge remains the Executive's
favourite confection. Is the minister aware that temporary traffic lights
have been in place on the A82 for more than a decade? Is that acceptable?
Does he consider that a period in excess of a decade can properly be
described as "temporary"? Does he agree that people and businesses in the
west Highlands require a proper, normal trunk road if they are to realise
their potential?

Lewis Macdonald: The people of the west Highlands require a proper and
objective assessment of the correct way of dealing with precisely the kind
of issues that Fergus Ewing has raised, which is why we will draw up a
route action plan for the road in question. That is the right way of
proceeding.

Mr Ewing will know that, in light of the last round of route action plans,
a number of announcements were made last week that affect roads in his
constituency, such as the A96 at Delnies and the A9 at Crubenmore and
between Kincraig and Dalraddy. I conclude by pointing out that, if his
party's spending commitment to invest £500 million in dualling the entire
length of the A9 were ever carried out, the consequences for deserving and
important roads such as the A82 would be too serious to contemplate.

Jackie Baillie (Dumbarton) (Lab): I welcome the minister's announcement of
a new route action plan for the A82 north of Tarbet. Indeed, I have been
urging the Executive on behalf of constituents to undertake such work for
some time now. Will the minister indicate the time scale for the study and
when he expects work on its recommendations to begin? Moreover, when he
returns on 2 May, will he consider additional improvements to the A82 from
Dumbarton to Tarbet as a key route to Scotland's first national park at
Loch Lomond and the Trossachs?

Lewis Macdonald: It is intended that work on the route action plan will
start within the next few weeks and be concluded towards the end of next
year, in good time for people to make submissions to the strategic roads
spending review process that will begin in 2004-05. I very much look
forward to discussing with Jackie Baillie proposals for improvements to the
A82 in her constituency after 1 May.

Racial Prejudice

13. Scott Barrie (Dunfermline West) (Lab): To ask the Scottish Executive
how it is combating racial prejudice among schoolchildren. (S1O-6706)

The Deputy Minister for Education and Young People (Nicol Stephen): The
Scottish Executive is working with a number of relevant organisations such
as the centre for education for racial equality in Scotland and the
Scottish Traveller education programme to take forward our commitment to
promoting race equality in schools. Moreover, in conjunction with others,
we recently launched a CD-ROM resource that was issued to all schools in
Scotland to support staff in the effective delivery of anti-racism
education.

Scott Barrie: The minister will be aware that the Race Relations
(Amendment) Act 2000 places a general duty on public bodies, including
education authorities and schools, to eliminate unlawful racial
discrimination and to promote equality and good race relations. How is the
Scottish Executive ensuring that schools and education authorities are
carrying out their duties under that legislation?

Nicol Stephen: The general duty is also reinforced by a specific
duty—with a compliance date of 30 November 2002—on education
authorities to come forward with proposals for individual schools to
implement a race equality policy. To ensure the act's smooth
implementation, the education department set up a race relations act
education delivery group, which was made up of a range of key stakeholders,
including CERES, the Association of Directors of Education in Scotland, the
Educational Institute of Scotland, the Commission for Racial Equality and
STEP. That work is on-going and we intend to ensure that all education
authorities and schools take their responsibilities in that regard
seriously.

Donald Gorrie (Central Scotland) (LD): Will the minister broaden his answer
and tell us what the Executive is doing to counter prejudice against
English families and prejudice that arises from sectarianism, much of which
has a racial background?

Nicol Stephen: As Donald Gorrie knows, we seek to tackle all sorts of
prejudice. Indeed, the initiative that I mentioned and other aspects of the
Executive's work seek to tackle prejudice that arises from sectarianism or
is directed at young people from any country. There was much more to our
anti-racism campaign than posters and advertisements. We want the issues to
be tackled in our schools and have set up websites with links to resources
that teachers can use. During this time of increased international tension,
it is especially important that the Scottish Executive does absolutely
everything in its power to combat all forms of prejudice and to promote the
safety and security of all Scotland's schoolchildren and communities.

First Minister's Question Time

15:10

Prime Minister (Meetings)

1. Mr John Swinney (North Tayside) (SNP): To ask the First Minister when he
will next meet the Prime Minister and what issues he intends to discuss.
(S1F-2635)

The First Minister (Mr Jack McConnell): I have no immediate plans to meet
the Prime Minister, but I plan to speak regularly with him over the coming
weeks. In particular, I intend to draw to his attention remarks that
Scotland's aid agencies made yesterday. They stressed to me the importance
of the United Nations not only in the provision of humanitarian aid in Iraq
during and after the conflict, but in the reconstruction of Iraqi society.
I am sure that those agencies and others strongly support the Prime
Minister's efforts today to convince the American Government to take the
same route.

Mr Swinney: I associate myself and my party with the First Minister's
remarks about the work of the humanitarian agencies and the primacy of the
United Nations in drawing the matter to a conclusion and putting in place
the necessary humanitarian assistance.

In a recent keynote speech, Scotland was described as a country that
suffers from low growth and population decline, that has the unhealthiest
people in Europe, where the environment is spoiled, where we are reluctant
to take a risk and quick to blame, and where communities are blighted by
violence on Saturday nights. When he made those remarks on Friday, was the
First Minister talking Scotland down, or was that just an assessment of the
failure of his Government and successive London Governments?

The First Minister: It is a measure of my ambitions for Scotland that those
are the issues that require to be addressed. I will be delighted to send Mr
Swinney a copy of the whole speech, so that he can see the answers and
solutions, as well as the challenges that Scotland faces.

The Parliament has several important functions. It is important that we
pass the right legislation, and that we do that in the name of Scotland. It
is important that we allocate our budgets and make decisions daily, weekly,
monthly and annually in ways that befit the Scotland that we are trying to
create. It is also important that we have wider ambitions and that we try
to tackle the underlying problems over the years, such as maltreatment of
our environment, the culture of violence on a Saturday night, the lack of
entrepreneurial culture and a host of other matters. If challenges such as
racism and sectarianism are taken on, Scotland will be made a better place.
That is exactly what I intend to do as a continuing First Minister.

Mr Swinney: If we have all those problems, that raises a question: who has
been running the country for the past 40 or 50 years among the crowd on the
other parties' benches?

The First Minister offered to send me a copy of his speech, but he will not
be surprised to learn that he does not need to do that, because I have
examined his speech closely. It contains a number of interesting ideas. The
big idea was a promise to take action against

"dealers who sell drugs to ... children at the school gate".

That idea is admirable, but six years ago in "Labour's covenant with
Scotland", the people were made an identical promise by Labour:

"We will ... introduce ... 'drugs cordons' round Scottish schools, whereby
anyone caught dealing in drugs within a specified radius will be liable for
tougher penalties."

Since that promise was made six years ago, how many drug cordons have been
established around Scottish schools and where are they?

The First Minister: It might have escaped Mr Swinney's notice, but the
Parliament has been in existence for only four years, not six years. In the
past four years, the Parliament has seen serious action being taken on
tackling Scotland's drug dealers and tackling drugs in Scotland, such as
the establishment of the Scottish Drug Enforcement Agency as promised, the
staffing of that agency and the additional powers—on which SNP members
were not keen—to take the proceeds of crime and put them back into
communities to ensure that dealers pay the price for their actions.

Action has been taken throughout Scotland to pull together drug action
teams that help those who require local rehabilitation and assistance.
Those are the practical measures that the Parliament was meant to take and
has taken. Other practical measures will be taken in the next session if we
spend the next four years talking not about independence, but about
problems in Scotland and how to address them.

Mr Swinney: The only thing that was missing from that answer was the word
"none". The commitment that I cited has not been delivered; that is yet
another broken promise. No wonder the First Minister read out that litany
of failure; it is the failure of this Government.

The First Minister promised that he would cut waiting lists by 10,000. He
has broken that promise. He promised that 80 per cent of primary school
pupils would achieve appropriate standards in reading and writing. He has
broken that promise. He promised to set up drug cordons, but he has broken
that promise, too. Given that he has broken so many promises, how can the
people of Scotland take seriously any of the First Minister's promises at
the forthcoming election? Is not it the case that patients, pupils and
victims of crime cannot wait any longer for the Government to deliver? Is
not it the case that the people of Scotland should move on and change the
Government of Scotland?

The First Minister: It is a pleasure to know that one of only three
examples that Mr Swinney quotes—the other two are inaccurate—is an
example from six years ago. It was included in a document, which I believe
was issued prior to the 1997 general election.

Only one significant promise has been broken in the past 12 months by a
politician in Scotland and that was the promise to talk about independence
that the leader of the Scottish National Party made last May. We have not
heard the word "independence" since—entire party political broadcasts do
not even mention the concept, never mind use the word. When we get to the
election campaign, we will talk about independence, but we will also talk
about education, health, transport, crime and job creation. Those are the
priorities for the people of Scotland, which is exactly why they will back
us to return after 1 May.

Cabinet (Meetings)

2. David McLetchie (Lothians) (Con): To ask the First Minister what issues
will be discussed at the next meeting of the Scottish Executive's Cabinet.
(S1F-2630)

The First Minister (Mr Jack McConnell): Yesterday's Cabinet was the last
scheduled meeting before the Scottish Parliament elections on 1 May. In the
current situation, contingency arrangements have been made for the Cabinet
to meet during April, should that be necessary.

David McLetchie: Although people's thoughts are at this time invariably
focused on the international situation, we all reflect that the war in Iraq
is, in part, about establishing a democratic society that has free
elections like the one in which we will participate on 1 May.

I return to domestic concerns for my question to the First Minister. After
four years of this Labour-Liberal Democrat Executive and no fewer than 53
tax increases, many people in Scotland will be disappointed that violent
crime continues to rise, that 19,000 more patients wait for hospital
treatment and that the number of new business start-ups has decreased.
People will also have been disappointed to learn recently that more than
half of the pupils in the second year of our secondary schools do not meet
national standards for reading. Does the First Minister share our
disappointment and concern? How will more of the same make any difference
at all?

The First Minister: Contrary to what Mr McLetchie says, our many
achievements include the highest standards in reading and writing that we
have seen in our secondary schools in my lifetime and substantial
improvements in support for business, not only for business start-ups, but
in support that allows existing businesses to grow. We have not only
ensured that we have better paid staff and better equipment and facilities
in our hospitals; we have brought down waiting times for Scotland's key
killer diseases.

I assure Mr McLetchie that, not only have we made those achievements, we
have many ambitions. There is much more still to do—that is the challenge
for the Parliament in the next four years. We will build on that record and
I am sure that it will educate us and lead us to meeting the challenge, and
to meeting it successfully.

David McLetchie: The big problem is that the record completely contradicts
all the First Minister's assertions. Is not it about time that the he
admitted that the centralising and top-down approach to running our public
services that has been the feature of the Administration for the past four
years has not worked and that it will not work?

Will he explain to people in Scotland why he did not cut his bloated
Government down to size by halving the number of ministers who interfere in
the running of our affairs? Why has he not cut the rates burden on Scottish
businesses that puts them at such a competitive disadvantage compared with
businesses south of the border? Why has he not given our doctors and nurses
far more say in the running of the national health service in Scotland? I
am thinking of foundation hospitals and general practitioner fundholding.
Is not it about time that we had a Government in Scotland that does
something about such problems rather than one that ignores them?

The First Minister: I am delighted to take up the member's challenge. On a
top-down approach and not giving enough local power, not only has the
partnership Administration devolved more powers to local authorities and
bodies in Scotland than any other Administration in my lifetime, but it has
done so successfully. It has worked in partnership with local authorities
and many other bodies that deliver services at a local level. We are also
devolving power to front-line managers of services who need such power in
order to make the right priority decisions at local level.

Furthermore, we have cut the rates burden for Scottish businesses by
freezing rates for next year and by giving a firm commitment that, in
future years, the rate of inflation will be the maximum by which they will
increase. There have been similar achievements for the new Scottish
Parliament and the Scottish Executive in a wide range of other areas.

In the next parliamentary session, it is important that we build on our
achievements not only by maintaining smaller class sizes in primary
schools, but by reducing class sizes in secondary schools. Not only did we
build on the 20,000 modern apprenticeships that we promised to deliver, but
30,000 apprenticeships have been delivered for young people. We have put
behind us the absolute hopelessness of the 1980s and 1990s and built a
Scotland that is fit for the 21st century.

Entitlement Cards

3. Pauline McNeill (Glasgow Kelvin) (Lab): To ask the First Minister
whether the Scottish Executive has any plans to introduce entitlement
cards. (S1F-2640)

The First Minister (Mr Jack McConnell): As part of our commitment to
providing people with better public services, we are supporting the
development by Scottish local authorities of a citizen's smart card. The
card will initially be used for bus travel, school meals and registration,
access to some leisure services and as a library card, although other
services can be added as required. We plan to make the card available on a
voluntary basis.

Pauline McNeill: I appreciate that there can be benefits to such a card,
which the First Minister has outlined, but he will be aware of the concerns
of many Scots that such a scheme could violate civil rights to privacy if
it is not presented properly. In the light of such concerns, will he assure
me that the purpose of any entitlement card would be made clear and that
there will be full consultation with Scottish communities about it? Will he
assure me that all our citizens, including asylum seekers, will not be
forced to carry any card that might be seen as an identity card and will
not be harassed by police authorities for not carrying such a card?

The First Minister: I am not in favour of compulsion. It is important that
such a card is voluntary, which is why we are piloting the card with local
authorities that wish to pilot it. It is right that they should have such
an opportunity.

I am not, however, in favour of our making it compulsory in Scotland for
people to carry several cards in order to access different public services.
In an age of modern technology and easy access to other services, it is
absolute common sense that people should have easy access to public
services and that information be held on one card that will allow people
local and national access to public services. If that can be achieved, we
will make Scotland a better place to live.

Lord James Douglas-Hamilton (Lothians) (Con): Will the First Minister say
what the difference would be between the entitlement card that he suggests
and the entitlement card that is being suggested for south of the border?
Will he spell out in more detail exactly what information will go into the
card?

The First Minister: The Home Secretary has begun a consultation on
entitlement cards in the United Kingdom; we will obviously engage with him
in that consultation. Such an entitlement card would impact on some
devolved areas, so it is important that the Scottish Executive and the
Parliament should make representations in due course. However, that is an
entirely different concept to the idea that I have just described. A
citizen's smart card in Scotland, which local authorities will pilot, can
be successful in allowing people in Scotland to get rid of all the clutter
of cards and other mechanisms that they use to access local services. There
can be access to local and national services through one card, which is an
important development. We have been willing to pilot and support such a
card and I hope that we can bring it about.

Forth Estuary Transport Authority

4. Nora Radcliffe (Gordon) (LD): To ask the First Minister what discussions
the Scottish Executive has had with the Forth Estuary Transport Authority
regarding transport options across the Firth of Forth. (S1F-2634)

The First Minister (Mr Jack McConnell): Officials are in regular contact
with the Forth Estuary Transport Authority concerning a range of
cross-Forth transport issues and we have a seat on its management board.

Nora Radcliffe: I thank the First Minister for that answer. Does he agree
that it will be important to run a sustainability slide rule over any
proposed new crossing, and that every effort should be made both to
maximise the rail capacity over the current rail bridge—for example, by
using longer trains—and to consider using the planning framework to group
together homes, leisure facilities and jobs in order to cut down
commuting?

The First Minister: I have much sympathy for the points that Nora Radcliffe
makes. It is important that we maximise the use of existing routes and that
we have the rolling stock that allows us to do that. It is also important
that, in our planning policies, we design homes and communities in such a
way as to reduce the need to travel distances to work or for other
purposes. I am happy to take up the points that Nora Radcliffe raises and
pass them on to the Forth Estuary Transport Authority.

Schools (British History)

5. Alex Johnstone (North-East Scotland) (Con): To ask the First Minister
what commitment the Scottish Executive will give to ensure that British
history is adequately covered in the curriculum in schools. (S1F-2627)

The First Minister (Mr Jack McConnell): Guidance to education authorities
and schools provides ample opportunities for teaching British history,
including Scottish history, at every level of the school curriculum.

Alex Johnstone: The First Minister might be surprised to hear that I was
present during the march that took place outside the chamber at half past 5
last Thursday. I assure him that although I did not take part, I felt that
it was my duty as an elected member of Parliament to stand by to hear and
see what was going on at that march. Does the First Minister agree—given
this great country's history of sacrifice in opposing tyranny and
oppression wherever it may occur—that it is high time that our young
people were made fully aware of the sacrifice that has been made by the
generations that preceded us and of the great and distinguished heritage of
this country?

The First Minister: I announced towards the end of last year that I thought
that it was important that we in Scotland acknowledge a variety of
occasions in our history, including the union of the crowns in 1603. I
think that it is important, not for party political reasons but for reasons
of knowledge, history and understanding, that young people in this country
understand all of their roots, where they come from and what our country
has done—good and bad—in the past. I certainly hope that in every
secondary school and primary school throughout Scotland we not only teach
our young people their Scottish history as effectively as possible, but
teach them about the time during which they have been part of Britain,
which should constitute part of their knowledge and understanding of where
they come from. That will also help to inform them of the benefits of
democracy, tolerance and respect, which are part of our national
character.

Andrew Wilson (Central Scotland) (SNP): Does the First Minister agree that
anyone who studies British history should also recognise that Britain was
first in the world in economic performance in the 19th century, but is
today 19th and falling? We should recognise that many of the countries that
became independent from Britain during the intervening period have
prospered and that none of the countries that have become independent from
Britain want to get back in.

The First Minister: Mr Wilson is full of contradictions; he has just made
more. He has spent his four years in the Parliament —when the eyes of
business were not upon him—criticising private profit, criticising those
who would manage public spending, advocating substantial increases in
spending on every occasion and trying to ensure that a culture is created
in the Parliament that is hostile to public-private partnerships and other
engagements with the private sector. He cannot do that and go round
Scotland's boardrooms telling people that he is a friend of business. Mr
Wilson must be more consistent. I hope that he will be in the weeks to
come.

Mrs Margaret Smith (Edinburgh West) (LD): Does the First Minister agree
that one of the strands that goes through British history is the quest for
justice? Four years ago, patients who had been infected with hepatitis C
from blood products had been waiting many years for justice; they are still
waiting for it today. Will the First Minister do all that he can to put
pressure on the UK Government to allow the Scottish Executive ministers and
the Scottish Parliament to do exactly what we want to do, which is to give
fair payments to those who have been infected with hepatitis C?

The Presiding Officer: I am sorry—that was possibly wide of the original
question. Does the First Minister want to respond?

The First Minister: I confirm that Malcolm Chisholm will—as he has been
doing over recent months—work extremely hard to ensure that we bring
about a just conclusion to the matter.

British Sign Language (Interpreters)

The Presiding Officer (Sir David Steel): It is appropriate that the last
question in this session of Parliament should be asked by the person who
uttered the first words in the Parliament.

6. Dr Winnie Ewing (Highlands and Islands) (SNP): To ask the First Minister
whether, in the light of Her Majesty's Government's decision to give
official recognition to British sign language as a language in its own
right, the Scottish Executive will fund a long-term training programme for
more sign language interpreters. (S1F-2624)

The First Minister (Mr Jack McConnell): As a start, I believe that we
should double the number of British sign language interpreters in Scotland
and I have asked officials to prepare plans for how we might achieve that,
which will be presented to whatever set of ministers occupies the Executive
offices after the election.

Dr Ewing: That was an encouraging answer.

I am proud to be asking the last question in the Parliament. Since my
members' business debate on the subject, during which the public galleries
were packed with deaf people, the Executive has taken quite a lot of steps
on the issue, such as the type-talk scheme, interpretation for visitors,
the BSL video, leaflets and the £10 million for audiological assistance. I
am happy to congratulate the Executive on those developments, but is the
First Minister aware that the core problems remain? Those problems are the
need for formal recognition of BSL, which is an ancient, sophisticated and
evolving language, and the emergency shortage of interpreters, which has
been referred to.

There are now 39 interpreters; at the time of my members' business debate
there were 32. However, Finland has 350 interpreters. There are fifteen BSL
students on the go, but because they are part time, they receive no
funding. I suggest the practical step of making the Heriot-Watt University
course a degree course, which would attract more students and allow them
funding as full-time students. That would speed up the process for the many
people who would like to be interpreters. The deaf also wish a centre for
deaf studies, which could perhaps be considered by whomever succeeds the
First Minister—I am optimistic about that.

In yesterday's debate on children, Jackie Baillie said that we want a
Scotland where every child matters; I ask that it should be a Scotland
where every deaf child matters.

The First Minister: I share Winnie Ewing's commitment to British sign
language. As a child, I learned basic BSL from my father. It is not only
important that we have enough interpreters in Scotland, but that we
encourage recognition of the language's importance to the deaf community,
especially to deaf children. We can do a lot more and I am sure that we
will do it. One of the marks of this young Parliament during the past four
years has been its willingness to do the right thing for Scotland's
children. I am sure that we will do that again on this issue in the years
to come.

Motion of Thanks

The Deputy Presiding Officer (Mr George Reid): The next item of business is
a debate on motion S1M-4063, in the name of the First Minister, on the
Presiding Officer.

15:33

The First Minister (Mr Jack McConnell): This is an important occasion. As
the proceedings of this four-year session draw to a close, I am delighted
to have the honour of moving a motion to pay tribute to our first Presiding
Officer, Sir David Steel. Sir David's experience, commitment and the wider
role that he has had in his new position have been fundamental to our
success as a young Parliament.

The Presiding Officer has been in Scottish politics in many different
capacities for nearly 40 years. When I became First Minister, I remember
calculating that the average age of members of the Scottish Parliament was
about 41 or 42. For those of us in that age range, that means that Sir
David became a member of Parliament before we were at primary school and
that we were still at secondary school when he became the leader of the
Liberal party. He has had a career of distinction and has made a massive
contribution to Scotland, the United Kingdom and the liberal movement
worldwide.

Sir David's experience, which is not always remembered by those of us who
are of a younger generation, has been fundamental to his success in his
position and to the on-going success of the Parliament during the past four
years. He represented his constituency for 32 years and was leader of the
Liberal party for 12 years. Following his retiral as a member of
Parliament, he became a life peer and, in 1999, he made the important and
exciting choice to return to politics to serve in the Scottish Parliament.

Sir David had also been one of the active leaders of the Scottish
constitutional convention, the body that drew up the blueprint from which
the Scottish Parliament was to be created. That was highly appropriate for
a Presiding Officer. He had been a lifelong campaigner for devolution, and
that commitment has shown through over the past four years. Sir David has
defended and promoted the founding principles of the Parliament. The
informality, courtesy and respect that characterise our proceedings—at
least, most of the time—are a tribute to his example to us all. His sure
hand and light touch have been shown on many occasions, not least in
Aberdeen last year, when he told the story of the white mice when Her
Majesty the Queen was present in the chamber.

Despite illness and all that has changed around him, Sir David's presence
has given us stability and an opportunity for this young Parliament to
grow. There has also been a wider importance to his role. We are fortunate,
in this young Parliament, to have had a Presiding Officer with
international experience and international interests. There was always a
danger of the new Scottish Parliament being a parochial institution.
However, a variety of speakers and visitors, such as Thabo Mbeki and
others, have visited the Parliament and have engaged with us, and Sir David
and other members have represented our new Parliament abroad, especially in
the USA on tartan day. Those occasions have served Scotland well, and Sir
David has served Scotland well. He has kept our proceedings in a wider
perspective, and that has been very important.

That is partly because of the man that he is. In the excellent book by Tom
Devine and Paddy Logue that was published last summer, entitled "Being
Scottish", in a short essay on his Scottishness, Sir David quotes John
Buchan, describing his constituents in the Borders as having

"realism coloured by poetry, a stalwart independence sweetened by courtesy,
and a shrewd kindly wisdom".

I can think of no better summary of Sir David Steel, in his role in the
Parliament. I commend that to the Parliament this afternoon. He has served
us well and I wish Judy and him well in retirement. [Applause.]

I move,

That the Parliament expresses its gratitude to Sir David Steel for his
service to the Parliament and recognises the important and historic role he
has carried out as its first Presiding Officer.

15:38

Mr John Swinney (North Tayside) (SNP): It is my pleasure to support the
motion that has been moved by the First Minister and to recognise the
historic event that we are witnessing today. We are a young Parliament, but
we are in the process every day of creating a new history and tradition for
our Parliament. When the Parliament was constituted, four years ago, my
dear colleague Winnie Ewing opened the Parliament with grace and style.
Soon after, she was able to hand over to an individual of wise guidance and
wise leadership, who has served the Parliament extremely well over the past
four years.

It is no easy task to establish the foundations of a new
Parliament—politically or in terms of the brickwork. However, the
political foundations that have been laid for the Parliament have been
characterised by the dignified way in which Sir David has undertaken his
responsibilities. He has chaired our proceedings and, as the First Minister
said, he has been an ambassador on our behalf and a welcome host to the
many international dignitaries who have come to see the emergence of this
new institution. He has also established some important principles in the
tradition of the Parliament. If I have heard him speaking more often about
any one subject in the Parliament, it has been about his desire to see the
Parliament's committee system thrive, develop and become ever more
influential. Our committee system has distinguished the Parliament from
other institutions with which people may be more familiar.

Sir David has been instrumental in defending and protecting Parliament and
the rights of Parliament. On occasion, members on the Opposition benches
might have liked him to give the Executive an even harder time,
procedurally, than he has given it. However, at all times he has acted with
fairness and dignity in his work. Sir David and I share a specific
objective. He has had a duty, over the past four years, to keep the
Parliament under control and to keep the Scottish National Party group
within it under control. Occasionally, I have been challenged by the latter
task during the past two and half years and I have sympathised with Sir
David's challenge when he has occasionally wrestled with that task.

The First Minister referred to the long political career that Sir David has
had in Scotland. He entered politics via the 1965 Roxburgh, Selkirk and
Peebles by-election, which he won decisively. However, that by election led
to the expulsion from the SNP of an eccentric character called Anthony J C
Kerr, who disobeyed the party leadership and decided to stand against Sir
David, despite the fact—if memory serves me right—that we were
establishing an anti-Tory pact at the time. Some traditions of Scottish
politics have not changed much.

It is with the greatest of pleasure that I associate the Scottish National
Party with the First Minister's remarks and with the motion. I am not
confident that Sir David Steel will be retiring. I cannot imagine that that
will be the case. He goes on from his responsibilities as Presiding Officer
to act as the Lord High Commissioner to the General Assembly of the Church
of Scotland. He will occupy a different seat in this building from the one
that he currently occupies, but in that and his future activities he has
the good wishes of everyone on this side of the Parliament. [Applause.]

15:41

David McLetchie (Lothians) (Con): On occasions such as this there is the
temptation to say, "Oh, for goodness' sake give him the watch and crack
open the sherry." [Laughter.] However, that would not do justice to the
distinguished service that the Presiding Officer has rendered to Parliament
in its first session. I am very pleased indeed to associate my colleagues
and me with the First Minister's and Mr Swinney's generous tributes and
with the terms of the motion.

When writing his memoirs, the Presiding Officer will no doubt reflect on
some of the trials and tribulations of his job. On day one, of course, the
Presiding Officer was handed the poisoned chalice of the Holyrood project,
which is a responsibility that he has shouldered with commendable
commitment but occasionally, some of us might think, with an unwise degree
of enthusiasm. The Holyrood project has been a labour of
Hercules—unfinished—of which the Presiding Officer will be delighted,
no doubt, to be well shot.

Presiding Officers and Speakers in Parliaments are, of course, akin to
football referees and it is a measure of Sir David's authority that, after
four years, there have been few bookings for dissent and no red
cards—yet. Indeed, with the benefit of hindsight, I have to thank the
Presiding Officer for preventing me on one occasion from asking questions
in the Parliament, which probably did much more for my credibility than if
I had actually asked them—such are the ironies and contradictions of
politics.

As chair of the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body, the Presiding
Officer has been responsible for the Parliament staff and in thanking him
for his contribution over the past four years I would also like to express
our thanks to the Parliament staff for the outstanding support and service
that they have given to us all in every department and in every respect.
[Applause.] I would also like to extend my best wishes to members who, like
the Presiding Officer, will retire from Parliament before the election. I
thank them for their contributions, particularly those of my colleagues
John Young and Ben Wallace.

As the First Minister said, Presiding Officer, you have given outstanding
service to public life in Scotland over many years and you will, as John
Swinney noted, make an early return to the Assembly Hall in your capacity
as Lord High Commissioner to the forthcoming General Assembly. That will be
yet another eminent title to add to your burgeoning collection.

And so, Sir David, I say to you: go back to your constituency and prepare
for retirement—although that is a prospect that we may all have to face
on 1 May. It has been a pleasure to have worked with you over the four
years of the Parliament, Sir David, and all of us wish you and Judy many
happy and fulfilling years ahead. [Applause.]

15:45

The Deputy First Minister and Minister for Justice (Mr Jim Wallace): Sir
David Steel will be pleased and reassured to know that, following debate
and discussion at our group meeting on Tuesday evening, the Liberal
Democrat group agreed to support the motion.

Although, on taking office as Presiding Officer, Sir David donned the
mantle of political neutrality—which we certainly believe that he has
maintained—I make no apology for saying that, as a Liberal Democrat, I
speak to the motion with warmth and particular personal pleasure.

David Steel led my party in the first three general elections in which I
fought and was leader of my party when I entered the House of Commons in
1983. I was subsequently his chief whip—indeed, I was the last chief whip
of the Liberal Party and the first chief whip of the newly merged party. We
fought many election campaigns together and, as Jack McConnell has reminded
us, in 1989, when we joined together in this building in the Scottish
constitutional convention, David Steel and Harry Ewing became the honorary
joint presidents of the convention. Further, we campaigned, along with many
others here, in the successful campaign for a yes-yes vote in the historic
1997 referendum.

Reference has also been made to Judy Steel, and it is important to
acknowledge the contribution that she has made, not only over the past few
years, but over many years. I well recall the night when Nicol Stephen won
the Kincardine and Deeside by-election. After the announcement of the
result, a camera went outside the count in Stonehaven where there were a
lot of rejoicing Liberal Democrats. David Dimbleby asked, "Who is that
woman jumping up and down?" and David Steel replied, "That's no woman;
that's my wife." Judy has been a stalwart support and we owe her a debt of
gratitude as well.

My father recalls visiting one of his clients in the Borders, the late
Andrew Haddon, a stalwart Liberal, who said that the local party had just
selected a lad to fight the forthcoming election. He said that he thought
that he was good and might go far—and indeed he has. Sir David
represented his constituents in Roxburgh, Selkirk and Peebles and,
subsequently, Tweeddale, Ettrick and Lauderdale with outstanding
distinction. One of the great battles of the earliest part of his career
was the attempt to save the Waverley line from the Beeching axe and I am
sure that he will be among the first to receive an invitation to be present
when the first stretch of new track is laid for the new Borders railway.

There have been some key themes to David Steel's political career during
the past 40 years. Those themes have brought consistency coupled with
pragmatism and drive, allied to good humour and courage.

An integral characteristic of all great Scots is internationalism. That is
a perspective that David Steel shares and has demonstrated throughout his
political career. No doubt, that perspective was fostered during his
upbringing in Africa, a continent to which he has devoted much time and
commitment.

Sir David's commitment to fighting racism and his leading involvement in
the anti-apartheid campaign were inspiring to many, and not without
political risk. It took a great deal of courage to take that campaign to
the Borders of Scotland—that great rugby-loving region—during the
1969-70 South African rugby team tour. However, the stance that Sir David
and others took undoubtedly helped to pave the way for the dramatic events
that took place in South Africa in the early 1990s.

Sir David's political philosophy has not prevented him from working with
others across the narrow party divides—indeed, it may have encouraged him
to do so. He has never been narrowly party-focused and has always had a
liberal ability to see and value other people's points of view.

The final theme of Sir David's career that I will mention—and the most
appropriate, given the context—is that, in keeping with many Liberal
leaders, he has always been a staunch proponent of Scottish home rule. He
rightly recognised the need for there to be a Scottish Parliament and the
tremendous value that would derive from Scots taking greater control of the
issues that affect our daily lives. Indeed, I think that Sir David drafted
the Scottish Liberal Party's evidence to the Kilbrandon committee in the
late 1960s. That commitment, allied to a willingness to work with others
and an understanding of the international context within which a devolved
Scotland must operate must make it all the more satisfying for him to have
been the Presiding Officer of the first Scottish Parliament since 1707.
Knowing how much Sir David cherishes this hard-fought-for Parliament has
meant that we have had confidence that the rights of the Parliament—and
the fundamental role of holding the Executive to account—have been well
safeguarded over these past four years.

It would be misleading to suggest that we are gathered here to bid you a
final farewell from this place. As David McLetchie and John Swinney have
already pointed out, you go out one door but will return in a few weeks'
time—six feet above contradiction, though we have never dared to
contradict you much down here—as Lord High Commissioner to the General
Assembly of the Church of Scotland. As the motion indicates, the role of
our first Presiding Officer has indeed been an historic one. Presiding
Officer, it is with gratitude and warmth that we congratulate you on the
dignified and distinguished way in which you have discharged your duties.
[Applause.]

15:51

John Young (West of Scotland) (Con): I find it a great privilege to be
speaking on behalf of the SPCB in this tribute to David Steel. He has been
a giant in British politics; indeed, his influence and fame has spread far
beyond these shores. He has been used by people overseas in a number of
different ways, and that is a tremendous tribute to him. The First Minister
covered David's political career in some detail—in fact I was tearing up
pages of my speech as the other speakers went on ahead of me.

However, one thing that they did not touch on was an election that I am
glad David Steel did not win. In the 1980s, he suddenly decided to stand
for the European Parliament. He chose the unusual seat of the central
region of Italy. The mind boggles to imagine where David would be today if
he had won that election. He would probably eat spaghetti every lunchtime,
have a lovely villa in Tuscany, speak fluent Italian—and no doubt, end up
as the speaker of the Italian Parliament in Rome. He may think that this is
a tough mob here, but it ain't nothing compared to that! If he had become
the speaker of the Italian Parliament in Rome, I suspect that he would have
brought the members under control in the calm manner that he employs all
the time.

David has often been criticised in his four years as Presiding Officer. He
has seen it in the press and people have been after him about this, that
and everything else. We in the corporate body were in a unique position
from which to observe his reactions to that criticism. He was always calm
and he never lost his temper. His blood pressure might have gone up
slightly, but never once can I recall him losing his temper. In fact, he
would be a great man to have in the United Nations. During his illness he
obviously suffered a great deal, yet he insisted on coming to the corporate
body to chair it. All of us greatly admired his bravery and courage during
that time—it cannot have been easy.

Not all members will be aware that there has been an interim setting up of
an association of former MSPs, of which I am the interim chairman—and I
hasten to add the word interim. Sir David Steel has agreed to be the
honorary president of that organisation and I am pleased to say that that
outstanding politician for Scotland, Winnie Ewing, has agreed to be the
honorary vice-president. With those calming influences, it will be a very
effective body indeed once it is fully set up.

I wish David, Judy and the family well. I know that David has written at
least 12 books on a variety of subjects, and I am quite sure that he will
produce many more. The book that I will stand in a queue to buy, even if
the price is 30 guineas a time, is the one that tells the inside story of
the Scottish Parliament's first four years and the corporate body. I wish
you the best of luck, David.

15:54

The Minister for Parliamentary Business (Patricia Ferguson): On behalf of
the members of the Parliamentary Bureau, both past and present, I have
great pleasure in taking the opportunity to say a few words before you go
into your semi-retirement—like other members, I am sure that it will be
no more than that.

As colleagues know, Sir David, for the first couple of years of this
Parliament I had the honour of being one of those who assisted you in
chairing meetings of the Parliament and in your other duties. I therefore
have a unique vantage point from which to view your work and your
contribution. I should probably say that a number of members have asked me
if I am going to reveal at this point whether a certain conversation on the
subject of whether the Presiding Officer should wear robes ever actually
took place. I can assure you that my lips are sealed—on that question at
least. We are politicians going into an election period, after all.

My office was keen to press-release my contribution in advance of the
debate. I have to admit that I was a little unsure about that, and I
decided to take some advice from my colleague, Angus MacKay. [Laughter.]
Angus advised me in no uncertain terms that it was probably not very wise
to issue such a press release today.

But seriously, I know that my fellow business managers, past and present,
have very much appreciated your fairness and even-handedness in chairing
the Parliamentary Bureau, a body that is often regarded by colleagues who
have not had the privilege of serving on it as being some kind of secretive
club—which we know is not the case. You have helped to make the bureau
what it is today. This might come as a surprise to some colleagues, but it
is usually a consensual body; more often than not we find ourselves in
agreement.

The whole Parliament admires the way in which you have persisted, often in
the face of criticism, steadfastly to maintain the integrity of the Enric
Miralles design for the new Parliament building. The Parliament also
admires the personal interest that you have taken in that project, as chair
of the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body, over the past four years. As
an ambassador for the Parliament, you have worked tirelessly, visiting
other Parliaments and organisations abroad and welcoming visitors from
abroad to this new Parliament.

I believe that the Parliament has developed well in its short life, and
that all its members have played a role in that development. The role of
its Presiding Officer has been particularly important in shaping it. It
seems absolutely no time at all since the day, almost four years ago, that
you were elected to the office of Presiding Officer of the Scottish
Parliament. Most of us had very little idea at that time about what the job
of the Presiding Officer would actually entail, or about how it would fit
into the overall life of the Parliament. It is the mark of the way in which
you have developed that post that anyone aspiring to the role in future
will have absolutely no doubt as to what is required of them. The post
requires a leader. It requires someone who is approachable, someone with
dignity, someone who can act with fairness at all times, and whose
commitment to the Parliament is unstinting.

We thank you, Sir David, as well as George Reid, Murray Tosh and all the
staff who have assisted you in your role, for the dedication that you have
shown to the role of Presiding Officer and to this new Parliament. I have
great pleasure in supporting the motion before us.

The Deputy Presiding Officer: It is with real pleasure, Sir David, that I
ask you to reply to the debate.

15:58

The Presiding Officer (Sir David Steel): I see that I have less than two
minutes in which to do so, Deputy Presiding Officer.

It is especially pleasing to listen to all those kind words when I reckon
that I am probably the only one of the 129 MSPs who has inevitably, at some
time or other over the past four years, disappointed, irritated, upset or
offended every one of the other 128. Although I may have made 128 temporary
enemies, I feel that I leave having made 128 permanent friends and I thank
members for that.

I would like the thanks to me to be linked directly to thanks to the nearly
500 staff whom we employ in our seven buildings, both those whom we see and
those whom we never see. From porters to policemen and from caterers to
clerks, we have built a dedicated and highly professional parliamentary
staff force, to whom not just I, but all of us, are genuinely and deeply
grateful. In particular, I thank those who work in my private office and
our chief executive, Paul Grice, who I think has given outstanding
leadership to the team.

I also thank the Deputy Presiding Officers, George Reid, Patricia Ferguson
and Murray Tosh, for the prodigious amount of work that they have
undertaken on your behalf, and especially for their work during my illness.
We worked as a team, especially in welcoming the unexpectedly large number
of distinguished visitors who came to visit us from overseas.

I would like to thank the Parliamentary press corps. [MEMBERS: "Boo!"] No,
I know that members will understand that it is one of the greatest
sadnesses of my life that I have never been able to see them or know who is
or is not in the press gallery.

We have had the odd grumble about press coverage, and I commend to you the
MSP who recently decided to do something personally to obtain positive
coverage. He invited the Lawnmarket gang to a trendy pub in Leith and
produced his well-trained Labrador. He threw a stick into the sea for it to
fetch. The dog walked across the water, picked up the stick and walked back
across the water to the astonishment of the assembled hacks. The next
morning, the member opened his newspaper to read the headline "MSP's dog
can't swim".

In spite of the occasional negatives, we ought to record that
unquestionably the scale of attention that the Parliament has received from
press and broadcasting has turned us remarkably quickly into the focus of
our national life. In fact, a recent poll found that only 13 per cent of
the public would like to have us abolished and yearned for a return to
total rule from inaccessible Westminster. Note that that is a much smaller
percentage than those who voted no in the referendum.

The Parliament has had, on occasion, justified critics but, in the light of
all that has been done in the past four years, few seriously argue that we
should revert to being what Malcolm Rifkind accurately described as the
only nation in the world with its own legal system but no legislature to
adapt, modernise and improve it. In fact, we are all aware that the heavy
legislative programme that we have experienced was partly the result of
taking up several long-standing, overdue reforms that never made it into
the Westminster queue. In the next session, I expect that still more time
may be spent on committee inquiries and scrutiny. I am fully confident that
the Parliament will grow in strength and effectiveness.

Now most of you are off to contest the election. As I explained to my
daughter when she asked for my help in her forthcoming fight for a council
seat, I can play no part in that. She gave me the ominous response, "But
babysitting is not a party-political activity."

I tried hard to think of something impartial, but new and original, to say
to all of you as you go out hoping to come back with your party having won
the election—for example: go back to your constituencies and prepare for
government. However, that line has already been taken.

I want to end by thanking all of you for the privilege of having been your
Presiding Officer. I use the word privilege deliberately. When I was a
student, I used to make speeches frequently on two topics: anti-apartheid
and pro-Scottish self-government. If someone had then tapped me on the
shoulder and said, "One day, my boy, you will preside over a Scottish
Parliament and introduce to it someone with whom you will have worked over
several years—the President of a democratic South Africa," I would not
have believed them.

That is just one among many reasons that I end simply by wishing you all
well and saying thank you, thank you, thank you. [Applause.]

The Deputy Presiding Officer: The question is, that motion S1M-4063, in the
name of the First Minister, on the Presiding Officer, be agreed to.

Motion agreed to.

That the Parliament expresses its gratitude to Sir David Steel for his
service to the Parliament and recognises the important and historic role he
has carried out as its first Presiding Officer.

The Deputy Presiding Officer: The motion is agreed to unanimously. For the
last time, I hand back the chair to Sir David Steel.

Decision Time

16:04

The Presiding Officer (Sir David Steel): There are three questions that I
must put as a result of today's business. The first question is, that
amendment S1M-4064.2, in the name of Kenneth Gibson, which seeks to amend
motion S1M-4064, in the name of Margaret Curran, on closing the opportunity
gap for older people, be agreed to. Are we agreed?

Members: No.

The Presiding Officer: There will be a division.

FOR

Adam, Brian (North-East Scotland) (SNP) 
Campbell, Colin (West of Scotland) (SNP) 
Canavan, Dennis (Falkirk West) 
Ewing, Dr Winnie (Highlands and Islands) (SNP) 
Ewing, Fergus (Inverness East, Nairn and Lochaber) (SNP) 
Fabiani, Linda (Central Scotland) (SNP) 
Gibson, Mr Kenneth (Glasgow) (SNP) 
Grahame, Christine (South of Scotland) (SNP) 
Hamilton, Mr Duncan (Highlands and Islands) (SNP) 
Hyslop, Fiona (Lothians) (SNP) 
Ingram, Mr Adam (South of Scotland) (SNP) 
Lochhead, Richard (North-East Scotland) (SNP) 
Marwick, Tricia (Mid Scotland and Fife) (SNP) 
Matheson, Michael (Central Scotland) (SNP) 
McGugan, Irene (North-East Scotland) (SNP) 
McLeod, Fiona (West of Scotland) (SNP) 
Morgan, Alasdair (Galloway and Upper Nithsdale) (SNP) 
Neil, Alex (Central Scotland) (SNP) 
Paterson, Mr Gil (Central Scotland) (SNP) 
Quinan, Mr Lloyd (West of Scotland) (SNP) 
Robison, Shona (North-East Scotland) (SNP) 
Russell, Michael (South of Scotland) (SNP) 
Stevenson, Stewart (Banff and Buchan) (SNP) 
Sturgeon, Nicola (Glasgow) (SNP) 
Swinney, Mr John (North Tayside) (SNP) 
Welsh, Mr Andrew (Angus) (SNP) 
White, Ms Sandra (Glasgow) (SNP) 
Wilson, Andrew (Central Scotland) (SNP)

AGAINST

Aitken, Bill (Glasgow) (Con) 
Alexander, Ms Wendy (Paisley North) (Lab) 
Baillie, Jackie (Dumbarton) (Lab) 
Barrie, Scott (Dunfermline West) (Lab) 
Boyack, Sarah (Edinburgh Central) (Lab) 
Brankin, Rhona (Midlothian) (Lab) 
Brown, Robert (Glasgow) (LD) 
Butler, Bill (Glasgow Anniesland) (Lab) 
Chisholm, Malcolm (Edinburgh North and Leith) (Lab) 
Craigie, Cathie (Cumbernauld and Kilsyth) (Lab) 
Curran, Ms Margaret (Glasgow Baillieston) (Lab) 
Davidson, Mr David (North-East Scotland) (Con) 
Deacon, Susan (Edinburgh East and Musselburgh) (Lab) 
Douglas-Hamilton, Lord James (Lothians) (Con) 
Eadie, Helen (Dunfermline East) (Lab) 
Ferguson, Patricia (Glasgow Maryhill) (Lab) 
Fergusson, Alex (South of Scotland) (Con) 
Finnie, Ross (West of Scotland) (LD) 
Fitzpatrick, Brian (Strathkelvin and Bearsden) (Lab) 
Fraser, Murdo (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) 
Gallie, Phil (South of Scotland) (Con) 
Gillon, Karen (Clydesdale) (Lab) 
Godman, Trish (West Renfrewshire) (Lab) 
Goldie, Miss Annabel (West of Scotland) (Con) 
Gorrie, Donald (Central Scotland) (LD) 
Grant, Rhoda (Highlands and Islands) (Lab) 
Gray, Iain (Edinburgh Pentlands) (Lab) 
Harding, Mr Keith (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) 
Henry, Hugh (Paisley South) (Lab) 
Home Robertson, Mr John (East Lothian) (Lab) 
Hughes, Janis (Glasgow Rutherglen) (Lab) 
Jackson, Dr Sylvia (Stirling) (Lab) 
Jackson, Gordon (Glasgow Govan) (Lab) 
Jamieson, Cathy (Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley) (Lab) 
Jamieson, Margaret (Kilmarnock and Loudoun) (Lab) 
Jenkins, Ian (Tweeddale, Ettrick and Lauderdale) (LD) 
Johnstone, Alex (North-East Scotland) (Con) 
Livingstone, Marilyn (Kirkcaldy) (Lab) 
Lyon, George (Argyll and Bute) (LD) 
Macdonald, Lewis (Aberdeen Central) (Lab) 
Macintosh, Mr Kenneth (Eastwood) (Lab) 
MacKay, Angus (Edinburgh South) (Lab) 
Maclean, Kate (Dundee West) (Lab) 
Macmillan, Maureen (Highlands and Islands) (Lab) 
Martin, Paul (Glasgow Springburn) (Lab) 
McAllion, Mr John (Dundee East) (Lab) 
McAveety, Mr Frank (Glasgow Shettleston) (Lab) 
McCabe, Mr Tom (Hamilton South) (Lab) 
McConnell, Mr Jack (Motherwell and Wishaw) (Lab) 
McGrigor, Mr Jamie (Highlands and Islands) (Con) 
McIntosh, Mrs Lyndsay (Central Scotland) (Con) 
McLeish, Henry (Central Fife) (Lab) 
McLetchie, David (Lothians) (Con) 
McMahon, Michael (Hamilton North and Bellshill) (Lab) 
McNeil, Mr Duncan (Greenock and Inverclyde) (Lab) 
McNeill, Pauline (Glasgow Kelvin) (Lab) 
McNulty, Des (Clydebank and Milngavie) (Lab) 
Monteith, Mr Brian (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) 
Morrison, Mr Alasdair (Western Isles) (Lab) 
Muldoon, Bristow (Livingston) (Lab) 
Mulligan, Mrs Mary (Linlithgow) (Lab) 
Mundell, David (South of Scotland) (Con) 
Munro, John Farquhar (Ross, Skye and Inverness West) (LD) 
Murray, Dr Elaine (Dumfries) (Lab) 
Oldfather, Irene (Cunninghame South) (Lab) 
Peattie, Cathy (Falkirk East) (Lab) 
Radcliffe, Nora (Gordon) (LD) 
Raffan, Mr Keith (Mid Scotland and Fife) (LD) 
Robson, Euan (Roxburgh and Berwickshire) (LD) 
Rumbles, Mr Mike (West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine) (LD) 
Scanlon, Mary (Highlands and Islands) (Con) 
Scott, John (Ayr) (Con) 
Scott, Tavish (Shetland) (LD) 
Simpson, Dr Richard (Ochil) (Lab) 
Smith, Elaine (Coatbridge and Chryston) (Lab) 
Smith, Iain (North-East Fife) (LD) 
Smith, Mrs Margaret (Edinburgh West) (LD) 
Stephen, Nicol (Aberdeen South) (LD) 
Stone, Mr Jamie (Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross) (LD) 
Thomson, Elaine (Aberdeen North) (Lab) 
Wallace, Ben (North-East Scotland) (Con) 
Wallace, Mr Jim (Orkney) (LD) 
Watson, Mike (Glasgow Cathcart) (Lab) 
Whitefield, Karen (Airdrie and Shotts) (Lab) 
Young, John (West of Scotland) (Con)

ABSTENTIONS

Elder, Dorothy-Grace (Glasgow) (Ind) 
Harper, Robin (Lothians) (Grn) 
MacDonald, Margo (Lothians) (Ind)

The Presiding Officer: The result of the division is: For 28, Against 85,
Abstentions 3.

Amendment disagreed to.

The Presiding Officer: The next question is, that amendment S1M-4064.1, in
the name of Keith Harding, which seeks to amend Margaret Curran's motion on
the opportunity gap for older people, be agreed to. Are we agreed?

Members: No.

The Presiding Officer: There will be a division.

FOR

Aitken, Bill (Glasgow) (Con) 
Campbell, Colin (West of Scotland) (SNP) 
Davidson, Mr David (North East Scotland) (Con) 
Douglas-Hamilton, Lord James (Lothians) (Con) 
Ewing, Dr Winnie (Highlands and Islands) (SNP) 
Ewing, Fergus (Inverness East, Nairn and Lochaber) (SNP) 
Ewing, Mrs Margaret (Moray) (SNP) 
Fabiani, Linda (Central Scotland) (SNP) 
Fergusson, Alex (South of Scotland) (Con) 
Fraser, Murdo (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) 
Gallie, Phil (South of Scotland) (Con) 
Gibson, Mr Kenneth (Glasgow) (SNP) 
Goldie, Miss Annabel (West of Scotland) (Con) 
Grahame, Christine (South of Scotland) (SNP) 
Hamilton, Mr Duncan (Highlands and Islands) (SNP) 
Harding, Mr Keith (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) 
Hyslop, Fiona (Lothians) (SNP) 
Ingram, Mr Adam (South of Scotland) (SNP) 
Johnstone, Alex (North East Scotland) (Con) 
Lochhead, Richard (North East Scotland) (SNP) 
MacAskill, Mr Kenny (Lothians) (SNP) 
Marwick, Tricia (Mid Scotland and Fife) (SNP) 
Matheson, Michael (Central Scotland) (SNP) 
McGrigor, Mr Jamie (Highlands and Islands) (Con) 
McGugan, Irene (North East Scotland) (SNP) 
McIntosh, Mrs Lyndsay (Central Scotland) (Con) 
McLeod, Fiona (West of Scotland) (SNP) 
McLetchie, David (Lothians) (Con) 
Monteith, Mr Brian (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) 
Morgan, Alasdair (Galloway and Upper Nithsdale) (SNP) 
Mundell, David (South of Scotland) (Con) 
Neil, Alex (Central Scotland) (SNP) 
Paterson, Mr Gil (Central Scotland) (SNP) 
Quinan, Mr Lloyd (West of Scotland) (SNP) 
Robison, Shona (North East Scotland) (SNP) 
Russell, Michael (South of Scotland) (SNP) 
Scanlon, Mary (Highlands and Islands) (Con) 
Scott, John (Ayr) (Con) 
Stevenson, Stewart (Banff and Buchan) (SNP) 
Sturgeon, Nicola (Glasgow) (SNP) 
Swinney, Mr John (North Tayside) (SNP) 
Wallace, Ben (North East Scotland) (Con) 
Welsh, Mr Andrew (Angus) (SNP) 
White, Ms Sandra (Glasgow) (SNP) 
Wilson, Andrew (Central Scotland) (SNP) 
Young, John (West of Scotland) (Con)

AGAINST

Adam, Brian (North East Scotland) (SNP) 
Alexander, Ms Wendy (Paisley North) (Lab) 
Baillie, Jackie (Dumbarton) (Lab) 
Barrie, Scott (Dunfermline West) (Lab) 
Boyack, Sarah (Edinburgh Central) (Lab) 
Brankin, Rhona (Midlothian) (Lab) 
Brown, Robert (Glasgow) (LD) 
Butler, Bill (Glasgow Anniesland) (Lab) 
Canavan, Dennis (Falkirk West) 
Chisholm, Malcolm (Edinburgh North and Leith) (Lab) 
Craigie, Cathie (Cumbernauld and Kilsyth) (Lab) 
Curran, Ms Margaret (Glasgow Baillieston) (Lab) 
Deacon, Susan (Edinburgh East and Musselburgh) (Lab) 
Eadie, Helen (Dunfermline East) (Lab) 
Ferguson, Patricia (Glasgow Maryhill) (Lab) 
Finnie, Ross (West of Scotland) (LD) 
Fitzpatrick, Brian (Strathkelvin and Bearsden) (Lab) 
Gillon, Karen (Clydesdale) (Lab) 
Godman, Trish (West Renfrewshire) (Lab) 
Gorrie, Donald (Central Scotland) (LD) 
Grant, Rhoda (Highlands and Islands) (Lab) 
Gray, Iain (Edinburgh Pentlands) (Lab) 
Henry, Hugh (Paisley South) (Lab) 
Home Robertson, Mr John (East Lothian) (Lab) 
Hughes, Janis (Glasgow Rutherglen) (Lab) 
Jackson, Dr Sylvia (Stirling) (Lab) 
Jackson, Gordon (Glasgow Govan) (Lab) 
Jamieson, Cathy (Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley) (Lab) 
Jamieson, Margaret (Kilmarnock and Loudoun) (Lab) 
Jenkins, Ian (Tweeddale, Ettrick and Lauderdale) (LD) 
Livingstone, Marilyn (Kirkcaldy) (Lab) 
Lyon, George (Argyll and Bute) (LD) 
Macdonald, Lewis (Aberdeen Central) (Lab) 
Macintosh, Mr Kenneth (Eastwood) (Lab) 
MacKay, Angus (Edinburgh South) (Lab) 
Maclean, Kate (Dundee West) (Lab) 
Macmillan, Maureen (Highlands and Islands) (Lab) 
Martin, Paul (Glasgow Springburn) (Lab) 
McAllion, Mr John (Dundee East) (Lab) 
McAveety, Mr Frank (Glasgow Shettleston) (Lab) 
McCabe, Mr Tom (Hamilton South) (Lab) 
McConnell, Mr Jack (Motherwell and Wishaw) (Lab) 
McLeish, Henry (Central Fife) (Lab) 
McMahon, Michael (Hamilton North and Bellshill) (Lab) 
McNeil, Mr Duncan (Greenock and Inverclyde) (Lab) 
McNeill, Pauline (Glasgow Kelvin) (Lab) 
McNulty, Des (Clydebank and Milngavie) (Lab) 
Morrison, Mr Alasdair (Western Isles) (Lab) 
Muldoon, Bristow (Livingston) (Lab) 
Mulligan, Mrs Mary (Linlithgow) (Lab) 
Munro, John Farquhar (Ross, Skye and Inverness West) (LD) 
Murray, Dr Elaine (Dumfries) (Lab) 
Oldfather, Irene (Cunninghame South) (Lab) 
Peattie, Cathy (Falkirk East) (Lab) 
Radcliffe, Nora (Gordon) (LD) 
Raffan, Mr Keith (Mid Scotland and Fife) (LD) 
Robson, Euan (Roxburgh and Berwickshire) (LD) 
Rumbles, Mr Mike (West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine) (LD) 
Scott, Tavish (Shetland) (LD) 
Simpson, Dr Richard (Ochil) (Lab) 
Smith, Elaine (Coatbridge and Chryston) (Lab) 
Smith, Iain (North East Fife) (LD) 
Smith, Mrs Margaret (Edinburgh West) (LD) 
Stephen, Nicol (Aberdeen South) (LD) 
Stone, Mr Jamie (Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross) (LD) 
Thomson, Elaine (Aberdeen North) (Lab) 
Wallace, Mr Jim (Orkney) (LD) 
Watson, Mike (Glasgow Cathcart) (Lab) 
Whitefield, Karen (Airdrie and Shotts) (Lab)

ABSTENTIONS

Elder, Dorothy-Grace (Glasgow) (Ind) 
Harper, Robin (Lothians) (Grn) 
MacDonald, Margo (Lothians) (Ind)

The Presiding Officer: The result of the division is: For 46, Against 69,
Abstentions 3.

Amendment disagreed to.

The Presiding Officer: The next question is, that motion S1M-4064, in the
name of Margaret Curran, on closing the opportunity gap for older people,
be agreed to. Are we agreed?

Members: No.

The Presiding Officer: There will be a division.

FOR

Aitken, Bill (Glasgow) (Con) 
Alexander, Ms Wendy (Paisley North) (Lab) 
Baillie, Jackie (Dumbarton) (Lab) 
Barrie, Scott (Dunfermline West) (Lab) 
Boyack, Sarah (Edinburgh Central) (Lab) 
Brankin, Rhona (Midlothian) (Lab) 
Brown, Robert (Glasgow) (LD) 
Butler, Bill (Glasgow Anniesland) (Lab) 
Chisholm, Malcolm (Edinburgh North and Leith) (Lab) 
Craigie, Cathie (Cumbernauld and Kilsyth) (Lab) 
Curran, Ms Margaret (Glasgow Baillieston) (Lab) 
Davidson, Mr David (North-East Scotland) (Con) 
Deacon, Susan (Edinburgh East and Musselburgh) (Lab) 
Douglas-Hamilton, Lord James (Lothians) (Con) 
Eadie, Helen (Dunfermline East) (Lab) 
Ferguson, Patricia (Glasgow Maryhill) (Lab) 
Fergusson, Alex (South of Scotland) (Con) 
Finnie, Ross (West of Scotland) (LD) 
Fitzpatrick, Brian (Strathkelvin and Bearsden) (Lab) 
Fraser, Murdo (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) 
Gallie, Phil (South of Scotland) (Con) 
Gillon, Karen (Clydesdale) (Lab) 
Godman, Trish (West Renfrewshire) (Lab) 
Goldie, Miss Annabel (West of Scotland) (Con) 
Gorrie, Donald (Central Scotland) (LD) 
Grant, Rhoda (Highlands and Islands) (Lab) 
Gray, Iain (Edinburgh Pentlands) (Lab) 
Harding, Mr Keith (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) 
Harper, Robin (Lothians) (Grn) 
Henry, Hugh (Paisley South) (Lab) 
Home Robertson, Mr John (East Lothian) (Lab) 
Hughes, Janis (Glasgow Rutherglen) (Lab) 
Jackson, Dr Sylvia (Stirling) (Lab) 
Jackson, Gordon (Glasgow Govan) (Lab) 
Jamieson, Cathy (Carrick, Cumnock and Doon Valley) (Lab) 
Jamieson, Margaret (Kilmarnock and Loudoun) (Lab) 
Jenkins, Ian (Tweeddale, Ettrick and Lauderdale) (LD) 
Johnstone, Alex (North-East Scotland) (Con) 
Livingstone, Marilyn (Kirkcaldy) (Lab) 
Lyon, George (Argyll and Bute) (LD) 
Macdonald, Lewis (Aberdeen Central) (Lab) 
Macintosh, Mr Kenneth (Eastwood) (Lab) 
MacKay, Angus (Edinburgh South) (Lab) 
Maclean, Kate (Dundee West) (Lab) 
Macmillan, Maureen (Highlands and Islands) (Lab) 
Martin, Paul (Glasgow Springburn) (Lab) 
McAllion, Mr John (Dundee East) (Lab) 
McAveety, Mr Frank (Glasgow Shettleston) (Lab) 
McCabe, Mr Tom (Hamilton South) (Lab) 
McConnell, Mr Jack (Motherwell and Wishaw) (Lab) 
McGrigor, Mr Jamie (Highlands and Islands) (Con) 
McIntosh, Mrs Lyndsay (Central Scotland) (Con) 
McLeish, Henry (Central Fife) (Lab) 
McLetchie, David (Lothians) (Con) 
McMahon, Michael (Hamilton North and Bellshill) (Lab) 
McNeil, Mr Duncan (Greenock and Inverclyde) (Lab) 
McNeill, Pauline (Glasgow Kelvin) (Lab) 
McNulty, Des (Clydebank and Milngavie) (Lab) 
Monteith, Mr Brian (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con) 
Morrison, Mr Alasdair (Western Isles) (Lab) 
Muldoon, Bristow (Livingston) (Lab) 
Mulligan, Mrs Mary (Linlithgow) (Lab) 
Mundell, David (South of Scotland) (Con) 
Munro, John Farquhar (Ross, Skye and Inverness West) (LD) 
Murray, Dr Elaine (Dumfries) (Lab) 
Oldfather, Irene (Cunninghame South) (Lab) 
Peattie, Cathy (Falkirk East) (Lab) 
Radcliffe, Nora (Gordon) (LD) 
Raffan, Mr Keith (Mid Scotland and Fife) (LD) 
Robson, Euan (Roxburgh and Berwickshire) (LD) 
Rumbles, Mr Mike (West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine) (LD) 
Scanlon, Mary (Highlands and Islands) (Con) 
Scott, John (Ayr) (Con) 
Scott, Tavish (Shetland) (LD) 
Simpson, Dr Richard (Ochil) (Lab) 
Smith, Elaine (Coatbridge and Chryston) (Lab) 
Smith, Iain (North-East Fife) (LD) 
Smith, Mrs Margaret (Edinburgh West) (LD) 
Stephen, Nicol (Aberdeen South) (LD) 
Stone, Mr Jamie (Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross) (LD) 
Thomson, Elaine (Aberdeen North) (Lab) 
Wallace, Ben (North-East Scotland) (Con) 
Wallace, Mr Jim (Orkney) (LD) 
Watson, Mike (Glasgow Cathcart) (Lab) 
Whitefield, Karen (Airdrie and Shotts) (Lab) 
Young, John (West of Scotland) (Con)

ABSTENTIONS

Adam, Brian (North-East Scotland) (SNP) 
Campbell, Colin (West of Scotland) (SNP) 
Canavan, Dennis (Falkirk West) 
Elder, Dorothy-Grace (Glasgow) (Ind) 
Ewing, Dr Winnie (Highlands and Islands) (SNP) 
Ewing, Fergus (Inverness East, Nairn and Lochaber) (SNP) 
Ewing, Mrs Margaret (Moray) (SNP) 
Fabiani, Linda (Central Scotland) (SNP) 
Gibson, Mr Kenneth (Glasgow) (SNP) 
Grahame, Christine (South of Scotland) (SNP) 
Hamilton, Mr Duncan (Highlands and Islands) (SNP) 
Hyslop, Fiona (Lothians) (SNP) 
Ingram, Mr Adam (South of Scotland) (SNP) 
Lochhead, Richard (North-East Scotland) (SNP) 
MacAskill, Mr Kenny (Lothians) (SNP) 
MacDonald, Margo (Lothians) (Ind) 
Marwick, Tricia (Mid Scotland and Fife) (SNP) 
Matheson, Michael (Central Scotland) (SNP) 
McGugan, Irene (North-East Scotland) (SNP) 
McLeod, Fiona (West of Scotland) (SNP) 
Morgan, Alasdair (Galloway and Upper Nithsdale) (SNP) 
Neil, Alex (Central Scotland) (SNP) 
Paterson, Mr Gil (Central Scotland) (SNP) 
Quinan, Mr Lloyd (West of Scotland) (SNP) 
Robison, Shona (North-East Scotland) (SNP) 
Russell, Michael (South of Scotland) (SNP) 
Stevenson, Stewart (Banff and Buchan) (SNP) 
Sturgeon, Nicola (Glasgow) (SNP) 
Swinney, Mr John (North Tayside) (SNP) 
Welsh, Mr Andrew (Angus) (SNP) 
White, Ms Sandra (Glasgow) (SNP) 
Wilson, Andrew (Central Scotland) (SNP)

The Presiding Officer: The result of the division is: For 86, Against 0,
Abstentions 32.

Motion agreed to.

That the Parliament welcomes the Scottish Executive's commitment to close
the opportunity gap for Scotland's older people by building first-class
public services and developing initiatives in health, transport and other
priority areas, which will support older people in living healthy, active
and independent lives.

The Presiding Officer: That concludes decision time. I now close the final
meeting of the first session of the Scottish Parliament 1999-2003.

Meeting closed at 16:08.


This work is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

The SCOTS Project and the University of Glasgow do not necessarily endorse,
support or recommend the views expressed in this document.

Document source:
http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/business/officialReports/meetingsParliament/or-03/sor0327-01.htm

Information about document and author:

Text
Text audience
General public: Audience size: 1000+

Text details
Method of composition: Wordprocessed
Year of composition: 2003
Word count: 52991
General description: Official Report. See http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/business/officialReports/index.htm

Text medium
Web (webpages, discussion boards, newsgroups, chat rooms): 
Text publication details
Published: Publisher: Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body
Publication year: 2003
Place of publication: www.scottish.parliament.uk

Text setting
Government/politics: 
Text type
Prose: nonfiction: Report: Written record of speech (e.g. hansard, legal proceedings, minutes of meetings): 

Author
Author details
Author id: 908
Surname: Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body