Community Regeneration

– in the Scottish Parliament at 2:30 pm on 27 June 2002.

Alert me about debates like this

Photo of George Reid George Reid Scottish National Party 2:30, 27 June 2002

The next item of business is a debate on motion S1M-3256, in the name of Margaret Curran, on "Better Communities in Scotland: closing the gap", and two amendments to that motion.

Photo of Margaret Curran Margaret Curran Labour 3:35, 27 June 2002

I am very pleased to speak in this afternoon's debate. We know that it is the in thing nowadays to question the language of regeneration and community empowerment. Indeed, anyone who mentions the word "strategy" at all is in for a hard time. However, I want to say at the outset that the document "Better Communities in Scotland: closing the gap" is meant to lay out briefly the development of a strategic approach that has been missing in Scotland for some time.

I am well aware that there is a determination across the chamber to deliver practical solutions. Indeed, I would go so far as to say that there is an energy to tackle poverty and deprivation in a decisive way, although we might well disagree about how we do so.

I want to remind members of the scale of the issue and of the enormous cost to individuals, families and neighbourhoods when they are caught in areas that lack any access to work, services and basic facilities. Such a situation exacerbates and compounds the experience of poverty. Furthermore, we are aware of—and are beginning to understand more completely—the nature of poverty and deprivation in Scotland, particularly in the rural areas, and to realise the real impact of geographical isolation and its consequences for work, services and basic facilities. As a result, any policy in this area must be informed by such an approach, and the document makes a case for an area-based regeneration policy.

We will never adequately close the gap unless we begin to address the level of provision and service delivery in some of the most deprived areas in Scotland. That is why closing the gap is a key priority for the Executive and why the regeneration strategy under discussion is part of our answer to the problem.

Lest we forget, I should remind the chamber of some of the statistics for Scotland. Someone who lives in the most deprived areas of Scotland is almost three times as likely to die young of a heart attack than someone who lives in the least deprived areas. Around 3 per cent of babies in the most deprived areas are born low weight, compared with 1 per cent of babies in the most affluent areas. In the most deprived areas, about one in six leavers from publicly funded schools go on to higher education, compared with one in two leavers in the least deprived areas. In schools in the most deprived areas, 22 per cent of children attain five or more Scottish credit and qualifications framework awards at level 5 or better, compared with 59 per cent of children in the least deprived areas. As a result, we can clearly argue why addressing that gap is the Government's proper focus.

We must also ensure that we sign up key players to deliver the changes that we want. However, the absolutely killer question is how we achieve that and what lessons we have learned from the past. Although we might think that we can simply bring together and deliver an easy collection of policies, I have to tell members that it is not as simple as that.

By way of introduction, I want to outline three points that we are already aware of from previous regeneration strategies and which are advanced as fundamental arguments in the process. The first relates to people and place. Although we know that individuals and families need support, it is critical that we change the environment around them and the services that are delivered to them. We know that community involvement works, but it needs sustained support and cannot be tokenistic. Furthermore, we know that we need the big players and spenders in local areas to buy into the process.

I hope that two very clear messages emerge from today's debate and I assure members that we will be very forceful about driving the policy towards both ends. First, it is no longer acceptable for any attempt at regeneration to be marginal and to consist merely of grant making. We expect all the big agencies to put regeneration at the centre of their strategies, which will affect education, health, enterprise and housing. Secondly, community involvement must be systematic and sustained, and funding will be directly to the evidence of such involvement at various levels. Those themes go to the heart of our new policy on regeneration.

The statement that we published on Tuesday does not represent only the views of the Executive. The direction that we propose to take and the changes that we want to make are endorsed by a range of organisations involved in regeneration, including the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities, Highlands and Islands Enterprise, the Scottish Urban Regeneration Forum, the Scottish Community Development Centre, the Scottish Adult Learning Partnership and social inclusion partnerships such as those that I visited in North Lanarkshire on Tuesday.

We must be committed to building a Scotland in which people's potential, not their background or their postcode, is what determines their futures and offers them real choices. We know from experience that we can turn around deprived communities. We have succeeded in doing it, but we have to do it better and faster than we have done before if we are to close the gap between our disadvantaged communities and the rest of the country. In putting together our community regeneration statement for Scotland, we have been guided by the past and by the lessons learned from both our successes and our failures.

I have referred to some of the lessons that we have learned, but I would now like to refer to some other critical lessons that have influenced the direction of our thinking. We must improve the delivery of public services in deprived areas in Scotland. We know that people in those areas rely more on public services than the rest of the population does. However, despite the millions of pounds that our public services are spending in deprived areas, that spending is not yet leading to the changes in the quality of people's lives that we all want to see. All too often, public services are not closing the gap in the way that they must. We must ensure that the money that core public services spend in deprived areas is better targeted and more responsive, and achieves better outcomes for the people they serve.

Mainstream spending must be planned and delivered in ways that take account of people's needs and priorities rather than the operational convenience of the providers themselves, and public agencies must become more accountable. It is now not enough for individual agencies to work more effectively on their own. They must work more effectively together. We need joined-up approaches, streamlined budgets and more involvement and consideration of alternative approaches, using the voluntary sector, community groups and even the private sector where appropriate, so that all can work together.

Making that happen is not an easy task, but a highly complex and long-term one. It is a formidable challenge for all of us involved in regeneration in Scotland. It requires changes in policies at all levels, including the reallocation of resources, changes in spending patterns, reshaping of service provision and improvements in access. If we do not do that, we will not fulfil our commitment to narrowing the gap. If we are to have concerted and co-ordinated action at all levels, we must link local, regional and national priorities together more coherently. There is little point in investing substantial sums in one estate while households two or three streets away face exactly the same problems but have no extra help. That has been one of the big criticisms of recent regeneration policies.

The Local Government in Scotland Bill, which is currently going through Parliament, paves the way for a reinvigorated approach to community regeneration through the statutory provision for community planning. Community planning, as most people will know, encourages local authorities, other agencies and communities to work together, not just on preparing plans and strategies, but on implementing and delivering those plans. It provides the catalyst for all agencies operating in a specific local authority area to start thinking seriously about how to co-ordinate resources and streamline services. It also offers new opportunities to better link the local, regional and national priorities, so that they are all pulling in the same direction.

There is a need for a strong national steer, but community planning offers communities and local agencies the scope to tailor solutions to their own areas. That can only be good news for the people in those deprived areas. Community budgeting, which is out for consultation, also offers opportunities to allow us to develop the tools to implement that approach. As I said, Scotland has a strong record in area-based approaches to community regeneration, and we remain convinced that we must continue to invest in them. They provide critical resources to fill the gaps and to top up services. Currently, 80 per cent of SIP and better neighbourhood services fund resources are used for those activities.

Targeted regeneration approaches also act as levers to help engage local people and get agencies round the partnership table, but SIPs are not the only models for delivering responsive, locally based regeneration. There are other models, and we and our partners must constantly be looking for what works best. Whatever mechanisms we use to tackle poverty at a local level, we must place them in a clear strategic context. We must also reduce the complexity of regeneration funding streams. We intend to do that by migrating the management of SIP funding to community planning partnerships.

Photo of Margaret Curran Margaret Curran Labour

Oh dear. Members can see that I am very interested in this subject, as I am carrying on regardless. I will summarise the rest of my speech.

We must mainstream SIP resources, although we recognise that that will take some time. We must work with the agencies that are responsible for doing that, to ensure that there is a smooth and clear transition. I reassure all those who are concerned that that may lead to less community ownership of the process that we are building in levers to guarantee that that does not happen. If anything, there will be more enhanced and strengthened community involvement, especially as we are putting great emphasis on support for community learning and development to ensure that we deliver community involvement. We recognise the closeness of people to their communities and the contributions that they make. We are investing in better monitoring and evaluation. As we roll the policy out throughout Scotland, the equality strategy will be central to its delivery.

I move,

That the Parliament warmly welcomes the publication of the Scottish Executive's community regeneration statement Better Communities in Scotland: Closing the Gap; agrees that despite past successes in community regeneration more needs to be done to improve the quality of life of people in Scotland's deprived areas; fully endorses the policy proposals for improving public services in deprived communities, placing community regeneration more firmly within the strategic framework of community planning, giving more priority to community learning and development and improving monitoring and evaluation, and agrees that these measures will make a significant contribution to closing the gap between deprived areas and the rest of Scotland.

Photo of Kenneth Gibson Kenneth Gibson Scottish National Party 3:46, 27 June 2002

The amendment that I will move is not the one that I wanted to move. Constrained by our standing orders, I could not lodge an amendment that made clear the SNP view that this document is a hastily flung together, ramshackle, tedious, repetitive and pointless publication that is written in the jargon of Execspeak. No wonder, then, that the minister did not speak with her usual panache.

Let us look at the content of the document. In paragraph 19 of chapter 1, we read:

"Communities are well placed to be able to develop and put into practice solutions to local challenges, and by working in this way we can build communities where ... people do not have to rely on public services".

However, on page 26 core public services are defined as

"the services that all people need for a decent quality of life and wellbeing. These include health, education, transport, jobs, and crime prevention."

Those are, coincidentally, the First Minister's five key priorities. So, in paragraph 19 of chapter 1, the Executive is saying that we can build communities in which people do not have to rely on health, education, transport, jobs and crime prevention. Where will those mythical, unhealthy, uneducated, stranded, unemployed, crime-ridden communities be? St Kilda? The moon? Does the minister propose the adoption of Pol Pot's concept of year zero? Whatever happened to social inclusion?

No wonder that even sympathetic media commentators are becoming exasperated by the Executive. On Tuesday, the normally pro-Labour Glasgow Evening Times made clear its frustration at the failure of the Executive ministers and their Westminster colleagues to act decisively to reduce poverty in our most deprived communities, especially in Glasgow, where the gap is, if anything, widening rather than closing. Tuesday's Evening Times editorial stated:

"For all her skilful delivery of exec speak theories and strategies, the Minister for Social Justice has failed to start moving Scotland's shameful mountain of social injustice."

To be fair to Margaret Curran, she has not been in the job for two months. However, the fact that we have had three social justice ministers in barely half a year and four in 18 months shows how instability in the Executive has impacted adversely on its ability to deliver, with the increase in child poverty from 29 to 30 per cent last year an obvious symptom.

Of course, poverty remediation is not one of the First Minister's fabled five priorities. Perhaps he sees no votes in it or it detracts from new Labour's "We are all Thatcherites now" philosophy, which is nakedly espoused by the architect of new Labour, Peter Mandelson MP.

It is astonishing to read in the minister's foreword to the document phrases such as

"The time for talking is over".

It may well be, but we are now five years into a Labour Government at Westminster and three years into this Executive. Should not the talking have ended years ago? There are some classic motherhood-and-apple-pie statements in the document. On page 6, the Executive says:

"we want to build communities ... where people want to live; where people have the opportunity to learn, work and play; and where people can grow up, work, bring up children and retire."

This woolly, long-winded, hand-wringing document is full of all the usual Executive phrases, which appear to have been culled in an afternoon from a variety of more glossy predecessors to be presented in the graveyard shift on the last afternoon before the recess. It is full of words and phrases such as "prepare", "consult", "plan", "strategy", "shared vision", "develop potential", "partnership working", "flexible solutions", "building confidence", "framework", blah, blah, blah. There is plenty of rhetoric about

"good examples of joint working and community involvement" on page 11 and

"significant successes in some communities" on page 3. However, little evidence has been provided to back such claims. I will quote some more classic lines from this estimable publication.

Photo of Kenneth Gibson Kenneth Gibson Scottish National Party

In a second.

How about:

"We will work in a way that means that decisions are made by those best placed to make the decision"?

I would go along with that. The document says:

"We need to know where action is needed most."

Who could disagree? The minister's introduction to the publication says:

"For the first time we will properly measure the success of local initiatives."

Why is that for the first time?

Photo of Margaret Curran Margaret Curran Labour

That is because anybody who is familiar with regeneration knows that debate on it needs to be more sharply focused and streamlined. Does the member agree with the substance of our proposals? What would the SNP do with regeneration?

Photo of Kenneth Gibson Kenneth Gibson Scottish National Party

If the minister waits, she will hear answers to some of her questions.

The document has a deep sense of urgency. Page 23 says:

"Publishing this document is the beginning of the process".

Page 25 says:

"we will develop a detailed work plan to take forward this action plan ... by the end of 2002."

Such a headlong rush to produce a plan to take forward the plan.

The document shows how important it is to

"develop a set of indicators that reflect the main issues that are important to our communities and which will allow us to track progress over a range of variables".

Overleaf, it says:

"We have yet to decide what indicators we will include".

Mañana, mañana. As the Evening Times pleaded in its editorial on Tuesday:

"Stop wasting time and too many lives."

Lives have been ruined by the grinding, hopeless poverty that afflicts hundreds of thousands of Scots, day in, day out, year in, year out. A quarter of the population in the minister's constituency of Glasgow Baillieston is affected.

New Labour has made matters worse by switching resources from Glasgow, Inverclyde and Lanarkshire to more prosperous suburbia. For example, Glasgow's share of aggregate external finance has fallen year on year from 15.74 per cent to 14.71 per cent since new Labour came to power. If the city's share had remained constant, the city would have £64.923 million more to spend this year on vital services. Glasgow City Council would not have had to cut £17.8 million from this year's budget, close more than 100 community facilities in the past five years, reduce the number of teaching posts—despite the lowest level of educational attainment in Scotland—or sack 4,500 council workers since 1997, while raising council tax to be the highest in the country. No wonder Glasgow City Council's director of finance, George Black, described that as a double whammy, and council leader Charlie Gordon said that it was a denial of social justice for Glasgow by the Executive.

Of course, a cynic might suggest that closing the gap for Glasgow is less important than buying votes in the new Labour frontiers of East Renfrewshire and East Dunbartonshire. Members may care to note that while cuts in resources for Glasgow amount to £315.17 per Glasgow council tax payer this year, the £11.003 million extra for East Renfrewshire equates to a remarkably synergistic subsidy of £297.08 for each of its council tax payers this year. That is a case of Robin Hood in reverse, if ever there was one. If the Executive is serious about closing the gap, resources must be tailored to meet need, not the search for suburban votes.

I do not doubt that some reactionaries in the north British Labour party will moan and groan about my robust critique and lack of positive alternatives and detailed solutions. In the day-long debate on regeneration in May 2000 and the three-hour debate on regeneration last year, we provided solutions. Members will find that the SNP's urban regeneration statement is about five times the length of the Executive's and that it is more detailed and contains more direct solutions to the problems of regeneration.

If the Executive continues to insult the Parliament by cramming debates on important social justice issues into 90 or 105 minutes as they have in the past year, with the emphasis on regurgitation of previous statements and allowing the SNP only seven minutes to respond, should we play ball? I think not. Give us a proper three-hour debate, and we will give Labour the answers that it appears still to desperately seek.

Finally—

Photo of Kenneth Gibson Kenneth Gibson Scottish National Party

Finally, I wish all members around the chamber a pleasant and relaxing summer recess.

I move amendment S1M-3256.1, to leave out from "warmly" to end and insert:

"notes with disappointment the content of the Scottish Executive's community regeneration statement Better Communities in Scotland: Closing the Gap; believes that community regeneration is a topic worthy of serious consideration, and demands that the Executive go back to the drawing board and come back when it has some well thought out, workable solutions to the problems faced by Scotland's deprived communities."

Photo of Lyndsay McIntosh Lyndsay McIntosh Conservative 3:54, 27 June 2002

I hesitate to say, in the spirit of consensus, that the Conservative party associates itself with Kenny Gibson's good wishes for a prosperous recess. That may be the only time that we agree with him, for the moment.

Poverty used to be about material needs. Strong resilient families and communities helped people to cope with income shortages. Today, the situation has almost been reversed. Most people have more income and wealth, but that material well-being cannot compensate for the new fragility of families, public order and sometimes failing public services.

Community fragmentation means that an increasing number of individuals and families cannot cope when misfortune strikes. I am not questioning for one moment the sincerity of ministers in their desire to tackle those problems, nor even am I questioning some of the social justice targets that have been set. Instead, I question the chosen means of getting there. I do not question the destination; I question the route. For every social problem, Labour and its Liberal Democrat partners appear to have only one answer, which is to spend more taxpayers' money on the same old levers of public policy. The document that is before us mentions past success in regeneration, but in many places persistent problems remain that are immune to state intervention. We need a new approach.

All but one of the Executive's social justice targets, for instance, focus on Government-centred action. Families, faith-based groups, community-based charities, professionals and other good neighbours in Scotland are useful only in so far as they do their paymaster's bidding. The document talks about building social capital, but does not allow for many new approaches and relies on the old methods of community education based on statutory services.

Our approach would be radically different. I am sure that we could agree throughout the chamber that our long-term stability depends on good schools, strong families, active citizens and charities, and on public services that are run by trusted and well-rewarded professionals.

Conservatives stand first and foremost for neighbourhood policing, which gives crime-ridden areas a constant, visible police presence. We must ensure that the police get better support from the criminal justice system. Social justice must be built on genuine justice for all our communities. I am sure that ministers have been made well aware by their own back benchers how important that is. At the same time, we must strive to build a neighbourly society that has strong relationships within and between communities, which link children to sources of care and discipline. That will reduce the likelihood of children drifting into patterns of anti-social and self-destructive behaviour, about which we have heard so much of late.

Throughout Scotland, there are charities and good neighbours who are, for example, helping a family to deal with a debt problem or mentoring a child who is at risk. Faith-based groups and self-support groups provide friendship to the very elderly and comfort those who are suffering. Smaller groups, which have deep local roots, are often the most innovative and personally compassionate. They are often led by local people, who understand the needs of their area. They are values-based groups and see people as neighbours rather than as clients. They tend to be peopled by men and women who have in-depth experience of the problems with which they seek to deal. Those networks of good neighbours are not equipped to meet every social challenge, but too often they are shut out from the current bureaucratic and politically correct funding arrangements.

Scotland's public services have become worse under Labour. Scottish Conservatives will seek to work closely with public service professionals to eliminate bureaucracy, which hampers and demoralises them. We would like to empower professions and make them properly accountable to the communities that they serve, rather than being driven by arbitrary and changing targets that are set by remote politicians.

We would ensure that schools educated children to the highest levels and equipped them with the practical skills that they will need for the world of work. They cannot all be academics. We would not pay lip service to empowerment as the minister does, as one of the members of the most centralising Government in decades—particularly in health, where the Scottish national health service is now under ministerial command and control. In education, Labour's equality means the same for all, irrespective of need. Yesterday, we heard that the Government overloads teachers with more and more bureaucracy. Police officers and NHS staff make the same complaint.

Am I dangerously close to running out of time, Presiding Officer?

Photo of Lyndsay McIntosh Lyndsay McIntosh Conservative

Thank you. Perhaps I will come back to this subject later in the debate.

We would like to promote greater diversity in education. Schools should prepare children for the whole of life, not just for paid work. That is why we would encourage more parental involvement in education and stand up for parents' values.

I would like to mention measurement, but I will leave that until my summing up. That is one issue on which I am sure that we will disagree. Perhaps Mr Gibson will pick up on that point.

I move amendment S1M-3256.2, to leave out from "warmly" to end and insert:

"notes the publication of the Scottish Executive's community regeneration statement Better Communities in Scotland: Closing the Gap; agrees that despite past successes in community regeneration more needs to be done to improve the quality of life of people in Scotland's deprived areas; notes the Executive's worthwhile aim of empowering professionals and communities to resolve local problems but considers that its bureaucratic, centralising approach fails to shift the emphasis of regeneration away from traditional government-imposed structures; notes that Better Communities in Scotland: Closing the Gap contains no meaningful proposals to measure the success or failure of regeneration initiatives, and calls upon the Executive to implement a genuinely diverse approach, independent of government, to empower families, communities, local voluntary organisations and professionals to take action to resolve the difficulties faced by Scotland's deprived communities."

Photo of Robert Brown Robert Brown Liberal Democrat 4:00, 27 June 2002

There is no magic wand for community regeneration. If there were, the successive Governments that have tried to find it for a number of years would perhaps have done so. There will be not a single solution, but a web of different solutions provided by different agencies. I was slightly surprised by the tenor of Lyndsay McIntosh's speech because, in general, the Executive's policies seek to take on board the range of available facilities—private, public and independent.

Last night, Margaret Curran spoke at an event that was chaired by Paul Martin, which marked the success of the St Rollox project in Springburn. The project is a highly successful enterprise that provides quality employment for local people. It is based on the commitment of Tesco—a private enterprise—working in partnership with the various public agencies to provide financial muscle, job guarantees, targeted skills training and community regeneration. That is not the only way to bring about regeneration, but it is an interesting and innovative approach that fits well with the Executive's policies. The key point about the St Rollox project, which is echoed in "Better Communities in Scotland", is the recognition that social injustice cannot be tackled unless decent long-term employment is taken up and sustained by local people. Failure to deliver that has been the crucial failure of previous regeneration strategies.

Most members agree that poverty, deprivation and lack of opportunity have a damaging effect on individuals and communities and that there is a hopelessness in many urban communities. Although there are issues in rural areas—which other colleagues will mention—as a member for Glasgow, I want to concentrate on urban issues. Even if we forget about the problems with older people, there is something particularly unappetising about the waste of talents and opportunities for young people. The concentration of urban deprivation in Glasgow is damaging and difficult.

One privilege of being an MSP is seeing at first hand the immense efforts of individuals and communities at all levels to build a better world. I give as examples the quiet confidence building of the staff and students at John Wheatley College and the achievements of Reidvale Housing Association in linking first-class housing, a pioneering play centre and an innovative sheltered housing project.

I warmly welcome the publication of "Better Communities in Scotland" because it builds on the lessons that have been learned from examples such as those that I have mentioned, particularly with the key roles of confidence building and raising skills, and because it aims to build from the bottom up. It is right that we should evaluate what works, but I have been struck time and again since the Parliament started by the poor state of our national statistics. The establishment of the Scottish centre for regeneration is an important step in trying to research and provide materials with which to judge the success of projects.

Building from the bottom up is easier said than done. The record of the SIPs in that respect, and the effectiveness of the considerable spend that has been committed to their care, is fairly patchy. The community planning framework must be enabling, not restrictive. It must allow genuine talent to flourish and genuine local independence to grow. Local authorities and other agencies must not strangle local communities by regarding local people and groups as pawns to be moved about on a regulated chessboard. Local people and groups must be given their head and allowed to make mistakes and to win victories. I ask the minister to say how local communities are to be empowered and how the lack of accountability of some SIPs to their communities or to the Scottish Executive is to be overcome.

How is success in regeneration measured? I am concerned about the imprecision of social justice targets and the impossibility of measurement. We should rely on a small number of key statistics that are intelligently analysed and researched. We should not measure the success of projects against artificial and inappropriate targets. One project that succeeds in sustaining employment for 10 people who have failed elsewhere, or a 20 per cent success rate for a particularly difficult client group, is worth a hundred other statistically more impressive arrangements.

Against that background, I would say that the publication of "Better Communities in Scotland" is a significant step forward. On behalf of the Liberal Democrats, I wish the initiative success. I support the Executive motion.

Photo of George Reid George Reid Scottish National Party

We have 32 minutes for open debate and eight members who wish to speak, so if everybody sticks to four minutes, all will be called.

Photo of Johann Lamont Johann Lamont Labour 4:05, 27 June 2002

I welcome the opportunity to contribute to this important debate on community regeneration and "Better Communities in Scotland: closing the gap". I am disappointed that Kenny Gibson and, to a lesser extent, Lyndsay McIntosh, chose to be so uncharacteristically non-consensual in their approaches. When I read the amendment that was lodged in Kenny Gibson's name, I had thought that it seemed a little hyperactive. The main course was obviously going to be his actual speech, however, which met new bounds of hyperactivity—and phlegm.

I make a serious point here: we have the opportunity to analyse how effective the current strategies have been, but it is absurd to suggest that we should simply stop and start all over again. When we seek real and lasting solutions to problems, they have to be developed in partnership with the community—as opposed to Kenny Gibson's view—and not on some faraway drawing board in some corner of the Scottish Executive. Some of the accusations that are being made are denying the important work that has been done in communities such as my own, particularly by local people in those communities who are working hard to make the process effective.

I will highlight a number of areas that I think are worthy of some consideration. The minister has commented on and acknowledged the importance of economic regeneration and community regeneration, and the fact that the two are intrinsically linked. There needs to be visible improvement in our communities' environment, as well as a visible increase in economic activity. People in communities should have a real say in shaping the decisions that are made. Apart from anything else, if they shape the decisions, the action that is taken is far more likely to be right.

We need to look beyond what public agencies can do in the way of economic regeneration. We need to use imaginative ways to harness the community and economic activity that is going on in our communities to the betterment of local people. Organisations—from the Glasgow Housing Association, which, in building and improving houses, must have at the heart of its work the building and improving of communities, to private sector businesses that plan to do business in our communities—can play a part in training people and supporting them as they enter work. They should view themselves—and we should view them—not just as being sited in communities but as playing a part in shaping them.

In particular, I highlight the Scottish Council Foundation's report on Glasgow, "Full Employment City", which revealed that, of every two jobs that are created in Glasgow, only one goes to a Glaswegian. I ask the minister to reflect on the report's recommendation that more be done to support social enterprise and the social economy. There is real evidence that jobs that are created in that sector are far more likely to be taken up by members of the local community.

In relation to social enterprise, I make a particular plea for attention to be given to the co-operative or mutual sector, which often brings together commercial effectiveness and democratic accountability, a connection that delivers for communities and that gives appropriate regard to them, drawing on their talents and experience.

I emphasise the importance of joined-up working, particularly in relation to the cities review. There is no point in supporting local economic regeneration in Glasgow if we do not address the logic of the economic imperative and what happens when people become economically active—they move outside the city boundaries.

We have to acknowledge a range of local solutions and initiatives. I do not have time to make a lengthy point about this, but I ask the minister to address the question of community transport and remedy some of the important gaps in provision. I refer in particular to the initiative taken by the Community Transport Association. I also wish to reflect on the importance of the process of community regeneration, which brings together agencies and the local communities. They must, however, be brought together to a purpose.

There are two challenges before us: to facilitate the involvement of the community—I welcome Glasgow City Council's recent initiative in giving extra support to community councils—and to ensure the accountability of those who represent communities in various organisations. It is essential that this process is a living and challenging one, which we engage in not for form, but because we seek to make a real difference to those communities that most desperately need regeneration.

Photo of Andrew Welsh Andrew Welsh Scottish National Party 4:09, 27 June 2002

In government, there is action; there is also the appearance of action. Those two realities are very different. The Scottish Government calls itself an Executive, and Scotland's Parliament has a right to expect action, not merely words, from an Executive. In "Better Communities in Scotland: closing the gap", the people of Scotland have every reason to be disappointed by the new Labour-Liberal Government. The document may talk about some of our nation's long-standing problems, but it provides no solutions for tackling and defeating them. As ever, the Labour Executive provides spin, press releases and propaganda, when the people of Scotland want solutions to the inherent and on-going community problems.

Over the past three years, the Labour Government's tactics and approach have been clear. The response to every problem that affects real people has been to set up a task force. Task forces may define and identify the problems, but they do not tackle them. Targets and aims are set, but they are almost never delivered and are quickly forgotten. Debates and strategies then follow. If all else fails, things are simply renamed. Scottish Homes is now called Communities Scotland, which makes neither grammatical nor common sense. How low Scottish Government housing policy has sunk since we moved away from the pioneering, dynamic and innovative Scottish Special Housing Association to the shrivelled-up and inadequate shell that is Communities Scotland.

If Governments will the ends of policy, they must also provide the means to fulfil those ends. The fact that the Executive's recent report on homelessness received a massive caveat from the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities, Shelter and the Scottish Council for Single Homeless shows that Labour's sleight of hand and lack of resources have been well and truly rumbled by the organisations that deal with the problems.

I was a co-sponsor of the Housing (Homeless Persons) Act 1977—indeed, I got the act to apply to Scotland—yet here we are in 2002 and the problems stubbornly remain. We still have a problem with our poor housing and environmental record. The task is clear enough. There is an unacceptable and growing gap between wealth and poverty within Scotland. A total of 409,000 homes suffer from critical disrepair. In other words, due to the neglect of basic repairs, those homes are not windtight or watertight.

Photo of Andrew Welsh Andrew Welsh Scottish National Party

I am sorry, but I will finish my point.

There are 118,000 homes—and thus many more families—that have lead in their water supply. A total of 208,000 homes have poor energy efficiency. That is the reality of the problem, which affects both urban and rural areas, and all of that takes place in an aging housing stock.

None of those problems is new to Scotland; they are all of long standing. We compare badly with our neighbours in other parts of Europe. I remember raising the problem of lead in the water supply in debates when I was at university. What kind of Government allows 118,000 homes daily to poison the people who live in them? Over 30 years ago, in my maiden speech in Westminster, I highlighted the problem that one third of Scotland's children were born to fail simply because of the social and economic environment into which they were born. Yet, although we have reached the 21st century, a third of our children are still born to fail, as the document makes clear.

Westminster never tackled the problems, but the Scottish Parliament must. We have problems of poor housing, of homelessness and of failure that is determined at birth. In such a wealthy country, we have a lack of opportunities and a too large and growing gap between the wealthy and the poor in our society. Those problems require strong, firm, committed and well-resourced action, yet the well-meaning waffle of "Better Communities in Scotland: closing the gap" is all that the Labour Government can offer. It is typical of new Labour that it talks about coping with the symptoms yet fails to deal with the underlying problem. The price of that failure will be paid by the poor and increasingly vulnerable, but new Labour will also have a price to pay when it faces the electorate, as surely and inevitably it must.

Photo of John Young John Young Conservative 4:13, 27 June 2002

In all fairness, I think Margaret Curran probably has one of the most difficult jobs in the Scottish Executive. Anyone who held her portfolio would face immense problems. It is symptomatic that, of 129 members, there have been on average only 23 members in attendance at the debate. Perhaps there is a sense of helplessness or of boredom because we have heard the debate before, but that is no excuse not to participate.

The Evening Times, which has been referred to, has recently mentioned Margaret Curran a number of times. On 25 June, it stated:

"As MSP for Baillieston, Social Justice Minister Margaret Curran is better placed than most to deliver solutions to the degradation and misery of poverty."

The problems are difficult, but we have faced them before in history. In 1840, things were considerably worse than they are today and in the 1930s things were worse in many ways. At the end of the 1930s, the second world war came along and we partially turned the corner—although I do not suggest that we want another world war, or any other type of war.

One of the problems is that although members unanimously want to get things done, there is uncertainty about how to go about that. There is staunchly worded rhetoric, but we need more than that as so many different groups of people are involved. Lyndsay McIntosh said that it is not the destination that is in question, but the route that we follow. Members will recall that, in 1933, Franklin Roosevelt faced immense problems all over the United States. He brought in the new deal, which was a mechanism that set about curing the problems over several years.

I worry about the approach of simply pouring money into all the different groupings. I would like to hear Margaret Curran, or whoever winds up for the Executive, expand on the idea of measurement to which she referred.

There is not enough time to illustrate this but I urge members to read the Evening Times of 25 June, which highlighted the problems of three locals from the Baillieston and Easterhouse areas of Glasgow. If parliamentary regulations allowed it, I would like half a dozen people or more from such areas to be invited into the Parliament to tell in their own words what it is really like out there. They face crime—

Photo of Karen Whitefield Karen Whitefield Labour

Does John Young agree that the Social Justice Committee plays a valuable role in doing exactly what he suggested? We genuinely engage with many groups from throughout Scotland and give them the opportunity to help to shape our work programme.

Photo of John Young John Young Conservative

I accept that, but I would like those groups to be able to address the Parliament. My point is that not every member is on or attends the Social Justice Committee.

We were told that a lot of Scotland's youth are unemployable, which is true. That is no fault of theirs, but is perhaps because of a lack of education or opportunity. They subsequently turn to crime and drugs and suffer rotten housing conditions and much more besides. If we had found ourselves in such situations at the ages of 15, 16, 17 or 18 we would probably have done the same as those youths, who face a bleak outlook.

Every member in the Parliament wants action; it is not a question of political point scoring. Members want to get something done, but we might disagree about the best way to go about that. We should seriously consider casting aside party prejudices to find a solution, in the way that Roosevelt in the 1930s managed to persuade most United States politicians, even from the Republican party, to cast aside their party prejudices. We should do that and aim for an ultimate decision that would give some recompense to unfortunate people all over the country, not just in Glasgow. I have no doubt that there are people in England and other parts of the country who could stand up and say the same things as the people from the areas to which the Evening Times referred.

I will conclude because I think that I have completed my final minute. I want to make a point on that, if I may, Presiding Officer.

Photo of John Young John Young Conservative

We are allowed only a matter of seconds or minutes for speeches in debates such as this, which is a problem.

Photo of George Reid George Reid Scottish National Party

You are taking someone else's time. Thank you. I call Karen Whitefield, to be followed by Irene McGugan.

Photo of Karen Whitefield Karen Whitefield Labour 4:18, 27 June 2002

I welcome the publication of "Better Communities in Scotland". I particularly welcome its central aim of improving on partnership work and community involvement by integrating community regeneration into the community planning process. I welcome its commitment to ensuring that mainstream services contribute effectively to the fight against social exclusion.

As this is the final debate before the recess, I thought that I would shock some members by acknowledging the previous contribution of the Conservative Government in this area. That Government's documents "Progress for Partnership" and "Programme for Partnership", which were published between 1993 and 1995, marked the start of a proper and nationally consistent partnership approach to community regeneration.

The establishment of the four pilot partnership areas set the scene for the social inclusion partnerships of today. Therefore, I was saddened that Lyndsay McIntosh did not acknowledge the success and hard work of communities and the Executive in developing the work that Ian Lang started.

The reality is that a lot has been learned since then. The theory of partnership rarely lived up to the practice. Too often, partner agencies would not agree on common goals and were overly protective of the resources that they could bring to the table and community involvement was merely tokenistic.

I am therefore pleased that the Scottish Executive has set out the steps that it will take to ensure that new partnerships work more effectively to assist in community regeneration. I welcome the Executive's commitment to improving training for staff and members of partner agencies. I welcome the commitment to ensuring that community representatives are properly trained and supported so that they can be active and informed partnership members. I also welcome the move towards more local decision making. Plans to link SIPs to the local community planning process, to examine the feasibility of local budgeting and to introduce neighbourhood management are all positive.

Another key element of improving our communities is safety. We all know the disruption that a small minority of anti-social people can cause an entire community. New housing developments and improved educational and employment opportunities are pointless if people feel that they cannot bear to live in their community any longer because of the disruption and fear that a small number of anti-social people cause.

We must ensure that, where possible, the people who cause that disruption are given the opportunity to change their ways, especially where children are involved, and we must provide support and constructive alternatives to such behaviour. However, where such people persist with anti-social behaviour, we must find ways of protecting the wider community from their actions. We must ensure that local authorities and the justice system use current legislative powers effectively and speedily to exclude those people from vulnerable communities. We should also examine options such as professional witnesses.

Many communities throughout Scotland, such as Petersburn in my constituency, are in the process of substantial housing redevelopment that has been actioned by the Labour-led Executive. Improving the quality of housing stock is important. However, communities are made not of bricks and mortar but of flesh and blood. If we are to regenerate our communities, it is vital that we provide community members with the necessary support, training and resources and that we allow them to participate meaningfully in and to shape the regeneration process.

The plans that are set out in "Better Communities in Scotland" acknowledge that and build sensibly on the community regeneration work of the last 10 years. I look forward to their implementation.

Photo of Irene McGugan Irene McGugan Scottish National Party 4:22, 27 June 2002

I am sure that no one would take issue with the statement that people need the core services of health, education, transport, jobs and crime prevention for a decent quality of life and well-being. However, all over Scotland, concerned people are at their wit's end because they are without basic services from the local police, youth services or housing department, for example. That is because, for some time, it has been difficult for major service providers such as local authorities to continue to deliver those core services and meet anything like the rising level of demand. It is also difficult for the voluntary sector because short-term project funding for initiatives is not the way to root much-needed services in local communities. I suggest that both sectors need more core funding to provide the core services.

Like other cities in Scotland, Dundee has too many areas of deprivation. When I hold surgeries there, I am left in no doubt about the stark realities of social inequality. The desperate people who come to the surgeries highlight the extent of poor housing in the city which, in some cases, is an affront to decent society. One man goes camping every weekend to escape the horrors of his multi after being 10 years on the waiting list for a council house. Others talk about the lack of facilities for young people, the vandalism that means that their children cannot play out on the grassy areas around the buildings, the elderly people who are terrified to go out and—most of all—the despair of those who are affected by drug misuse. They are desperate, desolate souls who have no hope of anything better and some of whom have given up altogether.

That is the extent of the problems that face us in the long-overdue attempt to create better communities. The difficulties in addressing all that should not be underestimated. Increasing the confidence of individuals and communities is mentioned throughout "Better Communities in Scotland". That is valid, but there is not much indication of how the Executive will achieve that.

Poverty is a factor in all that. In last night's excellent members' business debate, initiated by Trish Godman, we heard that Scotland must not be a country in which it is a crime to be poor and in which people such as loan sharks make profits out of other people's precarious financial circumstances. However, the continued existence of citizens advice bureaux and independent advice centres, which play a crucial role in providing support and information to vulnerable people who are living in poverty, is itself often precarious.

Underfunding of grass-roots projects, which take responsibility for providing local services, is a real issue. When the council holds the purse strings, it usually holds all the power. Independence and self-determination are important principles, both generally and in creating better communities. The voluntary sector will be under threat if only the Executive priorities are funded and there is little room or opportunity for other—perhaps better—ways of reducing child poverty or providing decent, affordable houses and safer streets to be tried.

We need to energise communities again, in Dundee and elsewhere. There are motivated people around who can offer motivation and hope. They are people who have lived in their area for a long time, who have seen it become run down and who are aware that a sense of community is almost non-existent. I worry about whether there are young people coming up behind them to continue their good work, because without serious help there is a limit to what they can do.

We need to support communities to take responsibility and action on their behalf. For too long, there has been very limited investment in communities. The Executive has not done enough to break down a culture of dependency and hopelessness. To some extent, its actions have retarded community development. Communities must get better soon.

Photo of Donald Gorrie Donald Gorrie Liberal Democrat 4:26, 27 June 2002

I am very happy to support and to try to develop the excellent points made by Robert Brown, who—as usual—made a thoughtful contribution to the debate.

Karen Whitefield referred to the four partnership areas, which are very important. One depressing fact forms the background to the debate: research conducted recently on the four partnership areas showed that in all four there was less community involvement in 1998 than in 1988. We must reverse that tide.

My normal boring speech is about bottom-up activities, which—as Robert Brown correctly said—are very difficult to bring about. However, we must try to help people to help themselves. That is far harder than doing something for their benefit.

The Executive document contains two particularly good lines. The first states that we should "give up power", and the second, which follows it immediately, refers to resources. Giving up power is vital, but Governments, the civil service, councils and others do not like doing that. It is possible to have a partnership and to talk about having one. However, some marriages are genuine partnerships, whereas others involve one person telling their partner what to do. We must have a genuine partnership. That means that people must be able to disagree with us and to do things that we do not like.

In many council areas there are problems—problems that have led to the decimation of community education, for example. Although some of the people who worked in community education were not great at what they did—as is the case in any activity—many of them helped local groups to mobilise against councils, which councils did not like. We must accept behaviour of that sort and take on people who belong to different parties. Such people may be a nuisance, but they may also get things done.

It is fundamental that there should be core funding of voluntary organisations. We choose incessantly to fund projects, rather than to provide core funding. Local boys clubs, girls clubs, citizens advice bureaux and pensioners clubs must be kept going with basic, core funding. They must be helped to participate in the social economy. Yesterday we discussed organisations such as credit unions. There is a range of similar initiatives that can be taken.

I agree entirely with the document's assertion that we should measure outcomes. Often it is hard to do that, but we should stop measuring what we put into services, as we have done hitherto.

The last point that I want to make is about encouraging local enterprise. Some of that enterprise might take the form of people earning money and not always telling Gordon Brown about it. For some people, the only outlet of enterprise is to sell one another drugs. We should help them and develop ways in which they can make probably less but at least reasonable money by starting up and developing a wee business. Some of the businesses will fail, but some will succeed and grow considerably. That is much better than hoping that all those people will get jobs in a big imported factory a few miles away, which will close down in a few years. I do not suppose that in Parliament we can officially endorse the black economy, but we want to encourage local enterprise. Some people might cut corners. If someone cuts a big enough corner in the City, they become a knight. If someone cuts a small corner on a housing estate, they get into trouble. Let us stop people getting into trouble and let us encourage them in their enterprise.

Photo of Helen Eadie Helen Eadie Labour 4:31, 27 June 2002

I, too, am happy to support the motion in the name of Margaret Curran. In doing so I want to echo many of the points that Robert Brown made—I am sure that he will polish his halo any minute now, given all the accolades he has had for what he said. He clearly understands the essence and complexity of community planning, what the terminology means and how the strategy enables and empowers people to tackle this vital issue meaningfully.

The Opposition has outlined a litany of problems, but fails to see how the strategy that the minister proposes will cope with the many problems that it has outlined. In Benarty, which is in the northern part of the Dunfermline East constituency, there are a high number of claimants for incapacity benefits—15 per cent compared with 8 per cent in the rest of Scotland. The percentage of children in households in receipt of income support is 46 per cent, compared with 22 per cent in the rest of Scotland. Seventeen per cent of people of working age claim income support, compared with 7 per cent in the rest of Scotland. The number of patients who use broncho-dilators is 50 per cent greater in Ballingry than it is in similarly deprived areas. The increase in the incidence of cancer is greater than it has been in other parts of Scotland and the percentage of the population in Ballingry who claim due to limiting, long-term illness is 21 per cent, compared with the Scottish rate of 12.7 per cent.

My purpose in highlighting that area of my constituency is to say, "Here is a classic case of deprivation." The scale of the deprivation does not match the deprivation that is found in the west of Scotland, but that does not diminish the need for the Executive to focus attention on other areas of deprivation in Scotland. A case could be made for saying that it is easier for the Scottish Executive to measure the difference it can make by piloting targeted work in areas such as those in my constituency.

I praise the Scottish Executive for its work on community planning. With my experience in local government, I support and appreciate how vital it is to ensure that there is a much more collaborative approach to working in every public service agency, voluntary organisation and, if possible, in the private sector, to shape our homes and futures and the places where we work and go to school, university, the hospital or the doctor.

On page 9 of the report, the Executive talks about improving literacy and numeracy to improve individual skills, community learning and development to build skills and confidence. I urge the minister to consider proofing the Executive's community planning policy and legislation for its impact on mental health and well-being, and I ask her to discuss with colleagues in the Scottish Executive the principle of similarly proofing all the Executive's policies and legislation.

I appeal to the minister to have early discussions with the Scottish public mental health alliance and, in particular, commend to her a report called, "With Health in Mind", on improving mental health and well-being in Scotland. I ask her to speak to her colleague Cathy Jamieson, the Minister for Education and Young People, and consider developing policy that will ensure that having emotionally literate young people is a core objective in schools.

Well-being needs to be an overarching priority for government. Some countries, including Norway, are implementing universal access to parenting programmes. School-based emotional literacy programmes are part of Australia's efforts to improve mental health and well-being.

In chapter 4 of the Executive report, clear direction is given on the action plan for developing the strategy and there is clear acknowledgement of the value of benchmarking outcomes. I ask the Scottish Executive to make the identification of the sources of frustration and suspicion that undermine community mental health and well-being in all decision-making processes an explicit goal and to ensure that it seeks to rebuild trust where it is weakest. As a nation, we are wracked by self-doubt—we dwell on what might go wrong rather than on what might succeed. For Scots, success is met with indifference or jealousy, confidence is labelled as arrogance and risk is avoided for fear of failure.

According to ConfidentScotland, a new movement that is dedicated to improving Scotland's self-confidence, our national well-being is damaged by low self-esteem. ConfidentScotland was formed when the broadcaster and communications specialist Bill McFarlan and the psychiatrist Dr Alex Yellowlees had what they described as a meeting of minds. I hope that the minister will meet their minds.

Photo of Colin Campbell Colin Campbell Scottish National Party 4:35, 27 June 2002

I make no apology for focusing on one of the services that is referred to in the glossary of "Better Communities in Scotland: closing the gap". Page 28 states that

"other organisations such as the police" are part of the solution to the five core issues of health, education, transport, jobs and crime prevention. Members will agree that every citizen, rich or poor, should be entitled to a safe environment and, where possible, if they suffer a criminal act, to a quick investigation and a prosecution. Unhappily, that is not always the case.

Like most members, I speak frequently to the police. I spoke to them recently at a closed-circuit television meeting in Bridge of Weir and a couple of months ago at Strathclyde police headquarters. Every time I meet a police person, I ask them whether they want more communications, better cars, better equipment or more CCTV. No matter what rank of officer replies, I inevitably receive the answer that more people are needed. The answer usually concludes with an explanation of how badly and thinly staffed their division is, especially at night.

I have asked written and oral questions on the matter and the Executive repeats the litany that it is spending more on policing than it has ever done before. That is fine, but it is hard to explain to a frightened old lady that the police did not come to help her because they were prioritising more serious crime and had moved her down the list. That situation befalls many people.

It is unfortunate that the Executive has no intention of improving the levels of service in 2002-03. I will quote from a reply by Jim Wallace to a parliamentary question that I asked in May. He said:

"To arrive at the distribution of Grant Aided Expenditure for 2002-03, forces were invited to submit detailed estimates of their needs for the current year assuming no change in the levels of service provided by the police."—[Official Report, Written Answers, 28 May 2002; p 799.]

No change in the levels of service means a service that is no worse and no better. A service that is no better is not good enough.

The service is suffering because the police are under-staffed and overstretched. The increase of 300 officers in three years, of which the Scottish Executive boasts, amounts to about one person per shift, which is totally inadequate to meet the needs of law enforcement, leave, illness and courses. It is also insufficient to create the atmosphere of safety and security that is so conspicuously absent in some areas.

We are all subject to crime. I live in a row of four houses and, over the past few years, three out of four of us have been the victims of walk-in, walk-out crimes, housebreakings or the pinching of wheels from cars. Although those experiences are unhappy, they do not bring with them the violence, overt threats and mindlessness that characterise crime in areas in which the gap needs to be closed.

One of my pupils—a girl—stumbled over a corpse in a close on the way to school one morning. On a separate occasion, she saw a friend bleed to death from a severed jugular on a supporters' bus that had been bombarded with bricks. That was before the drug trade, competing drug empires and addicts' desperation became major factors in crime.

The Executive's document says that it wants to make more core services, of which the police are one, as effective as possible in deprived areas. To do that, it will have to increase police force strength and put its money where its mouth is.

Photo of George Lyon George Lyon Liberal Democrat 4:39, 27 June 2002

I have listened closely to the speeches from members of Opposition parties and I am amazed that no mention has been made of the challenges that face some of our rural communities. Regeneration and closing the gap involve not only urban communities; the challenges that the Executive faces are just as big in rural communities.

I want to highlight some of the challenges in the island communities that I represent. The biggest challenge is depopulation. Figures in the structure plan for Argyll and Bute show the likely populations in the islands in 10 years' time. On Tiree, a 17.8 per cent drop is expected; on Mull, 18.2 per cent; on south Kintyre, 11.9 per cent; on Coll, 14.3 per cent; and on Bute, where I live, 19 per cent. If we cannot arrest those steep declines, many of the islands may empty completely. A critical mass can be reached below which the population is no longer sustainable.

What common causes underlie the challenges that such communities face? I would say that they are transport and jobs, both of which are highlighted in the document that we are discussing. A major problem is the high cost of ferry travel and air transport to the islands. Another major problem is the lack of jobs. The island economy is a low-wage economy with a narrow base—usually tourism, agriculture and fishing. That leads to seasonal employment. People cannot get jobs for 12 months: they are taken on in summer and then laid off in winter.

A linked issue is poor access to public services. It is extremely difficult to deliver the same quantity and quality of public services to small island communities as can be delivered elsewhere. That can lead to the loss of our young people, which exacerbates the problem of rural depopulation. Young people leave because of a lack of opportunity; a lack of jobs does not encourage them to return. On islands, we also have a problem because of our inability to compete with people who want to buy holiday homes. Those people constantly outbid the local island population.

What is the answer? The Executive is doing quite a lot to intervene and rescue some island populations from what has been a clear market failure. We are taking action on transport because we need lower costs and a more flexible transport system. I hope that the tendering process that was announced at lunch time today will deliver a service that is not only better but cheaper. We need action on employment. We need to widen the industrial base of the islands and move away from the reliance on tourism and the primary industries. We have to exploit the opportunities that the knowledge economy provides, basing employment on a good communications infrastructure. Through Highlands and Islands Enterprise, the Executive has funded such measures over the past nine or 10 years. More has to be done.

It is important that we address unemployment so that we can encourage young people to come back to island communities. We must also consider flexible and more innovative ways of delivering public services.

The Scottish Executive has taken action. The better neighbourhood services funding that was allocated to the Argyll islands is one measure that has tried to improve our public services. The modernising government programme has led to funding to provide more innovative ways of delivering services to the islands. That is welcome, but I call on ministers to take more action.

There is a real challenge out there. On islands such as Tiree we are reaching a critical point. We have lost 15 per cent of the population in the past two years. If further action is not taken, the population could implode and the island's very future could be threatened. I ask ministers to acknowledge the rural dimension to this debate.

Photo of Lyndsay McIntosh Lyndsay McIntosh Conservative 4:44, 27 June 2002

A number of people have commented on measurement and in my opening statement I said that I would come back to the issue. Helen Eadie, Kenny Gibson and Robert Brown all mentioned the difficulties with measurement. From the minister's statement, one would think that proving the worth of the plan was the main reason for change. However, the "Better Communities" document says little or nothing about measurement.

Outcome measures are yet to be set and no one knows how that will be done. One has to question what the minister and civil servants have been doing. The document contains warm words, but they take the Scottish people no further forward. As the minister said earlier, the time for talking has passed—it is time to measure and walk the walk.

Ministers set targets and make 10-year plans that are opaque and for which no one is directly accountable. The community planning approach simply ties in the innovation of the voluntary sector to the work of the statutory agencies, so that voluntary organisations spend their time looking for grants that come with conditions, rather than being able to get on with helping people in need. Many members are familiar with that argument. That approach has also created a professional poverty industry, driven by the socialist ideals of income redistribution rather than by self-help through families and communities.

It is time for a change in Scotland's deprived communities. Change for the better can come only by ending the current approach and by building genuine autonomy, self worth and aspiration in individuals and families. Those values allow good communities to look after one another and reduce the reliance on failed state systems of intervention.

Photo of George Lyon George Lyon Liberal Democrat

I question whether the recipe that Mrs McIntosh suggests will address the needs of my constituents. It is clearly the market failure and inability to influence their own situation that means that our communities need public services to step in. We need public intervention to turn such communities around.

Photo of Lyndsay McIntosh Lyndsay McIntosh Conservative

I have to question whether George Lyon listened to my opening speech. I did not say that public services were not making the effort. I said that some public services—not all—were failing.

Donald Gorrie and others mentioned local enterprise and communities helping themselves. I would like to bring to the Parliament's attention the Camelon Boat Company, an organisation that is trying to do something in its community. In the context of one of the biggest things that has ever happened in Scotland, the Falkirk wheel, the Camelon Boat Company is trying to bring jobs to the area and is receiving no encouragement whatever.

Robert Brown mentioned the St Rollox partnership. I wish that I had been there to add my congratulations. Instead of attending the St Rollox partnership event last night I went to the Ministry of Defence event. Robert Brown commented on urban deprivation and the difficulties faced by some people. There are opportunities there to take the children who are the mini crime waves and give them a challenge that will turn round their lives. I have spoken to the minister about that.

I could not possibly let Karen Whitefield comment about Ian Lang and the social inclusion partnership pilots that have been developed so much further without saying something. No one is questioning the fact that good can be done in SIPs, but as the minister mentioned, there are difficulties about people who are just a few streets apart and do not get assistance because of the fine line that is drawn between them. SIPs must develop and move on. I am sure that the minister is well aware of my interest in that.

Photo of Murray Tosh Murray Tosh Conservative

No, the member must wind up.

Photo of Linda Fabiani Linda Fabiani Scottish National Party 4:48, 27 June 2002

On Tuesday night, I rushed home from a social occasion because I was so looking forward to reading "Better Communities in Scotland: closing the gap".

Photo of Linda Fabiani Linda Fabiani Scottish National Party

I was sadly disappointed. I cannot improve on Kenny Gibson's critique of the document, although I disagree on one point. I found one phrase that had an absolute ring of truth. On page 8, paragraph 15 says:

"We must also be smarter".

That is straight from the horse's mouth.

Photo of Linda Fabiani Linda Fabiani Scottish National Party

Never mind. I know that it takes Labour members a long while to get such things.

The minister churned out the statistics on poverty and we heard Helen Eadie rehearse some local ones. We know the statistics—we hear them over and over again in the chamber. However, some people are living those statistics every day of their lives and nothing has changed for them since 1999 or 1997. The statistics remain the same. Indeed, child poverty is up 1 per cent from last year. However, the minister is still talking about the development of a strategic approach. As Lyndsay McIntosh said, there are no aims, targets or time scales in the document.

SIPs were introduced in 1999. In her speech, the minister assured us that SIPs would not be the only model to be used under the new strategy. That is just as well, as only five out of 50 SIPs—or 10 per cent—did not underspend over the past two years. All over the country, there are examples of SIPs that underspent their budgets. Dundee Xplore underspent by 46 per cent, Glasgow Smaller Area SIP underspent by 99 per cent, Moray Youthstart underspent by 77 per cent and West Lothian SIP underspent by 66.9 per cent.

Photo of Margaret Curran Margaret Curran Labour

In the Parliament some weeks ago, Linda Fabiani raised the same issue with me. With all due respect, I have to say that she fundamentally misunderstands what regeneration is about. She also fundamentally misunderstands what the Executive is trying to do. I wish that she would pay the issue some serious attention.

When the Executive works with communities, as Linda Fabiani tells us to do, there are times when it is necessary to go at their pace, to allow them to work at their own pace and to give them time to develop the models about which Donald Gorrie spoke. Working in that way can lead to SIPs being underspent. The SNP's approach would mean that the Executive frittered the money away at the end of the year. That used to happen, but we now take a managed approach.

Photo of Linda Fabiani Linda Fabiani Scottish National Party

I did not ask for a speech; I allowed the minister an invention. It is clear from the fact that SIPs have underspent so badly that the minister does not understand how communities work. The minister is changing the parameters and the monitoring of partnerships. She is doing so because she now realises that she did not set up the system properly in the first place.

Andrew Welsh raised the issue of poor housing. Shelter sent us a briefing, setting out its view of the Executive's glossy document. Shelter rightly says:

"There is insufficient focus on housing in this statement."

It went on to ask how

"regeneration can occur without a focus on the provision of decent, good quality housing".

On Tuesday night when I was at home, I also read an article in Inside Housing magazine, which explained the enigma of why housing is not a central part of the regeneration strategy and why the housing improvement task force is still to produce its second report. The report is due fairly soon but, as the magazine reported, Ms Curran cites the work of the task force, which she chairs, as "the big issue" between now and the election. The article notes:

"Ms Curran is enthusiastic about its work and says that the recommendations it is due to make next spring will form part of Labour's manifesto commitments at the next election."

Photo of Linda Fabiani Linda Fabiani Scottish National Party

We are talking about a Scottish Executive task force, not a Labour party focus group. We are talking about politicisation of the worst kind. I do not know the politics of the members of the housing improvement task force, but can the minister tell me whether John Spencely, Robert Rennie, Martyn Evans, Allan Ferguson—

Photo of Murray Tosh Murray Tosh Conservative

No, the member is in her last minute. There is no more time for interventions.

Photo of Linda Fabiani Linda Fabiani Scottish National Party

Those people think that they are part of a Scottish Executive task force, but would they be happy to be on a Labour party manifesto think-tank?

Photo of Murray Tosh Murray Tosh Conservative

It had better be a point of order and not a point of politics.

Photo of Margaret Curran Margaret Curran Labour

I rarely raise points of order in the chamber. I do so much less often that other members do and I expect consistency of approach from the Presiding Officer.

Linda Fabiani is misleading the chamber when she says that we have politicised the housing improvement task force. I have to get that on the record.

Photo of Murray Tosh Murray Tosh Conservative

I am sorry, but that is not a point of order; it is a point of political disputation. I ask Linda Fabiani to quickly close her speech.

Photo of Margaret Curran Margaret Curran Labour

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. How do I clarify such misleading information?

Photo of Murray Tosh Murray Tosh Conservative

You have already done so, as what you said is on the record. If you want to write to the member, you should do so.

Photo of Linda Fabiani Linda Fabiani Scottish National Party

I close by repeating the quotation:

"Ms Curran is enthusiastic ... the recommendations it is due to make next spring will form part of Labour's manifesto commitments at the next election."

Photo of Murray Tosh Murray Tosh Conservative

I call Hugh Henry to close the debate for the Executive. I am sorry to inform Mr Henry that he has only six minutes.

Photo of Hugh Henry Hugh Henry Labour 4:53, 27 June 2002

Oh dear! Thank you, Presiding Officer.

The debate this afternoon has shown clearly the difference between the partnership parties in the Executive and the Opposition. We heard a passionate indication from Margaret Curran of the Executive's commitment to trying to improve the quality of life for people in our most disadvantaged communities. Robert Brown made a thoughtful and caring contribution. However, the SNP and the Tories made contributions that were fatuous and vacuous. To be frank, what they said was completely irrelevant. Half the time of most of the SNP contributions was spent on issues that were nothing at all to do with the focus of the document that we are debating. The SNP contribution was utterly irrelevant. Colin Campbell spent more time talking about Bridge of Weir than about the communities that are directly under threat. SNP members clearly do not understand the issues.

We recognise that we still need to spread some important messages throughout Scotland. We need to ensure that public services, which account for the lion's share of spending in deprived communities, are more effective, responsible and accountable to the people in those communities. It is a disgrace that, in the 21st century, people in such communities suffer from a lack of opportunity to contribute to life when compared with others in Scotland. That is why we are determined to do something about social inequality and why social justice lies at the heart of the processes and measures that the Executive has proposed.

Lyndsay McIntosh and other members said that those communities are under stress. However, we know that more needs to be done in those communities than in others simply to redress the balance. Indeed, we have introduced many measures in all Executive departments because we recognise that closing the gap is fundamental to the Executive's work on transport, education, health and everything else.

We also recognise that service delivery is only part of the equation. As many members have pointed out, we have to examine how we raise the skills, confidence and expectations of people whose lives are blighted by poverty and disadvantage. That is why, as Margaret Curran pointed out, we are giving a high priority to community learning and development and to ensuring that those measures support local people's involvement in the community planning process.

I want to address some of the specific points that have been mentioned. However, it is hard to comment on Kenny Gibson's speech because, like other members, he would have said what he had to say irrespective of anything else that was said in the chamber. He felt that he had a point to get across, despite the fact that that point was extraneous and irrelevant to the whole debate.

Photo of Hugh Henry Hugh Henry Labour

I am sorry, but—[ Interruption. ] Presiding Officer—[ Interruption. ]

Photo of Lord David Steel Lord David Steel Presiding Officer, Scottish Parliament

Order. Mr Gibson, we must excuse the minister—he is very tight for time.

Photo of Hugh Henry Hugh Henry Labour

Kenny Gibson said that we must work with those who are best placed to make decisions. I recognise that, given the events of the past few weeks, John Swinney and others in the SNP have a new-found interest in trying to change the decision-making process, but Kenny Gibson should not bring his party's private grief into the chamber.

By and large, other members spoke about urban issues. As George Lyon pointed out, Kenny Gibson and others failed to recognise that rural poverty also forms a major part of our strategy.

Indeed, the policy document that Kenny Gibson mentioned was the urban regeneration document and had nothing to do with the widespread problems of poverty across Scotland. He made the strange comment that the SNP document was five times the length of ours, which is a clear illustration of the expression, "Never mind the quality, feel the width."

Photo of Kenneth Gibson Kenneth Gibson Scottish National Party

It is. The minister should be aware that it is possible to have both quality and width.

Photo of Lord David Steel Lord David Steel Presiding Officer, Scottish Parliament

That is not a point of order. Minister, you must begin to wind up.

Photo of Hugh Henry Hugh Henry Labour

I find it hard to address some of Lyndsay McIntosh's comments. She claimed that the Conservatives' approach would be radically different. However, we know what is meant by a radically different Conservative approach: we have seen it in Easterhouse, Ferguslie, Foxbar, Drumchapel, Wishaw, Craigmillar, Vale of Leven, Dundee and Falkirk. It means destroying communities across Scotland. We know what radical Toryism is all about and we are not going back to it.

Robert Brown was absolutely right to say that there is no magic wand. He spoke about the need to consider social justice as well as long-term employment opportunities.

Robert Brown, Lyndsay McIntosh and others also mentioned monitoring and evaluation. We recognise the need to improve monitoring and evaluation. The Scottish centre for regeneration, which we are setting up within Communities Scotland with funding of £3 million over the next three years, will help us to produce a solid framework for evaluating projects and programmes and will be at the forefront of developing best practice in community regeneration. We want to know what that money is being used for and we want best practice applied across Scotland.

Because of lack of time, I do not have the opportunity to comment on other contributions, but the Executive's document is a clear indication of the Executive's determination to make a difference to the quality of life of people who have for far too long been excluded. I therefore commend it to Parliament.