Rural Business (Sustainability)

– in the Scottish Parliament at 9:30 am on 26 September 2002.

Alert me about debates like this

Photo of Murray Tosh Murray Tosh Conservative 9:30, 26 September 2002

The first item of business is a debate on motion S1M-3418, in the name of Alex Fergusson, on business sustainability in rural Scotland, and on two amendments to that motion. I invite members who wish to take part in the debate to press their request-to-speak buttons, and I call Alex Fergusson to speak to and move the motion.

Photo of Alex Fergusson Alex Fergusson Conservative

I draw members' attention to my declaration of interests as registered.

It is good to see that a debate on rural issues first thing on a Thursday morning can still pack them in. I am grateful to those members who have turned up, particularly from other parties, to hear a little bit of common sense spoken on the subject. That was not meant to be a joke, but I shall now get down to serious matters.

Four years ago, Scotland was beginning to buzz with anticipation at the prospect of life with a new Parliament after almost 300 years without one. Although it should be noted that that anticipation was accompanied by varying degrees of eagerness, it was remorselessly led by the proponents of the new constitutional arrangements as being the panacea for all ills, the very greenest of grass on the other side of the political fence, and indeed the answer to all Scotland's problems. That it could never be mattered not a bit, as the electorate was lulled into believing that the new politics that would be on offer would solve issues one at a time in a mature, consensual manner befitting the 21st century and the new political era that devolution would bring.

It is therefore perfectly fitting that, as the build-up to the general election begins, we should reflect on whether those overfed aspirations have been met and on whether the new politics—which, as we all know now, turned out to be exactly the same as the old politics except that it is perpetuated as such by the power-crazed ambitions of the Liberal Democrats—has delivered. The short answer is, of course, that it has not and that fact was even admitted recently by our First Minister. It has not delivered because the hype was over the top, the aspirations were never based on reality and the promises were never deliverable.

As I have said on many occasions, nowhere is that disillusionment more keenly felt than in rural Scotland. Rural Scotland was always more sceptical about this Parliament and it has remained so about the achievements of its first Executive. The reasons for that are not hard to come by and are what lie behind our motion this morning. Our traditional rural industries—fishing, forestry and farming—continue to face real problems. Although we all accept that times change and that economic forces must change with them, we cannot underestimate the value of those industries to our rural economy. They are still the bedrock and will remain so for some time to come. To those great industries we can now add tourism. My colleagues David Davidson and Jamie McGrigor will expand on tourism and fisheries in their contributions.

Photo of Stewart Stevenson Stewart Stevenson Scottish National Party

Will Alex Fergusson join me in congratulating the Scottish National Party on boosting tourism in rural areas by having its conference in Inverness, where most of my colleagues are today?

Photo of John Home Robertson John Home Robertson Labour

Inverness is a city. [ Laughter. ]

Photo of Alex Fergusson Alex Fergusson Conservative

I am only sorry that Mr Home Robertson beat me to it, because I would not dream of congratulating the SNP on anything, and I certainly cannot do so now, as SNP members do not even know the difference between a town and a city.

Last Thursday, together with John Scott and Jamie McGrigor, I joined a third of Scotland's dairy farmers, who were gathered at Asda's Grangemouth distribution centre to protest at the pitiful share of the end price for milk that they receive. I spoke to three relatively young men from north Ayrshire, who spoke with great clarity but also with great bitterness about what the Executive was, or was not, doing for them. One of them, whose farm borders a town and who has traditionally had a generally good relationship with the residents of that town, who walk on his farm both at his direction and with his blessing, said that no one now bothers asking him. He told me, "They walk all over the farm with two fingers pointing in my direction." That is before the Land Reform (Scotland) Bill is even enacted. His question, which is echoed by many including myself, is why, given all the problems that he faces as a farmer, the Government has concentrated on the social engineering that lies behind the Land Reform (Scotland) Bill, the Agricultural Holdings (Scotland) Bill and the Protection of Wild Mammals (Scotland) Act 2002. It does not make any difference how easy it is to sell those bills to the urban majority. In most of rural Scotland they are seen as irrelevant, damaging and driven by political dogma rather than practical reality.

Even where the Minister for Environment and Rural Development has turned his hand to practical measures, they have usually ended in shambolic failure. For proof of that shambles, one need only look at the agricultural business improvement scheme, the rural stewardship scheme, the less favoured areas support scheme in any of its various guises or the 121 farmers caught up in the double payment of sheep annual premium. Farming, whether the Executive recognises it or not, feels let down and unwanted and the blame for that lies squarely in the hands of the Executive.

Photo of Mike Rumbles Mike Rumbles Liberal Democrat

Does the convener of the Rural Development Committee recognise that, between 1995 and 1997, farm incomes fell by 56 per cent, so that is not something new? Does he also realise that the Scottish Executive has just announced that the average amount of money given to all farmers who claim a subsidy has risen to £19,000 a year?

Photo of Alex Fergusson Alex Fergusson Conservative

Yet the problems continue every year. The situation has continued to decline on an annual basis, and it is probably one of the longest sustained depressions that agriculture in Scotland has known for some considerable time. I shall give some figures later that will address Mr Rumbles's point.

Photo of Richard Lochhead Richard Lochhead Scottish National Party

Does Alex Fergusson accept that Mike Rumbles's point is erroneous? The average may be £19,000 per farmer, but too much of the money goes to too few farmers, and we must cap the amount of cash that goes to the bigger farmers to spread the cake more widely.

Photo of Alex Fergusson Alex Fergusson Conservative

Mr Lochhead knows as well as I do that the problems with capping do not come from this Parliament or from Westminster, but from Europe. That is something that can be addressed only at European level.

I want to move on to forestry, if I may.

Photo of Alex Fergusson Alex Fergusson Conservative

I shall come back later to figures that will address Mike Rumbles's problems.

Yesterday marked the opening of International Forest Fest 2002 at Lockerbie. It is a magnificent celebration that receives worldwide recognition of which I hope all Scotland can be proud. I believe that the Deputy Minister for Environment and Rural Development will be there tomorrow in the company of the Princess Royal—probably counting his blessings that it is not her brother.

That event is a worthy recognition of a vital industry which, as I highlighted in my members' business debate in Aberdeen, is in some peril and will remain so if the Executive does not engage with the industry to solve the transport problems that currently beset it. Given that the industry was founded with considerable help and assistance from the taxpayer, it is surely criminal that the same industry should now be almost paralysed in some areas by the lack of public funding in its transport infrastructure. Following my members' business debate in Aberdeen, at which the deputy minister agreed to join the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities and representatives of the industry to discuss those problems, I wrote to him in early July requesting further details. I only hope that he has implemented his meeting rather more urgently than he has treated my letter, as I have yet to receive a reply.

Over the past three and a half years, we have constantly been told that, as traditional industries decline in overall importance, new industries and businesses will take their place in the rural economy. It would be lovely and wonderful to think that they had, but the truth is that they have not. That is why my motion

"notes that rural business start-ups remain at an unacceptably low level".

Although I welcome the significant successes that occur in the Highlands and Islands Enterprise and Scottish Enterprise areas, there are just not enough of them. Despite the upbeat report given to us two weeks ago by Dr Jim Hunter of HIE, there were fewer business start-ups in the Highlands and Islands during the first five years of this Labour Government than in the last four years of the previous Conservative one. Mr Rumbles will be interested to note that there were 350 business start-ups per annum under the Conservative Government, but that figure has been reduced to 275 under Labour. Why is that? It is quite simply because the Administration has no understanding of business and no sympathy with business needs, and has led this country to the pitiful situation in which we have seen a decline in company creation from 10 per cent to 1.7 per cent in just one year. That is unsustainable and must be addressed.

The way to address the problem is through infrastructure, both for transport, which is the subject of our next debate, and for information technology. Only when some meaningful Executive attention is paid to those matters will we be able to address the fact that rural Scotland has to play what the chief executive of Dumfries and Galloway Council recently referred to as catch-up in the jobs market.

Only then will we be able to unleash the potential to which the SNP's new snappy little slogan refers, but which the only policy on which all its members agree, independence, will hold back and stifle—not unlike the new SNP colour scheme. Only when the Executive realises that it must differentiate between urban and rural transport, schools and health issues and in all other service provision will rural Scotland again begin to prosper.

Almost four years, 328 agricultural publications, 100 fisheries documents and 816 environment and natural resources papers have passed, yet rural Scotland has little to show for that other than an increase in the number of shelves that are required to hold 1,244 reports, strategies, leaflets, reviews and studies with which our Government has busied itself. The problems remain, the fires continue to burn and the Government continues to fiddle. Last weekend, more than 400,000 people took to the streets of London to show their displeasure. The people of Scotland will undoubtedly show equal displeasure at the ballot box next May.

I move,

That the Parliament deplores the failure of the Scottish Executive to arrest the decline of our rural industries; notes that rural business start-ups remain at an unacceptably low level; regrets and deplores the Executive's continued lack of investment in rural transport and information technology infrastructure and the over-regulation which has resulted in barriers to the regeneration of the rural economy, and calls on the Executive to devolve decision-making powers to a local level while reversing policies which are damaging to rural communities in Scotland.

Photo of Allan Wilson Allan Wilson Labour 9:41, 26 September 2002

I thank Alex Fergusson for his less than inspiring address, but I must correct him. When I was last in royal Deeside, I was in the company of HRH Prince Charles rather than his sister. The delightful Camilla Parker Bowles was also there. Prince Charles was a charming dinner host and we discussed the future of aquaculture in Scotland. I do not believe any of the recent press reports.

Photo of Allan Wilson Allan Wilson Labour

He wrote to me after the dinner. The note was personal and I do not wish to share its contents with the chamber.

Scottish Labour and our trusty friends and allies, the Scottish Liberal Democrats, are committed to ensuring that our rural areas develop and thrive in ways that leave no one behind. We are committed to closing the opportunity gap. We must find radical solutions to problems in our farming and fishing industries—I agree with Alex Fergusson that there are many problems in our rural areas.

We should support a diverse rural economy that provides opportunities for local people, aim to reproduce what is best in rural communities and spread benefits to those who have previously been excluded.

Supporting sustainable rural economic development is a key priority for us. We want to help rural Scotland to capitalise on its strengths, many of which members know about. There should be an adaptable and entrepreneurial work force, a reputation for quality and an excellent environment and quality of life in rural areas.

While Labour and our partners are investing to help people in rural areas to get jobs and tackle rural poverty, what are the Conservatives doing? They seem to be more concerned with fox hunters and landowners. The Tories have called the Agricultural Holdings (Scotland) Bill a right-to-rob bill. In fact, it will mean that tenants will have first refusal in buying land that comes up for sale. Labour is empowering tenants while the Tories want to protect the vested interests of landlords. The Conservatives and the SNP support a right to rob. We command the centre left, which is where the vast majority of the people of Scotland are.

The Executive's commitment to rural development is firm. We take an integrated and holistic approach to the issues and needs of our rural areas. We embrace economic development and the development of communities, skills and learning, transport and infrastructure, communications and connectivity. Specific responsibility for rural development at Cabinet level ensures that rural issues are correctly prioritised and there is a co-ordinated approach through the Cabinet sub-committee on rural development to tackle particular concerns and problems.

However, we recognise the scale of the challenges that rural businesses face and the significant variation in economic challenges that are faced in different parts of Scotland. We recognise that local flexibility is required. Highlands and Islands Enterprise and Scottish Enterprise, together with their networks of local enterprise companies—on whose boards significant representation is drawn from local business communities—provide the right mechanism to deliver economic development activities in rural and urban areas.

We firmly believe that a strong economy provides the foundation for robust and sustainable rural development—that underpins our political strategy. A strong economy also helps to meet our objectives for social justice, which are as important in rural Scotland as in urban and suburban Scotland. It also helps to meet our objectives of increasing opportunities for all and first-class public services and infrastructure to help rural businesses and communities to grow and prosper.

Like their urban and suburban counterparts, rural businesses first need a climate of macroeconomic stability. Scotland's position as an integral part of the UK economy brings us substantial benefits in respect of macroeconomic stability. Interest rates are at a 38-year low.

Photo of Duncan Hamilton Duncan Hamilton Scottish National Party

Not a single member and neither of the two people in the gallery would dispute that we want a strong economy, but will the minister concede that we are in recession? On delivering for rural businesses, the minister mentioned information technology infrastructure. He will remember that Wendy Alexander, the previous Minister for Enterprise, Transport and Lifelong Learning, wanted a strategy that included a pilot scheme in the Highlands and Islands to roll out broadband. Has anything been done about that project? When will it be delivered?

Photo of Allan Wilson Allan Wilson Labour

I intend to deal with connectivity in my oration. We do not deny that there are problems in the economy, but the member should listen to what I say. Macroeconomic stability—whether in urban or rural Scotland—is absolutely fundamental to the ability of the Scottish economy to pull its way out of recession. The member must share that objective with Scottish Labour and its Liberal Democrat colleagues.

Inflation is at a 30-year low and unemployment is at its lowest for a generation. I say to Duncan Hamilton that each of those achievements would be jeopardised by economic independence. Irrespective of how economic independence is packaged or the colour that is used to disguise it, it jeopardises such stability. Inflation is at a 30-year low, interest rates are at a 38-year low and unemployment is at its lowest for a generation.

Photo of Murray Tosh Murray Tosh Conservative

No, the minister is over his time already.

Photo of Allan Wilson Allan Wilson Labour

I must make progress.

With such economic stability, we are delivering unprecedented resources to growing the Scottish economy. Recently, the Executive unveiled significant and far-reaching expenditure plans, which mean that, by 2005-06, public spending in Scotland will be more than £4 billion higher than in 2002-03.

Photo of Allan Wilson Allan Wilson Labour

That is a huge investment in every aspect of Scottish life—in growth in the economy, improved transport infrastructure and in increasing opportunities for all our people. The investment will be throughout Scotland.

The Executive is committed to promoting a vibrant rural economy, building on existing strengths, encouraging new opportunities, supporting inward investment and developing a skilled work force. We are providing significant additional resources to deliver growth in the Scottish economy, supporting rural businesses and delivering our top five priorities for the whole of Scotland—health, education, transport, jobs and reducing crime.

I move amendment S1M-3418.2 to leave out from "deplores" to end and insert:

"endorses the Scottish Executive's significant plans for investing in Scotland over the next three years to support economic growth, including sustainable rural development; notes that a strong economy provides the foundation for meeting social justice objectives in respect of increasing opportunities for all, first-class public services and infrastructure, and further endorses the key priorities and long-term actions set out in A Smart, Successful Scotland, the enterprise strategy for urban and rural areas, of helping businesses and communities grow, building global connections, and improving Scotland's skills base."

Photo of Murray Tosh Murray Tosh Conservative

I call Richard Lochhead to speak to and move amendment S1M-3418.1. I ask members to stick to the time limits.

Photo of Richard Lochhead Richard Lochhead Scottish National Party 9:50, 26 September 2002

I welcome the debate, which is on a very important subject, although I lament Alex Fergusson's woeful performance in his opening speech for the Tories.

The best thing about the Tories today is the colours worn by Annabel Goldie. It is good to see the impact that the SNP is having on setting trends. I commend her for wearing a lovely shade of heather.

The SNP will support the Tory motion, but the striking thing about it is that it could have been lodged and supported by the SNP in any of the 18 years when the Tories were in power, because it is as relevant to the 18 years of Tory Government as it is to the three and five years of Labour Government in Edinburgh and Westminster respectively.

The Government's record on making progress in rural Scotland in the first three and a half years of the Scottish Parliament has been appalling. Despite the fact that the budget is apparently going up to £26 billion in a few years, I do not think that anyone in Scotland, particularly in rural Scotland, would trust the Government to spend any of the cash wisely in rural Scotland or to make the blindest bit of difference. That is why it is so important for rural Scotland that we change the Administration at next May's elections to the Scottish Parliament.

One of the difficulties about the debate is in defining rural businesses. When I made an inquiry at the Scottish Parliament information centre, I was told that

"it is very difficult to provide information about the status of 'rural' businesses" and that

"the Executive said that 'there is no official measure of rural businesses'."

One thing that we have to get right at the beginning is information and statistics about the health of the rural economy and the number of rural businesses. All of us who represent rural constituencies know fine well that our rural communities face enormous challenges. In recent years we have seen a downturn in the agricultural and fisheries sectors. The manufacturing sector has taken hits because of the strength of the pound and tourism has taken hits because of foot-and-mouth disease and other issues. We know that a challenge that faces the Parliament is to stimulate economic growth in the rural economy if we want to create jobs and build our rural economies in the future.

Photo of Mike Rumbles Mike Rumbles Liberal Democrat

I referred in an earlier intervention to the Scottish Executive's announcement, in response to my question to a minister, that the average amount of money given to all farmers who claim a subsidy is £19,000 a year. In Richard Lochhead's intervention on Alex Fergusson, he indicated that he wanted to cap that level. At what level does he want to cap the subsidy to farmers?

Photo of Richard Lochhead Richard Lochhead Scottish National Party

Mike Rumbles clearly does not understand the situation, which is that some farmers get up to £300,000 while other farmers get almost nothing. The SNP supports family farms and believes that they should get more support. The point that we are making is that support should not go only to the big farmers.

The Rural Development Committee has run two important inquiries into the state of the rural economy. The first one was on changing employment patterns in rural Scotland and the second was on identifying obstacles to rural development. We have heard woeful stories from around the country from our rural communities. The submission from Argyll and the Islands Enterprise indicates that the population in that part of the world is declining. It states:

"All areas are depopulating other than North and Mid Argyll, Mull and Cowal."

That story is replicated throughout many rural communities in Scotland. It is worrying that even when the population is increasing the number of young people in those communities is decreasing, because they are going to the cities to get a future and to get jobs.

Photo of Richard Lochhead Richard Lochhead Scottish National Party

I want to move on.

We are finding out from the evidence that is coming in from rural communities that small businesses are closing down and collapsing. Boarded-up shops litter the high streets of our rural towns and villages. Supermarkets are taking a big share of all the business and no one is doing anything to protect the high street shops. Aberdeenshire has lost 181 shops over the past 20 years. The situation is going from bad to worse under the Executive. All our communities have lost their banks and post offices.

Photo of Murray Tosh Murray Tosh Conservative

No. He is in his last minute.

Photo of Richard Lochhead Richard Lochhead Scottish National Party

The message that we are getting from all rural communities is "Infrastructure, infrastructure". If we get the transport infrastructure right the rest will happen naturally. Broadband is a huge issue. We must do more to improve broadband infrastructure in rural communities.

Bob Downes, from BT Scotland, wrote yesterday in Business a.m. that broadband will not help many rural communities because of the costs and the lack of infrastructure. We must ensure that geographical location is not a factor for businesses. We can do that only by making sure that we have a modern economy.

Regulation is a huge issue. Who on earth would want to work in many of our rural industries? I am holding up a summary of the fisheries regulations, which the Executive issued a few weeks ago. I challenge anyone to understand 27 pages of the most complex fisheries regulations. It is no wonder that people want to leave that industry. I also have a 70-page document that outlines one scheme and it is accompanied by a 17-page leaflet. That is for only one of the many farming schemes. It is no wonder that the farming community has to divert valuable resources to employ people to fill in the forms for them. That cash should be staying in the pockets of the farmers.

Photo of Murray Tosh Murray Tosh Conservative

It is time for the member to wind up.

Photo of Richard Lochhead Richard Lochhead Scottish National Party

It is not only about infrastructure. We must ensure that we have powers in the Parliament to deliver for our rural communities. The aggregates tax and other macroeconomic matters, which are damaging our rural communities, are reserved to Westminster. There is nothing that the Parliament can do about them.

Photo of Murray Tosh Murray Tosh Conservative

The member is launching into a lot of new material. Can he wind up, please?

Photo of Richard Lochhead Richard Lochhead Scottish National Party

There is also the issue of European representation. Ross Finnie, the Minister for Environment and Rural Development, apologised recently to the people of Scotland because Margaret Beckett, the UK Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, turned down agri-monetary compensation for Scottish farmers. We lost £11 million for rural Scotland because we do not have our own representation.

I conclude by saying that our message to the Executive is to deliver the infrastructure to take rural Scotland forward and to ensure that the Parliament acquires powers so that we can represent our rural communities in Europe and elsewhere. Perhaps then we will be able to release the potential of rural Scotland.

I move amendment S1M-3418.1, to insert at end:

"and recognises that Her Majesty's Government has ignored the plight of our rural communities and calls for the many powers that it currently has to be transferred to the Parliament in order to boost the rural economy."

Photo of George Lyon George Lyon Liberal Democrat 9:56, 26 September 2002

I declare my interest, as in the register of members' interests.

I congratulate Alex Fergusson and the Tories on lodging the motion. Alex Fergusson suffers from the widespread complaint that seems to afflict all Tories—they have no memory of what happened before May 1997. Once again, Alex Fergusson demonstrated that in his speech.

Photo of George Lyon George Lyon Liberal Democrat

I want to make some progress. I will let Alex Fergusson in later.

The Tory motion criticises the Executive for its continued lack of investment in rural infrastructure and rural public services. Alex Fergusson failed to notice that last week Andy Kerr announced a £4 billion increase in new spending by the Scottish Executive over the next three years. That is a 4.6 per cent real-terms increase. Rural Scotland's hospitals, schools, houses and roads all stand to benefit from that massive increase in investment by the Lib-Lab coalition.

That investment comes on top of the real-terms increase that has been delivered in the first three years of the coalition. That investment is starting to rebuild our rural infrastructure after 18 years of neglect under the Tory Government.

Photo of Alex Fergusson Alex Fergusson Conservative

Can George Lyon tell me of one rural businessman, farmer or land manager who was operating five years ago who would rather be where they are now than where they were then?

Photo of George Lyon George Lyon Liberal Democrat

As I make progress through my speech, Alex Fergusson will realise that that is all down to the Tory legacy.

Our rural economy is in such a state because of 18 years of Tory misrule. The Tory motion claims that the Executive has failed

"to arrest the decline of our rural industries".

The facts do not support that premise. Farming will this year receive a record high of £60 million in less favoured area support. The average figure under the Tories over 18 years was 50 per cent lower than that. There has been a 50 per cent increase since the Executive came to power. This year there has been a 30 per cent increase in the sheep annual premium that goes to our hard-pressed sheep farmers and £25 million of help is going into the fishing industry, under the decommissioning scheme, to bring the catching effort into balance.

Photo of George Lyon George Lyon Liberal Democrat

I will make some progress, because I am limited for time. Calm down, boys. I have more points to make.

The sum of £1.8 billion is going into cleaning up our beaches and improving Scotland's water quality. We have increased spending on promoting Scottish tourism. I have named but a few areas of investment.

That record of investing in rural Scotland is head and shoulders above the Tories' disgraceful and appalling record of mismanagement and failure to invest in our rural infrastructure, health services and schools.

Of course, responsibility for the mess in which our primary industries, such as agriculture, find themselves falls squarely on that appalling record of mismanagement. Many of the problems that face our farmers and crofters can be traced back to the Tory years. For example, over the past six years, Scotland's beef industry has been locked out of its export markets and Scotland's sheep industry has been constantly threatened by the export ban on lamb that is more than six months old. Our livestock industry has been strangled by regulation, all of which was introduced by the Tories, and small abattoirs have been put out of business by that same Tory regulation.

Scotland's reputation for the quality of its livestock's genetics has been ruined. We were once regarded as the livestock yard of Europe, but now we are seen as the diseased man of Europe. In 1995, the beef industry in the UK produced 110 per cent of UK consumption, but today the figure is 65 per cent. That is all down to Tory mismanagement. The Tories, in their complete mismanagement of BSE and their dealings with Europe, put electoral survival ahead of the interests of Scotland's farmers and crofters. We see the result today.

Alex Fergusson and John Scott claimed that they lobbied with their milk producer friends, who are suffering from a price for milk that is one of the lowest in Europe. Milk producers are in danger of bankruptcy and are unable to stand up to the power of the supermarkets and processors. I will tell members why they are in that position: in 1993, the Tories, in pursuit of their ideological dogma, deregulated the milk marketing boards and banned our producers from forming a single co-operative to take on the power of the supermarkets. [Interruption.]

Photo of George Lyon George Lyon Liberal Democrat

That left the producers powerless to extract a decent price for their milk.

I hope that Alex Fergusson and John Scott reminded their milk producer friends that the Tories destroyed the milk marketing boards.

Photo of George Lyon George Lyon Liberal Democrat

I will do so, Presiding Officer.

The Tories' attempts to portray themselves as the champions of rural Scotland are nothing more than shameless hypocrisy and should be exposed as such. The Lib-Lab coalition is championing the interests of rural Scotland. We are seeking to rebuild a vibrant, prosperous rural Scotland after a disastrous 18 years of Tory failure. [Interruption.] I support the amendment in the name of my colleague, Allan Wilson.

Photo of Murray Tosh Murray Tosh Conservative

Such excitement so early in the morning. [ Laughter. ]

Photo of John Scott John Scott Conservative 10:02, 26 September 2002

For the purposes of the debate, I declare my interests.

By anyone's standards, Scottish agriculture is one of the mainstays of Scotland's rural areas. Total farm income in Scotland was £519 million in 1996 but £273 million in 2001—virtually half the total of five years earlier. I hope that that answers Mr Lyon's question.

Since 1997, we have had a Labour Government that knows little and cares less about rural areas. Since 1999, we have had a Lib-Lab coalition in power that chooses not to address the real issues and that, in the words of Iain McMillan of CBI Scotland, needs to be less "self-indulgent" and to "grow up". After Mr Lyon's performance, who could disagree with that?

Let us look at some of the problems. Business rates in Scotland put off would-be entrepreneurs in urban areas. The difficulties of starting up a business in rural areas are far greater, given the lack of skilled people and connectivity. It is little wonder that the rate of business start-ups in Scotland is 40 per cent below the figure for England and Wales, or—as David Ross said after 1,000 days of devolution—that people are discouraged by the fact that the Scottish Executive has delivered 1,000 new laws and 500 new regulations. Coincidentally, over the same period, the Scottish Executive has produced 1,244 reports, strategies, leaflets and reviews, none of which has contributed one penny to rural incomes.

After the extra burdens of regulation, reporting and additional taxation, is the outlook positive or negative? Has the framework to deliver a prosperous rural Scotland been put in place? If one were to ask those questions of any thinking person from a rural area, the answer would be a resounding no. Of course, the farmers' markets co-operative has been a success, given that, from a standing start in 1999, it now turns over £12 million to £15 million a year. Sadly, although that is a valuable model of how to create new small rural businesses without putting at risk a significant amount of capital, and however proud I may be of the co-operative, it will not solve the problems, because they are much deeper. The difficulties that rural Scotland faces are no longer the strong pound and the lack of access to export markets because of disease. The problems that we must address are much worse, and they are of the Parliament's making.

Allan Wilson referred to the importance of macroeconomic stability, but we face macroeconomic instability. We also face land reform legislation that promotes tenants' rights to buy and unfettered access to land, coupled with the impending unquantifiable cost of the Water Environment and Water Services (Scotland) Bill. The stock market is at its lowest level for almost a decade and the value of land, which underpins Scottish agriculture's indebtedness to the bank, is at risk.

Photo of John Scott John Scott Conservative

No.

Quite simply, the successful businessmen and women—let us not forget the gender balance— who invest in land and houses in Scotland have sustained land values for the past 100 years or so.

Photo of Murray Tosh Murray Tosh Conservative

You have one minute, Mr Scott.

Photo of John Scott John Scott Conservative

That source of investment is about to dry up as stock market values and company profits crash about our ears and as the self-inflicted and damaging legislation sinks in to the minds of would-be investors in land in rural Scotland.

The proposed land reform legislation is bad enough in itself, but it will have the effect of bringing significantly more land on to the market at the exact time when would-be buyers have neither the funds nor the inclination to invest. The value of land will fall—who can say whether its fall will be as dramatic as that of the stock market, but fall it will, as a result of the Scottish Executive's legislation. What then? As land prices fall, the security that banks hold will become less valuable and more land will need to be sold as the ratio of security to borrowings slips into imbalance.

In the worst-case scenario, land prices will no longer be sustained by their profitability or by investments and profits from the south. They will be burdened by needless legislation from the Parliament and will fall to the value of land in third-world countries. [Interruption.] I see the Presiding Officer signalling me to wind up—I will do so now.

The Lib-Lab, politically correct coalition will be to blame for that fall in land prices. Make no mistake—the Parliament's land reform and access legislation is a wound that is being inflicted by the politically correct Scotsman on the unsuspecting rural Scotsman.

Photo of John Scott John Scott Conservative

Within 10 years of the Parliament's inception, it will deliver third-world status to its rural dwellers. The solution lies in less regulation, taxation, reporting and interference.

The Executive still—

Photo of Murray Tosh Murray Tosh Conservative

Mr Scott, you must close. I do not have five minutes to give to everyone who wishes to speak.

Photo of Alasdair Morrison Alasdair Morrison Labour 10:07, 26 September 2002

As always, I listened carefully to Richard Lochhead's enlightening speech. I put it into the context of the Nationalists' latest mantra, which is "Release our potential", and it has just dawned on me exactly where they have been keeping their potential for all these years.

For the purposes of the debate, I will confine my remarks to the part of rural Scotland that I know best—my constituency in the Western Isles and other parts of the Highlands and Islands. Alex Fergusson's singularly depressing motion betrays a staggering ignorance of the real success story of the Highlands and Islands. There is continuing revival and regeneration of that region, which, for one and a half centuries, was synonymous with economic contraction, social collapse, cultural decay and, above all, depopulation.

Photo of Alasdair Morrison Alasdair Morrison Labour

I cannot.

The Highlands and Islands is no longer synonymous with those things—we are on the way back up and well on the way to becoming one of the highest-quality economies and societies in Europe. Business start-up rates are higher than the national average and are continuing to rise.

The Tories speak of barriers to regeneration, but where are those barriers? In my constituency, we are witnessing a transformation as we continue to invest in new ferries, causeways and bridges to link islands. We are turning the Western Isles into an ever-improving single economy. For the record, this year was our best-ever tourism season.

Photo of Alasdair Morrison Alasdair Morrison Labour

I cannot, as I have only four minutes. [ Interruption. ] I will not take an intervention.

I do not deny that we face challenges, but we continue to make progress. Duncan Hamilton, in an intervention, raised the issue of broadband technology. This morning, I was happy to learn from the BBC's Radio nan Gaidheal's news service that the Western Isles is closer to securing that technology, which is an important development. Delivery of that infrastructure is just around the corner. In Lewis, we continue to retool the Arnish yard, which will become a multipurpose industrial facility and a centre of excellence for the renewable energy revolution. All that work is being done with the support of the Executive, the UK Government and their agencies.

I remind the chamber of George Younger's visit to the Western Isles 20 years ago, when the unemployment rate sat at an incredible 40 per cent. Today, the unemployment rate is 5.5 per cent. In Lochaber, which for years was blighted by high levels of unemployment, unemployment sits at 1.6 per cent.

The Tories trumpet their rural and countryside credentials. Let them align themselves with the people of North Harris, who, as we speak, are negotiating a purchase price for 50,000 acres of their island. The Tories will not do that, nor will they support our Land Reform (Scotland) Bill, which will empower people and communities. They will not support the Agricultural Holdings (Scotland) Bill, which is another piece of legislation that will help to redistribute rights.

There is no doubt that the Tories will support their friends—the gentrified land-owning classes. Rather than helping the people of North Harris to secure the land and to set their own priorities, the Tories would prefer the island to be bought by some faceless millionaire absentee landowner. There is no doubt that the Tories will fight for the countryside; they will go to the barricades and march in our streets to sustain the systems of privilege that are being dismantled by the Executive and the UK Government.

As for Scottish National Party members with their tartan variation of Toryism, they traverse our country blowing their tartan bugle, which makes a different sound according to which part of Scotland they are in. Although they profess a desire for a publicly owned Caledonian MacBrayne ferry network, one of their spokesmen in the Western Isles welcomed a buyout bid by a private operator. They proclaim their support for the people of north Harris, but another island-based nationalist destabilised and undermined the people's efforts.

It must be admitted that the SNP has come a long way from the days of its fiery slogan, "Free by 93", to today's mildly rabble-rousing, "Release our potential." Both slogans are absolute nonsense, but at least Alex Neil had the good sense to demonstrate that he has a sense of humour.

Today's motion could have been spawned only by representatives of a party that is firmly wedded to the past, to an age when privilege was the religion and avarice was God. Let us give the Conservatives' depressing motion a resounding no vote.

Photo of Stewart Stevenson Stewart Stevenson Scottish National Party 10:12, 26 September 2002

I congratulate Alasdair Morrison on telling us the blindingly obvious—that the Western Isles is closer to getting broadband. It is closer to getting broadband only in the sense that the Western Isles is closer to the United States than Edinburgh is. That does not mean that broadband is round the corner or that broadband will come tomorrow.

I want to concentrate on broadband, because although farming defines the geography and topology of the countryside, increasingly the economic life of the countryside must lie elsewhere. Future generations must have access to future industries. The infrastructure that is delivered by broadband technology is an essential component of the countryside's access to the future.

The Executive's strategy is not a broadband strategy at all; it is a narrow-band strategy. Ministers have indicated in replies to me that delivery of the aggregated public sector demand for broadband will start in the second half of 2003, some two years after the announcement of the strategy.

Let me read a quotation:

"Broadband is crucial to the success of the ... economy, public services and the drive to raise people's skills and knowledge."

Photo of Stewart Stevenson Stewart Stevenson Scottish National Party

I do not have time.

"Bringing broadband within reach of more areas ... will help ... companies to become more competitive, open up opportunities for online learning and help deliver services more effectively."

I apologise to Andrew Davies, the Minister for Economic Development in Wales, for omitting the words "Welsh" and "of Wales" from that quote. Wales is an example of a country with significant rural areas that is engaging in a real broadband initiative, which receives £100 million. The rate of take-up of broadband in Wales is between 20 and 30 per cent higher as a result of the measures that have been taken.

In Scotland, we have universal access to broadband via satellite technology. How many people have taken up a system that is expensive and has some technical limitations? The answer is 182. Countries that are similar to Scotland are in a very different position. The UK is 22nd out of 28 countries in an Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development survey of the most connected countries. The rate in Scotland is half the UK's rate. Finland is 10th in the OECD survey, Sweden is fourth, Norway is 14th and Switzerland is 12th. Those countries all have financial independence. Although that might not be the only reason, it certainly helps when one can control everything that one does in an economy.

We are expected to welcome the fact that 67 of our telephone exchanges are capable of supporting ADSL, but we should remember that there are 1,100 exchanges in Scotland. The figure of 67 represents a tiny percentage of that total. Scotland will be left behind unless we can bring broadband to the whole country, on a level playing field and at uniform cost, as is being done in Wales. We must not restrict the new technologies to city centres.

The next generation of broadband is SDSL—symmetric digital subscriber line—which is being piloted in Glasgow. SDSL will present a further disadvantage to rural areas, which will not have access to the technology. This week, we have learnt that things will get even worse.

Photo of Stewart Stevenson Stewart Stevenson Scottish National Party

I am finished.

The fact that the new Office of Communications has no Scottish representation will mean that broadcasting and communications will have no voice where the decisions are made. The Executive's partners in Government are responsible for that.

Photo of Euan Robson Euan Robson Liberal Democrat 10:16, 26 September 2002

I am grateful for the opportunity to raise a couple of constituency points. Roxburgh and Berwickshire has benefited from European structural funding since 1994, in the form of the objective 5b programme until 1999 and under the south of Scotland objective 2 programme from 2000. Over the six years of that programme, the total investment available will be £44 million, of which about 45 per cent has been allocated. That represents a considerable success story.

Investments have included the business centre at Ettrick Riverside, the Border Union Agricultural Society showground at Kelso and the rural resource centre at Tweed Horizons. There have also been investments in tourism and in business support, growth and promotion, which are particularly relevant to today's debate.

The point of the European funding programmes has been to invest in such areas to the benefit of the rural economy. Unfortunately, the objective 2 programme will end in 2006, as will LEADER +. Further such programmes will be required after 2006. Without such programmes, there will be a significant funding gap, which will have a detrimental effect on the rural economy and rural businesses in my constituency and throughout the south of Scotland. That could occur at a time when the proposed reforms to the common agricultural policy might mean that the Borders and the south of Scotland will lose the direct investment that comes into the local economy from the CAP.

The overriding necessity for a new funding programme is clear to those in the south of Scotland who have noted the benefits of present and previous programmes. Any post-2006 programme should include greater flexibility than is available at present. The current programme excludes hard infrastructure projects, by which I mean transport and building projects and other direct investments of that kind. To use the jargon, the programme prefers soft infrastructure projects.

Unlike our friends in the Highlands and Islands, the south of Scotland does not have a history of European funding over many years. A large backlog of problems needs to be addressed. European funding could well address that backlog to the benefit of the rural economy and rural businesses. Flexibility would be immensely valuable in any post-2006 programme.

The key problems that will face the Scottish Borders and whole of the south of Scotland in the next few years revolve around the lack of skilled labour, which is the result of demographic trends such as out-migration and the need for upskilling. Therefore, it is equally important that we obtain an extension of the lowland Scotland objective 3 programme for training and guidance support, which ends in 2006. The programme includes £300 million of expenditure and its objectives are to raise employability, address social exclusion, promote lifelong learning and develop a competitive economy. That investment is immensely helpful and valuable.

The rural businesses and rural economy of the south of Scotland, and of my constituency in particular, have benefited from those European programmes. I would dearly like those programmes to continue after 2006. I hope that my colleagues from the south of Scotland will be prepared to back the campaign of the south of Scotland alliance, which is drawing up important advocacy of the post-2006 programmes that we need in our part of the world.

Photo of Jamie McGrigor Jamie McGrigor Conservative 10:20, 26 September 2002

It was good to hear Alasdair Morrison speak in glowing terms about the Western Isles and its causeways and bridges. All of them were instigated by the Tory party.

I want to highlight how we can regenerate one sector of the Scottish rural economy in the Highlands and Islands. I will highlight the problems facing people in the salmon farming industry and in the wild salmon and sea trout angling industry, which have received so much comment in the press recently. After attempting to show how the problems of those two industries are linked, I will suggest solutions that will help to encourage enterprise, employment and wealth creation so that both sections can flourish and do better.

For many years, there has been a furious debate about whether the huge growth in salmon farming over the past 20 years has been a key factor in the decline of wild salmon and sea trout stocks in the north-west of Scotland. Many believe that the explosion in the numbers of parasitic sea lice is a result of the increase in salmon cages in sea lochs. That explosion has led to a huge increase in mortality in the smolts, which are the young wild salmon and sea trout starting their journey to sea. If the smolts have to pass through clouds of sea lice, they are easily overwhelmed and killed by parasites. The lice also do immense damage to the farmed salmon.

Photo of Jamie McGrigor Jamie McGrigor Conservative

I am sorry, but I do not have time.

Both circumstantial and scientific advice show that those claims are correct, so it is vital that the situation is reversed to allow more money and employment to be generated by angling tourism.

I cannot stress enough the importance of wild freshwater fisheries to the economy of rural Scotland and especially to that of the Highlands and Islands, but the reality is that the Scottish farmed salmon industry is now a key industry, which produced 40 per cent of Scotland's food exports last year. The farmed salmon industry employs some 7,000 people, many in remote areas and others in processing plants within towns. When will the Scottish Executive face up to the issue and find a solution so that the wild and farmed industries—which are equally vital to the Highlands and Islands—can live together in sustainable co-existence?

Both industries underpin the future of people, families and communities. On the one side, the wealth of experience in river management and angling that has been amassed by generations of river ghillies and managers has now been added to by the scientists who work on the fisheries trusts. The trusts are making progress in delivering area management agreements with the different fishery stakeholders. Believe me, despite its recent deterioration, Scottish fishing is still sought after by many anglers worldwide. As such, it provides income and employment and is a large contributor to many rural hotels and businesses.

On the other side, we have the salmon farming industry, which underpins the lives of so many in remote areas and the products of which support many ancillary industries. The salmon farming industry has become indigenous in the Highlands and Islands and supports local culture, including the game of shinty.

Photo of Allan Wilson Allan Wilson Labour

Does the member care to explain away the reported increase in the sea lice population on the east coast of Scotland and in the Solway firth, where there are no salmon farms?

Photo of Jamie McGrigor Jamie McGrigor Conservative

There is no increase in sea lice on the east coast. The increase has been on the west coast, where the salmon farms are.

The tools now exist to resolve the sea lice problem. I ask the minister to make it easier for fish farmers to use those tools to secure the future of fish farms and of wild fish interests. The drug Slice has been shown to be effective in reducing sea lice levels markedly. Six farms that were tested on Loch Sunart had nil lice after treatment. Why is the Scottish Environment Protection Agency taking so many months to grant licences for something that it says is safe? Surely SEPA should be pragmatic. That is the first thing that I ask the minister to do something about.

Photo of Murray Tosh Murray Tosh Conservative

It should be the last thing, because your time is up.

Photo of Jamie McGrigor Jamie McGrigor Conservative

I shall just close, Presiding Officer.

The second thing is that I would like to see both industries live together in sustainable co-existence. I ask the minister to do everything in his power to ensure that.

Photo of Rhoda Grant Rhoda Grant Labour 10:25, 26 September 2002

I am pleased to be able to contribute to the debate, but I do not recognise the area that I represent in the description in the Conservative party motion. Yes, the Highlands has problems, but they are more about housing our expanding work force than about finding jobs. The Highlands is bucking the Scottish trend because our population has increased by 20 per cent over the past 30 years.

In line with other parts of Scotland, our unemployment rates are low and are lower than the average. Unemployment in the Highlands has dropped by 13 per cent in the past year alone. Everyone in the Highlands knows that Lochaber was an unemployment black spot, but it now enjoys some of the lowest unemployment rates in the whole of Scotland. That is due not only to an increase in the number of jobs but to the work that agencies have carried out. They have ensured not only that people have the skills to take the jobs on offer but that they have the skills to access them, providing driving lessons, for example, as part of the new deal. As Alasdair Morrison mentioned, the business start-up rate in the Highlands and Islands is higher than the Scottish average.

There are still challenges. Some communities are dependent on tourism, which may provide only seasonal employment. We need to attract year-round tourism. That already happens in places where people undertake winter sports. We must create more indoor activities for those who would come to the Highlands in the winter for our scenery but not for our weather. I welcome the Enterprise and Lifelong Learning Committee's inquiry into tourism. I am sure that the committee will receive a great welcome when it visits the city of Inverness on Monday.

The Tory motion talks about the lack of investment in IT. In Argyll and Bute, the three islands partnership is using IT to deliver services to remote communities. For the first time, those communities can access services without having to travel to the mainland. Almost all the public agencies are involved and the Executive has helped with finance. The north Argyll islands also benefited from digital communities initiative funding. By giving each home a computer, the initiative has not only encouraged the use of IT but has provided the tools to do it with. That is a clear example of the benefits of IT to rural communities.

Last week, the Highland Council advised MSPs how the council, the Executive and other public bodies hope to take things further by connecting schools and general practices to broadband. I believe that a similar project is going on in the south of Scotland. Such projects will bring IT to the heart of rural areas and will provide a quality of service that would be unavailable commercially.

Rural areas also face transport problems, because they lack the critical mass of people for the commercial provision of public transport services. Again, the Executive has stepped in by investing £18 million in the rural transport fund between 2001 and 2004. By 2004, local authority money for rural public transport services will increase to £25 million.

Different communities are using that money in different ways to suit their needs. In Sutherland, a bus service has been built round the peak times for use of the successful dial-a-bus scheme. That means that the existing resources can be expanded into other areas. In Aviemore, the money has been used for a community car scheme for those who do not have access to a car. IT has also been used to provide a reception service for the scheme. People who wanted to volunteer but were not able to do so outside can now provide the service from home. Those are not high-profile schemes, but they make a huge difference to the lives of the people who benefit from them.

As I said in my introduction, we face challenges. More people are moving to rural Scotland to benefit from the quality of life and experience, and high-quality work is now available in rural areas. We need further investment in housing to ensure that that continues. Many businesses tell me that expansion is held back by the difficulty of finding a work force because of the lack of housing. We need to take an inter-agency approach to deal with the problem and to ensure that the barriers are broken down. I ask the minister to ensure that he takes that forward.

Photo of Christine Grahame Christine Grahame Scottish National Party 10:29, 26 September 2002

Let me quote from the speech that the Minister for Finance and Public Services made to the Parliament:

"For our rural communities, we will deliver additional support for our forestry strategy and our fishing industry. Our investment in infrastructure and public services will bring direct benefits for rural communities."

But what was the next sentence? It was:

"Our cities are central to the quality of life and well-being of Scotland."—[Official Report, 12 September 2002; c 13669.]

That is where the rub lies. We hear a lot of gesture politics and gesture words about rural communities, but there is no financing.

Photo of Christine Grahame Christine Grahame Scottish National Party

I have only just started. The member should let me get on.

As far as infrastructure is concerned, the Borders has received nothing for roads or for the rail link. Although a rail link has been proposed to Edinburgh and Glasgow airports—

Photo of Christine Grahame Christine Grahame Scottish National Party

No—the member should sit down. We have received only £2.4 million for the Borders rail link. That is a hill of beans.

Photo of Christine Grahame Christine Grahame Scottish National Party

I am not giving way at the moment. We have not even received any funding for broadband.

What has the Scottish Executive delivered for the Borders economy? I will tell the chamber. It has delivered a call centre. In 1999, Donald Dewar announced the creation of a call centre that would boost the Borders economy and bring 250 jobs to the area. In a Scottish Liberal Democrat press release from 14 February 2001—it is always handy to keep such releases—Ian Jenkins described it as a

"major boost for the Borders economy, an economy that has had more than its fair share of job losses in recent years."

He continued:

"I am especially pleased that this will help diversify the economy and will also provide opportunities for young people to both live and work in the Borders."

Well, well. What happened to that call centre, which received about £1 million of Government funding? Until this June, its employee total was in double figures. In June, it managed to increase that figure to something like 160 and, for a brief moment, on 29 August, it employed 313 people, 60 of whom were commuting from Edinburgh. Within three weeks, 100 of those jobs had gone and I have learned today that 30 more people are on short-term contracts. That is the reality of investment in the Borders economy.

Let me quote from young people—

Photo of Christine Grahame Christine Grahame Scottish National Party

Oh, deary me. The Liberals have been in the Borders for 40 years. They were a waste of space then, and they still are.

I have some comments from young people who took up employment at the call centre. "One upset worker" said to The Southern Reporter:

"I only started three weeks ago, and had a week on a training course. This came totally out of the blue—everyone was looking forward to the careers they were promised."

A mother said:

"My son gave up his job to go there and has had to pass a lot of tests, only to be told he no longer had a job. They shouldn't be allowed to get away with destroying people's lives."

For the people in the Borders, there were simply a lot of soundbites, noise and big promises. If people are working at the centre, they are lucky to get £10,000; most of them are on short-term contracts. The way in which the organisation hires and fires its staff is outrageous. How anyone can stand up in the chamber and say that the Borders has done well out of this Lib-Lab coalition is a great mystery to me and to the people who will vote next year.

Photo of John Home Robertson John Home Robertson Labour 10:33, 26 September 2002

As a resident of the Borders, I am well aware of Christine Grahame's own ability to generate noise and soundbites.

I begin by referring members to my entry in the register of members' interests.

As the member for East Lothian, I must say that I do not recognise the picture of rural doom, despondency and desolation that Opposition members have conjured up. Alex Fergusson is really too nice to be convincing as a Jeremiah, although the nationalists have some potential in that area, if nowhere else.

The main complaint from rural east Lothian is that the economy is overheating with high house prices and rents. There is also a lot of concern that there is too much development, with consequent pressure on rural schools and infrastructure. However, I welcome such pressure. We simply need to learn to cope with the situation and get it right.

I am well aware that the foot-and-mouth outbreak in 2001 was a catastrophe for agriculture and that commodity prices for milk and cereals are unsustainably low this year. However, most reasonable farmers will agree that the Scottish Executive's environment and rural affairs department is making the best of a difficult job.

There are encouraging signs. For example, a couple of weeks ago, I visited Kelso tup sales and saw very healthy trade. Indeed, the fact that one of Stewart Stevenson's constituents saw fit to spend £18,000 on a Fife-bred Suffolk tup indicates a certain degree of confidence in the future of sheep farming. That cannot be a bad thing.

I recall from my time in the rural affairs department during Donald Dewar's Administration that the Executive gave a very high priority to rural policy. That is not surprising, because the influence of rural Scotland has never been greater than it is in the Parliament. Indeed, the First Minister was brought up on the isle of Arran, which is in Allan Wilson's constituency. What greater rural influence can one ask for?

The big challenge is to ensure that rural support measures are value for taxpayers' money. It is a funny old thing, but—to take a topical example—every single year the Scottish Executive spends more than the total capital cost of the Holyrood building on production subsidies to Scottish farmers under the common agricultural policy. However, all that public money is conspicuously failing to sustain employment on Scottish farms. As a result, I welcome efforts by the Scottish Executive and the UK Government to shift the CAP's emphasis away from production subsidies towards environmental and social priorities. That must be the right move.

I pay tribute to the thousands of rural enterprises that are adding value, diversifying and helping to develop tourism and a range of opportunities in rural Scotland. That must be the way forward, based on partnership between local businesses and public agencies including Scottish Enterprise and local authorities.

Photo of John Home Robertson John Home Robertson Labour

I am sorry—I do not have the time.

I want to cite two examples of such partnership that will help rural areas in my constituency. The Haddington farmers' market is an extremely successful example of a local authority initiative that has boosted the rural economy. I am also looking forward to some innovative projects that will be proposed for new European Union funding under the LEADER+ community initiative for rural east Lothian.

Such initiatives, together with new funding for essential health, education and transport services, must be the best way forward for rural Scotland. With great respect to the Conservative party and those who went to London last weekend, it is time for a reality check. Fox hunting is not, and never has been, the mainstay of the rural economy, and the Conservatives are not doing anyone any favours by trying to stoke up antagonism between rural communities and the rest of Scotland. That sort of division is as futile and damaging as the nationalist threat to break up the UK. We do not need that potential for mayhem.

Photo of Mike Rumbles Mike Rumbles Liberal Democrat 10:37, 26 September 2002

The partnership agreement between the Labour party and the Scottish Liberal Democrats says:

"We will work to support rural life, rural communities and the rural economy."

The programme for government makes it clear that our priority is to

"promote improved environmental, employment and living conditions in rural areas".

I have already pointed out that we are seeing one of the highest-ever levels of investment in rural areas. Indeed, the minister made the same point in his opening speech. I also highlighted the fact that farmers who claim support from the Scottish Executive now receive an average income of £19,000, which is the highest-ever level of support.

Photo of Mike Rumbles Mike Rumbles Liberal Democrat

Not after 40 seconds.

I will not dwell long on the SNP's position, but I point out that its members seem intent on talking down rural Scotland for their own political purposes. Although there is no doubt that there is a real crisis in farming, they have no policies on or answers to how we can improve the current situation. They even failed to consider the interests of rural areas when they proposed that fuel taxation should be harmonised with that of other European nations. Such a policy would have deprived Scottish farmers of cheap red diesel.

Before I leave the subject of the SNP, I should say that Christine Grahame's speech was remarkable. She constantly talks down the Borders and refused to take interventions from my colleagues Ian Jenkins and Euan Robson. Indeed, she has constantly attacked their fight to get investment and jobs into the Borders. In her speech, she again attacked investment and job boosts for the Borders. For example, she ignored the £2 million funding for the Borders rail link and the Scottish Executive's £45 million investment in the A1. She spoke complete bunkum.

Photo of Mike Rumbles Mike Rumbles Liberal Democrat

Sit down.

I want to turn my attention to the Conservatives, because I have some information for them. Alex Fergusson seems to think that rural Scotland's problems started in 1997 when the Tories left the scene, but official statistics show that, between 1995 and 1997—the last two years of Tory rule—the total income from farming fell by 56 per cent. Between 1995 and 1997, borrowing by farmers increased by £73 million, or 8 per cent, while investment remained unchanged. The value of cattle livestock products fell from £594 million in 1995 to £545 million in 1997, which is a drop of more than 8 per cent. The value of sheep livestock products fell from £290 million to £260 million, which is a drop of more than 10 per cent. Between 1996 and 1997, the value of non-cereal crops fell by 53 per cent to £130 million. Between 1991 and 1997, debt increased by 27 percent from £1,250 million to £1,593 million. The value of output for finished cattle fell by 22 per cent and the value of cows and bulls fell by a massive 76 per cent.

Photo of Mike Rumbles Mike Rumbles Liberal Democrat

I would if I had more time.

I have listed those statistics to prove a point. The Tories are intent on pretending that they are the guardians of rural Scotland. Nothing could be further from the truth. Their policies have damaged rural Scotland. The statistics show how damaging it was for rural Scotland the last time they were in Government.

We now have a Scottish Executive that is doing its best to improve life in rural Scotland. There are real difficulties, but the situation is improving. We have had the highest level of investment ever.

Photo of Duncan Hamilton Duncan Hamilton Scottish National Party 10:41, 26 September 2002

Perhaps the most remarkable admission in Mike Rumbles's speech was that the Scottish Executive is "doing its best". Frankly, the Scottish Executive's best is not good enough.

I am grateful to the Conservative party for lodging today's motion. It has given us the opportunity to unveil the range of half-truths and downright lies that we have heard from the Scottish Executive over the past couple of years.

Today's debate has brought out three issues. The first relates to broadband. Annabel Goldie has left the chamber, but she will remember from the Enterprise and Lifelong Learning Committee that business identified broadband as the number 1 issue for businesses that seek to improve their competitive capacity. It was their number 1 priority and we said that we would make it our number 1 priority.

What happened was that the Scottish Executive introduced a pilot project and punted the issue into the long grass. There was the suggestion that we would be able to aggregate public sector demand, which would stimulate the use of broadband across Scotland. We have not seen that happen. There is no evidence that we are any further forward.

When Stewart Stevenson says that the uptake of connectivity in Scotland is half that of the UK, we should take that statistic further. Connectivity in the Highlands and Islands is half that of Scotland. The area that can benefit most because it is remote and rural is the area that is benefiting least.

Photo of Duncan Hamilton Duncan Hamilton Scottish National Party

No thank you; I will come back to the member in a second.

Secondly, with regard to transport, there have been some interesting statements in the debate. It is obvious to those who represent the Highlands and Islands—Rhoda Grant will know this—that ferries and roads dominate—

Photo of Duncan Hamilton Duncan Hamilton Scottish National Party

I am just talking about the member's colleague.

Ferries and roads dominate just about everything in the Highlands and Islands.

I was interested to hear George Lyon argue that Argyll and the isles is a land of milk and honey and that there is a strong economic community there. I refer George Lyon to the submission from Argyll and the Islands Enterprise and from Argyll and Bute Council. The council said that the absence of roads, bridges and ferries was a

"major constraint on economic development".

Argyll and the Islands Enterprise said:

"Transport, especially to the islands, is inadequate in terms of frequency and affordability."

Those people are on the ground and they are telling us about the reality of the situation. To try and spin that away is disingenuous. Consider the CalMac position and the instability in the CalMac tender. Consider the diminution of service on the Clyde and ask whether those are really the signs of an Executive that is committed to economic development. Perhaps they are; Maureen Macmillan will tell me.

Photo of Maureen Macmillan Maureen Macmillan Labour

Duncan Hamilton has made a lot of noise in the press about the CalMac issue. He said that he would write to me, as reporter on the CalMac issue. That was approximately a month ago. He said that publicly but I am still waiting for the letter. When will it come?

Photo of Duncan Hamilton Duncan Hamilton Scottish National Party

Perhaps that is another difference between Prince Charles and me. I think the member will find that the people in Dunoon and who live along the Clyde consider the matter with dismay. They see an Executive that is now committed to a diminution of service between Dunoon and Gourock; an Executive that is today claiming that it is in favour of economic development.

In his contribution, the minister said that he believed in the stable economic environment provided by the United Kingdom. Now that we are in a recession, I ask the minister to consider who got us there. It is not the case that it is not the Executive's responsibility or that it can ask who will get us out of the recession. The Executive has been in charge of a relative economic decline. The UK Government will not now claim the £11.8 million of compensation that it could have done to alleviate the recession. When farming has been decimated by the strong pound, there is no prospect of the Executive claiming that it has created a strong economic environment.

When it comes to who will turn the situation around, I ask members to consider the comments made by Mr Lyon earlier this year. He said:

"Labour policies are a disaster for rural Scotland."

He also said that it is clear that Labour is trying to

"slash vital support for our most fragile communities."

That is the support that the Executive is getting from its so-called allies. I suggest that we all be clear today that whoever turns the economic situation around, it will not be this Executive.

Photo of Allan Wilson Allan Wilson Labour 10:45, 26 September 2002

I am tempted to say that whoever turns the situation around, it will not be Duncan Hamilton because, as I understand it, he is leaving us. I am sure that we all agree that he will be a loss when he goes.

I thank the Conservatives. I am extremely grateful to them for the platform that they have again provided for us to focus on the Executive's significant plans to invest in and support economic growth and sustainable rural development. I am grateful to them for giving me the opportunity to outline again our strategy for growth, which is a strategy for all of Scotland, urban and rural—we do not distinguish between the two. That strategy has the key priorities of helping businesses to build and grow, building global connections and improving Scotland's skills base.

Photo of Alex Fergusson Alex Fergusson Conservative

The minister has just hit on the nub of the problem. The Executive does not make any distinction between urban and rural Scotland. That attitude is behind today's motion. Does the minister accept that there is a need to differentiate between the two? The situation is not one in which one answer suits all. We need differentiation of policy to address the problems of rural Scotland.

Photo of Allan Wilson Allan Wilson Labour

Closing the opportunity gap is as relevant to rural Scotland as it is to urban Scotland. Social justice is as important in urban and suburban Scotland as it is in the countryside. That is the point I am making. It is a very simple point. The Conservatives try constantly to create an artificial divide between urban and rural Scotland where none exists, and they do so to be divisive and to talk down Scotland.

"A Smart, Successful Scotland" sets out a policy that is acknowledged—even by the SNP—to grow businesses, promote global connections and extend skills and learning. Scotland's people are a huge resource, as many an inward investor has realised.

The Executive's latest expenditure plans will take public spending in 2005 and 2006 to a level £4 billion higher than in 2002-03. I make no apology for repeating that. That is a product of our successful stewardship of the UK economy. Investment has been rightly targeted at growing the economy and improving transport infrastructure. If there are three Is that are significant for the rural economy, they are infrastructure, infrastructure and infrastructure.

In the spending review, we identified two specific targets to encourage more sustainable agricultural activity in the 13,500 farm businesses in Scotland's remote hills by 2006, and to deliver better service provision to rural communities through support for around 80 new rural development projects each year and funding for three to four joint initiatives per year with other Executive departments or agencies by 2006. The spending review will also expand the Scottish rural partnership fund by an additional £2.2 million. It will maintain the historically high levels of support for agriculture through the less favoured areas scheme. It will also provide an additional £2 million per year from 2003-04 to improve the quality and range of businesses and other advice available. It will implement the Scottish forestry strategy with an additional £4 million of resources for recreational and tourism-related facilities, especially in our national parks. It will also make available an additional £2 million in the first year, £2 million in the second year and £3 million in the third year in domestic funding in support of European Union fisheries structural funds to secure sustainable and successful sea fishing and aquaculture industries in Scotland.

If there was one blot on the landscape of today's debate—which I have enjoyed—it was Jamie McGrigor's contribution, which talked down the importance of the aquaculture industry to sustainable rural communities and to sustaining employment in the most fragile, remote and rural communities. Frankly, Jamie McGrigor should reflect upon his speech. I will say no more.

Photo of Allan Wilson Allan Wilson Labour

No, I am in my last minute. The only thing I will say is that Jamie McGrigor should reflect upon his speech to the chamber, and ask himself whether it contributed to growing a sustainable agricultural industry.

The doubters and cynics should stop talking down Scotland and rural Scotland. The habit of doing down Scotland, our abilities, our performance and our potential can impact on our future. Let us lift the level of debate. We should talk about what we can do, rather than constantly talk about what we cannot do.

There is much that is positive in rural Scotland. To answer Duncan Hamilton's question, I say that I believe that it is an attractive place in which to live and work. Technology is helping rural Scotland to have the kind of enterprises that used to be located far away, which is increasing the population in the Highlands and Islands, as Alasdair Morrison said. We have real diversity, real companies, real jobs and real prosperity. Our challenge is to build on that and extend it to remote and fragile areas of rural Scotland.

Photo of David Davidson David Davidson Conservative 10:51, 26 September 2002

The Executive seems to have wakened up this morning, which is about the first time that it has done so on rural affairs since the Parliament was established. It gives me great pleasure to support my colleagues in highlighting the continuing failure of the Scottish Executive to acknowledge its shabby disregard of our rural economy and the sustainability of rural communities.

Photo of David Davidson David Davidson Conservative

Not yet.

I thank Richard Lochhead for generously supporting our motion. I presume that he did so because the SNP could not think of anything else to say. It is a shame that the SNP misguidedly thinks that independence will automatically restore profitability, diversification, investment and hope to rural Scotland. Once again, despite this being SNP conference week and despite the SNP having the opportunity to lay out its stall, we have not heard anything new.

Amazingly, once again, the minister failed to respond to the motion in any detail. The Executive's amendment refers to "significant plans". One must ask where the Executive has been since the Parliament opened. In the past few years, farms' profitability has sunk to its lowest level. Never mind all the nonsense and drivel from Mr Rumbles this morning. The fact is that the Executive is now talking about farm income, whereas the Conservatives used to publish the figures for net income—in other words, wages. Mr Rumbles seems to confuse a £19,000 subsidy with the profit that farmers and their families can spend. The man does not have a clue.

Photo of David Davidson David Davidson Conservative

Not at this time.

Many members across the parties have mentioned broadband connection. In the days when Wendy Alexander was a minister, significant comments were made on how broadband would be rolled out and how we would get diversification. However, apart from in the Western Isles—that unique community that is forging ahead of the rest of Scotland—broadband is not being rolled out in rural areas. In addition, training is not being made available and there is no access for start-up businesses.

I am puzzled as to why the minister did not refer to the fact that schools in rural communities are closing. Why is that happening? Where are the general practitioners and dentists that we need in rural communities? The minister did not refer to quality of life, yet he went on and on about what the Executive has done for rural communities. As my colleagues have asked, why have there been fewer business start-ups in the past five years under Labour than there were under the last four years of the Conservative Government?

It was interesting to hear about the minister's new relationship with the royal family. What did he learn from Prince Charles, who admits, because of his direct connection with the rural community, that there are problems? Prince Charles might be able to persuade the minister when the Parliament cannot.

Given the minister's broad brief, can he tell us how many new rural bus routes have been introduced and how many have been withdrawn over the past few years?

All I can give the minister and the Executive credit for is interfering and meddling in the vital areas of the rural economy. The Executive has spent a lot of parliamentary time on issues such as hunting and land reform, on which it thinks it is doing well. Land reform is already damaging investor confidence.

Photo of Maureen Macmillan Maureen Macmillan Labour

Does David Davidson disagree with Jim Hunter, the chairman of Highlands and Islands Enterprise, who said, when the Executive was accused of failing to deliver:

"Well, not in the Highlands and Islands you aren't ... you're presiding over something ... remarkable—the revival and regeneration of a region"?

Photo of David Davidson David Davidson Conservative

It probably helps that the area still has objective 1 status, which has been denied elsewhere.

Photo of David Davidson David Davidson Conservative

I beg Maureen Macmillan's pardon. I meant transitional support.

Over the next few days, I will visit some of Aberdeenshire's sporting estates to hear about the problems first hand. It is interesting that many of their problems seem to be caused by the uninformed approach of the urban Labour party, meekly supported by the Liberal Democrats, who posture in their constituencies and then, hypocritically, turn up in the Parliament to act as voting fodder for the Executive week after week. That cannot be denied; it is on the record.

I have dealt with Mr Rumbles. We have to get across the fact that we are talking about net income, not gross income. We do not want to play the accountancy game.

Photo of David Davidson David Davidson Conservative

Not at this time.

John Home Robertson—whose speech was wonderfully insulting—compared the cost of the new Scottish Parliament building with the rural economy. He even suggested that the Holyrood project is better value for money than putting money into agri-support. I wish that he would tell that to the farmers of Scotland. That was a classic comment from someone such as him.

The debate has been interesting, in that there has been a lot of heat but little light. There have been one or two pockets of honest comment from Labour members. However, it is interesting that, in his ranting apology for the Executive's actions, George Lyon talked at some length about how land reform was going to be fair. Does he agree—he may have a personal interest; I could not possibly comment—that one set of landowners will be replaced by a new set of landowners? That is not the way in which to drive the economy forward. That is just political dogma.

Photo of George Lyon George Lyon Liberal Democrat

It is clear which lot of landowners the Tory party supports. The Duke of Buccleuch's recently published accounts show that he gave £7,500 to the Tory party to ensure its continued support for his cause.

Photo of David Davidson David Davidson Conservative

I am sorry, but I thought that we lived in a free society where people could put their money where they wanted. I notice that the expatriate Scot who is big in the film industry does his business and nobody criticises him for that, except for the fact that he does not live here. Such things happen with the Labour party, too. How many millions are given to the Executive's colleagues by large businesses down south?

George Lyon raises a spurious defence. We need honesty in the chamber from the Liberal Democrat lackeys and the Labour party about what they think the problems in rural communities are.

Once again, all we heard about in Allan Wilson's speech were plans to invest. There are always plans to invest, but there is never action. The issue is always the future and having another think-tank and another initiative. The Executive never does anything. The minister has failed to tell us the differences between the Government's rural and urban approaches. We have also learned that the Executive has nothing to say to rural communities. Roll on May 2003.

Photo of Murray Tosh Murray Tosh Conservative

I have a point to make about four members who spoke in the debate and who referred to their interests in the "Register of Interests of Members of the Scottish Parliament". It is preferred practice that, when members refer to their interests, they specify what the interests are. I did not pick up any individual member on that point, because the clerks did not draw it to my attention until two members had already passed us by. Members ought to say what their interests are, but not at any length.

Photo of Duncan McNeil Duncan McNeil Labour

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. Members of the Opposition did not observe parliamentary protocols in this morning's debate—they made their speeches and then left the chamber. That is becoming a regular practice and we might need to take some action.

Photo of Murray Tosh Murray Tosh Conservative

The clerks keep a running note of members who leave the chamber early—those members are not confined to one party. The Presiding Officers make it clear in advice to all members that, when they have spoken, they should remain in the chamber, that they should hear the opening speeches when they are participating in a debate and that, when they have participated, they should be in the chamber for the closing speeches. Those are elementary rules of courtesy that we should all observe.

Photo of Tricia Marwick Tricia Marwick Scottish National Party

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. Would you care to invite those members who made declarations of interest to declare what those interests were?