Scottish Parliament Rural Affairs Debate

Thursday, 30th June 2005

 

Today is the last day of term.

Decades on, most of us remember the last day of the school term, which had about it a certain predictability: we could turn up in our own clothes; we could bring a game; if there were any speeches, they were about what we were doing during the holidays; and we got away at lunch time.

As members who are concentrating will know, our strike rate is one out of four-we are allowed to turn up in our own clothes.

There was, of course, another given about the last day of term: even if one had the most Calvinisitic heidie in Scotland, one would not be expected to do any mental arithmetic.

However, today’s debate is really about a clever piece of mental arithmetic concerning whether we are putting our money where our mouth is.

It will relieve the front-bench team to learn that, with a mere 180 seconds left to me this morning, I will focus on just one statistic from the report.

One in three Scots now lives in rural Scotland-although I suspect that, the day after tomorrow, that number will be a little higher.

However, that part of Scotland benefits from two thirds of the total economic development spend.

That is an interesting statistic.

I am not arguing that rural Scotland does not deserve two thirds of the spending. Indeed, the recent performance of rural Scotland, particularly the Highlands and Islands, rather makes the case for high spending and I commend that example to the Conservatives-there is little evidence that high spending has held back the Highlands, which has growing numbers of migrants, strong growth, good entrepreneurial instincts and a host of other good things.

I ask us to do two things over the holidays.

We should consider how different rural Scotland is today for children leaving school from the rural Scotland that we knew.

Rural unemployment has been all but eliminated.

Previously exploited workers in the tourism industry now have a minimum wage and holiday rights.

Ferries that were falling to bits in our day have been replaced by a smart new fleet.

Jim Mather: Will the member give way?

Ms Alexander: No, I want to pursue this point.

Families used to be isolated and rural schools were falling to bits, but all that is changing.

Furthermore, the idealistic land reform pipe dreams of the Brian Wilsons-and, indeed, the Rob Gibsons-are now a reality.

That tells us that cleverly spent money matters. It can pump prime and not simply crowd out.

Of course, this would not be a proper debate if we did not pose a challenge.

This summer, as we look around rural Scotland, we need to ask ourselves how we can serve tomorrow’s generation.

Of every 100 children who leave Scottish schools tomorrow, only two will ultimately make their living in farming the land or fishing the sea.

Together, those two young Scots out of every 100 will get £400 million from the common agricultural policy and another £400 million from the Scottish Parliament.

They will get more than the total budget of Highlands and Islands Enterprise, which supports all other industries, more than double the environmental protection budget for the whole of Scotland, four times what we spend on ferries and air services and 10 times what we spend on the Scottish tourism industry.

Scottish teachers made us do mental arithmetic because numbers tell a story.

The story that we need to deal with next term concerns the question whether, despite the successes of recent years, we are spending too much supporting the rural Scotland that our grandfathers knew and not enough on the rural Scotland that our children who will leave school tomorrow deserve to know.

However, that part of Scotland benefits from two thirds of the total economic development spend.

That is an interesting statistic.

I am not arguing that rural Scotland does not deserve two thirds of the spending. Indeed, the recent performance of rural Scotland, particularly the Highlands and Islands, rather makes the case for high spending and I commend that example to the Conservatives—there is little evidence that high spending has held back the Highlands, which has growing numbers of migrants, strong growth, good entrepreneurial instincts and a host of other good things.

I ask us to do two things over the holidays.

We should consider how different rural Scotland is today for children leaving school from the rural Scotland that we knew.

Rural unemployment has been all but eliminated.

Previously exploited workers in the tourism industry now have a minimum wage and holiday rights.

Ferries that were falling to bits in our day have been replaced by a smart new fleet.

Jim Mather: Will the member give way?

Ms Alexander: No, I want to pursue this point.

Families used to be isolated and rural schools were falling to bits, but all that is changing.

Furthermore, the idealistic land reform pipe dreams of the Brian Wilsons—and, indeed, the Rob Gibsons—are now a reality.

That tells us that cleverly spent money matters. It can pump prime and not simply crowd out.

Of course, this would not be a proper debate if we did not pose a challenge.

This summer, as we look around rural Scotland, we need to ask ourselves how we can serve tomorrow’s generation.

Of every 100 children who leave Scottish schools tomorrow, only two will ultimately make their living in farming the land or fishing the sea.

Together, those two young Scots out of every 100 will get £400 million from the common agricultural policy and another £400 million from the Scottish Parliament.

They will get more than the total budget of Highlands and Islands Enterprise, which supports all other industries, more than double the environmental protection budget for the whole of Scotland, four times what we spend on ferries and air services and 10 times what we spend on the Scottish tourism industry.

Scottish teachers made us do mental arithmetic because numbers tell a story.

The story that we need to deal with next term concerns the question whether, despite the successes of recent years, we are spending too much supporting the rural Scotland that our grandfathers knew and not enough on the rural Scotland that our children who will leave school tomorrow deserve to know. Today is the last day of term.

Decades on, most of us remember the last day of the school term, which had about it a certain predictability: we could turn up in our own clothes; we could bring a game; if there were any speeches, they were about what we were doing during the holidays; and we got away at lunch time.

As members who are concentrating will know, our strike rate is one out of four-we are allowed to turn up in our own clothes.

There was, of course, another given about the last day of term: even if one had the most Calvinisitic heidie in Scotland, one would not be expected to do any mental arithmetic.

However, today’s debate is really about a clever piece of mental arithmetic concerning whether we are putting our money where our mouth is.

It will relieve the front-bench team to learn that, with a mere 180 seconds left to me this morning, I will focus on just one statistic from the report.

One in three Scots now lives in rural Scotland-although I suspect that, the day after tomorrow, that number will be a little higher.

However, that part of Scotland benefits from two thirds of the total economic development spend.

That is an interesting statistic.

I am not arguing that rural Scotland does not deserve two thirds of the spending. Indeed, the recent performance of rural Scotland, particularly the Highlands and Islands, rather makes the case for high spending and I commend that example to the Conservatives-there is little evidence that high spending has held back the Highlands, which has growing numbers of migrants, strong growth, good entrepreneurial instincts and a host of other good things.

I ask us to do two things over the holidays.

We should consider how different rural Scotland is today for children leaving school from the rural Scotland that we knew.

Rural unemployment has been all but eliminated.

Previously exploited workers in the tourism industry now have a minimum wage and holiday rights.

Ferries that were falling to bits in our day have been replaced by a smart new fleet.

Jim Mather: Will the member give way?

Ms Alexander: No, I want to pursue this point.

Families used to be isolated and rural schools were falling to bits, but all that is changing.

Furthermore, the idealistic land reform pipe dreams of the Brian Wilsons-and, indeed, the Rob Gibsons-are now a reality.

That tells us that cleverly spent money matters. It can pump prime and not simply crowd out.

Of course, this would not be a proper debate if we did not pose a challenge.

This summer, as we look around rural Scotland, we need to ask ourselves how we can serve tomorrow’s generation.

Of every 100 children who leave Scottish schools tomorrow, only two will ultimately make their living in farming the land or fishing the sea.

Together, those two young Scots out of every 100 will get £400 million from the common agricultural policy and another £400 million from the Scottish Parliament.

They will get more than the total budget of Highlands and Islands Enterprise, which supports all other industries, more than double the environmental protection budget for the whole of Scotland, four times what we spend on ferries and air services and 10 times what we spend on the Scottish tourism industry.

Scottish teachers made us do mental arithmetic because numbers tell a story.

The story that we need to deal with next term concerns the question whether, despite the successes of recent years, we are spending too much supporting the rural Scotland that our grandfathers knew and not enough on the rural Scotland that our children who will leave school tomorrow deserve to know.