Speaking following the debate on Prison Visiting Committees in the Scottish Parliament today, Liberal Democrat Justice spokesperson Alison McInnes MSP said:

Alison McInnes MSP"Today's debate highlighted the serious flaws in the Government's proposals to abolish Prison Visiting Committees.

"More than simply being an independent voice for prisoners, the Committees play a far greater role in ensuring that standards in our prison estate are maintained. Yet the Cabinet Secretary refuses to acknowledge this.

"The fact that Prison Visiting Committees can make frequent and unannounced visits to prisons is a vital check for ensuring that prisons are well run. That, along with the fact that they provide a local, totally independent voice, is a prime reason why the system has endured so successfully.

"Expert opinion universally recognises the vital role that Prison Visiting Committees play within our justice system - a role they carry out at a fraction of the cost of the Government's proposed advocacy service. The Cabinet Secretary must now listen to those experts, see sense and drop these badly considered proposals."

Following John Swinney's comments on an independent Scotland's future currency, Scottish Liberal Democrat President and former Treasury spokesman, Malcolm Bruce MP said:

Malcolm Bruce MP"In his attempt to shed light over the Scottish Government's plans for an independent Scotland's future currency, John Swinney has inevitably raised more questions and with it concern.

"By rejecting the Euro in the mid- to- long term, Mr Swinney does not acknowledge that adopting the Euro may well be condition set in return for Scotland's EU membership.

"In opting for Sterling, he states that he would enter into a 'dialogue' with the Bank of England about his spending plans before asserting that no conditions will be attached, which is frankly absurd.

"The truth is that by acknowledging that the Bank of England would act as a bank of last resort, the Scottish Government would have no choice but to accept the conditions of the Bank. Is this anyone's idea of true independence?"

"The reality is that independence is a complicated and protracted process in which the Scottish Government will have little or no control on the details that will determine it."

Commenting after the colleges debate in the Scottish Parliament, Scottish Liberal Democrat Education spokesperson Liam McArthur MSP said:

Liam McArthur MSP"There is a real risk that the Education Secretary will be the last person left defending the deep cuts to the budget of Scotland's colleges.

"Again today, rather than acknowledge the widespread concerns of students, staff and colleges on the impact these damaging cuts will have, Mr Russell resorted to attacking his opponents for even bringing the issue to Parliament.

"Yesterday the First Minister emphasised the priority he attaches to tackling youth unemployment, a fight in which Scotland's colleges have a key role to play. Last week, the Finance Secretary invited the other parties in parliament to discuss how the government's Budget might be improved.

"It seems the only person unwilling to accept and argue the case for an improved funding settlement for our colleges is the Education Secretary.

"This is a remarkable position for him to take and suggests that Mr Russell's pride is blinding him to what needs to be done for our colleges.

"Scotland's colleges improve the life chances of thousands of people, of all ages in all parts of the country.

"Colleges provide students with the skills they need to get up and get on and they deserve a much fairer deal from the Scottish Government's Budget."

Commenting after the Education Secretary gave a statement on Higher and Further Education Governance, Scottish Liberal Democrat MSP for the North East, Alison McInnes said:

Alison McInnes MSP"Obviously Michael Russell thinks he knows better than College Principals on how to run their colleges.

"Colleges are being put under central diktat as the Scottish Government tries to grab all the power to the centre. First it was our local police forces, now we are seeing it with our colleges.

"I am particularly concerned by the proposals to siphon off what are judged to be excess college reserves. In many cases colleges will have carefully built up their reserves as part of plans to undertake particular local projects or improvements.

"The Cabinet Secretary denied that this proposal was on the table but the report from Professor Griggs couldn't be clearer. Either Mr Russell has not read this report or he is trying to pull the wool over our eyes.

"Colleges are already facing budget cuts thanks to SNP choices and now they face having most of their reserves taken away and used by central Government.

"Instead of shouting down anyone who dares challenge him, the Education Secretary needs to come clean and tell colleges what the SNP's plans will actually mean for their budgets and reserves."

Commenting as the First Minster tells a summit that youth employment is his top priority, Scottish Liberal Democrat leader Willie Rennie MSP said:

Willie Rennie MSP"If youth employment was a top priority for the First Minister then he would have already reversed his cuts to Scotland's colleges with the extra money available from Westminster.

"Colleges are vital for helping people get up and get on especially in the current financial climate. These cuts will mean fewer college places.

"To maximise youth employment in Scotland, the First Minister should also swallow his pride and work closely with the UK Government to promote the Youth Contract.

"The Youth Contract can benefit 16,000 young people in Scotland, helping them gain skills and employment. By promoting this, the Scottish Government can do something positive for young people.

"Promoting the Youth Contract and reversing the cut to colleges should be the top two priorities for the Scottish Government if it is serious about tackling youth unemployment."

Jim Hume, Scottish Liberal Democrat MSP for South Scotland and Spokesperson for Rural Affairs, is encouraging the farming sector to respond to the Scottish Government's consultation on the European Commission's proposals for the future of CAP.

Jim Hume MSPCommenting as the consultation was launched today, Mr Hume said:

"It's vital that every section of the Scottish farming sector engages with the Scottish Government on this issue.

"All alterations of CAP ultimately will result in re-distribution, so the EU must bear this in mind in their deliberations and ensure that there is a transition period to allow businesses time to change.

"As part of that, if we do not have an agreed CAP for the end of the current arrangement in 2014, then a bridging mechanism must be in place to ensure a smooth transition between any gap in funding.

"At the moment transition could potentially be used until 2019 - five years after proposed new CAP - but if the new CAP is late by a year or two, then enough flexibility should be installed so that the 2019 date is continued further into the future to allow five years of transition at least.

"CAP must work for Scottish farmers."

Commenting on revised research on the benefits of setting a minimum alcohol price, Scottish Liberal Democrat Health spokesperson Alison McInnes MSP said:

Alison McInnes MSP"Far too many communities in Scotland continue to be blighted by alcohol abuse. We need decisive action to tackle this and minimum pricing is a step in the right direction.

"Cutting the number of alcohol related deaths and illnesses in Scotland is something we should all be striving for.

"Scottish Liberal Democrats have already signalled their support for minimum alcohol pricing and we will work constructively with Ministers to take steps to rid Scotland of the scourge of alcohol abuse.

"Minimum pricing is by no means the silver bullet but it is a positive and confident step towards changing the culture of drinking to excess in Scotland."

Speaking after the publication of the Scottish Government's Spring Budget Revision order, the leader of the Scottish Liberal Democrats Willie Rennie MSP said:

Willie Rennie MSP"This is another missed opportunity to help save Scotland's colleges.

"The budget revision today shows that the Scottish Government has received £136 million of additional resources from the UK Government in the current year alone.

"The Finance Secretary John Swinney should have been indicating today that he would be reversing his £40m cuts to colleges. There is no excuse to make the cuts now he has the extra money available.

"The Scottish Government needs to change course, reverse the cuts and stand on the side of the students who have sent 63,000 emails in support of the campaign.

"In tough economic times, the Scottish Government needs to support young people and colleges."

Liberal Democrats are not opposed to referenda but all of the international evidence on their administration points to the fact that, if the question to be asked is not clear and unambiguous, then the debate that precedes the vote is more likely to become confused with a direct effect on the outcome.

The SNP Government's consultation on a referendum, published in February 2010, set out proposals for a multi-option referendum positing questions on extensions to the status quo and on independence. There are precedents for holding a multi-option referendum but I would submit that the question of independence is of a completely different order of magnitude to questions on variants of devolution and as such should be kept apart.

The SNP would claim that DevoMax is part of a continuum towards Independence rather than a separate proposition but as DevoMax is within the United Kingdom and independence clearly not the propositions are fundamentally different and should be treated as such.
These issues gain a greater degree of significance when examining the structure of the questions the SNP propose and the potential nonsense of the results is exposed.

For example, if DevoMax was to win by a landslide with 99% it would lose to independence if it secured just 51% in its separate question. The SNP claim it's because the second question on independence is an extension of the first on DevoMax so would be an expression of a desire to go further than DevoMax. Yet that is not the clear question on the ballot paper which is whether to support independence or not. I would suggest it is not credible or democratic for the most popular option to lose.

The SNPs argument that the structure of the questions is like the 1997 referendum could pose a threat to their independence ambitions as a failure of the public to endorse DevoMax could result in Independence being rejected even if it secures a majority.

This is because the SNP believe DevoMax as the first part of the journey towards independence but if the voters don't travel the first part of the journey they can't travel the second part, independence, even if they wanted to. In 1997 if the voters had supported more financial powers in the second question they would not be introduced if they rejected the proposition in the first question to create the Scottish Parliament. You can't have more powers for a Parliament that doesn't exist. The same applies now.

These two examples give us an inkling of the confusion that would descend on the referendum campaign if there were to be two questions. The Liberal Democrats believe it should be a one straightforward question on the fundamental issue of Independence for which the SNP have a clear mandate.

Liberal Democrats have long campaigned for Home Rule from Gladstone through Grimond and have a strong track record of delivery, helping to create the Scottish Parliament and are delivering significant financial powers now through the Scotland Bill. We want to go further so that Scotland can raise, in broad terms, what it spends so that we can determine our own destiny on the domestic agenda whilst sharing risk and opportunity with the rest of the UK family.

We aim to deliver this as we've done before through making the case, developing the consensus with others and implementing the subsequent plans. Submitting our professional plans on Home Rule to a second class question in a referendum on independence is something we will not do.