 Rwyth Davidson, cwestiwn i ddaeth nhw. Rwyth Davidson. Rwyth Davidson 1. Rwyth Davidson 2. Rwyth Davidson 3. Rwyth Davidson 4. Rwyth Davidson 4. Rwyth Davidson 4. Rwyth Davidson 6. Rwyth Davidson 7. Yn y Hyddydd N Siwg, mae'r cyfrifatau hefyd yn digwydd ond eraill mae Gwyiereun i Gwisbeth I a Rwyndd Arddangosol I yn realo ni wedi ddiwedd i gweithgål ac yn fadoedd chi'n eu ddyddu i g ôl i ddeithas wahanol am ar deimlo iddyn nhw. I will have engagements to take forward the Government's programme for Scotland. Ruth Davidson. I would like to associate myself and my party with the message of the First Minister. I know that events elsewhere in the world are taking precedence right now in the news, but I believe that this Parliament has a job in holding this Government to account. In March, we discovered that the Scottish Government had signed a £10 billion memorandum of understanding with two Chinese companies, and we only discovered it because a picture appeared in the Chinese trade press. We learned this week that the deal had now collapsed, and we only learned of that thanks to the Scottish Sunday papers. Does the First Minister think that this is the mark of a transparent Government? The First Minister. This Government is focused on one of our core responsibilities, which is trying to attract jobs and investment to Scotland. That is something that I will never apologise for. That was the whole purpose that underpinned the memorandum of understanding that Ruth Davidson refers to. That memorandum did not commit us to any particular investment, but it did commit us to exploring opportunities for such investment. We were made aware in August that, due to the political climate, our partners in that memorandum of understanding felt that they could not proceed at this time. We did not take that as a cancellation of the memorandum of understanding. We remained committed then, as we remain committed now to pursuing all opportunities for investment. I regret the fact that the partners do now consider the memorandum of understanding to be cancelled. I would end by saying this. The reason for that is the political climate that was created. As First Minister, I will certainly reflect on any lessons the Scottish Government should learn from this experience, but I say this sincerely and genuinely. I hope that the Opposition parties will reflect on that, because scrutiny and questions are, of course, legitimate. I agree with Ruth Davidson that the Opposition's job is to hold this Government to account. I think that all Opposition parties should be careful not to create a climate in this country that seems to be inhospitable to investment, because if that happens, then that is not good for our economy or for any of us. Ruth Davidson. The First Minister is demanding that the rest of us take responsibility for a deal that we did not even know existed, and the Parliament would have scrutinised the deal if she hadn't hidden it from the Parliament. The First Minister might have answered a question, but, once again, it was not the question that she was actually asking, so let me answer that for her. It is not the mark of a transparent Government. It is not the mark of a transparent Government. It is the mark of a Government whose first instinct is to duck and dive and think that it can escape scrutiny when it wants to. This is a Government that even tries to hide which of its MSPs backs Brexit. The double standards that we have from this shower are extraordinary. The First Minister's former Cabinet Secretary, Richard Lochhead, said the other way that it was unacceptable that the UK Government should do deals without full disclosure. Yet here we have a Scottish Government that did not tell us that the Chinese deal was on and it failed to tell us when it was called off. We have already just heard the excuse that it was the Opposition parties daring to ask questions. Can I ask her, in all seriousness, is it really her position that the collapse of the deal is everybody else's fault and nothing to do with her Government? First Minister. Firstly, if she cared to listen to what I said, I said that I, as First Minister, would reflect on any lessons that we had to learn from this experience. I say that again. Let me repeat the fact that this memorandum of understanding was a commitment to build relationships and to explore opportunities. It was not actually a commitment to any particular investment. That is why I think that the charge of double standards from Ruth Davidson is actually a bit staggering, because Ruth Davidson is the representative of a party that has apparently made commitments to Nissan and yet refuses to publish the letter telling us what those commitments are. Commitments that may carry a price tag for the taxpayer. I suggest that Ruth Davidson perhaps concentrates on getting the House of her own party in order before she comes here to lecture the Scottish Government. In terms of the wider issues of Brexit, I have to say that there is certainly no secrecy around who in the Tory benches supports Brexit, because they all support Brexit now, regardless of what they might have said before the referendum. I do not think that the Conservatives have got any excuse to lecture anybody when it comes to trade and investment, because let us not forget that the Conservative Party is the one who wants to rip Scotland out of the EU, out of the single market against our will, and that is what is going to have such a damaging impact on jobs and investment in this country. Ruth Davidson. I cannot believe that the First Minister is persisting to come to the chamber today to say that the Chinese Communist Party pulled the plug in this deal because they heard the Scottish Liberal Democrats roar. It is just that this entire saga is embarrassing for this Government and I think it is embarrassing for our country because if we spell out what actually was at stake here or what we are now being told was at stake here because it was hidden at the time, it was £10 billion that could have been invested in housing and transport, and that is exactly the kind of investment that you would expect the Scottish Government to pull out all the stops to secure. Given that, wouldn't you have expected, at least one, just one of the First Minister's ministerial team to have picked up the phone to the potential investors after me to make sure that the deal was still on track? Why wasn't that call made? First Minister. We continue to engage not just with the partners in this deal but with anybody that we consider could lead to investment in Scotland. That is part of our core responsibilities but it is about rich, is it not? For oppositions to stand here today and complain about a deal which was actually a memorandum of understanding to explore potential deals, collapsing, when for weeks, during and after the May Scottish Parliament elections, we repeatedly had opposition parties from the chamber demanding that the whole thing was cancelled. So they demanded that it was cancelled and then they've got the nerve to come here and say all these things are saying about the fact that the situation has developed as it has. That, I think, is double standards and that, I think, is staggering hypocrisy. So we will concentrate as a Government on making sure that we focus on our job of doing everything we can to create jobs, investment and trade in and for Scotland. That's even more important now than it has ever been before given the fact that Ruth Davidson's party is determined to take us out of the European Union against our will. Ruth Davidson. Again, not answering the question I asked about what calls were made by ministers to try and save this deal and according to John Swinney on the record he says there have been no discussions between the First Minister or other ministers and the Chinese investors since May. The deal is a deal that loves to preach from its high horse but it can't face up to evidence of its own incompetence. Let's recap. They failed to tell us a deal was signed, they did nothing to keep it going, they failed to tell us when it collapsed and it's all everybody else's fault but there is an important question here about what happens now. In 2012 the SNP published a strategy for engagement between Scotland and China to double the number of major Chinese investors here by 2017 and to position Scotland as a base for Chinese investment. If this Government wants to bring forward transparent, well-thought-out plans for Chinese inward investment then they can expect a fair hearing but rather than blaming us or blaming Brexit or blaming the weather will the First Minister remove the shroud of secrecy from deals like these with the Scottish people? Ruth Davidson is absolutely entitled to ask questions of this Government but to talk about a shroud of secrecy when her party is refusing to publish the details of the commitments that have been given to Nissan frankly is double standards on stilts. In terms of how this Government will proceed we will continue to try to attract investment from China from other countries, from anywhere that wants to invest in Scotland in reasonable investment proposals that is our job. I will end this exchange where I started. I and this Government will reflect on lessons that we need to learn from this experience that is important and I accept responsibility for that but we have an opposition that demanded the cancellation of this memorandum of understanding we had an opposition that had a hysterical over-the-top reaction to this memorandum of understanding so while, yes, I take responsibility for learning lessons I really do think that the opposition also have to reflect on their behaviour which led to a political climate in which these partners felt that they couldn't proceed so perhaps if we all do that we might be in a better position in the future. Question 2, Kezia Dugdale. Thank you, Presiding Officer. Can I associate myself and these benches with the First Minister's remarks regarding Remembrance Sunday and ask the First Minister what will next meet? The Cabinet will next meet on Tuesday. Kezia Dugdale. Today is equal pay day. From today until the end of the year women are essentially working for free. An equal pay day comes just one day after the most experienced presidential candidate in American history who just happened to be a woman was defeated by the least qualified candidate ever. We still have so much to do to break the glass ceiling that women face. Donald Trump's behaviour towards women sends a dangerous signal across the world. So what steps is the First Minister taking to make Scotland a fairer and safer place for women? First Minister. Kezia Dugdale is right to raise this issue. I, as I said yesterday, regret the result of the US election. It was not the outcome that I wanted but I do respect the verdict of it but Hillary Clinton's defeat yesterday amongst many other things perhaps tells us that we are not as far down the road to true gender equality as we hoped we were. So we do have a great deal of work still to do. Kezia Dugdale raised the fact that today is equal pay day. This is the day that marks the point in the year where because of the pay gap for every other day of this year for nothing. In Scotland, and this is the good news, we are making progress in closing that gender pay gap. It's 6.2 per cent which is still far too high but it's lower than it was and it is lower than that across the UK as a whole which stands right now at 9.4 per cent. But we still got a long way to go. The Equal Pay Act was passed in the year I was born. It is an absolute scandal that we don't yet have equal pay in this country. So we are doing a range of things from funding to trying to deal with some of the underlying issues like expanding childcare. We are also using the powers we have to try to create greater transparency around pay. So for example, we recently lowered the threshold for public authorities to publish their gender pay gap and equal pay statements from those with more than 150 workers to those with more than 20 workers. So these are some of the steps we are taking. There are others as well. But today is a good reminder for all sorts of reasons and when it comes to battle for true gender equality much has been achieved but there is still much to do. Kezia Dugdale. I would agree with that. The reality is that in January we will have a misogynist in the White House a man who is boasted about assaulting women and has used the most degrading language possible. But today we learned from EIS about the unacceptable level of bullying in our schools including the use of sexualised and derogatory language right here in Scotland. What's more, 42% of our teaching staff have witnessed homophobia and transphobia in Scottish schools. So does the First Minister agree with me that these figures are alarming and can I ask her what action the Government will take to tackle bullying in our schools? We've given a range of commitments to the TIE campaign amongst others that we will continue to back efforts and stand behind efforts to make clear that there is zero tolerance of bullying in our schools. That's particularly related of course to homophobic bullying but I was very concerned to read the reports this morning that teachers think after the Brexit vote there has been an increase in bullying and that is just a reminder to us of the responsibility we all carry to promote the principles of tolerance, respect and diversity. There's a lot of debate as there was in the aftermath of Brexit about the reasons underlying the US election result yesterday and there is no doubt whatsoever that many people feel economically alienated. I was talking about that in relation to Brexit just this week and all of us have got a responsibility to oppose austerity and to address those issues but what we must never allow to happen is those legitimate issues to ever give a veneer of respectability to racism to misogyny to intolerance generally. We've all got a responsibility to do that now perhaps more than ever before. Thank you everyone. Of course Donald Trump's intolerance is not just aimed at women. We all remember the sickening sight of him mocking a disabled journalist. We can't forget his plans to build a wall or ban people of one face from entering America but I'm sure the First Minister would agree that Scotland is not free from that intolerance. We have seen reports of hate crimes against disabled people soar by 300 per cent since 2010 and cases of Islamophobia have nearly doubled. The events of this week are distressing for those of us who believe in a society that is stronger together who believe that we can achieve more working together than we can do standing apart who believe that what unites us is far greater than what divides us. Does the First Minister agree with me that co-operation and inclusion will trump the politics of division and isolation? Yes, I do. It was an irony, rather a sad irony, that yesterday, as well as being the day we found out the result of the US election, was also the anniversary of the fall of the Berlin wall. That, as well as many other aspects of the election result, made us all very reflective. I got some criticism yesterday for having expressed my view of who I wanted to win the US election, as I indeed had Kezia Dugdale. During that campaign I found so many of President-elect Trump's comments to be deeply important and I never want to be, I am not prepared ever to be a politician that maintains a diplomatic silence in the face of attitudes of racism, sexism, misogyny or intolerance of any kind. I think that it is important today that firstly we hope that President-elect Trump turns out to be a president very different to the kind of candidate he was and reaches out to those who felt vilified by his campaign. But people of progressive opinion the world over, I think do have to stand up for those values of tolerance and respect for diversity and difference. There is more of an obligation on us now than there perhaps has been on our generation before. It is a time to, for all of us, no matter how difficult and sometimes how controversial or unpopular it may be in certain quarters to be beacons of hope for the values that we all hold so dear. I have a constituency supplementary from Anas Sarwar. Figures published this week by ISD show that over 1500 patients are trapped in hospital as a delayed discharge clear to go home but unable to secure a care package. One of those patients is Janice Arundel. She is blind, has learning disabilities and turns 59 on Christmas Eve. Her clearly emotional and distressed brother David came to my surgery to explain that Janice has been in hospital since November having fallen and broken two bones in her neck. Janice was cleared to leave hospital in April and became a delayed discharge. As of today she has now been waiting 209 days at the Glasgow Royal Infirmary. It shouldn't take a question in this Parliament to sort this, but sadly it seems it does. Despite the health secretary promising to eradicate delayed discharge so what can the First Minister say to Janice, her family and the other 1500 patients and their families about this scandalous situation? First Minister. That is a completely unacceptable situation and I would never suggest otherwise and I would expect the local health board and the local council who have course now worked together in an integrated joint partnership to rectify that situation without further delay. Obviously I don't know more of the details than those that Anna Sarwar has just shared with us about this case but from what he said it is completely unacceptable. On the wider issue of delayed discharge an extremely important issue principally because of the impact of delayed discharge on individuals but also because of the impact of delayed discharge on the wider healthcare system. We have taken a number of actions and continue to take a number of actions. I have talked about the integration of health and social care something that no previous administration managed to do. We have done that that is a step in the right direction. We are transferring resources from the acute health sector to do more to build up social care services and we are seeing progress in reducing delayed discharges. The number of bed days lost from delayed discharge have decreased over the past year. The number of delayed discharges are on a downward trend although I want to see them go faster and more consistently downwards. Those are real priorities for us that we are taking the action to get the results we want to get because what Anna Sarwar has reminded us of and rightly reminded us of is behind all the statistics that we cite in this chamber lie human beings. I hope that he has mentioned if he wants to pass the details to the health secretary I will ensure that the health secretary liaises with the health board and with the local council to make sure that that action is taken. To ask the First Minister what issues will be discussed at the next meeting of the cabinet. Matters of importance to the people of Scotland. Minorities across America are frightened. People across the world were horrified by the election of President Trump. I agree with the First Minister that that is why we all need to stand together for tolerance and compassion. That does show our democracy is precious and scrutiny of government is important. At the risk of being accused of hysteria, I hope that the First Minister will not mind me asking questions about the collapse of the Chinese deal. The First Minister has criticised those before who have asked questions about it. Organisations like Amnesty International have concerns about one of the companies, Chinese state-owned CR3. She has today said that the deal is not dead yet. It has been a few months since the deal was signed. Has the First Minister carried out an investigation into their human rights record yet? First Minister. Amnesty International rightly and responsibly raised concerns with the Scottish Government and we have responded to Amnesty International. If my memory serves me correctly, I will certainly check that that is the case. We take concerns that are raised of that nature seriously and carry out proper investigations. The point that I had made previously about this memorandum of understanding and I have made it again today already, the memorandum itself did not commit us had there been any projects coming forward, specific projects, full due diligence would rightly and properly have been carried out at that time. I have already said more widely today that the Government will reflect on any lessons that we have to learn from this experience and I hope that the Opposition will as well. I say that not trying to blame anybody but simply trying to state a fact that when something comes to an end because of a political climate, I think that we all have to ask ourselves how that political climate came about. I simply say that there is an irony in Willie Rennie's question or at least the preface to Willie Rennie's question talking about the collapse of a deal. Willie Rennie is the Opposition politician chiefly who has been demanding that we cancel this deal ever since he knew about it. We will continue to take forward exploration of investment, we will do that responsibly and we will do that of course learning the lessons that we consider from this experience. What the deal cancelled because you hadn't even bothered to find out about the human rights record of this company in the first place. This is a dereliction of duty by this Government to so casually sign a memorand of understanding with a company you know nothing about. What is the value of the First Minister's signature if it can so be so easily dismissed, so easily binned after no scrutiny and the First Minister was incapable of answering my question. Has she done an investigation into her human rights record? I suspect not. She's not even bothered. Ruth Davidson was absolutely spot on. She's blamed everybody. This is important stuff here. This is the performance of this Government with regard to human rights but Ruth Davidson was right. She has blamed everybody else in this chamber for the collapse of this deal and hasn't even bothered to pick up the phone. Why didn't she even bother if it was that important? Surely it was worth a phone call. Surely she's responsible for the collapse of this and nobody else. First Minister. I'm afraid Willie Rennie has to make up his mind either he wanted the deal cancelled at the deal to use his word either he wanted it cancelled or he wanted me to pick up the phone to try to retrieve and to rescue it. He can't have it both ways. Contrary to what Willie Rennie has said, I think those watching will have heard me say on a number of times that yes, I accept there are lessons for the Government to learn about this and we will reflect on those and learn those lessons. But when we have partners saying that the reason they feel they cannot proceed with investment is because of the political climate created, I think we have the right to question who contributed to creating the political climate. That's what I am doing in this case and we will learn the lessons. All I'm saying is that I think Opposition parties should perhaps reflect as well. A number of supplementaries. First Minister, Gordon MacDonald. Thank you, Presiding Officer. The First Minister has rightly condemned the brutal MOD cuts announced this week including the redford barracks in the Collington area of my constituency. She will also have noted that two Highland Tory MSPs chose to ignore the closure of Fort George and their questions on yesterday's statement in Parliament. Unlike those Tory MSPs will the First Minister confirm that her Government will fight not only for the Highlands but for all of the areas affected by these base closures? Yes, I was extremely angry when I heard about the UK Government's proposals about the defence footprint in Scotland. I should say that those proposals were put forward in full consultation with the Scottish Government whatsoever. They represent, if they go ahead, a 20 per cent reduction of the defence footprint in Scotland. I think that that is unacceptable. There are many communities including in the member's constituency that will be badly affected by those decisions. I think that it's right that we oppose them and that we seek to understand more about what the UK Government tends to do to compensate side by side with communities. Those on the other side of the chamber may not want always to do that, but those on this side of the chamber will do. I think that those proposals represent a Government that seems to always be willing and able to find money to invest in tried and nuclear weapons but can't find the investment to safeguard our conventional footprint here in Scotland. I think that those are the wrong decisions. Ross Thomson. Thank you, Presiding Officer. In a response to parliamentary question, I table the justice secretary, Michael Matheson, stated that Police Scotland have powers to move on unauthorised travelling encampments where there are exceptional circumstances, including vandalism, antisocial behaviour and encampments of six or more caravans. However, Inspector Colin Taylor from Police Scotland in the Northeast which I represent stated that there is nothing within the law that allows police to simply move on trespassers. From responses such as these, it's clear that the Scottish Government is saying one thing and the police are saying another. On 21 September, I wrote to the First Minister on this issue and I'm still waiting for a response. Can the First Minister please confirm to me now what steps the Scottish Government is taking to ensure that the police are aware of the powers that are available to them and feel comfortable enough in using them? I'm happy to ask the justice secretary to write to the member to bring clarity to this issue. Trespass is not a recognised law and I don't know perhaps the reason behind the comments that the member has cited. It seems to me that the answer that was read out there was pretty clear but I'll ask the justice secretary to contact the member to answer any further questions that he's got about the matter. To ask the First Minister for her reaction to the UK Government's announcement of the long-awaited new bidding for its contract for difference scheme supporting low-carbon projects. The decision that was announced yesterday is deeply concerning. The UK Government, after a great deal of delay announced its decision on contract for difference and there are two particular aspects of that announcement that are of extreme concern to Scotland. Firstly, what I can only describe is the betrayal of our island communities in terms of not treating onshore wind developments in our island communities in the usual form of energy and therefore able to bid into the option for the contract of difference. That is completely contrary to commitments that had been given to our island communities previously. Secondly, not having a ring-fenced amount in this contract for difference for marine technology obviously that raises real concerns for world-leading projects like major. We'll continue to liaise with the UK Government. Again, just like the one we've been talking about on the basing review this was announced yesterday when obviously I was elsewhere without any consultation with the Scottish Government. I don't think that's the right way to proceed particularly when these decisions have such an impact on our economy right across the country. Question number four, Stuart Stevenson. To ask the First Minister what assessment the Scottish Government has made of the impact on Scotland of the outcome of the United States presidential election. First Minister. While the outcome of the US presidential election is not the one I had hoped for it is the verdict of the American people that said I hope that the new president will reach out to those who felt marginalised and often vilified by his campaign and make clear that he will be a president for all of modern multi-cultural America and also one who values the principles of tolerance, respect and diversity. The Scottish Government will continue to monitor developments during the transition period between now and January. We will fully assess the impact for Scotland once President-elect Trump forms a new administration and its priorities are made clear. Stuart Stevenson. On 19 November 1863 at Gettysburg the founder of the Republican Party Abraham Lincoln said that their nation was dedicated to the proposition that all are created equal. Can the First Minister agree that while the US president elects comments during the election barely connected with that proposition he will have our support if he embraces in his acts and his thoughts Lincoln's statements as a proper foundation of what can truly make America great again and a great friend of us? First Minister. Yes, I do agree with that. I was struck yesterday by comments made by the German Chancellor Angela Merkel when she said she wanted to have constructive engagement with the new president but wanted that to be engagement based on values of respect for all, of tolerance and of diversity and I echo that sentiment. The relationship between Scotland and the United States of America is a strong one that I believe will endure so as the elected First Minister of Scotland I want to engage positively and constructively with the American administration and never ever shy away from standing up for these important principles and I very much hope we see a President Trump that is very, very different to the candidate Trump we have all been witnessing and many of us have been appalled by in the past few months. Jackson Carlaw. No doubt the First Minister will be urgently considering whether Mr Trump's election represents a material change in circumstances. Mr Trump has said that he will expedite a new trading relationship between a UK leaving the European Union and the United States given her direct intervention against the new White House to which she has just referred and her dismissal of the president-elect appointed by her predecessor as a business ambassador for Scotland how will she ensure that this new potential trade Scottish business and Scottish jobs are not prejudiced as a result? I have to say, I'm not sure that anything I've said about Donald Trump even comes close to some of the tweets that I've seen earlier on from Ruth Davidson that I believe I've now been deleted from her Twitter account about Donald Trump. So maybe I'm misadvised about that but what I've just said is important that the relationship between the United States and Scotland is a long-standing one, it's based on ties of family, of culture, of business and I want those ties not just to continue I want them to be enhanced and to get even stronger so as First Minister I want to engage with the next American administration just as we have the last one but I do believe it's important for all politicians at this moment in our history to stand up and be counted on important principles of tolerance and respect and diversity and I'm not going to shy away from doing that and I hope that Donald Trump builds an administration founded on those principles and if he does that we can continue to ensure that that close relationship gets even closer in the future. Question 5, Murdo Fraser Thank you, Presiding Officer. I feel we may have been here before but what lessons have been learned following two Chinese companies withdrawing from a memorandum of understanding with the Scottish Government? The purpose of the memorandum of understanding was to build relationships with a view to developing investment projects in Scotland while in August partners made clear to us that moving forward at this time was not possible given the political climate. We remain committed to exploring investment partnerships with China and with other countries. It is a key part of the job of this Government to secure jobs and investment particularly at a time when Brexit puts our economy at risk. Murdo Fraser Thank you First Minister for her response. The EY Scotland attractiveness survey shows that Scotland's record in attracting foreign direct investment from China is not as good as the UK as a whole. China is in the top five origins for investment in the UK but does not even feature in Scotland's top 10. Perhaps that is no surprise given that we have just seen what the Chinese have dubbed the Scottish shambles. How will the Scottish Government improve its handling of deals with China so that we can see greater Chinese investment here in Scotland? We will continue to work hard to attract more investment from China as we will do from other countries. It is interesting that Murdo Fraser chooses to cite the EY report. I am glad that he has chosen to cite the EY report. Unfortunately, what he forgot to say is that that report shows that for many years now Scotland has been the most successful part of the UK outside of London for attracting inward investment. That is something to be proud of. It demonstrates the success of this Government and our enterprise agencies for attracting investment in jobs into Scotland. That is now what is put at risk by the Tory's obsession with taking us out of Europe and it is why it is so important that we continue to do the job that we are determined to do. Question 6 Pauline McNeill. To ask the First Minister what steps the Scottish Government is taking to reduce the number of children in temporary accommodation. First Minister. The temporary accommodation has fallen since 2007, but it is still too high. Scotland's strong homelessness rights means that families are in temporary accommodation while they wait for appropriate permanent housing. We want the time children spend in temporary accommodation to be as short as possible. That is why we will introduce a cap of one week for families living in B&B type accommodation. Of course, we are fully committed to the prevention of homelessness and will deliver at least 50,000 affordable homes by the end of this Parliament to ensure that vulnerable families have more housing options to them. Pauline McNeill. Thank the First Minister for her answer. She will know that households with children spend the longest in temporary accommodation an average of 23 weeks. This Christmas, there are actually 591 families with children who will spend their time in temporary accommodation which she will have described as a scandal. The figure seems to be on the rise and does not seem to be decreasing. I am sure that she will agree with me that the impact on children's health and education and wellbeing is affected by that. I wonder if the First Minister would consider in addition to what she said today about the one-week cap for those in B&B accommodation two further steps that she could take. Firstly, to consider strengthening the statutory duty in the 2014 act which gives reasons why families with accommodation should be housed as a matter of priority. Secondly, since she mentioned the target of 50,000 houses which I welcome will she consider ensuring that there are some kind of conditions on house builders, on the types of houses that we are going to build here with this target? For example, if we build more pensioner type houses then that would free up family accommodation to house desperate families who need urgent action from your Government. First Minister. To give further consideration to both of those suggestions firstly in terms of amending the 2014 act and second point about the type of housing although I would point out to Pauline McNeill that it is already the responsibility of local partners when they are putting together the strategic housing investment plans to consider the range of different housing that is required in local areas so that kind of planning already exists in the system and it is important that that is undertaken properly. I agree with Pauline McNeill that we do not want any children living in temporary accommodation. The numbers have come down since 2007 although in terms of the most recent year we have seen a slight increase. It should be pointed out and I do not say this as any kind of excuse but it is an important contextual point that most temporary accommodation is in the social rented sector and is generally of a high quality but nevertheless it is not good for children to be living in temporary circumstances and that is why reducing the cap to one week is so important so that children get into permanent settled accommodation as quickly as possible but the importance of our underlying ambition to build more houses is a key part of the solution so we will continue to make sure that we take the right decisions to meet that target. Christine Grahame Given the UK's callous cap on benefits and the predictions of thousands of children and families being thrown into poverty with the possibility of them being unable to meet rental payments does the First Minister foresee further pressures on the temporary accommodation for children and families and how will the Government cope with that? First Minister Yes, I do. It worries me greatly and in fact some of the increase that we have seen in temporary accommodation may in some part not exclusively but in some part be down to benefit changes in terms of whether it is coming from more people suffering homelessness so it is important that we have the right frameworks in place and that includes the right support frameworks in terms of the benefit system. Some of the changes that are in place now in terms of the reduction of the work allowance and universal credit and transferring some of the arrangements in the private housing sector into public housing in terms of limits on the amount of housing benefit to make this issue that we are talking about worse. That is why we will continue to put pressure on the UK Government not to do these things but also as we take more not enough but more responsibility ourselves around some of these issues we will try to make sure that we have the right systems in place. Question 7, Maurice Golden. To ask the First Minister whether optional religious observance in schools for 16 to 18-year-olds will support the values of a diverse outward looking Scotland. Religious observance is a school community activity which offers opportunities for young people to reflect meaningfully on different points of view and values including their own. It promotes critical thinking and helps young people to become aware of different ideas and beliefs about life. The values of a diverse and outward looking Scotland are fully supported by this aspect of school experience. Any decisions about a young person withdrawing from it should involve both parents or carers and the young person, especially young person grows in maturity and understanding of their own learning. Maurice Golden. I thank the First Minister for that response but can the First Minister give an assurance to constituents of mine in the west of Scotland and beyond that within the parameters of any consultation or potentially amended guidance or legislation with respect to this that there will be no threat to faith schools and how they choose to deliver education? Nothing about the consultation that has been announced is about faith schools and I absolutely give that commitment but we are, as the member indicates, looking at a consultation about revising the guidance which is principally around the issue that has been raised by the humanist society in the context of a court action which is now sisted about whether young people themselves without the agreement of their parents can withdraw from their religious education or observance. That is the issue that we are looking at. I think that it is right to look at that as young people get older then clearly the responsibility for these decisions is enhanced and that is a position that already exists in England and Wales so we are looking at that but it is on that particularly narrow issue. That concludes First Minister's questions. I will now move to members' business and I will take a few moments for members and ministers to change seats.