 David Bowie. Cymru dw flynyddoedd y myneddylyg. Felly mynd i gael am i gael y rockingg какую rhaidiau eich gweith boilon, dylai udiect stimulatell y gwarthwyr itrwydd? Peyf啲 porgymerau ym Yn Pork boyfriend digas content, yn f наблюдio cyffinissiion cyffinisio gan laeni дdiwylo. Mae行i siwaint ac e preparation, chael ymgylcheddau ac yn cyfnodol yn gweithio y gwasanaeth ymgylcheddau a'r ystod y cyfnodol yn gweld i gael gweld o'r cyfnodol a'r ystod yn y brwyllfa yn cyfnodol. Mae ymgylcheddau ystod yn sicrhau cyntaf i gychwyn i'r parlymyniad ymgylcheddau Cymru, gyda 1 mlynedd y cyfnodol, oherwydd mae ein cyfnodol o'r cyfnodol ymgylcheddau cyfnodol chefial to model the impacts of a minimum unit price policy. A range of minimum unit prices was modelled showing the level of reductions in alcohol-related harms. The Scottish Government decided that a 50-pence minimum unit price resulted in a level that is proportionate." I thank the cabinet secretary for that answer. It is now broadly accepted that minimum unit pricing is a huge piece of the jigsaw in terms of changing consumption behaviours, but alcohol is also linked to seven different types of cancer, including breast and bowel cancer. Given that public awareness on this issue is relatively low, can I ask the cabinet secretary if the Government has any plans to implement a public health education campaign highlighting the risks of alcohol that could sit alongside the implementation of the legislation? I thank Jenny Gilruth for her question. First, she is right to highlight the harm reduction that the policy will achieve. Over the five years of the policy, we expect to see 392 fewer alcohol-related deaths and over 8,000 fewer alcohol-related hospital admissions. Jenny Gilruth is also right to talk about the impact on cancer rates. We know the links to breast cancer that alcohol use has been linked with over the past few years, which has been strong evidence indeed. In terms of the public health campaign, the public health campaigns that we run generally are linking the harms associated with alcohol misuse to public health messages and making sure that we get that across. There will also be an awareness campaign that will go along with minimum unit pricing to raise awareness among retailers and the public about the policy introduction to make sure that everybody is aware of the details of the policy that has been introduced and that the materials for that are going out very soon. Jenny Gilruth I thank the cabinet secretary for that response. Can the cabinet secretary advise that the rates set for minimum unit pricing will be kept under review? If any broader policy review, as is permitted by the legislation's sunset clause, will be carried out by public health experts and not by the involvement of those in the alcohol industry? As I said in my initial answer, we believe that a minimum price of £50 per unit strikes a reasonable balance between public health benefits and intervention in the market. We are committed to evaluating and monitoring the impact of minimum unit pricing on individuals, on communities, on the alcohol industry and on Scotland as a whole. NHS Health Scotland will lead on that and work is well under way on establishing and commissioning the various studies that are involved in the evaluation programme. As Jenny Gilruth mentioned, we inserted a sunset clause into the legislation, which requires the Scottish Government to report to the Parliament on the impact of minimum unit pricing no later than five years after it begins. The report will then be debated here in Parliament and a full vote will be required in order to continue the policy. Miles Briggs The cabinet secretary will give more details regarding the timescale in terms of the Scottish Government intending to begin evaluating the effectiveness of the 50p per unit minimum, and what mechanism, potentially, the Government would bring forward to look at and increase the rate in the future. The evaluation will be on-going, so we will not wait until the end of the five years for it to be on-going. It will be an on-going evaluation that will be taken forward. I think that that is quite right and proper. In terms of keeping the rate under review, of course we will keep the rate under review to ensure that it delivers the desired outcomes for the people of Scotland, but we believe that the 50p rate is the right rate, and there are no current plans to change that. For two reasons. One, all the modelling has been done on the 50p per unit, and therefore in terms of the evaluation of what we think will be the harm reduction, we would want to measure that against the modelling that has been done by the University of Sheffield. Secondly, the consultation that we have just carried out, a majority of respondents supported the 50p minimum unit price rate being retained. We do not want any further delay on that. We want to get on with the policy introduction, and sticking with the 50p per unit price is the right way to proceed. We hope that we will have the support of the Parliament in doing so. I am sure that the cabinet secretary would agree that minimum unit pricing on his own will not be a silver bullet to fix the harmful relationship that many have with alcohol, and we must also look at the deep-rooted causes of that relationship, the relationship between inequality, poverty and then health. As it stands, the implementation of MUP would give a windfall to supermarkets in terms of their profits, and we believe that money should be clawed back to invest back into public health. Will the minister consider how we use our tax powers that we now have in Scotland, so that we can introduce such a levy that would mean extra money going to public services and to local people? First of all, we are using our tax powers to deliver an additional £400 million into the health service in this next coming year. Of course, £20 million of that has also been earmarked for alcohol and drug services. We have invested more than £689 million in tackling drug and alcohol problems since 2008, so there are already substantial resources going in to alcohol and drug services. In terms of any revenues raised—it is important to say that that would not be profit, it would be revenues raised—we do not know who will benefit from that, whether it is a retailer, wholesaler, producer or a combination plus. We have to set that against the likelihood of a reduction in the amount of alcohol, particularly for some products. If we take chemical cider, for example, there is a substantial increase in the price for chemical cider. I am hopeful that that will result in an impact on the sales of that product. That is why it is important to do the evaluation to properly understand all that. Of course, we will keep those matters under review, but let us get the policy up and running and then we can evaluate that aspect of it as well. Christine Grahame Thank you, Presiding Officer. As a Borders MSP, does the cabinet secretary foresee booze cruises down the tweet to Berwick being an issue, or white van man woman down the A1 endeavouring to thwart the legislation? It is unlikely, in our opinion, that the preferred price of 50 pence per unit would make it worth people's while to travel, as it would cost them in terms of fuel and time. If we think of 50 pence per unit, the price sets the right balance to avoid the scenario that Christine Grahame is painting. We acknowledge that the way that we buy alcohol has evolved in recent years, with online sales and telephone sales providing new channels for alcohol purchase. Obviously, minimum unit pricing will apply where alcohol is dispatched from within Scotland. Obviously, it will not apply if it dispatches from England, and that is one of the limitations. However, we will consider what we can do better to better understand the issues around online sales and telephone sales and the refresh of our framework. We will closely monitor the impacts of minimum unit pricing once the policy is in place, including cross-border sales and online sales. I should have said in relation to a point that Anasawa asked. It is important whether it is that issue or cross-border issues. There are 40 measures in the alcohol framework that has been refreshed. It is an important one, but it is not the only measure that we are taking to tackle alcohol misuse. It is part of a package of which I think will help us to change the relationship that we have with alcohol within our country. Question 2, Mike Rumbles. To ask the Scottish Government for how long peak trends between Edinburgh and Glasgow will operate with reduced carriages. Minister Humza Yousaf. First of all, I regret any reduction in capacity in any of our services in Scotland, let alone our key arterial route between Edinburgh and Glasgow. The interim changes to peak trend capacity are due, as the member probably knows, to slippage in the introduction of the new class 385 fleet and contract ending to at least four trains or 12 carriages. Scotland has made significant efforts to try to reduce the impact of that as it works with the manufacturer, Hitachi, to introduce a new 385 fleet as quickly as possible. Hitachi, the train manufacturer and ScotRail are working tirelessly towards introducing the new trains, some of which are undergoing testing. However, it is important to say at this stage that neither ScotRail nor Hitachi nor I would be comfortable at all with compromising safety. We simply will not do that, so we must listen to drivers' concerns around windscreens. We are in close contact with ScotRail to ensure the impact of the short-term capacity problems that are minimised. Passengers are being given help to plan their journeys, including clear information on services, with more capacity as well as reduced fare on the Edinburgh to Glasgow route via Airdrie. ScotRail has already altered leases for diesel trains to help me to get against project delays, and every attempt has been made across other rail operators and leasing companies to either prolong leases or secure additional trains as a short-term solution. I have here the minister's statement at a meeting of the rural economy and connectivity committee on 29 March last year, at 11 months ago, when he told members that the introduction of the first, new, longer, faster and greener class 385 trains remains on schedule for the autumn with the full fleet becoming operational on the Edinburgh to Glasgow route during December. The minister was pictured everywhere claiming credit for all of that. Is the minister aware that the delays to the roll-out and the consequent reduction of carriages will have a major impact on the lives of thousands of commuters? It was not just about the drivers with the windscreen. That has been delayed a long time before that became public. Can I say to the member—of course—that I absolutely regret the inconvenience that has been caused to passengers? What I am saying here is clearly that there have been issues, and those have been well documented, of course, around the manufacture of the trains. Now, there are other issues that the member is right to allude to them, but he would be remiss of me not to point out the fact that productivity at the new UK plant, issues around supply chain with Hitachi, a global company, have been the primary factors in the delay that we are seeing. Frankly, I do not think that passengers care really who is to blame. They want to see the new trains into introduction, and that is what I am working to do, but I cannot compromise safety. There are some trains that are built. He probably knows that a number built, a number going through testing here in Scotland, but until the drivers, until ASLEF, who are right, of course, absolutely correct to put forward their concerns, until they are satisfied that those safety issues have been resolved, then I will certainly be putting additional pressure on Hitachi in Scotland, but not to compromise safety. While he is absolutely right to raise concerns that passengers have, I do not dismiss that in the slightest. What my job is to try to do is mitigate that as best as possible. We have done that. ScotRail has managed to extend some leases and have managed to change around their schedule on maintenance and refurbishment, so that the impact is not as bad as we first feared. However, of course, the sooner we resolve the problem and the issue, the better for everybody involved. With carriages on peak services reduced by up to 50 per cent, commuters faced the unenviable choice of getting on a train packed to the rafters to an even greater extent than normal or going the long way around. They have had to put up with a lot in recent years for the promise of faster trains and more seats, but this latest day buckle was not part of the plan. Perhaps the minister can tell the chamber if he has set a deadline for this problem to be resolved and what the repercussions will be if a Bailio ScotRail, if the roll-out of the new carriages is not delivered in any timeframe that he sets down. He tried to push me on that in the rural affairs, rural economy and connectivity committee. The reason why I did not give him an exact date is because clearly I have to give Hitachi and ScotRail the room in the time to work with Asleth, the drivers, to come to a satisfactory conclusion on the windscreen and some of the other issues that they are facing. However, I can promise him that the pressure that I am putting on them is extensive and is great. From me onward, I think that the member is also aware that we have the delivery of the high-speed trains as well. With the introduction of the high-speed trains, that should mitigate some of the capacity issues that we face. He is also right to say that, with the introduction of the 385s, once those issues are resolved, with the AHSTs coming into service as well, there will be an enormous amount of additional capacity that passengers will feel. In the meantime, in order to mitigate some of the capacity issues that we are facing in the short term, there is the Airdrie to Bathgate route, which is longer, a bit at £13, all day during peak times as well, should hopefully help to minimise some of those overcrowding issues. Five members still want to ask questions, which is impossible before the next debate. However, if all the members just ask a question, no preamble, and the minister gives a successful answer, we will try to get some of them in. John Mason. I wonder if the minister can say how many people are using the Airdrie to Bathgate line if he knows that there are any extras? I will try to get the information in that cross. Jamie Greene. I will keep that brief. When was the transport minister aware that there would be a problem with contracts and rolling stock coming to an end for the delivery of new carriages? Is he aware of any further leases that are coming to an end, given that there are no available rolling stock carriages anywhere in the country? If he thinks that the situation is representative of a rail service that excels in its forward planning and ability to deliver reliable, comfortable service for commuters. Can I just get to the last point of his question before I answer some of the other points that he made? It is worth saying that, of course, we expected to attach the train manufacturer to deliver those trains last autumn, and, in fairness to ScotRail, they built in five additional months, almost six months, of additional time at the end of the lease. You would have to have some heck of some crystal ball to envisage some of the problems that attach have been facing as a global company. I must say that I am astounded that some of the problems that they have been facing in terms of supply chain and productivity at their new plant. It is not a lack of forward planning. There were a number of months built in at the end of the leases, and they have done their best ScotRail to extend some of those leases, but, clearly, in the case of four trains, in the case of 12 carriages, they have not been able to do so. Yes, of course, we are aware and we have a spreadsheet and we know when trains are going off lease. ScotRail knows when they are going off lease. We are continuing to plan for the best-case scenario in terms of the introduction of 385s, but also prudently what would be the worst-case scenario and how we would mitigate against some of that. When I understand the criticism that is coming from Opposition members, I hope that they will know that I have always been the first to come to Parliament and, indeed, right to the committee whenever I have known about those issues. It is better, of course, to be upfront about those matters and to try to find a solution to them. I promise him that I will continue to keep Parliament and the relevant committee up to date. Given the recent BBC documentary, Mind The Gap, revealed instances of passengers collapsing on an ever-increasingly overcrowded trains, and given the concerns of unions such as the T double SA over cuts in staffing by ScotRail leaving stations without a health and safety department, what recent discussions has the minister had with ScotRail specifically over the issue of health and safety, and can he give a category guarantee that passengers' health or safety has not and will not be reduced as a result of the delay in the delivery of new trains or as a result of staff redundancies? I think that the member raises an important point. Health and safety and our transport network is my number one priority. I am dealing with, of course, weather challenges that we will be facing in the next couple of days, and that is absolutely paramount in everything that I do. Rather than taking my word for it, it is probably worth going to the independent regulator, the operator of road and rail, the ORR, who, of course, deem whether or not trains are safe. Of course, our trains are absolutely deemed to be safe, but that is not to take away the point that Colin Smith rightly raises around staffing. I met with the unions, those who are involved in railways, during my quarterly meeting with them only last week. They continued to push me to push ScotRail around issues around staffing when I am pleased to say that there is more recruitment happening on ScotRail that should help with some of the concerns that the member raises. In terms of our trains being safe, absolutely that is our number one priority. That is, of course, as he knows, the well-documented reason—well, one of the reasons, I should say, for the delay of the introduction rightly, as left, of course, mentioning some of the concerns, raising some of the concerns that they have around the windscreens. I apologise to Mr Finnie and Mr McKee, I am afraid that we have no more time, we have already eaten into the next debate. That concludes topical questions. I am conscious that we did drop speakers and cut back time on the next debate. The next item of business is a debate on motion 10652, in the name of Eileen Campbell, on developing a Scottish healthy weight strategy. Could I invite all members who wish to speak in this debate to press their request to speak buttons now?