 The first item of business is general questions. In order to get as many people as possible, I would appreciate short and succinct questions and answers to match. Question 1 I called Daniel Johnson. To ask the Scottish Government what lessons have been learnt regarding the procurement of new fairs. Minister Jenny Gilruth Transports Scotland works closely with Caludonia and maritime assets limited in relation to procurement of new fairs and lessons learned from the previous processes. The recent report by Audit Scotland noted that a number of improvements have already been made since the 801.802 project. Those include CMAL undertaking additional risk assessments, enhanced financial diligence on preferred bidders and employing additional independent technical and commercial support. The problem with the email that was published yesterday is that we are being asked to accept by Scottish ministers that a one-line email that simply alludes to a conversation with the Deputy First Minister. It is sufficient for the Government to undertake a contract worth the best part of £100 million, as it turns out, hundreds of millions of pounds of liabilities further to that. Indeed, Audit Scotland's statement yesterday makes it clear that that is not sufficient documentary evidence for that decision. The permanent secretary last week accepted that there was a question about whether or not the law had been complied to with regard to the decision-making in this contract. In order to learn lessons, you need to accept the mistakes that have been made. Will the minister now accept Audit Scotland's position that that email is insufficient documentary evidence of the decision? Does she accept the permanent secretary's position that there is a question about whether or not there has been a breach of the law? If there is the question of a breach of the law, will ministers now refer themselves to the relevant authority so that that can be investigated? In relation to Daniel Johnson's question, he talks of one email signing off the procurement of the ferries himself. That is how Government works to Mr Johnson's question. That is how decisions are signed off by ministers on a daily basis. That is the job, and that is how it is processed. In terms of the lessons that have been learned, we have built what first of all— Ms Gilruth, if you could just give me a moment. Members, we will hear the minister's response. First of all, Caledonia and Maritime Assets Ltd, CMAL, conducted the procurement process, and in its capacity as a procuring authority, CMAL awarded the contract to and then signed off the contract with female following ministerial approval, as was outlined to Parliament yesterday. That was signed off by the then transport minister. In terms of lessons learned, as to Mr Johnson's substantive question, we have already confirmed to the chamber that we will look at a formal lessons learned exercise on completion of 801 and 802. The Scottish Government, Transport Scotland and CMAL have already accepted all the recommendations of the Audit Scotland report. CMAL and Transport Scotland have now already confirmed that, in future, all major vessel procurements will require a full refund guarantee to be in place. As Audit Scotland has reported, CMAL has redesigned its tender process to carry out additional risk assessments on all bidders to undertake enhanced financial diligence, as I previously stated. That will include financial monitoring by an independent accountancy firm before and after the contract award. Graham Simpson. It sounds like there are no lessons learned. I have been nagging the minister for weeks now to publish the Project Neptune report. If she published that, we could start to have a conversation about how we procure ferries. When will she publish it? There is no barrier to that now. She could do it next week. Mr Simpson knows that I have already given an assurance to Parliament and indeed to him directly that I will publish the Project Neptune report. He will undertake and understand that some of the contents of the Project Neptune report were impacted by the local government elections in terms of the power restrictions, but I absolutely recognise the need for transparency on that. I am currently liaising with officials about doing it as quickly as possible. Indeed, I believe that Mr Simpson only last night made direct representations on that to the director of ferries at Transport Scotland. For the bodies themselves, I am not going to set out the detail of that today, obviously, and not in an answer during general questions, but it is essential that we have transparency on that. I recognise the need for that and I have already given Mr Simpson an undertaking on the Project Neptune report. Stuart McMillan. It is clear that the Yard 1 contracts to build three other vessels, as well as the 801 and 802, but does the minister, however, agree that the recent reports on one of the floating bars indicate that there were issues at the Yard, not only affecting public contracts and such when the Yard went into liquidation? The nationalising of the Yard was the only way to create a business fit to win both future public and private contracts. I agree with Mr McMillan's observations. We have set out two very clear priorities for the Yards management. Those are to finish building the two ferries currently under construction and to get the Yard into shape to compete for new work. That is absolutely vital. Although any decisions about future vessel contracts to pursue, whether those be in the public or the private sector in regards to opportunities, are for the Yard itself, I know that Ferguson Marine is actively pursuing a range of different vessel opportunities. Ministers will, of course, support the Yard in any way that we can to help to secure those. Willie Rennie. I think that the minister does not realise that she has made the situation a whole lot worse. She may be satisfied with one-line emails to sign off hundreds of millions of pounds of taxpayers' money, but Audit Scotland aren't, and they said so last night. What we need is a proper public inquiry into what has happened. We need the Government to refer itself to the authorities because there is a question now about state aid as the permanent secretary made clear last week. When is the minister going to wake up and realise the mess that she is in? I am not necessarily sure, Presiding Officer. There is a question in what Mr Rennie set out today. As I have already explained and set out to members, the Auditor General welcomed the evidence to Parliament previously, saying that we are pleased that CMAL has acknowledged some of our recommendations on the adequacy of the contract and the need for milestone payments to be reviewed to ensure that they are more closely aligned with quality and progress. CMAL and Transport Scotland have now already agreed to all major future vessel for curements being in the requirement of a full bill's refund guarantee to be in place. 2. Murdo Fraser To ask the Scottish Government what role it considers community hospitals will have in the delivery of any services in the future. Cabinet Secretary, how is the use of it? The community hospitals form an integral part of local healthcare delivery systems. I was delighted to visit Falkirk community hospital this morning. They help to provide care closer to people's homes, which is personalised, holistic and patient-centred. They can provide a wide range of services, including often non-acute inpatient services, particularly post-acute geriatric care, rehabilitation services and palliative care. They have a potential part to play in facilitating service integration locally and often act as a locale for the development of a single point of access to integrated services. Murdo Fraser I thank the cabinet secretary for his response. In Perthshire there are community hospitals in Blair Gowrie, in Creef and in Pitlockry, all of which have seen a reduction in services over the last number of years, a process accelerated during the Covid pandemic. There are now indications that some of the services that have been removed, such as minor injuries units with open access, during the Covid pandemic, will not now be reinstated. This process is being done without any consultation with the local communities. Can we have an assurance from the cabinet secretary that the local communities will be fully engaged and consulted before decisions are taken about the future of those services? Murdo Fraser raises an important point. On the substance of his question, I agree with him, of course, whenever there are decisions made, be it by the local health board or by the local health and social care partnership, decisions should be taken in conjunction with members of the public. He has raised a number of issues around Pitlockry, community health hospital, Blair Gowrie and some of the minor injury units. I have detail in all of those information on each of those. If there are particular concerns, he has got about specific issues within the region that he represents. I am more than happy to raise that with the local health board and with the health and social care partnership. The cabinet secretary will, of course, be aware of the Eddington hospital in East Lothian in the south of Scotland and the outstanding invite from the very broad community group to discuss with him the current situation. We heard last night that it will be over two months before Lothian NHS is in a position to make a decision about staffing for the reopening of the hospital. What does the cabinet secretary say about the on-going delay after the NHS has been removed from the crisis? That was, of course, occasioned by Covid. I will take a couple of issues with some of the premises of his question. First and foremost, of course, he knows that I have met the community. He was on that call when I met the community. I have met MSPs. We have had a debate in this Parliament about the Eddington hospital, so I am well versed in the issues. However, the second point that I would like to take issue with is that he suggests that the NHS is suddenly out of significant pressure. It is not. I visit hospitals. I visit community services on a very regular basis. I have just come back from Falkirk community hospital this morning. There is still an extremely significant challenge that our NHS is under. My understanding on the Eddington hospital is that that decision of course continues to be reviewed and monitored regularly by NHS Lothian Gold Command. I would expect them to continue their engagement with MSPs and with the local community groups. However, I am sure that they will be absolutely aware and will agree with the point that the NHS is still under extreme pressure. Therefore, it is only right that those decisions are kept under review. To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on infrastructure investment in the south of Scotland. The second strategic transport projects review includes plans for future transport investments, specifically for the south west that recommends improvements for the A75 and A77, including bypassing the villages of Crockford and Springhome and upgrading or relocating Stranrair rail station. Recent investment includes the Mabel bypass and two new rail stations at Reston and East Linton. Other regional investment in infrastructure also extends to affordable housing, superfast broadband, active travel, new schools and through growth in city reading deals. I thank the minister for her answer. Exactly six months ago in the chamber, the First Minister and the then transport minister Graham Day promised to engage with the UK Government over an upgrade to the A75, often to refer to as the goat track, after it was singled out as the single most, the trunk road in most need of upgrade in the whole of the UK and the union connectivity review. Since then, freight companies are now threatening to move their business away from Cain Rhine, which would be a devastating blow to the economy of the south of Scotland. Stena line, who operates a ferry service there, have also appealed to the First Minister to act immediately and make the A75 and A77 a priority. Yet to date, I am told, no such meeting has been formally held or even a date officially organised despite the request from the UK Government. Given the broken promises previously made— Can we have a question, please, Mr Carson? Can the SNP Government stop dragging its heels and engage with the UK Government to act much faster? For Mr Carson's awareness, I did meet with representatives from Stena line on 29 April. That was a really positive meeting and it was also an opportunity to hear from them directly about their views on the need for improvements on both routes. However, that was the latest of a series of meetings that have occurred between ministers and ferry operators over a number of different years. To Mr Carson's substantive point with regard to engagement with the UK Government on that, as he will be aware, the union connectivity review claims to offer a level of funding and support for the A75. We, of course, await the UK Government's response to that, but despite being frozen out of that process and despite transport being devolved to this Parliament, I am quite prepared to discuss that with the UK Government. However, I will need an assurance that this would be additional funding and it will not be top-slice by the UK Government. I am sure, as a proud member of this Parliament, that Mr Carson would agree. Question 4, John Mason. To ask the Scottish Government how many Ukrainian refugees have arrived in Glasgow. As of the most recent data published by the UK Government on visas and arrivals, show that, as of 10 May, a total of 7,684 visas had been issued to people from Ukraine naming a Scottish sponsor, including 4,982 naming the Scottish Government as the sponsor under the UK Sponsorship Scheme. As of 10 May, 180 of those visas were issued to post codes within the Glasgow City Council Authority, with 88 arrivals in the Glasgow City area reported. The total number of arrivals under the UK Sponsorship Scheme for Scotland was reported at 2,126, of which 855 had named the Scottish Government as their sponsor, and 1,271 named a private sponsor. John Mason. I thank the minister for that answer. I wonder if he can give us any update concerning the welcome hub at Glasgow airport, the council's resettlement team and the provision of £200 resettlement grant, because some people have a difficulty getting those £200. Minister. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I thank John Mason for giving me the opportunity to set this out in detail. Nationally, more than 600 people have been triaged at Scotland's welcome hubs, and Glasgow airport's hub has triaged more than 120 people. Welcome hubs and the support that they offer have been designed at pace in a constantly evolving environment. The signage at Glasgow airport has been improved to ensure that arrivals can locate the welcome desk where they will be directed to the welcome hub or given advice. I am grateful to our local authorities and third sector partners for making this possible. The UK Government is responsible for funding the UK Sponsorship Scheme. We continue to seek clarity on funding mechanisms and reporting arrangements from the UK Government, but in the meantime, local authorities are making up-front emergency payments and where needed, we have worked with COSLA to assure and reassure councils that funding for the scheme will be provided by the UK Government. To ask the Scottish Government what plans are in place to support community integration for Ukrainian refugees resettling in Scotland. Thank you, Presiding Officer. We are working alongside local authorities and partners to help the displaced people from Ukraine integrate into communities and support them to settle here. Local authority case workers are in place to enable access to services, including healthcare, education, employment and social security advice. Our new Scots strategy provides a clear framework for integration and it assists partners to make the best use of resources and expertise by promoting partnership approaches, join-up working and early intervention. We have also provided £1.4 million to the Scottish Refugee Council for the expansion of its refugee integration service, as well as funding Just Right Scotland to enable them to provide free and confidential legal advice to Ukrainians seeking safety in Scotland. Government guidance states that unaccompanied children and children accompanied by adults who are not their legal guardians are the most vulnerable group of refugees who may arrive in Scotland. Will the Government develop plans to ensure proactive efforts are taken to reunify unaccompanied children with their parents? Should that situation arise here in Scotland and that those working with Ukrainian refugees, such as case workers from local councils, are trained to deal with the safeguarding concerns specific to unaccompanied children who do not speak English? I thank Bill Kidd for raising what is a very important issue and one that is of a key concern of this Government. Sadly, the UK is in the unenviable position of being the only major European country without a legal route for unaccompanied children who do not have prior familial connection. That is an untenable position, exposing vulnerable children to preventable harm. I have raised this issue with UK ministers and also called for an urgent four nations meeting to agree what more can be done to provide sanctuary for these children. For those who do arrive, Scotland's priority will be to ensure that they are safe and cared for. Such arrangements are considered to be temporary and in place only until the children can return home safely in accordance with international convention and will continue to work with Ukrainian authorities, operational partners and the third sector to support the reunification of displaced unaccompanied Ukrainian children. To ask the Scottish Government how much of the £500 million energy transition fund for the northeast has now been allocated. Minister Tom Arthur, the first £20 million of the £10-year £500 million just transition fund for the north-east in Murray, which we have called on the UK Government to match, was allocated in this year's budget. Since that announcement, ministers have engaged extensively with regional stakeholders meeting trade unions, businesses, communities and local authorities in order to develop the fund in partnership with those who live and work there. The insights collected have been crucial in shaping our approach, and we are finalising the objectives and criteria of the fund with our stakeholders and hope to publish these in the coming weeks. Meetings are one thing, but ministers want action. The fund was unveiled over nine months ago, and we still have no details. I hear that there was £20 million allocated in this year's budget, but it appears that not one single penny has been spent and is still sitting in the Government's coffers. We also do not know if the fund will complement the UK Government's £16 billion transition fund or not. When will the devolved Government report back with an update on this fund so that it starts helping the people of the north-east? I think that that question demonstrates the risks of prescripting your supplementaries before you have heard the answer to that substantive question. As I said, the details will be published in the coming weeks. The member asks where the money is. I would remind him that it is allocated for this financial year. We are six weeks into this financial year, and I do not think that it is the strongest suit for the Tories to go on the rapidity of funds being deployed, for it took us six years for the Tory Government to go from Brexit to indicating what this year's prosperity fund would look like. We are engaging with partners across the region, working collaboratively on a bottom-up approach. We will report back to Parliament imminently on the criteria, aims and objective of the funding.