 The next item of business point of order yesterday, the Cabinet Secretary for Education announced several significant updates on this year's school exams on Twitter. This morning's substantive changes contained within today's Covid-19 statement were leaked to the media, including STV and the BBC ahead of its delivery in Parliament. That has become common practice for the SNP Government this session, and I have raised it with you on numerous occasions. Each time I have, you say, and I quote, all significant and substantive announcements should be made to Parliament. What steps can now be taken to end this contempt? What can be done to insist that the Scottish Government respects your good office and the Scottish Parliament? I thank Mr Kerr for that point of order, and I can advise Mr Kerr that I intend to address this issue before we move to the statement this afternoon. We will continue with topical questions, and the first question today is Colin Smyth. To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an explanation of its decision not to proceed with the sale of Glasgow Presswick Airport at the present time. During our period of ownership of Glasgow Presswick Airport, we have sought to do what is right for the business, the taxpayers and the economy of Ayrshire. Glasgow Presswick Airport has developed as a specialist airport carving a niche in a very competitive aviation market, and the annual accounts laid before Parliament in December show that the business continues in a positive direction with a profit posted for 2020-21. We were pleased that the recent sale process attracted bids from credible investors and very detailed and extensive work was done by all parties involved. However, following careful consideration of a recommendation by the Presswick board, we took the decision not to proceed with the sale at this time. Our intention for Presswick Airport is still to return it to the private sector at the appropriate time and opportunity, but any decision must be informed by what is right for the long-term success of the business and the contribution that it makes to the local economy. The cabinet secretary has just said that the Government rejected bids for the airport. One preferred bidder, but it seems more than one bid. Can the cabinet secretary confirm reports that two bids were received from the preferred bidder for Presswick? Now that this process is at an end and seems that there is no longer a preferred bidder, can she tell us exactly why those bids were rejected by ministers? Our reports also correct that the second bid was lower than the first bid due to withheld information on the condition of the runway coming to light after the first bid was made. Can the cabinet secretary also tell us before those latest bids were rejected in the nearly 10 years since the Government bought Presswick, has it received and rejected any other bids for the airport? I thank the member for those questions and I know that there is a lot of interest in this. I am certainly happy to come back to the chamber to answer some of those points more fully. Throughout the sale process, there has been speculation about bids and bidders with a number of companies mentioned. I would stress that much of it has been inaccurate. We will need to continue to respect commercial confidentiality and not comment on the identity of bidders or the substance of the bids, which I hope is something that the member appreciates. That is hugely important to provide confidence in any future sales process, either with previous bidders or with new bidders. I can be very clear that the commercial bids received were assessed against the commercial case and the wider economic case for the region. It is on the basis of independent advice and following a recommendation by the board, the Presswick board, that we decided that the bid did not, at this point in time, represent the value for the taxpayer that we are looking for. I would welcome a further opportunity, because that vague answer is simply not good enough. There is no preferred bidder for Presswick at the moment, so that the cabinet secretary cannot hide behind an on-going confidential process that, frankly, is no longer on-going. The sale has collapsed. I would ask her to reconsider her answer to my question and tell her specifically why the bids that were on the table were rejected. Given that there is significant investment needed in Presswick to give it a sustainable future, that is no longer going to come from any new owner any time soon. Can the cabinet secretary tell us exactly where the needed investment for Presswick will come from, or is it a case, as it seems, that a decade after buying Presswick, the Scottish Government still has no plan whatsoever for the future of the airport? There are a lot of questions in there, and I appreciate that you want short answers, but I would like to answer them in detail. In terms of the identity of the bidders, whether there is a live bid or not, we should note and cannot comment on speculation about the identity of bidders. I appreciate that there is a desire for more information on the detail of the bids that were received and rejected, but it is hugely important that I hope that all members would understand that we need to safeguard the integrity of those commercial discussions, both because we are bound by commercial confidentiality and to avoid undermining any future negotiation with current bidders or previous bidders. I can be clear, as I have already said, that the commercial bids that were received were considered on the basis of independent advice, not to be adequate right now to secure value for the taxpayer. Any return to the private sector needs to be on the right terms. We need to make sure that we are confident that any sale would not only represent that value for the taxpayer but also puts the business on a firm footing going forward. The long-term commercial sustainability is important—the business needs to develop and support jobs and the economy. In the most recent sale process, we were not satisfied on the basis of independent advice that those objectives had been met. Given the importance of the Esher growth deal investment in South Asia, primarily focused around Preswick Airport, can the Scottish Government give assurances that any future potential buyer for the airport would be supportive of the Esher growth deal and the Spice port? I think that the member makes an important point that emphasises the comments that I have already made about meeting the objectives that we have set. Of course, any potential future buyer would need to take their own decisions about what is right for the business, but we are clear that the Esher growth deal provides significant opportunities locally, not just for Preswick but for the wider region. We need to do all that we can to encourage any future owner to engage with local growth deal partners. Colin Smyth tried his best to get an answer to this, but the cabinet secretary was having none of it. I ask the cabinet secretary again what was the reason for the bid or bids being turned down? Was it down to the price being offered, investment, jobs or a combination of all three? Answering that in a number of different elements, we were pleased that the current sales process attracted a significant and credible interest from bidders. We considered those offers carefully from each bidder and a revised offer from the business that remained in consideration. We reached the view informed by the advice of the Preswick board and professional advisers that the sale should not progress further on commercial and broader economic terms. We agree with the Preswick board—this might go some way to answering the member's questions—that the market conditions are not particularly favourable at this time to maximise the enterprise value of the business and the value to the Scottish Government as a shareholder. That conclusion was reached again following independent assessment. The business will continue to develop its commercial and its growth strategy under the Scottish Government ownership. The last point that I would make is that the accounts were published in December, and I am sure that they were of great interest to the member. Those annual reports and accounts published on 21 December show that diverse revenue streams have helped to mitigate the Covid impact on passenger numbers in 2020-21, but there is no question that Covid has had an impact on the aviation sector. An operating profit before exceptional items was £500,000, and the total profit after tax for the year is £12.8 million. The business is progressing. We need to ensure that it is the right bidder at the right time that maximises the economic asset. To ask the Scottish Government how it will assist young people to access the expanded free bus travel scheme. The potential transformational scheme opened for applications yesterday, and there are a range of ways in which people can apply. Those are detailed on the Transport Scotland website. For example, online applications for either a Young Scot national entitlement card or a national entitlement card can be made at getyournec.scot, the improvement services online portal applications can also be made directly through local councils. I believe that, as of this morning, more than 37,000 applications had been made via the getyournec.scot portal alone. I know that there have been some concerns expressed about the complexity of the online process, but the process in place for the young person's national entitlement card is broadly similar to that for older people. It is also obvious that it is not ideal to be launching the scheme in the current circumstances. Given the situation with the pandemic, we are encouraging all the children and young people whose travel is essential this time to apply. As I said in my letter to MSPs last week, we are striking the right balance of enabling children and young people and families who potentially have the most benefit from free bus travel to access it at the earliest opportunity, whilst maintaining plans to fully market the scheme at the right time, potentially helping bus services to recover from the impacts of the pandemic. I thank the minister for that answer and the fact that he wrote to all of us MSPs and MPs last week to update us on the plans. I am certainly going to do that, but I cannot promote the scheme in my constituency. Ministers are right that it potentially is a transformational policy. I want to know how the minister will ensure that children and young people who might benefit the most get their entitlement cards as early as possible. I have had some concerns raised with me from parents applying about the complexity of the application process, particularly on the proof of identity that is required. Is the minister concerned that that might limit its success? I welcome the member's positive comments about the scheme and her commitment to promote it. There are no additional proof of age, personal or address requirements when I apply for a young Scotland NEC with a free bus travel product on it. The only difference is that parents, guardians or in some cases carers have to apply on behalf of children and young people under the age of 16 if they want an NEC or a young Scotland NEC that is free bus travel product on it, and they have to provide proof of that status in order to protect the children and young people. However, I want to give good reassurance that we are committed to delivering the scheme in a way that is safe for children and young people, and that there is still confidence in parents and guardians, and that we are absolutely determined that the children and young people who might benefit the most from free bus travel do not miss out on it. We will, of course, be monitoring the scheme and responding accordingly as we go along. I thank the minister for his reply and what he has just said about monitoring the scheme. I specifically raised the topical question, because I wanted to ask about one particular group of individuals in the application process. It has been raised to me by foster carers in my areas for care experience and looked after children. The fact that they might not have ready access to their birth certificates might have to have that additional process of going to the council's social work departments for access to them, which might complicate or extend the process for them. Obviously, those children and young people cannot be disadvantaged. We need to make sure that there are no additional barriers for them. Can the minister give some comment on that specifically and how we can make sure that there are not only barriers for care-experienced young people? Joi Martin raises a perfectly valid point. I want to offer other re-issues that we are aware of the potential challenges for foster care and kinship care families. Clearly, local authorities, which are corporate parents, are responsibly here to help families access this benefit. We are working with local authorities to ensure that that is happening. However, I say to members that if there are any issues that emerge involving their constituents, please contact my officer. We will seek to assist. The current Young Scott card has already been calculated in its part of the age standard scheme in Scotland. Why can young people not use that until they receive their new cards so that they can benefit immediately from the free bus travel? Many existing young Scott card holders are under the age of 16, so they need to apparent guardian or carer to apply for a replacement card with the free bus travel product on their behalf. That is because we are committed to delivering the scheme in a way that is safe for children and young people. For those over the age of 16, local authority partners need to ensure that they are sending a replacement card to the correct address. As details held, they are not necessarily current, hence the need to apply for an additional card. There are also offline young Scott NEC replacement processes in place with local councillors. However, I get that Mr Whippield has any specific cases in mind that he should get in touch with me. How does the Scottish Government's approach to concessionary and free bus travel differ from that of the UK Government? There are some obvious differences between the free national bus travel for the age of 60 and not state pension age. Essentially, what we have here is a determination to expand national provision of free bus travel and not shrink it as far as that is possible. That concludes topical questions.