 when they need them. Thank you very much. That concludes General Questions. We turn now to First Minister's Questions, question number one from Ruth Davidson. Thank you, Presiding Officer. Six years ago, this Parliament introduced new rules so that parents could get more information about their local school. The 2012 Education Scotland regulations were crystal clear. Pupils and parents needed schools to provide comprehensive information particularly on their curriculum, including on subject choice and on school performance. Can I ask the First Minister, six years on, how many schools are actually complying with those regulations? First Minister, I don't have access to that specific information in front of me. I'm happy to write to Ruth Davidson with the information after this session, but there is a wide range of information available to parents about the performance of schools, about the education system in general. Of course, one of the things that this Government is determined to do is improve the information that's available about how our pupils are performing in schools. That's why we've introduced standardised assessments to replace the assessments that were previously under way by local authorities. Of course, contrary to what they previously said, the Scottish Conservatives now appear to want us to move away from that. So we will continue to take steps to make sure that there is good quality information for teachers to help to inform their judgment about pupil performance, but also for parents about the performance of their children and the schools that their children learn in. Ruth Davidson The answer to the question that I asked was just 7 per cent. That is according to a new analysis by Professor Jim Scott of Dundee University, which he will be presenting next week in a detailed paper on education and parental information. Schools should, according to this Government's own rules, give parents clear data on the curriculum and on performance, so that parents can find out about the school that they are entrusting their children with, or, where appropriate, make an informed decision about which school to choose. Yet, according to Professor Scott, six years on, the parent who wishes to make an informed choice of school has relatively little hope of doing so. When more than nine out of ten schools fail to publish the information that this Parliament requires of them, is not he right, First Minister? First Minister. Schools already publish a range of information. For example, there is a dashboard that covers broad general education. Schools also publish, for example, information on subject choice. I want to see parents have more information about the performance of their children. That is why we have standardised the assessments that were previously in place, including at primary 1, in order that we are ensuring that teachers know whether young people are meeting the benchmarks that are set by curriculum for excellence. I am a bit confused, I have to say, about Ruth Davidson's line of questioning today, because she is asking me to provide more information about the performance of young people in our schools. The Scottish Conservative Party is also asking us to abolish the standardised assessments for primary 1 that does just that. Ruth Davidson appears to be a bit confused about her own education policy. The First Minister says that she wants more information, but she is not even making sure that the information that this Parliament requires of schools is being put in the public realm. 7 per cent is shameful. Here is why this matters. The Government says that we need parents to get more involved in schools, because that is how children learn better. I agree, yet, in Scotland's secondaries, it is quite clear that too often parents are being left in the dark as to what is actually going on inside the school gate until they suddenly discover halfway through their child's school journey that subjects that they thought were an offer are not. The Government knows that more needs to be done, which is why it launched a new action plan on increasing parental involvement last month. Why will it put the action plan in law so that we can actually see some action? The First Minister of course. Based on our experience around standardised assessments, which the Conservatives called on us to do and are now asking us to abolish, if we were to announce tomorrow that we were going to put this parental engagement strategy in statute, as Ruth Davidson has just asked me to do, I would guarantee you that the Conservatives would decide that they suddenly opposed that, because when it comes to measures to improve our education system, the Tories are good on rhetoric, but they tend to put short-term party political interests over the interests of pupils in our schools. As I said, we publish a range of information. For the last three years, we have also been publishing information on the curriculum levels at P1, 4, 7 and S3. We will continue to look to extend the range of information that parents have about the performance of children in schools. I just say again that it strikes me as being rather strange that Ruth Davidson is pursuing this line of questioning today, when, as I understand it, next week the Tories will bring forward a motion to ask us to abolish standardised assessments in P1, which are all about providing more information. I think that the Scottish Conservatives should really sort out their own position on these matters before coming to ask me questions about them. Ruth Davidson The First Minister has the gall to stand there and talk about anyone else inflating their education rhetoric. This is the woman who stood here a year ago and heralded a flagship education bill as the most radical transformation of our schools since devolution, and then she promptly threw it in the bin. Let's get back to the question that I actually asked her, which was about the action plan that the Deputy First Minister launched just last month. Perhaps in that instance, she did not see the calls from organisations such as Save the Children, who said that we had hoped that the plan would be underpinned by legislative change. It is yet another let-down from a Government that has proved timid and weak in improving our schools, a Government that dumps its own education bill because it finds it too hard, a Government that introduces an action plan but refuses to put it into law and a Government that brings in new rights for parents and then won't enforce them. The First Minister says that education is her top priority, but isn't it the truth that when she's put to the test any test, she fails? On the education bill, we are taking forward the proposals that would have been in that bill much more quickly. I think that that is a good thing. In terms of the parental engagement strategy, we will take forward the proposals in that. That, of course, has the support of COSLA and, perhaps more importantly, the national parent forum. Ruth Davidson's hypocrisy on those matters is absolutely breathtaking. I'm going to read something out. She asked me to make available more information so that people know how young people in our schools are doing. Let me just read out something to the chamber. We welcome the Scottish Government's recent decision to reintroduce national testing in primary schools. It is an admission that the current system has not been good enough. We believe that the Scottish Government needs to be far bolder in measuring progress in our education system. The Scottish Government should design the new standardised test at P1, P4 and P7 to fit international methodologies. I've just read out the Scottish Conservative 2016 manifesto. I understand that, next week, the Scottish Conservatives are going to vote or bring forward a motion for the abolition of standardised assessment at primary 1. The hypocrisy on those matters is breathtaking. What we see from the Conservatives is that they are shameless opportunists on those matters. They do not care. They care only about the short-term political opportunity. They care not a jot about school children. They care not a jot about standards in our schools. Ruth Davidson has revealed that yet again today. 2. Richard Leonard Oedic Scotland's report reminds us that children living in low-income households are three times more likely to suffer mental health problems than their more affluent peers. It also makes clear that access to Scotland's mental health services for children and young people has not got better during Nicola Sturgeon's time as First Minister. It has got worse. Demand is increasing for mental health services. I very much welcome the Audit Scotland report that has been published today. That report confirms that spending by national health service boards on children and young people's mental health has gone up by just under 12 per cent in real terms since 2013. The CAMHS workforce has gone up by 11 per cent since 2014. The system is seeing more patients within 18 weeks, but demand is growing faster. As the report this morning shows, there has been a 22 per cent increase in referrals to CAMHS. The report is also right in saying that the system is geared too much towards specialist care. The plans that we set out last week in the programme for government are designed to address exactly that investment in school councillors and school nurses to ensure that every secondary school has a counselling service, mental health first aid treatment being available for teachers and, of course, the establishment of a community mental wellbeing service for five to 24-year-olds. I would hope that Richard Leonard would welcome all of those initiatives. Richard Leonard. Let me be clear, First Minister. I asked why have things got to crisis point under your watch, not what was in your programme for government last week. After all, that was the SNP's 12th programme for government and your fifth as First Minister. This summer, the Government at last published a review of children who were rejected for mental health treatment, and it revealed that some young people were being turned away from treatment even though they were self-harming. Does the First Minister even begin to understand the human cost of that, the damage done, the lives changed irreparably? Does the First Minister even know how many of those referrals have been rejected since she took office? The First Minister absolutely understands the human cost when the national health service, either in mental health services or physical health services, does not provide care as quickly as we want it to. Richard Leonard asked me about performance under this Government. The key thing here about mental health, and I think that this is widely recognised, is that this Government has invested more in mental health. There are more people working in mental health, including in children and adolescent mental health services. The system is seeing more patients, it is also seeing more patients within 18 weeks, but demand is rising faster. As I have said many times before, that is a good thing, because it means that the stigma associated with mental health is reducing. What we have to do is continue to build capacity that we are doing, but also to make sure that we are building capacity in the right places. Too many young people are referred to specialist services when that is not necessarily the right option for them. I said a few moments ago about investment in school counselling and the new community mental wellbeing service. Those are important initiatives that we are taking forward. As we do that, we also ensure that specialist care is there for those who really need it as quickly as possible. I hope that people across the chamber will get behind those plans because they are the right plans and in the interests of young people across the country. Richard Leonard Presiding Officer, the exact question that I asked was how many referrals for treatment had been rejected since Nicola Sturgeon became First Minister. The answer is almost 25,000. 25,000 cases rejected since you took office, First Minister. Today's report calls for a step change and Labour will work with the Government to deliver the changes that we need. That is why we press for councils in schools and for a review of those rejected cases. However, the reality is that the Government has been too slow to act because it did not take that issue seriously enough. With thousands of Scotland's children rejected for treatment during her time in office, surely the First Minister must show an ounce of regret that her Government did not act sooner? The new Minister for Mental Health has today admitted that too many children and adolescents are being let down. Will the First Minister admit that she has been too slow to act, that she has let these children and young people down for over a decade, and will she today offer them an apology? I regret and apologise to any patient, whether they are an adult or a child, who is not seen by the national health service either for mental health problems or physical health problems as quickly as they should be. I say that unreservedly, but I do not accept Richard Leonard's characterisation. As I have said before, the Audit Scotland report recognises that we have put additional resources into mental health. We have seen additional people employed to work in mental health. Since 2007, the CAMHS workforce has increased, I think, by 69 per cent. We have recognised the rising demand on mental health services, and we have acted on that. However, demand has risen faster than I think that anybody necessarily anticipated, which I think is a good thing, so we recognise that we must do even more, not just to build the capacity of specialist services, but also to build the capacity of community services. On rejected referrals, it is exactly because we were concerned by rejected referrals that we set up the audit of rejected referrals. Denise Coyer, of course, is looking at this and published her first recommendations this very week, and there will be a new national CAMHS referral criteria published later this autumn. We are acting and we have set out further plans. What I would say to Richard Leonard—I welcome this—if he is serious about working with the Government to take forward those plans, I welcome that, and perhaps we can build some much-needed consensus on a very, very important issue. We have some constituency supplementaries, the first from Jamie Greene. The address into Ironferries is a lifeline service for residents in quite a vital part of its tourism industry. Unfortunately, this past year, that service has been severely disrupted due to continuous cancellations. Once again, the Isle of Iron is offline for technical reasons, and only half of the timetable services are currently running. It is not just this service, First Minister. Right across Scotland, island communities are being let down by an aging fleet and a lack of new vessels—the new vessels promised—are ready over a year late. Does the First Minister understand why Scotland's island communities are quickly losing their patience with this Government's inability to provide them regular and reliable ferry services? Can I ask her to take this up with the cabinet secretary for transport so that he can deal with this as a matter of priority? Transport secretary deals with those matters on a daily basis. I am sure that he would be delighted to meet the member to discuss them in more depth. Of course, I am aware, as is the entire Government, about pressures on the ferry network. We understand the impact that that has on people's lives and businesses in our island communities. I indeed heard first hand from communities in Arran when the cabinet recently met in Arran about the pressures that increased visitor numbers are putting on those lifeline services. Those are complex challenges, but we are determined to improve services. We have invested significantly in ferry services and we continue to work to address those issues. Over £1 billion has been invested in ferry services across the Clyde and Hebrides since 2007. Eight new ferries have been added to the CalMac fleet since 2007. We are continuing to invest in new vessels and ferry infrastructure to renew the fleet. Two new vessels have been commissioned from Ferguson's shipyard. A range of work is on-going and we will continue to be undertaken to ensure that those living and working on our islands have the services that they deserve. First Minister, I draw your attention to the plight of my constituents, the Bakish family, who have had their appeal for asylum rejected by the United Kingdom Home Office, despite the very new risk of religious persecution and the danger for their lives should they return to Pakistan. The community in North Glasgow, where the family has stayed since 2012, has rallied around them. Their two sons, Somer and Areem, were joined by school friends in the moderator of the Church of Scotland, handing in a petition to the Home Office, signed by 85,000 people in support of the family. Does the First Minister agree with me that the need for a petition in the first place to draw attention to the plight of the Bakish family demonstrates just how fundamentally flawed and discredited the UK asylum process has become? Will you offer the family your support and best wishes? Can the Scottish Government, as I have already done, also make representations to the UK Government during attention to the family's plight? I agree wholeheartedly with the sentiment of Bob Dorris's question and I agree about the deficiencies in the UK Government's asylum and immigration regime. The Scottish Government believes very strongly that asylum seekers must be treated humanely and fairly with their dignity and rights upheld at every stage of the process. The Home Office has a duty to ensure that full account is taken of all the individual circumstances in every case, and this is particularly important when applications are refused and absolutely imperative when children are involved. I am very heartened to hear how the local community has rallied around the Bakish family and about the response to the Reverend Pollock petition. I would also like to congratulate Somer and Areem on what they have achieved in very, very difficult circumstances. They are an absolute credit to their parents, their school, their community, and indeed they are a credit to Scotland, so the Scottish Government will continue to look at what appropriate representations we can make. Montrose port is a key industry in Montrose in the north-east. Keeping the port open requires dredging and disposal of sand. Last week, contrary to expert marine consultant advice, Marine Scotland refused to renew the port's disposal licence. The next time that there is a strong easterly or swell, the port could silt up, lose depth and potentially close due to inability to dredge. Will the First Minister instruct the cabinet secretary and Marine Scotland to immediately visit the port authority to, at the very least, issue a temporary licence for 12 months and prevent an economic and social catastrophe? I am very happy to ask the cabinet secretary to engage with the port authority. I am sure that the cabinet secretary would also be happy to meet the member to look at those issues in great detail. I am sure that he is already being looked at in great detail and to take whatever action is considered appropriate. The First Minister will have seen the comprehensive letter at the weekend from the teachers union, the EIS, on the review of assessments for five-year-olds in school. The union states have created a high-stakes environment and a slippery path to league tables. They are swallowing up time and drain resource. The First Minister promised that this would not happen and yet the teaching union disagrees. What more evidence does she need that those tests should go? I respectfully disagree with Willie Rennie. As I said in this chamber last week, assessments in our primary schools, including in primary 1, are not new. 29 out of 32 councils already carried out assessments. In fact, many of those councils carried out two assessments every year. What the Scottish Government has done is standardised them so that all local authorities are using the same assessment and then made them relevant to the curriculum for excellence levels, which, of course, at primary 1 is a play-based curriculum. Those assessments are not high-stakes. There is no pass or fail to those assessments. Of course, it is up to teachers when in the school year pupils undertake them. Of course, if a teacher does not think that it is appropriate for any child to undertake them, that is entirely up to the teacher's discretion. They provide important diagnostic information to inform teacher judgment about the performance of young people. We set benchmarks for children in primary 1 levels that we expect them to meet. Some people might disagree with that, but I have not heard disagreements to that in this chamber. We set benchmarks that we expect children to meet in primary 1. It is absurd to suggest that we should not then try to assess whether or not children are actually meeting those benchmarks. It then allows early intervention, if necessary, if children are not performing as expected. It also allows a teacher to know whether a child is performing better than expected and to stretch that child rather than allowing them to get bored in the classroom. Of course, we have seen educational experts. Sue Ellis, Lindsay Paterson today, in a newspaper, talk about the importance of benchmarking information. We should take some of the politics out of this debate and focus on what is right for our children and education as a whole. Willie Rennie Lindsay Paterson supports league tables. It is shocking for the First Minister to claim that she is supporting his position. It sounds also—in fact, she is—she is saying that EIS is wrong. Just last week, the First Minister said that she was listening to teachers, now she is ignoring them. The evidence is mounting 170 pages of searing criticism from teachers, a damning letter from the EIS, the waste of resource, the useless value of the information, the high stakes environment, the slippery path to league tables. Teachers are very clear, they have said that the test should go. The union has said that the test should go. When this Parliament votes next week to scrap the primary one tests for pupils, will she respect the will of Parliament and scrap the tests? She dodged the question last week. If the Parliament says stop, will she stop? First Minister Firstly, we will argue our case rigorously and robustly. That is what happens in a democracy. Can I just take on some of the points that Willie Rennie has raised? I am not saying that the EIS is wrong. I am saying that I have a difference of opinion with the EIS. That is entirely legitimate. I have spoken to many teachers who also have a difference of opinion about assessments. Let me read out some of the teacher quotes from the survey that the EIS carried out of its members. I know that there were many quotes in that survey that did not support standardised assessment. Here is some data. The data is incredibly detailed and personalised. Feedback will be very useful in looking at next steps. I really like the fact that there was not the use of timers to ensure that children were given thinking time and supportive required. In P1, the assessments were carried out on iPads. The child often had no idea how they were being formally assessed. It worked well. The P1 numeracy task was appropriate and aligned with curriculum for excellence. I thought that they fitted in quite well with levels and provided a range of questions. I know that Willie Rennie does not want to hear what some teachers have actually said about standardised assessments. There is a difference of opinion, and I accept that. However, as I said earlier on, we set benchmarks for how we expect our young people to perform in primary 1. It is incumbent on us to know whether that is the case. The early intervention can be taken as required. I have said very clearly on so many occasions that I want to see as race standards in Scottish education and I want to see as closing the attainment gap. We need data to inform the action that we take to do that. I will continue to make what I think is the common sense argument for this. I look forward to the debate continuing. Mark Ruskell Thank you. I declare an interest as an associate member of the British Veterinary Association. The Government's chief vet has claimed this morning that the practice of shipping live dairy calves on five-day journeys from Scotland to Spain is acceptable and that criticism is alarmist. Is that the Government's official position? If not, will the First Minister join me in congratulating P&O ferries on their decision to ban live exports this week? The issue is extremely emotive. It is also more complex than some of the coverage that I stress. Some of the coverage has given the impression of—I thought that the chief vet in the papers this morning set out quite clearly some of the facts behind the claim of 100-hour journeys. As Mary Gougeon has also set out in Parliament this week, the issue here is that male dairy bull calves do not have a market for them right now here in Scotland. If they are not exported for production, what happens is that they are slaughtered at birth—a small number are exported—but farmers here want to find alternative markets domestically. Welfare of animals is absolutely paramount. Transport in the EU is subject to strict regulation, and there is no hard evidence that those regulations are being breached. As the member is aware, the Scottish Government is currently carrying out a year-long monitoring project that will look in more detail at this. We will continue to be very rigorous as we observe this and continue to take whatever action we consider to be necessary. John Lewis employs several thousand staff in Scotland. It faces challenging times, with profits down 99 per cent. The company cites Brexit uncertainty as a contributing factor, but Dominic Grabb says that it is John Lewis' own fault, stating just this morning in the BBC that there is a temptation for business not doing well to blame Brexit. Does the First Minister agree that the UK Government should stop burying its head in the sand and accept that they are the ones putting our economy at risk? With Dominic Grabb's comments this morning, the clueless, incompetent shambles of a Tory UK Government is really taking the biscuit. It really begs her belief that the Tories, who are taking the country in Scotland's case against our democratic wishes out of the EU, have the nerve to turn around and blame businesses for raising concerns and say that they are using Brexit as some kind of an excuse. The sooner the Tory Government get over their own ideological civil war and start putting the interests of businesses across the UK at the forefront of their considerations, frankly, the better for all of us. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. The First Minister will be aware of the powerful and harrowing testimonies by survivors to the Scottish child abuse inquiry. Can I ask the First Minister how she responds to the concerns expressed by those representing survivors of abuse about reports that legislation to create a survivors compensation scheme may not be introduced until 2021, with implementation obviously much later still. Will the First Minister confirm that she will look at how the scheme could be taken forward with greater urgency? Will she make a commitment to create an interim compensation scheme in order that the many elderly and vulnerable survivors may secure the justice and support that they need now and before it is too late for them? Can I thank Johann Lamont for raising this really important issue? The stories of survivors are extremely harrowing and, of course, this Government set up the child abuse inquiry. The report on survivors compensation was just received by the Scottish Government last week. All members would understand that we are taking the time to consider the recommendations in that report very carefully but also extremely sympathetically. I cannot give Johann Lamont the specific answers to her questions today because we are still considering the report. The Deputy First Minister will come forward to Parliament in due course to set out the next steps, but I would absolutely associate myself with the Scottish Government with the sentiment of the question that Johann Lamont asked. From today, Social Security Scotland will make the first payment of the new carers allowance supplement, the first devolved benefit to be paid, which recognises the important contribution that carers make across Scotland. Will the First Minister outline how the Scottish Government will continue to support carers and how it is building a social security system that is fairness and dignity at its heart? Today is a landmark moment in the history of devolution and it is one that we probably should take a moment to celebrate. Today, the first payments will be made by our new executive agency, Social Security Scotland, through the carers allowance supplement. That carers allowance supplement will put an extra £442 a year into the pockets of carers in this financial year. That is an increase of 13 per cent and a total investment of more than £30 million a year. I think that that is something of a proud moment for this Parliament and indeed for Scotland. We will continue to take forward our new social security powers that will include looking at additional support for carers. However, as I said in the programme for Government last week, we also hope to deliver the pregnancy and baby payments of the new best start grant before Christmas, again another milestone in this Parliament taking some power over social security. Let me just end by saying that I hope that it won't be too much into the future before this Parliament has total control over social security because, as we are already proving, this Parliament would make a far better job of it than Westminster is currently managing. 4. Stewart Stevenson To ask the First Minister what discussions the Scottish Government has had with the UK Government regarding reports that an estimated 1,000 miles of roads in Scotland have no mobile phone signal. Mobile telecommunications, of course, is a reserved matter and is therefore the responsibility of the UK Government to improve coverage. It is worth pointing out that the UK Government's failed mobile infrastructure project promised 84 mass to cover what are called not spots but managed to deliver the grand total of three. However, at its recent meeting with the UK Secretary for Digital, Michael Matheson, raised the issue of roadside mobile connectivity. We pressed in particular to see progress made in the Home Office's emergency services mobile communications programme, which has been beset with delays and we await from them confirmation of the proposed approach to delivery. However, because we cannot wait for Westminster to deliver decent mobile connectivity in rural Scotland, we have created our own mobile infrastructure plan, committing £25 million to improving 4G coverage. We have recently awarded a contract for the programme, and the supplier is currently working towards delivery of the initial 16 sites in remote parts of Scotland. 4. Stewart Stevenson I very much welcome the £25 million that the Scottish Government has put into improving mobile telephony in Scotland. However, as we know, the UK Government has little understanding and less interest in Scotland. Is it now time for responsibility and the associated funding for mobile telephony to be completely devolved? The First Minister Yes, absolutely. There is a pattern that emerges sometimes where matters are reserved, which is being talked about by welfare. The UK Government does not get its act together and fails to deliver, and then the Scottish Government has got to step in to do Westminster's job for it. That has been true in aspects of welfare. It is now true on mobile connectivity. I think that it is about time that we cut out the middleman in all of this and just devolve those powers to Scotland so that we can get on with it ourselves. 5. Liz Smith To ask the First Minister what action the Scottish Government will take to improve the implementation of the 1 plus 2 modern languages policy in broad general education. The First Minister We are already taking action to increase the pace of implementation of the 1 plus 2 modern languages policy in the broad general education. Since 2013-14, we have provided a total of £27.2 million in additional funding to support its delivery. Alongside that, we have provided funding each year to Scotland's national centre for languages to support schools and local authorities in delivering 1 plus 2. Information provided by local authorities in April shows that at least 91 per cent of primary schools are meeting pupils' entitlement to learning a first additional language from P1 onwards, and at least 62 per cent of secondary schools are providing learning of a first additional language from S1 to S3. Liz Smith Thank you for that First Minister. The Telegraph reported at the weekend that 38 per cent of the secondary schools in Scotland are not implementing the 1 plus 2 programme. You have just confirmed that yourself. That is despite the £27 million that you have just referred to. That is at the same time that the number of teachers in modern languages has declined by 20 per cent in the last 10 years. The number of entries for SQA levels 3 to 5 in French and in German has fallen by 60 per cent and 58 per cent respectively in the last five years. Will the First Minister admit that the Scottish Government's language policy is not working nearly well enough and that it is yet another example of why there is an urgent need to review subject choice under the curriculum for excellence? The First Minister No, I do not agree with that. We have work to do. Of course, the 38 per cent was the other side of my articulation of 62 per cent that is, but we will continue to make progress on delivering 1 plus 2. I think that just to give some context here in terms of performance overall about language education, the total entries of language hires are up 2.6 per cent since 2007. The total passes of language hires are up 6.3 per cent since 2007. This is the fifth year that language higher entries have exceeded 7,500 overall. Statistics published last December show that total teacher numbers are increasing. There is lots of progress to look at, but we want to continue to do more because we know that language learning helps to build confidence. It helps to foster interest in other cultures and encourages tolerance and respect, which I know that not all people in the Conservative Party are keen on, but we are very keen on it on those benches. Gordon MacDonald The SNP set out its 1 plus 2 languages policy in our 2011 manifesto. I am pleased to hear today of the progress that is being made. I also took the time to search the Conservative party manifesto of 2011, 2015, 2016 and 2017 and cannot find a single mention of foreign language teaching. The 1 plus 2 policy would never have been implemented by the Tories. Does the First Minister agree that the Tories' only guiding principle is to attack the SNP even at the expense of our children's education? I think that that is a point that Gordon MacDonald made very well. It is not a mention of modern languages in any of its manifestos, although I remind Gordon MacDonald that, as we know now from standardised assessments, even if it had been in its manifesto, it would not have mattered to the Tories because they would have jettised it at the first opportunity to inflict a defeat on the SNP. That is what the Tories are. We are concerned about the interests of children in our schools, and that will continue to be what stands between us. The First Minister really is in denial about that. The precipitous decline in both enrolment and attainment in certain modern languages has been tracked now over a number of years. Those skills are critical to the economic future of this country and to our children's capacity to participate in that future. Will she take her head out of the sand, admit that we have a problem and tell us what she is going to do about it? If Ian Gray had chosen to listen, he would have heard me say that we have much more work to do because it is so important to our economy, it is so important to the confidence of our young people, and it is important to the interests of other countries and other cultures. I have set out some of the progress, but we will continue to invest and support local authorities in schools in making the further progress that we all want to see. To ask the First Minister in light of the David Hume Institute report, Wealth of the Nation, what action the Scottish Government will take to improve productivity. Raising productivity growth is vital to boosting our long-term economic performance as the report highlights Scotland's productivity is the highest in the UK behind London and the south-east. It also shows that among the UK's city regions Aberdeen and Edinburgh have higher productivity than anywhere outside of London. Of course, in the last 10 years, Scotland has largely closed the productivity gap with the rest of the UK. However, we know that more needs to be done to match the levels of productivity in top-performing European countries, which is why we have set out further policies in the programme for government to boost productivity. Those include a commitment to invest an additional £7 billion over and above existing plans on schools, hospitals, transport, digital connectivity and clean energy by 2026. I thank the First Minister for her response. Comparing ourselves to the rest of the UK whose performance has indeed been woeful is not desperately ambitious. Since 2007, every SNP-led administration has set a target for improving productivity, and rightly so, but that target has been missed completely. We were to be in the top quartile of OECD countries for productivity by 2017. That is equivalent of getting promoted to the Premier League. Instead, we have been relegated to the third division. It is not improvement, but it has gone in reverse and productivity is effectively flatlined. What specific lessons will she take from the David Hume Institute report to improve productivity and drive growth in Scotland? We will continue to invest in infrastructure and increase our investment in business R&D, set out in last year's programme for government, and continue in just now. We will continue to take the action that we have set out on growing exports. Jackie Baillie says that we should not compare ourselves to the rest of the UK. I am going to place a small bet here. If Scotland was doing worse than the rest of the UK on this measure, I think that Labour would want to compare Scotland to the rest of the UK. If she would listen to my original answer, she would have heard me say that, yes, we have closed the gap with the rest of the UK, but our aim is to match the level of productivity in the top-performing European countries. That is exactly what we are working to do. In the first quarter of this year, productivity has increased by 1.7 per cent. Productivity growth has, as I said, been higher than any other country or region of the UK, including London. Look at the David Hume report. For example, it says, and I am quoting from it here, among UK regions, Scotland is behind only London and the south-east for productivity. It goes on to say that financial services are more productive than in all the parts of the UK. Similarly, Scottish manufacturing is more productive than the UK average. There is good news in our progress in productivity, but we will continue to make the investments to get us to the level of other European countries. Dean Lockhart Thank you, Presiding Officer. The economy committee recently found that, over the past 10 years, the SNP has failed to reach all seven of its own economic targets, including for productivity. Does the First Minister agree with the findings of the economy committee and does she accept responsibility for her Government failing to meet every one of its own economic targets? I cannot believe that the member has managed to miss the financial crash and the austerity that has happened over these times. If he wants to talk about economic performance, let us talk about economic performance. On the most recent statistics, we know that last year the Scottish economy grew faster than the economy in the rest of the UK. We know that unemployment is close to a record low. We know that employment levels are close to a record high. We know that for female employment and youth employment, we are performing better than the rest of the UK. Export growth in Scotland is faster than the rest of the UK. We have closed the productivity gap. There is lots to be positive about in our economic performance. We have more to do, but the biggest threat to our economic performance is Tory Brexit. That is the reality that the Tories really need to wake up to. 7. Shona Robison To ask the First Minister how the Scottish Government will mark the official opening of the V&A Dundee. The opening of the V&A Dundee on Saturday heralds an exciting new chapter for the city of Dundee. It is a fantastic addition to the diversory of cultural experiences that Scotland has to offer promoting our nation globally and attracting visitors and investment. The Scottish Government has been a long-term supporter of the project with substantial financial investment in the building's construction and operation. A number of Scottish Government ministers are participating in opening events this week. I look forward to touring the building with some of Dundee's young people tomorrow. Last night, I saw the inside of the V&A Dundee for the first time and I can tell the First Minister that she is in for a real treat tomorrow night. Will the First Minister join with me in thanking all of the public and private sector partners who have worked so hard over the past 10 years to make the V&A Dundee dream into a reality? Can she say what she expects the transformational impact for Dundee to be from the iconic project and the significant investment made by the Scottish Government and other funders to deliver it? Finally, what she thinks could be the next thing for Dundee in its renewal journey? I agree absolutely with Shona Robison. I want to congratulate all the public and private sector partners. That is an astonishing achievement. Of course, the Scottish Government has been a significant funder. We have provided £38 million towards construction and also provided almost £7 million in revenue funding to date. I am looking forward to seeing it tomorrow from the pictures and footage that I have seen that looks absolutely stunning. On its transformational potential for the city of Dundee, it is probably quite hard to overstate what that might be. It puts Dundee firmly on the cultural map of the world. It will attract more visitors to Dundee. I am sure that it will attract more investment into Dundee. The city of Dundee has every reason to feel incredibly optimistic about the future. The Scottish Government is very ambitious for Dundee and looks forward to making additional investments in Dundee. I am looking forward to being pressed to do exactly that by Shona Robison over the months and years to come. Thank you very much. That concludes First Minister's questions. We are going to move on to members' business shortly, in the name of Linda Fabiani, on East Kilbride workers said near Prasaran. However, we are going to take a few moments for the gallery in particular to change so that members can move out quietly. I will suspend for a few minutes to allow that to happen. However, it is suspended for a few minutes.