 beansakte. Rŷsiroddweidle, ati faint o weld y sgoligau dudillion yr ystybiad線iaid gyda'r perffnas â'r strategiauLabolaidd? Mae'r strategiau Wallp Apple will sindig a'r果ryd o performingiriad Eleforth-B Weather Service mewn gwelysauёлio Twyrdd. Éu glendag Russia yn gweld I. Fyrddam Llywodraeth yn blaen i well lastly rygio ar weithfawr. Byddwn ni f?​ Can I ask the cabinet secretary if he can confirm that shot's police station has been removed from the list of stations that may face closure? If so, what other stations have also been removed from that list? Understanding from Police Scotland is that the issue around the state review has still been taken forward by local divisional commanders, and that includes divisional commanders that ar rainsheirfer gywanedirEd o ddarfod yn cywyrdd. rydym ni i bludd ei ach varyfrifiadau gyda ni wedi rhoi, a byddai chi gyr i ddar determin cyóseau. Mikel Caugleydd는데요 yn garffentedd y snos dim rwy'n dangun bod semicyn nifer sca Brock Tard, ledd yn ddig Zoellig caveira bandits roi dyma'r ddullion copsiter Wanguair, ac peirno diethanol i ddefnyddio'r ddych chi nodi tuwr yn y dden ziwyddiancydd yddydd wyliau am lle ym ddefnyddio'r ddyllion ond ai ddullion cyflen Marshall yn y dirwydd rhai alliance tyngwyr Deen. that it's fit for purpose and meets the needs of local policing, and that Police Scotland will continue to take that work forward in engaging with local communities, including local elected members, to engage in their views around the estate's proposals within their own immediate area. Margaret Mitchell. Given the criticism about and since the creation of Police Scotland, leading centralisation of pleting at the expense of local policing, will the cabinet secretary now support the abandonment of the closure of local police stations, such as Larkhall and that in Hamilton, where we play an important role in collecting intelligence at a local level and also at a national level combating serious and organised crime? The member is completely wrong in this issue around the estate review. The police estate has built up over 100 years, and Police Scotland is looking at the estate to make sure that it's fit for purpose, and it reflects the new and emerging demands that it faces. It's not about whether it diminishes policing. As assistant chief constable Andy Cowie made it very clear that the service that it delivers is about not doing less in local communities and making sure that facilities are fit for purpose. If the member thinks that the best way in which the police can go about is collecting intelligence is by having police stations, then simply the member has no idea about how modern policing is taking forward. Rona Mackay. Does the cabinet secretary agree that if Police Scotland feels the changing nature of crime and the way in which it's reported means that it's necessary and sensible to change the estate portfolio, it should be able and supported in doing that? The work that Police Scotland is taking forward, as I mentioned earlier, is to reflect on the fact that it has a police estate that has evolved over 100 years. The reality is that the way in which police stations are used today has dramatically changed than the way in which they were used 100 years ago. I would have thought that members in the chamber would welcome the fact that Police Scotland is looking at their estate to make sure that they are using it as effectively as possible and in doing so enhancing the way in which it can deliver local policing, in particular in working in collaboration with a range of other agencies that are absolutely essential in meeting the new and changing nature of crime in our society. That's exactly what Police Scotland is looking at doing. It will continue to do that by engaging with local communities, with local divisional commanders, having a key role in the decision making around any changes to replace the estate in their divisions. Question 2 has been withdrawn. To ask the Scottish Government what its most recent figures are for the uptake of the Young Scot national entitlement card. Minister, the Young Scot national entitlement card is available free of charge to everyone aged 11 to 25, living in Scotland. As of 31 May, there were approximately 655,000 Young Scot card holders. Of those card holders, 151,000 are aged between 16 to 18 and qualify for concessionary travel and bus rail and ferry through the Scottish Government's concessionary travel scheme for young people. Pauline McNeill The figures that I obtained from SPICE show that the last figures available were 2009 and that approximately 30 per cent of the population aged 16 to 18 in Scotland held the relevant entitlement card. In view of that, does the minister not think that it's time for a review of the uptake of this card, which seems to be extremely low? Is it not time also for a review for discount travel for young people? The promotion of it is extremely poor. The discounts are confusing and they are restrictive, having to travel off-peak and you have to spend more than £12. I think that Scotland's young people deserve better investment on that. I hope that the minister will in time be able to support my private member's bill on transport discounts for 16 to 18-year-olds, but does the minister not agree that that age group is entitled to a better promotion of discount travel across the country? I would disagree slightly in that the uptake of it is fairly good, but I will look at the figures that she says that she has obtained from SPICE and where we can work with Young Scot, who are an excellent organisation, I think, respected across the chamber, to further promote that scheme. I will look to do that. Wherever we can do that, we will certainly will. However, the discounts that are provided by the scheme are excellent and make a real difference. I know about her view in respect of her private member's bill. In fact, she knows that I met her and told her that, of course, the Government would look with an open mind with any piece of legislation that she chooses to bring forward. Of course, any extension of that scheme would undoubtedly have to be costed. Therefore, we will no doubt be going back into that period that everybody enjoys as members in this chamber and to the spending review, and therefore no doubt her party can put forward proposals on what the cost of that would be. However, those proposals would have to be costed in a very budget that is quite constrained. However, I will certainly speak to her and I will look to see if the promotion of the concessionary travel scheme for young people can be more visible. Brian Whittle I wonder if the minister has ever considered encouraging the extension of the use of the Young Scot national entitlement card to other areas such as access to local facilities. Minister? Some local authorities choose to tinker with the scheme to allow them access, for example, to local facilities. That is for local authorities to do that. We, because, as I say, with the budgetary constraints that we have, of course, look to maximise that budget and use it in a way that benefits the most people. In terms of the concessionary travel scheme, he might know that we have plans to extend that to modern apprentices under the age of 21. However, if proposals come forward from Opposition parties, if those proposals are costed, we can have a discussion on that. However, at the moment, there are only plans to change the national concessionary travel scheme that will be put forward in a consultation. We will look, of course, to extend them, as I say, to modern apprentices. To ask the Scottish Government how it will ensure that products that are covered by the conformity European or CE mark that are manufactured or sold in Scotland will continue to meet such standards post-Brexit. As we have made clear since the vote to leave the EU last year, maintaining Scotland's membership of all and access to the single market is the best way to protect our interests. That is a policy that we will continue to pursue and we will not accept a position where consumers or businesses in Scotland have inferior rights and protections compared to those in other EU countries. I thank the cabinet secretary for his answer. The CE marking is recognised worldwide, and many consumers across the globe who are not familiar with the European economic area recognise the confidence that a CE marking on a manufacturer's product can give. It ranges from toys to electrical equipment to smoke alarms. If we find ourselves out with the EEA, how will our manufacturers be able to show compliance with the standards that are recognised throughout the world, and will there be additional costs in doing so? Clare McArham's question highlights yet another of one of the complexities that surround Brexit and yet another benefit that may be lost to Scotland. As a non-EU state, Scottish manufacturers would likely need to pay an EU broker a fee to obtain CE marking. That serves once again as a demonstration of vital access to the single market that is for Scottish businesses and consumers. A few days before the EU starts its negotiations, apparently with the rest of the EU, we have no indication whether consumer protection even features on the agenda of the UK Government in its discussions with the EU. We do not yet have the strong and stable Government that we were told we were going to have. What we are facing is a shambolic exit—a sheg exit. I will clear my throat before I say that—from the EU under the Tory Government. Bodies in the UK issue guidelines on EU certification on a sector-wide basis. Given that, will the cabinet secretary work with his counterparts in the UK Government to ensure that the matter is taken forward on a UK-wide basis, especially as 65 per cent of Scotland's trade is with the rest of the UK? Apologies, Presiding Officer. If I could not hear the start of Dean Lockhart's question and some mumbling from the Labour branches at the time, but in relation to working on those issues with the UK Government, of course we will do that. We have done that in many issues. Wherever the interests of Scotland need to be represented, we will do that by the best means whatever. I am happy to come back to the first part of the question when I find that in the official report to Dean Lockhart. 5. Alison Johnstone To ask the Scottish Government what consideration it has given to introducing legislation on the installation of CCTV in abattoirs. Presiding Officer, the Scottish Government has already recommended the installation of CCTV as best practice in the monitoring of animals at the time of killing. I am advised that an estimated 95 per cent—the overwhelming majority of animals—are slaughtered in plants where CCTV has already been installed voluntarily. The Scottish Government does not consider that CCTV by itself prevents welfare failures or secures welfare compliance. We will continue to monitor animal welfare at time of slaughter through the presence of food standards, veterinary and inspection staff in all approved slaughterhouses. We will consider whether there is a role for the Scottish Government to help industry to produce a set of good practice protocols for the review, evaluation and use of CCTV. Data released under freedom of information law by Food Standards Scotland lists 706 breaches of animal welfare regulations, Scotland's 35 abattoirs, between May 2015 and January this year, many involving multiple animals. More than a third of those instances were rated as critical non-compliance, meaning that they had caused avoidable pain, distress or suffering. I think that many consumers would be horrified to learn that they might be supporting businesses where animals have not been treated with care and respect. Surely the cabinet secretary should commit to insisting on 100 per cent CCTV coverage in areas where animals are stunned and killed, and of course that is not to take away from the importance of veterinary inspections. Scotland has the highest welfare standards at slaughter with strict legal requirements, and it is important to avoid giving the impression that that is not the case. The Farm Animal Welfare Committee, the experts in this matter, has said that CCTV cannot act as a substitute for direct oversight by management or veterinarians. It is important to be clear that of those 706 breaches, the majority, 479, were attributable not to the slaughter house, as was implied by the questioner, but to on-farm or transport activity. I would also say that Food Standards Scotland quite rightly takes all of those matters extremely seriously indeed, not mentioned by the questioner, but that action has been taken in many of those cases to enforce breaches, as is absolutely correct. Christine Grahame Thank you, Presiding Officer. While it is indeed the case that 95 per cent of slaughterhouses, according to Food Standards Scotland, have CCTV, I would suggest that it is required, it depends where it is. I would suggest that it is required in all areas affecting animal slaughter from the point of delivery to lairage itself, race to stunning box, stunning box and point of stunning, roll out from stunning box, hoisting, sticking and bleeding area. Would the Scottish Government, if it will ever consider legislation, factor in CCTV in all of those areas? The member displays an admirable knowledge about the specific details of the process of slaughterhouse, and she is quite right to raise that each of those factors deserve carefully to be considered. That is why we have already indicated, as I said in my original answer, that we are considering helping the industry to produce a set of good-practice protocols, but it remains the case that the Farm, Animal and Welfare Committee believes that CCTV cannot by itself be the solution and is not a substitute for proper management and oversight. Of course, we will continue to keep those matters carefully under review. To ask the Scottish Government when its Rural Payments Division will issue advice to the Crofting Commission to determine the sublet crofting application at vigour West Gl Shetland, which was submitted to the commission on 24 June 2016. The Scottish Government provided the additional information requested by the Crofting Commission on 8 June this year. If no further information is required for the sublet crofting application, the Crofting Commission will complete their actions and provide advice on their outcome. I am grateful to the cabinet secretary for looking into this case. I would be grateful if he could tell my constituents when the commission will reach a determination on the application, given that it has been outstanding from June of last year. When he introduces his reforms on the Crofting Commission next week, will he ensure that the principle to be followed is that the Crofting Commission should be a body that helps crofters rather than the other way round? The member is absolutely right to raise this individual case, and I can assure him that my officials received a very full answer from the commission. It is important to say that the commission regret that the case applicant experienced an unfortunate three-month delay between August and November last year. They have given an explanation for that, and I am happy if the member wishes to explain that and to provide it for his constituent. I would say that, over the past 12 months, the average time taken for sublets is 12.2 weeks, Presiding Officer. That would indicate that there is not generally a problem with his process, but I am sure that the Crofting Commission chief executive and board members will have listened carefully to what Mr Scott has said and ensure that things are processed as quickly as possible in future. I refer members to my register of interests to ask the Scottish Government whether all farmers will receive their 2015 and 2016 subsidy payments by the end of June 2017. We completed 99.9 per cent of pillar 1 payments by the EU deadline of 15 October, and now we have only 25 of the 2015 BPS payments still to complete. In relation to pillar 2 2015 claims, we have now paid over 99 per cent of all rural priorities claims for 2015, along with 98 per cent under the land managers option scheme, and 85 per cent of ELFAS 2015 claims. We hope to complete processing the vast majority of outstanding ELFAS claims next month. We have repeatedly made clear our determination to make the vast majority of payments by the end of the payment period, and we are doing all we can to meet that goal. Everyone is working incredibly hard to process the remaining payments. We have addressed a small number of known defects that held up some claims, and they are now being progressed. We will continue to provide regular updates and progress across schemes to the rural economy and the public audit and post-legislative scrutiny committees. Edward Mountain. I thank the cabinet secretary for that long answer, which effectively said no. We have had the blunt and condemning report on the £180 million cap IT system produced by Fujitsu, a damning report produced by Audit Scotland, and we have also been warned that there might be £60 million plus of fines to be paid. Last year, cabinet secretary, you gave the Parliament a three short word answer to the problem. We are sorry. In return to me today, can you answer a short three word question on this omni shambles? Who is to blame? I could just answer the question that was asked by the member by using three words in relation to the three propositions that he made, and those three words are, you are wrong. You are wrong because the Fujitsu report did not, as you say, conclude that the system was broken. On the contrary, as he well knows, the Fujitsu report, the technical report concluded that the system is fundamentally sound, and we are sorting the defects. Secondly, I know that the Opposition is not very keen on the facts, but he is. Secondly, the Auditor General recognised that significant progress has been made, and thirdly, he is wrong that there will be a £60 million fine, and we are absolutely certain that that will not be a figure that we recognise. I would point out another fact that, last year, the Auditor General said that the fines, the penalties, would total between £40 million and £125 million. That too will not be the case. Therefore, on all three matters, the Conservatives have got their facts wrong. I suggest that they have a thorough reading, as I have, of the report. Finally, I pay tribute to the hundreds of staff around this country, most of the officers of which I have visited and many of them I have spoken to, that, unlike the Tories' carping from the sidelines, are working flat out to do the duty that we all want to see of ensuring that farmers and crofters get the money, the support payments to which they are entitled.