 Rydw i'n gwych du'n cael ei bod yn fawr i'w mewn bynnag i gael ddweud o'r ysgolwch i gyffredinol achos 3rdal amgylchau yng nghymru. Felly, gw parties yn gwybod o'r gael ddweud o'r cyffredinol a'i gael ddweud o'r cyffredinol ac hefyd i ddweud o'r cyffredinol, oedd mae hi'n gwneud i gael i ddweud o'r cyffredinol oedd mae'n gwneud i gael ddweud o'r cyffredinol.odi ddio kör hyn Vamosffaith gysylltionol yn ymdda Meir streaming number of subjects that Scottish School pupils can take. In reply she said this, We will continue to work hard with local authorities and with schools to ensure that our young people have the broadest and widest possible choice. Can ask the First Minister what progress has she made in achieving this. First Minister. I will continue to ensure ...that the pupils have the widest possible choice of course. The System has changed over the last few years iawn i festu allan y caelu wych chi wedi ymlaen. Felly awr, dytle i ddim fφo rhau ymchannwys, dalein, dalu ffgrwrs, ftagwadau, Stratgiad corwyddoesol i wneud. Ruth Davidson? I'm not sure that was much of a progress report on school choice, so let's take the progress that was presented to this Parliament yesterday. Professor Jim Scott appeared before the education committee and he talked of the staggering drop in subject choice that we're seeing in our schools following the introduction of curriculum for excellence. Now, more than half of Scottish schools restrict pupils to just six exam courses in S4. Here's the impact. Over the last five years, those restricted choices brought in under this SNP Government have cost Scottish pupils 622,000 qualifications. That's 622,000 courses that would have been sat but never were. Now, Professor Scott, who is a former head of 18 years standing, so those shouting from a sedentary position might want to listen to what he had to say yesterday. He said this, I actually struggle to say that in a public forum it is almost unbelievable. I think so too. What does the First Minister make of it? First Minister. I think it's entirely unbelievable actually. Unfortunately for Ruth Davidson, I've looked rather closely and with interest at Professor Scott's research. The problem is when you try to compare the old and the new systems, it's a bit like comparing apples and oranges. Professor Scott, it might do Ruth Davidson well to listen to some of this. Professor Scott focused on awards below higher level. That's essentially looking at what pupils achieve by the time they finish S4, but the days of large numbers of pupils leaving school at S4 are long gone. The overwhelming majority stay on to S5 and S6. We focus on the awards pupils achieve by the time they leave school. For a young person, that's what matters to their chances of getting an apprenticeship, a college place, a university place or a job. When you look at that, we see attainment overall is up and the gap between the richest and the poorest is nano. Here are some figures for Ruth Davidson to chew over. The proportion of pupils getting passys at higher level has risen more than 10 per cent. It was 50.4 per cent in 2009-10. In 2016-17 it was 61.2 per cent. When we look at national 5 level, the proportion leaving school with an award has risen 9 per cent. It was 77.1 per cent in 2009-10. It was 86.1 per cent in 2016-17. At higher level, the gap between the richest and the poorest has fallen by almost 7 per cent. Here's one last statistic that I think should interest people right across this chamber. It comes from Maureen MacKenna, the director of education in Glasgow. She points out that in Drumchappel High School, I think, recognises one of our more deprived areas. In 2006, 8 per cent of pupils achieved one or more higher by the end of S5. In 2018, that was 53 per cent. What? 8 per cent to 53 per cent. You know, I think it's about time. Ruth Davidson stopped talking our schools down and started celebrating the achievements of pupils right across this country. Ruth Davidson? I can tell that the First Minister doesn't want to talk about that 622,000 figure. In fact, she would rather talk about anything else. I think I heard her at the beginning as she was rising saying that she didn't believe it, but let me go back to the actual transcript that was presented to the committee yesterday. If things had gone on as they were in 2013, we would have had an extra 622,000 qualifications in Scotland in the five years since. That is the analysis. It is not just about those 622,000 qualifications that were lost. It is also about the drop in subject choice and where it is hitting pupils the hardest. Let's talk about schools in deprived areas, shall we? The schools that are most likely to drop down to as few as five subjects in S4, leaving pupils with little room to pursue a rounded education, are in those deprived areas. Let's listen to Dr Marina Shapira of Stirling University, who also gave evidence yesterday. She said, yet this, the reduction in subject choice is larger in schools in higher areas of deprivation and the reduction is larger in schools where there are more children on free school meals. If we are going to sort the problem, we need to accept the evidence. Will the First Minister accept the evidence from Dr Marina Shapira? Let me offer some more evidence from the director of education in Glasgow city council. She said it just this week. In 2008, just 5 per cent achieved five or more hires by the end of S5. In 2018, that had increased to what she described as an incredible 13.4 per cent, an increase of 178 per cent. She points to another school in Glasgow, St Thomas Aquinas secondary school, where in 2006 29 per cent achieved more than one higher by the end of S5. In 2018, that was up to 65 per cent. All of the statistics are pointing in the same direction. I am not sure if Ruth Davidson is standing here today saying that somehow that does not matter. The proportion of pupils getting passes at higher level has risen by more than 10 per cent. It has risen by 9 per cent for those getting a qualification at national 5 level. We also see over 50,000 skill-based qualifications, awards and certificates have been achieved this year, which incidentally is double the figure of skill-based qualifications that were achieved in 2012. Just for added measure, talking about closing the attainment gap, just this morning, UCAS has released new data showing that Scotland has hit another new record for the number of young people getting a university place. Let's start celebrating that success. Lastly, I do not think that the Tories have a shred of credibility on education left after the U-turn that they did yesterday, voting to scrap primary 1 assessments that they have spent the last four years demanding that the Scottish Government introduce zero credibility for Ruth Davidson. The First Minister can ball and shout the odds all she wants, but there are legitimate questions to be asked about education under her watch, and I will continue to ask them. In May, the First Minister accepted that the drop-in-subject choice needed a dress. I read out her answer just a few months ago. Today, she is saying that to have half of schools offering only six courses at S4 seems absolutely fine, but the point here is that the crash in subject choice that we are now seeing is a symptom of a wider malaise, and it is caused by the chaotic introduction of curriculum for excellence. Under this Government, we have seen reduced subject choice, we have seen teachers left in the dark, we have seen a higher pass rate falling, we have seen attainment in national exams down by a third compared to the old standard grades, and yet on education, this Government shows no sign of listening to the evidence, of listening to this Parliament or of listening to parents or to teachers, and more must be done before damage is exceeded. The solution is a complete overhaul of curriculum for excellence, and for once will this Government listen. If Ruth Davidson does not like me shouting out the evidence, let me repeat it a bit more quietly for her. The proportion of pupils getting passes at higher level has increased. The proportion of pupils getting passes at national 5 level has increased. The number of skill-based qualifications being achieved by our young people in schools has doubled since 2012, and we have got a record number of young people going to university. That sounds to me like success that this Government is determined to build on. Curriculum for excellence has just been lauded and praised by the International Council of Education Advisers. Ruth Davidson, week after week on, stands up here demanding more information on the performance of pupils in schools, and yet yesterday she and her party performed a breathtaking U-turn and voted against assessments in primary 1 that she called for, demanded in her manifesto and has demanded at regular intervals since then. Ruth Davidson, on issues of education, is a shameless opportunist. I will leave her to the political opportunism, and I, the Deputy First Minister and this entire Government, will go on with delivering for the interests of pupils right across this country. I think that the people of Scotland will notice the difference. Presiding Officer, this Government appears to still believe that without the standardised testing of five-year-olds, teachers will not be able to assess our children's learning needs. Scotland's teachers profoundly disagree. Why does the First Minister believe that she knows more about teaching Scotland's school children than Scotland's school teachers? I continue to believe that, if we set benchmark for what we think children in primary 1 should be achieving in education, we have a duty to those children, to their parents and to wider society to be able to know whether those children are achieving those benchmarks or not. That is judged by the judgment of teachers, but I think that it is right that that is informed by the standardised assessments that we have been talking about. I continue to take that view. As the Deputy First Minister said yesterday, he and we will reflect on Parliament's judgment yesterday, and we will come back with a statement in due course. I think that there is a mix of opinions among teachers. Let me read out, for example, the opinion of Lindsay Watt, who is a former head teacher at Castleview Primary School in Edinburgh, the winner of the Robert Owen award, which recognises inspirational educators. That teacher said that this is a teacher of almost 40 years experience, 25 as a head teacher. I am confused as to why there has been such a furory over primary 1 pupils undertaking standardised assessments. Various forms of standardised assessments in primary 1 have been used for many years. The new format is an attempt to unify the process. They provide an opportunity for schools to access robust additional assessment, providing valuable information to parents about their child's learning journey. I think that that is important. I think that the opinions of all teachers are important, but I am determined that we do raise standards and we close the attainment gap. The more information we have to help us to do that, the better. That is my view, and it is a very strong view that I hold. Last night, the Parliament voted decisively to scrap primary 1 tests. We have a First Minister who talks a lot about the will of Parliament when it is in the interests of her party. I hope that the First Minister will listen to the will of Parliament when it is in the interests of Scotland's children. Teachers say that those tests are a waste of time, but the Government says, and we have just heard it again, that it will carry on regardless. The First Minister always accuses others of talking Scotland down. I only wish that she would stop talking down to Scotland's teachers and start valuing them. This week, Scotland's teachers have rejected the Government's latest pay offer. If the First Minister will not listen to teachers on primary 1 testing, will she listen to them on pay? We will continue to negotiate on pay through the standard processes. I think that that is what we would be expected to do and is rightly what we will do. Going back to standardised assessments, Richard Leonard is quite selective when it comes to respecting the will of the Scottish Parliament. Let us focus for just a moment, shall we, on the will of the people in an election. In the 2016 election, two thirds of voters who voted in that election voted for manifestos that contained a commitment to standardised assessments in primary 1. I do not know whether Richard Leonard thinks that that should just be cast aside, but I do not think that that should be cast aside. We will reflect on what Parliament said yesterday, and then we will make a judgment based on what we think is right for the interests of young people across Scotland. Our consideration will not be party political opportunism. Our consideration will be the best interests of pupils in Scottish classrooms. Richard Leonard says that education is the driving and defining priority of her government. It is her record on education that she says she wants to be judged by. Let us look at the record. £400 million cut from school budgets, a testing policy in tatters, a flagship education bill ditched, Scotland's teachers on the verge of strike action, First Minister, if education really is the top priority, why is the Government's educational policy in such a mess? I am delighted to be able to share all of that information again with the chamber. There are a higher proportion of pupils passing exams in Scotland, more pupils getting hires, more pupils getting national five qualifications, more pupils getting skills-based qualifications, the gap between the rich and poor pupils closing, more young people including young people from our deprived areas going to university. I think that that is success and it is success that we are determined to build on. I have said and I will say again that education is our top priority. We want to be judged on that. To be judged on that, it is important to have the information that tells Parliament and Scotland whether we are succeeding or not. We have the information when it comes to exam passes. I want to have that information from the early stages of primary school so that we know that we are not letting young people down. We simply should not leave it too late to act and to intervene if young people need extra help. That is why we think that assessments in primary 1 are the right thing to do. Two thirds of the people who voted in the last election agreed with that. I think that that is rather important. We have a number of constituency supplementaries. The first is from Angela Constance. Thank you, Presiding Officer. The Westlaw, the Incuria, recently reported on the plight of the McKenzie family from Brich in the more rural part of my constituency. The family attended St John's hospital with their sick baby and were transferred eventually after a three-hour wait for an ambulance to the Royal hospital for sick children because the children's ward at St John's remains closed to inpatients. The baby was discharged at 11 pm, and the family were then left to walk into the city centre to catch the last bus to Livingston to then get a taxi home to Brich arriving at 1.30 am in the morning, all, of course, contrary to the commitments made by NHS Lothian to provide transport support to local families. Given that baby Kenzie is one of 788 Westlawdian children to be transferred from St John's to the sick kids, how will you and the Government ensure that NHS Lothian and, crucially, the paediatrics programme board do absolutely everything and more to return our much-loved and first-class children's ward to a 24-7 service as soon as possible? I can assure Angela Constance that the Government will work closely with NHS Lothian to ensure that the ward is reopened as quickly as possible. The acting chief executive of NHS Lothian assured Jeane Freeman on 28 August that all efforts are being made to recruit medical staff and advanced north practitioners to reinstate the inpatient unit. The current situation is related to ensuring patient safety. I do not think that any member of this Parliament would responsibly suggest that patient safety should not be paramount. I will ask the cabinet secretary for health to look into the specific case that Angela Constance has raised and keep her and other members with an interest updated in progress in getting the inpatient unit reopened as quickly as possible. Liam McArthur Last week, a full-born crisis for Shetland's aquaculture and shellfish sectors was only averted at the 11th hour by Northland's ability to charter an extra freight vessel, allowing vital time-sensitive shipments to be made. That is also a critical period for Orkney's livestock sector, looking to ship most of its cattle and sheep to the Scottish mainland. As Markham Scott from Orkney Mark said to me earlier today, Northland had not secured the arrow, the potential consequences for farming in Orkney would have been disastrous. Does the First Minister accept that meeting the growing freight needs of linchpin industries in Orkney and Shetland now requires access to a third freight vessel on an on-going basis? Will she ask her transport minister to look seriously and urgently at proposals that have already been made that could increase freight capacity, not just on the northern Isle routes but also on west coast routes and freeing up potential additional space for passenger traffic as well? I think that Liam McArthur for raising what is an important issue. Yes, I do understand the demands that are being made for increased freight capacity. I will certainly ask the transport minister to look at the proposals that have been made to brief me on his views on those and to correspond with Liam McArthur about the way forward. I am grateful to him for raising the issue and the transport secretary will revert to him as soon as possible. Anas Sarwar, this week, we learned of the third contamination effect in the cancer word at the Royal hospital for six children in the sports space of time. This has affected drinking water, washing facilities, patients being prescribed antibiotics who are already immunocompromised, patients being transferred to local hospitals to get a wash or have to go home, and treatments being delayed. One angry and distressed parent, Donna Louise Hurrell, contacted me directly and she told me that her daughter has now had her chemotherapy delayed on three separate occasions. She asked me to ask directly how many cases of chemotherapy have been delayed due to bacterial and safety concerns affecting the hospital. Can the First Minister please address that directly but also ask the cabinet secretary to instigate an urgent investigation of that hospital to give full answers and full transparency in the interests of those patients, their families and also the wider community, and to guarantee that we can minimise the risk of that ever happening again? The situation is deeply regrettable. In terms of the question about numbers of cases, I do not have that information to hand but I will undertake to ensure that that information is provided to Anas Sarwar. The primary concern here of the health board and indeed of the Scottish Government is the safety and wellbeing of children and their families at the hospital. We are aware of the new cases that have been linked to this incident and families involved have been kept fully informed and it is right that that continues to happen. We are lazing closely at the moment with Health Protection Scotland and Health Facilities Scotland. Both of those organisations are supporting NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde to ensure that all appropriate steps are in place to manage this incident, while no patients with bacterial infections are currently giving cause for concern. It is very important that all precautions are taken to prevent any further infections. I will undertake to provide the information that Anas Sarwar asked for but I will also ask the health secretary to keep him and the chamber updated on this situation. Brian Whittle Thank you, Presiding Officer. The First Minister will be aware of the issues at Ayr station hotel and the severe disruption to rail services south of Ayr, which is pushing even more traffic on to the already overloaded A77. I wonder if she and her Government are aware that there are now plans to close the A77 several times over the next few weeks for urgent resurfacing works, which will, in effect, cut off the south west. Although we do not want the postponement of the surfacing works in the A77 given its appalling state of disrepair, surely there must be a better plan than that, which takes into account the travel needs of the population in the south west, including the replacement bus service and the huge volume of freight traffic using that road. The First Minister Well, I understand the difficulties that are being posed by the situation at Ayr station. If the member is saying that he does not think that the resurfacing work should be postponed, obviously that limits the options, but of course Transport Scotland and others involved here have to look closely at the decisions to make sure that disruption is being minimised. I know that the transport secretary will be taking a very close interest in that, and I will happily ask him to co-respond with the member about that. We have, in previous weeks, talked about the situation at Ayr central. A proposal was made around car parking spaces, for example, at Preswick airport, which has been taken forward, and we will continue to do whatever we can to minimise the disruption that the situation is causing, including looking at some of the decisions around works to the A77. I hope that that answer is helpful and that the Transport Secretary will be happy to provide further information. Shona Robison Does the First Minister share my serious concerns over reports that the UK Government is planning to renaig on the Tay cities deal that was reported by the courier newspaper earlier this week, which would see the UK Government reduce its contribution to the deal by a reported £80 million? Will the First Minister agree to raise this matter urgently with the UK Government to ensure that it delivers on its part of this crucial deal? The First Minister concerns that cities and their regions play a crucial role in driving economic growth, which is why the Scottish Government is working individually and collectively with our cities, regions and businesses and individuals within them to boost that growth. We know that all partners have invested a huge amount of work in their proposals for the Tay city deal and delivering for the regional economy. We continue to encourage the UK Government to match Scottish Government investment in the Tay cities deal. The Scottish Government remains absolutely committed to achieving a heads-of-term agreement as soon as possible. We are in a position to proceed right now and the situation is that we are waiting for the UK Government to confirm its position. I hope that that happens soon and I hope that the commitment of the UK Government is not diminished. I had the privilege of attending the opening of the V&A last Friday, which was transformational for Dundee, and I think that it would be a deep shame if that momentum could not continue with the Tay cities deal being resolved as quickly as possible. The Scottish Government is ready to go. The question that remains to be answered is whether the UK Government is going to stick to its commitment as well. I hope that the answer to that is yes. I hope that the First Minister is aware of revelations that have been published by the ferret and the national that campaigners against fracking are among the peaceful democratic campaigners labelled by Police Scotland as domestic extremists. We have known for years that environmental campaigners, along with peace activists and others, have in the past been spied on or infiltrated by police forces in the UK, including in Scotland. However, that statement of current practice is shocking. Anti-fracking campaigners who exercise their democratic right to protest are heroes, yet Police Scotland is labelling them as domestic extremists. When did the First Minister or her justice secretary become aware of that and what action has the Government taken to address it? First Minister, I absolutely support the right of peaceful democratic protest. I have taken part in my life in many peaceful democratic protests, including fazlain against nuclear weapons. I will defend the right of people whether they are protesting against fracking or nuclear weapons or any other issues. As long as they do that peacefully and democratically, I absolutely defend the right to do so. It is, of course, for the police to answer for operational decisions that they take, but that is my view, and I am very happy to state that view unequivocally today. Patrick Harvie I am afraid that we should not accept that this is merely an operational matter. If individuals, campaign groups and communities cannot peacefully campaign on matters—issues that matter in our society without being labelled as domestic extremists—and this is the same category used to describe the threat posed by racist and fascist forces in our society, that strikes at the heart of the relationship between policing and the public. That is clearly a political question. First Minister mentions fazlain. This weekend, I will be joining members of my party, as well as those in the SNP, I am sure, in Labour and many others at fazlain again to protest the existence of weapons of mass destruction in Scotland, just as people have worked across party lines to oppose blood sports, environmental destruction, asylum evictions and more. The right to do so freely is fundamental to a democratic society. Can the First Minister give an assurance that campaigners at fazlain on Saturday will not be designated as domestic extremists merely for attending a peaceful rally? First Minister Let me give my view. I think that if I was to start in this chamber speaking on behalf of Police Scotland, there would be all sorts of justifiable and legitimate criticisms of me for doing so. However, I am very happy to ask the chief constable to address the point on behalf of Police Scotland that Patrick Harvie has raised. I do not consider people who protest against nuclear weapons or fracking or anything else in a peaceful and democratic way to be extremists in any sense. We would not expect anybody to consider them to be extremists. Patrick Harvie is absolutely right that peaceful protest is a fundamental part of democracy. People should have the right to protest as long as they do so peacefully. That applies to people who will be at fazlain on Saturday. I wish them well. I look forward to the day when there are not nuclear weapons on Scottish soil at fazlain and sooner that day arrives, the better. That applies to people campaigning and protesting against nuclear weapons. It applies to people campaigning or protesting against fracking or any other issue, so that is my very firm view and it is one that I hope will have the support of people right across the chamber. First Minister for being so bold and radical this morning. She now wants to delay Brexit by a few weeks. That is definitely going to save us from colossal economic damage. Despite going calls for a final say on the deal, the First Minister continues to dither. Does she not understand that we do not just need a delay to Brexit, we need to stop it dead in its tracks? First Minister. First Lady, I do not want Scotland to be dragged out of the EU against its will at all. I do not want it to happen in March. I do not want it to happen in April. I do not want it to happen at all. Nothing Willie Rennie has ever said on this issue would give Scotland a guarantee that in future we will not be dragged out of the EU against our will. Let me make an offer to Willie Rennie, as somebody who supports the idea of a people's vote. I said again yesterday that the SNP will not stand in the way of that, but if Willie Rennie wants me to be an enthusiastic advocate of that, let him explain to me how that vote will guarantee that Scotland will not simply find itself in the same position that we find ourselves in in June 2016, where we vote to remain in the EU, but the rest of the UK votes to leave. I make an offer to Willie Rennie. If he can explain right now how Scotland is guaranteed that it will not find itself in that position, then I am happy to talk to him further about it. Willie Rennie. The First Minister should be preparing for victory, not defeat, and we would have a better chance of winning the people's vote if we had the Scottish Government on board. Every day, the First Minister dithers gives comfort to those who want a hard Brexit. Being neutral on a people's vote undermines the positive way out of this. Sadiq Cann supports it. Hundreds of Labour delegates want it. Former Conservative ministers back it. Even the Czech Republic and Malta are on board, and the last time I looked, they were small independent countries. Support is building. On Saturday, there is a people's vote rally in Stirling. There will be an SNP speaker at that rally. Will he be backing the people's vote campaign, telling them they are wrong or dithering, just like the First Minister? Willie Rennie failed to answer the question that I posed, which I thought was quite notable. Willie Rennie said that we should be preparing for victory. I campaigned for victory in the EU referendum in 2016, and I helped to secure a 62 per cent vote to remain in the EU in 2016. It did not count for anything because the rest of the UK voted to leave. If I am going to enthusiastically get behind the campaign for another EU vote, then surely it is not unreasonable to ask for guarantees that Scotland will not find itself in that position all over again. The fact of the matter is that Willie Rennie and others campaigning for a people's vote are unable to give that guarantee. If they are prepared to give it, I am happy to get behind that campaign. However, it seems to me right now that there is only one thing that can stop Scotland having these decisions imposed on it against its will, and that is for Scotland to be independent. Maybe it is time that Willie Rennie started to support that. We have some further supplementaries. The first is from Finlay Carson. Thousands of my constituents in Galloway and Western Freests face being bypassed by the digital revolution and are unable to access high-speed broadband services, according to Audit Scotland. Indeed, large parts of Scotland are unlikely to secure super-fast internet speeds by this Government's deadline of 2021, with rural communities likely to be hit hardest. 376,000 households are still lacking high speeds, and more than 221,000, including many businesses, will not have access to the network before 2021. Can the First Minister give my constituents a promise that our Government will publish a clear timetable for our 100 by the summer of 2019, or will this yet again be an example of the Scottish National Party's Government habit of making big announcements and then, two or three years down the line, failing to deliver? Good idea for the member to have actually read the Audit Scotland report before coming to this chamber today. Let me give him some snippets. Let me start with what Fraser McKinlay from Audit Scotland said on Good Morning Scotland this very day. He said, and I'm quoting, The good news is that the Scottish Government has achieved its target to provide access to fibre broadband to 95 per cent of homes and businesses across Scotland by the end of last year, and they did that well. Or we could take page 5 of the report. Higher than expected take-up and lower than expected costs mean that 60,300 additional premises will gain access to the fibre network at no extra cost to the public sector. Or page 8 of the report, by the end of 2017, 95 per cent of premises in Scotland had access to fibre broadband. Only around two thirds of premises in Scotland would have access without public sector investment on the 100 per cent commitment. Let's remember that that 100 per cent commitment, both in terms of coverage and broadband speeds, will take us ahead of any other part of the UK. Fraser McKinlay, when I asked this specific question this morning, said, We are definitely not saying that that won't be achieved by 2021. We are investing £600 million in the R100 procurement programme—the procurement will be let next year—and just as a final point, Presiding Officer, the Scottish Government is investing £600 million. Despite that being a reserved matter, the UK Government is investing just £21 million, a mere 3 per cent of the total. Why don't you take it up with your own Tory colleagues in Westminster before you come lecturing the Scottish Government on a programme that we are delivering and, according to Audit Scotland, delivering well? Last night, the Prime Minister told EU leaders that she has put forward serious proposals on Brexit, but all that is on the table is a no-deal or a blind Brexit, both of which would seriously damage Scotland's interests. Does the First Minister think that those are really serious proposals or just seriously misguided? Brexit is a mistake and the handling of Brexit by the UK Government is a complete in utter shambles. I am quoting a Tory MP just this morning when I say this, that checkers are as dead as a dodo. Although the Prime Minister wants to frame the choice that is coming later this year as one between no-deal and checkers, it is increasingly likely that that choice is going to be between no-deal or a no-detail deal, where the future statement about the relationship after Brexit has no detail is vague and nobody will know what comes after EU membership. It would be reckless in the extreme for the UK to take a step off the Brexit cliff edge, effectively wearing a blindfold with no idea where it is going to land. In those circumstances, it would be far better and far more responsible to extend article 50 so that all of the alternatives can be properly looked at. However, it is long past the case that we can expect sensible approaches from this Government. The UK Tory Government is intent on recklessly taking the whole country off the Brexit cliff edge, and I think that future generations will judge them extremely harshly for that. Jenny Marra Can I add my voice to the calls to break the deadlock over the Tay cities deal, Presiding Officer? The First Minister knows that, as part of Dundee's regeneration and our superb new V&A, the city is bidding for decommissioning work to create good jobs. Can the First Minister tell the chamber why she will not publish the EY report, which details why Dundee did not get decommissioning investment in her programme for government, so that Dundee can better understand her Government's analysis of the economic opportunity? The First Minister I will come back to run the issue of the EY report. We remain committed to securing jobs and decommissioning in a whole range of other areas for Dundee. Right now, assuming that the UK Government stops dragging its feet over the Tay cities deal, there is every reason to be really optimistic about the future of Dundee. Of course, the Scottish Government was the principal funder of the V&A that I know that she attended the opening of on Friday. We have also put the headquarters of the new social security agency in Dundee, delivering hundreds of jobs in the city of Dundee. It is a Government, whether it is the social security agency, whether it is our support for the V&A, whether it is our continued support for jobs in a whole host of other areas. It is a Government that is full square behind Dundee, and we will continue to be so. To ask the First Minister how the Scottish Government will use the social metrics commission's new framework for tackling poverty. We welcome the work of the social metrics commission to further develop our understanding of poverty. I note that the commission states that the UK Government political debate has focused on the measurement of poverty rather than the action that is needed to drive better outcomes, and it calls for, I am quoting, energy into creating pathways out of poverty. Of course, the opposite is the case for this Government, where we are committed to action, having already set our statutory targets. Of course, the UK Government has scrapped their child poverty targets, scrapped their poverty unit and scrapped the child poverty commission. They are also presiding over the disastrous roll-out of universal credit and welfare cuts that will seem more children pushed into poverty. This Government, by contrast, is focused on actions that will reduce child poverty and tackle deep-seated inequalities. I thank the First Minister for that answer. On child poverty specifically, the report shows that Scotland does better in working to address this than the rest of the UK does. Isn't it the case, however, that while Scotland lacks full powers over employment laws and social security, we are tackling those problems with one hand tied behind our back, in the face of even deeper cuts to welfare from a visibly uncaring UK Government? Yes, that is absolutely right. While we work to try to lift children out of poverty, UK Government welfare policy in particular is actively pushing families and children into poverty. There are independent reports that show that more than one in three children could be living in poverty by 2030. That is squarely due to UK welfare cuts, which by 2020 will amount to almost £4 billion a year for Scotland. While the UK Government is ignoring child poverty, we are getting on with tackling inequalities and taking action to meet our child poverty targets. In March, we published Every Child, Every Chance, which is our four-year programme of action to reduce child poverty. Since then, we have announced the early introduction of best start grant payments, the new minimum school clothing grant of £100, all of which provides crucial help for parents. However, there is no doubt whatsoever that, with more powers over welfare, we could do so much more. Of course, an independent Scotland could do so much better. To ask the First Minister whether the Scottish Government will provide an update on the Scottish breast screening programme in light of reports that many women were not contacted for their final check-up. A review of the Scottish breast screening programme by the Scottish clinical task force identified 1,761 women aged over 70 who were not invited for their final breast screening appointment. I can tell the chamber that all those women have now been sent a letter advising them of what has happened and offering an opportunity to attend for breast screening. All women affected who wish to have a breast screen will receive an appointment for screening before the end of October this year. We will ensure that any additional screening will not displace other women due for their screening appointment. Work has also been taken forward to develop an IT fix to address this specific issue going forward. Arrangements are in place to manually identify any women who may have been missed for this reason until that IT fix is in place. Jamie Greene I thank the First Minister for that update, but it does miss a crucial fact. That is that that was predictable. In 2016, a review by Healthcare Improvement Scotland found that nearly 4,000 women had not been sent screening invitations and, as a result, it made a number of recommendations, one of which was better oversight of that IT system. In May this year, the former health secretary told his chamber that, I quote, I want to reassure members of the public that this issue does not affect the NHS in Scotland and patients should be reassured that there are no problems with the programme records or the IT system. Can I ask the First Minister why the 2016 recommendation was ignored? What reassurances can she give today that the screening programme IT system is and will be fit for purpose? First, in relation to the 2016 issue, my understanding is that this is a separate issue, and therefore I am not sure that it is accurate to say that this was to use the word that was used In relation to the situation around the English breast screening programme, the former health secretary sought and received assurances at that time that that issue was not being repeated in Scotland. However, Shona Robison rightly requested further due diligence checks. The clinical task force was established to support public health England in identifying and contacting any women affected who was now living in Scotland. That task force also carried out a wider review, and the issue that we are talking about today was an unrelated and separate issue. It was as a result of that issue that we discovered that the 1,761 women had not been invited for their final screening appointment. I would take this opportunity to apologise to each and every one of these women that should not have happened. However, it is important to put in context, although it does not reduce the anxiety for any of these individual women, it is around 0.2 per cent of the approximately 700,000 women who are eligible for breast screening in Scotland and are invited every three years. It is because of the action that the previous health secretary took at the time of the announcement in England that that issue came to light. As I said in my original answer, all women are now being offered appointments for screening, and an IT fix is being put in place to ensure that that does not happen in the future. I hope that that answer gives some comfort to the women who did miss their final screening appointment, but also to the wider population of women who go for breast screening. Thank you very much, and that concludes First Minister's questions. We will now turn to members' business in the name of Liam MacArthur on Scotland's marine energy industry. First, we will have a short suspension to allow members and members of the public to leave the gallery and for new members to arrive. A short suspension.