 The First Item of Business is General Questions. At Question 1, I call Pam Gossall. To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on the consultation on the future of qualifications and assessments. Shirley-Anne Somerville. Professor Hayward is leading an independent review on the future of qualifications and assessments to inform that review. A public consultation was launched on 21 October yw i'w gwaith i'r 16 ymgyrch chi'n gwyll�r, a dweud i'r 16 deis peidwyr chi'n gweithio gwaith i'r adnewid y blaenydd o'r drafod i ddiwedd ar hyn o'mwneud yn cyhoeddwyr sydd o ddarmell, ac yn cydweithio i gwyllgor ac yn cymdeithasglwyno'n gwyllt nawr. Felly, rwy'n gwithfawr i chi'n ei gael i ddwygen arfer oedd ddod o fewni'r Seiddur, ond ei gwylleptor hwyrddi, byw ddim yn cydweithio i'ch gydag i gydag i march 2023, a bwysig i chi'n mynd i'r parlymonau, dyfodig i ysgolau'r ysgolau yn y cwestio ar gyfer y newydd. I thank the cabinet secretary for that response. Last week saw the launch of the consultation into the future of exams and qualifications in Scotland. Only three of 59 members on the education reform board are teachers and there are no parent representatives. What assurance can the Waist itwch i chi'n meddwl teithaeth? Mae Gwyrdd yn ei gweithio i chi fyddrach i chi'n meddwl i chi efolyg â'u gwagod honnod, maennyddol i chi'n meddwl i chi wedi gweithio The board membership refers to the reform of the three national agencies. Professor Hayward's work, which is independent of government, is being supported by an independent review group. That includes learners, parents, carers, education staff and college and university representatives. I hope that I have clarified that. Ms Gosall will be satisfied that parents, carers, education staff, colleges and universities representatives are included. Mark Ruskell To ask the Scottish Government what support is available to displaced people from Ukraine who are moving from temporary accommodation into permanent housing. Our aim is to improve the performance of the super-sponsor scheme. This week, we published 16 interventions following a review of the scheme. Our aim is to empower those arriving with clear advice, support and improved access to longer-term housing options, thereby reducing dependency on short-term and temporary accommodation. That is why we have put in place up to £50 million for our Ukraine longer-term capital fund to increase the overall supply of housing stock. That has already provided over £400,000 to North Ayrshire and £6 million to Aberdeen City Council. Mark Ruskell I have seen first-hand how communities and local authorities across my region from Cylindr-Rysaith are working tirelessly to try and find long-term housing solutions for displaced Ukrainians who have found sanctuary in Scotland. It is critical that any housing offer empowers our new Ukrainian neighbours to have choices over their next steps. I did welcome the Minister's statement on Tuesday, but could the Cabinet Secretary outline what further support will be made specifically to local authorities like Stirling Council to support the displaced Ukrainians to access that housing, but also critically to co-ordinate efforts with local communities who also have their own interests and their own efforts in trying to find solutions for their Ukrainian neighbours? I can tell the member that we have provided £11.2 million of funding to increase capacity of local authority resettlement teams to support refurbishment of properties and enhance the pace of host checks and matching. I encourage local authorities to ensure that they are making full use of that funding. We are encouraging all local authorities and registered social landlords to consider what properties there are in their area that could be brought back into use. I encourage the member to discuss the fund with local authorities in his region to identify opportunities to make best use of the funding. Mark Ruskell also mentioned the role of communities. He makes a very important point. The warm, welcoming response from communities the length and breadth of Scotland has been absolutely amazing. We want to encourage that to continue. Sometimes solutions are being proposed by the community to be listened to and acted upon where that is appropriate. To ask the Scottish Government what action it is taking to help GPs manage their workloads. Despite the challenges of the pandemic, general practice has been strengthening significantly. We are committed to increasing the number of GPs in Scotland by 800 by the end of 2027 and making good progress towards that target. We have also recruited 3,220 whole-time equivalent healthcare professionals, such as community nurses and physiotherapists, into our multidisciplinary teams across practices. Local evaluation shows that the expanded MDTs are freeing up GP capacity, allowing a focus on patients with more complex conditions. It is also reducing multiple appointments for the same issue and associated with high staff and patient satisfaction. I thank the cabinet secretary for the answer. Almost every MSP in the chamber will have constituents who are unable to get an appointment with a GP. Instead of helping to address the issue, the cabinet secretary has cut GP sustainability payments by around £5 million, considering the tremendous workload that GPs are under. How can the Scottish Government justify that? I remind the member that investment in general practice is going up, not down. We are investing at least £170 million a year in growing primary care multidisciplinary teams. That is up £15 million. Last year, we were supporting general practice. We know and have heard that anecdotally, face-to-face appointments are beginning to increase, but I accept that not to the level that some people would like. Therefore, I have asked GP practices that are not offering pre-bookable appointments to make sure that they are offering them. Let me remind Alexander Stewart that the reason why we are having to reprofile money within health is, in large part, to respond to the economic incompetence of his party. The health budget is worth £650 million less just due to inflation. Pay rises are way in excess of what we budgeted for because of the Tory cost crisis. Please do not come here and shed crocodile tears about primary care when it is your party's disastrous stewardship of the UK economy that has caused such devastating impacts in the first place. Christine Grahame, I have constituents advising me that post Covid, their experiencing barriers in certain GP practices is only certain to booking face-to-face appointments because the practice has changed their process to online consultation forms, which is difficult for some constituents to use. Is the cabinet secretary aware of his moody comment? I am aware and I absolutely accept what Christine Grahame is saying. As I said in my last response, I have spoken to the British Medical Association and the Royal College of GPs about this matter. It is also why I came to this Parliament a number of weeks ago to say that I will personally be in contact with every single GP practice to ensure that pre-bookable appointments are available, which can help with that face-to-face issue. On the online appointment and online booking, I will make sure that I reach back in to our key stakeholders, such as the BMA and the Royal College, to make sure that those who are digitally excluded are not left out in terms of getting face-to-face or GP appointments. I am very grateful. Last week I met a very respected GP in the south of Scotland who indeed trains the next generation of doctors. The GP was blunt with me and said that himself and his colleagues are burnt out—the impact of the pandemic, yes, but also the strain that GPs have been under for years. Many GPs are now at breaking point and are seriously considering early retirement, and the Scottish Government need to show the GPs that they are serious about getting primary care services right. Given the announcement yesterday, does the Health Secretary not fear that this will act as a catalyst for early retirement by GPs? I would say to Martin Birtfield—he raises a very important point up—that when I met with Dr Andrew Bueast earlier this week from the BMA, he was saying similar about GPs' burnout and workload. That is why it is so important that we continue to invest in the multidisciplinary team model. Let me say that funding for that continues. That is why recruiting 3,220 members of healthcare staff as part of that multidisciplinary team model will help to ease and alleviate some of the workload from general practice. To Martin Birtfield, the reason why we are having to reprofile some of this money, which is staying, of course, within health, is to help us to ensure that we can put forward the best pay deal possible for our healthcare staff in these challenging times. To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on the work of the Women's Health Group, including when it will next meet. The Women's Health Group was established in February 2020 to develop a women's health plan. It was disbanded following the publication of a plan on 20 August 2021. The Women's Health Plan Implementation Program Board was established in January of this year to oversee the delivery of that plan. Chared by Professor Marion Bain, the deputy chief medical officer, the board brings together a range of organisations to ensure that the actions within the plan are implemented effectively, along with continued input and influence from women themselves. The board meets quarterly at last met yesterday, the terms of reference, and other information about the board is available on the Scottish Government's website. I thank the cabinet secretary for that answer. Six months ago, I was advised that the Government is working with the Scottish Perinatal Network to examine adoption of the percentile growth factor test for pregnant women in order to detect preeclampsia, which can kill both mother and baby and lead to further health risks later in life. Such tragedies can now be prevented by using these simple and reliable tests already in use from England to Sierra Leone. Can the cabinet secretary therefore advise as to progress in rolling out PLGF tests in Scotland? I first recognise and record the interest that Kenneth Gibson has had on the issue for not just many months but many years. Progress has been made. The Scottish Government is committed to ensuring that women receive high-quality safe care, including in the diagnosis, prevention and treatment of preeclampsia. While NHS boards in Scotland can already choose to offer placental growth factor PLGF testing, should they wish to do so, we have continued to work with and progress that work with the Scottish Perinatal Network. We have also approached the Scottish Health Technologies Group, which provided advice to NHS Scotland on the use of new and existing technologies. That group started work last month, considering the most recent nice guidelines on PLGF testing and will produce an adapted version of the guidance for Scotland with recommendations. The SHTG group has started consulting there with the clinical community, with patients organisations and wider stakeholders, and that work is expected to be completed by spring 2023. On the back of the member's question, I will explore if there is any further pace that can be injected into this process, given how important me those tests can be. To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on how it is reducing waiting times for children adolescent mental health services. We are setting the conditions needed for long-term sustainable improvement to CAMHS systems. We saw an 8.6 per cent drop last quarter in the number of waits over 18 weeks. However, I recognise that performance against the national waiting time standards varies across health boards. We are directing tailored support to boards not on track to meet the standard, providing access to professional advice, ensuring that they have robust improvement plans in place, and we are monitoring progress closely. I have also met recently, with boards furthest away from achieving the standard, to discuss my concerns and expectations for improvement. I have previously written to the Minister about my constituent John in East Dunbartonshire. John's nine-year-old son has been self-harming. He waited six months from referral into initial assessment by CAMHS. He was then told that it would be a further year until a support plan was in place. John's younger son is now imitating his brother's behaviour. The entire family are at their wit's end. Thousands of children are on waiting lists despite the Scottish Government repeatedly promising to fix this. Can the Minister explain to John why children are continuing to wait so long to get the proper support plans they need? Minister? Neither John nor his son should be put in that position. I will write to Mr Bibby about that situation again. We want to see young people treated as quickly as possible. We also want to put in place a system whereby there is not an over-reliance in acute services and that we can deal with things before they reach that stage. We are working very hard and have invested heavily in CAMHS services. Obviously, there has been impact because of the Covid pandemic, but we are seeing progress and I hope that that continues, and I will write to Mr Bibby. To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to reports that affordable housing and development plans have been put on hold because of eventries. Scotland is significantly ahead of the rest of the UK in providing affordable housing, having delivered almost £113,000 affordable homes since 2007, over £79,000 of which were for social rent. We recognise the impact of interest rates on high material and labour costs, which is why we continue to operate a flexible grant system that we expect will support the continued delivery of the affordable homes target. In advance of the emergency legislation, we set up a working group with social landlords to help assess the options to keep rents affordable for tenants beyond 31 March in the light of the cost of living crisis. That work is continuing, and during the passage of the bill, we further committed to giving clarity and certainty to social landlords on rent setting no later than 14 January. Jeremy Balfour has failed to answer the question. Lord Willie Hawke recently announced that his plan to spend more than £1 billion on building 11,000 affordable homes in Scotland was scrapped. Specifically, he said that because of Patrick Harvie's rent-free bill, he would have to put things on hold. Does the cabinet secretary now recognise that the SNP Government's rent-free housing crisis has made the housing crisis worse not better in Scotland? I recognise the lessy-fair attitude of the Tories. They oppose measures to help tenants with rent increases during a cost of living crisis. In the same way as they oppose measures to restrict the loss of housing to short-term holiday lets, no ideas, no solutions, just opposition for opposition's sake, and yet they refuse to take responsibility for the disastrous economic policies of the Tory Government, leading to high interest rates, which is the biggest impact on the social rented sector and the affordable housing supply programme at this moment in time. Total hypocrisy, as ever from the Tories. To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on its consultation on a new agricultural bill. The Scottish Government launched our consultation entitled Delivering Our Vision for Scottish Agriculture Proposals for a New Agriculture Bill on 29 August. The consultation closes on 21 November, and all members of the public are encouraged to submit responses. Alongside the consultation, we are hosting a number of events to hear views from across the country on what needs to feature in the future bill to transform how we support farming and food production in Scotland to become a global leader in sustainable and regenerative agriculture. Rachel Hamilton I thank the Minister for that answer. Presiding Officer, yesterday hundreds of farmers and a handful of tractors rallied outside Parliament to highlight the issues facing farmers across Scotland. They feel let down by an SMB green coalition that simply does not understand their concerns. Their disdain for the Bute House agreement was especially clear. Given the views expressed by farmers yesterday, does the Minister agree with me that her green coalition partners have no understanding of the needs of rural Scotland? Presiding Officer, I am not even sure where to begin with that question, except to say that farmers and food producers in Scotland are quite right to come to this Parliament to speak to representatives here. The fact of the matter is that, while I stand here answering this question, the Cabinet Secretary for Rural Affairs is right now with the Agriculture, Reform and Implementation Oversight Board proactively engaging with industry to design future policy. Whether it is Brexit, whether it is utter economic incompetence, or whether it is with its complete refusal to listen to industry, it is the member's party and Government who are repeatedly and profoundly letting down Scotland's food producers. Presiding Officer, I absolutely never cease to amaze me when the Tories try to promote themselves as the party standing up for farmers. They can say what they like about the concern and support for agriculture, but where was that support and concern when they opposed this Parliament with holding consent to the subsidy control act? The hypocrisy is utterly galling. The NFUS were clear and expressing concerns about the potential impact of legislation on farmers. It could have profound and fundamental impact on our ability to tell the support to the specific needs of Scotland's farmers, which it is supposed to represent. Does the Minister agree with me that, while the other parties can be relied upon to play politics, when it comes down to the facts, the SNP can be relied upon to safeguard the interests of Scottish agriculture and deliver on those interests? I completely agree with Jim Fairlie. A very useful voice for the farming industry and the Parliament. Members, can we make sure that we hear all members when they are speaking? The inclusion of agriculture support in the scope of the UK subsidy control act is unnecessary and risks undermining the agriculture support framework. Farmers and crofters in Scotland face challenges that are not found elsewhere in the rest of the UK, yet that constrains our ability to develop future policies that are tailored to meet them. However, we remain fully committed to delivering our vision for agriculture and implementing a framework that delivers high-quality food production and empowers Scotland's farmers and food producers to play their very important role in mitigating climate change and supporting nature recovery in Scotland. We will get on with that job.