 I remind members that social distancing measures are in place in the chamber and across the Holy Rood campus. Members must take care to observe those measures, including when entering and exiting the chamber. Please only use the aisles and walkways to access your seat when we're moving around the chamber. The first item of business is First Minister's Questions. Question number one, Douglas Ross. I'm sure that I start by speaking on behalf of the whole chamber when we wish Steve Clark and his entire squad all the very best for the Euros. It has been a long 23-year wait for the men's international team to qualify for a major finals. I know that, in their first match against the Czech Republic on Monday, against the Alden Way on Friday and their final group stage match against Croatia on 22 June, they will have the support, the hopes and the backing of the entire country. I ask the First Minister if she stands by her statement given to this chamber when she said that grades would not be based on, and I quote, algorithms, statistical models or historical performance at schools. First Minister. Yes, I do, but before I come on to a little more detail on that, can I also take the opportunity today to wish Steve and all of the Scotland men's football team all of the best, as they are prepared to embark on this European Championship campaign. On Monday afternoon, 23 long years of frustration and pain and standing on the sidelines will come to an end. The team has done us proud already, but to echo Douglas Ross and I'm sure that everybody across the chamber, we are all absolutely behind them as they kick the first ball and will behind them all the way through the tournament and we all hope that that is for quite a considerable way into this tournament. Who knows perhaps the whole way, but good luck to Steve and all of the team. I stand by that statement absolutely. This year's national qualifications awards are based on teacher judgment. That teacher judgment is evidenced by the attainment of pupils, not by pass results or by algorithms. No learners' grades will be marked down or up because of their schools' past performance. If any learner has demonstrated that, for example, they deserve an A grade, then an A grade is what they will receive. There are quality assurance processes in place and we may come on to discuss them in more detail, but neither the SQA nor Education Scotland are involved in those processes. Once provisional grades are submitted to the SQA, they will not be changed because of any schools' past performance. The First Minister says that she stands by that statement, but the evidence paints a very different picture. Let's go through some of that evidence. An Education Scotland report published last week said that three in four councils in Scotland are analysing results using historical attainment data. Some councils have published their own reports and this is what they say. Inverclyde are holding data analysis meetings before submitting grades. Edinburgh is making adjustments based on previous attainment data and East Renfrewshire has a checklist to ensure that teachers compare this year's grades to the last three years. All of that is in direct contradiction to the promise given by the First Minister to this chamber last week and reiterated just a few moments ago. Once again, young people will lose out based solely on where they go to school. That is the same shambles as last year. It is just more sleek. Instead of the SQA marking pupils down at the end of the process, the system will force teachers and schools to do it first. How on earth can young people have confidence in this system when the First Minister's words don't match reality? What Douglas Ross is trying to suggest happens is simply not the case. Let me take the chamber and those watching at home through the process. I have already set out that awards this year are based on teacher judgment. Teachers arrive at those judgments by looking at the attainment, the work that pupils have done. There are no past results or algorithms that dictate what an individual learner's grade will be. In terms of the quality assurance process that is in place, I think that everybody would expect some process like that to be in place. The only way in which a school's past performance is looked at in its local area is to identify whether a school overall might have provisional grades that appear to be significantly out of step with past performance. However—this is the important part—if that happens, what happens then, not by the SQA, not by Education Scotland, but provisional grades are checked again by the relevant teachers. The key part is this. If the teacher's judgment is that they stand by the result that they gave, that result stands. It is not changed. It is simply a checking procedure, but it ends in the same place, where it is the teacher's judgment based on the attainment of the pupil that determines the grade. Provisional grades are submitted to the SQA. The SQA is not involved in that process before that. When the provisional grades are then submitted to the SQA, they will not be changed because of a school's past performance. That is a world away from the situation last year, where algorithms and the past performance of schools automatically changed the performance in the grades of some pupils. That is not happening. That system is based on teacher judgment evidence by the work that pupils have done throughout the year. The First Minister chose to ignore all the points that I read out from Edinburgh Council and East Drenfrewshire Council, because the harsh reality of the system is that, if you are lucky enough to attend a consistently high-achieving school, your grades probably will not be reviewed. However, if you attend your local school where people work hard but not everyone gets five A's, the kind of schools that the First Minister and I went to, then your grades are more likely to be lowered. Last night, I met members of the Scottish Youth Parliament, who spoke about how unfair the system is. They feel that their voices have been ignored and pupils with exceptional circumstances are being overlooked. In this year of all years, we should be going out of our way to recognise exceptional circumstances and listen to young people's concerns. If they were able to put points to the First Minister, what would they say? Cameron, Liam and Sophie all said that young people should be able to appeal their grade without the risk of it being downgraded. The appeals process is supposed to ensure that pupils get the grades that they deserve, but instead this year's system is asking them to roll the dice with their future. Will the First Minister do something about that now, allow an appeals process that does not risk downgrades and ensure that we make this system fair? I will come on to the appeals process in a second, but already we see here that Douglas Ross used the word sleek it earlier on. If I may say so, I think that there is a bit of that in how he posed that question. He took the perfectly legitimate comments of young people about the appeals part of the system and almost suggested that they were backing up what he said about the earlier part of the system in his first question. Before I come on to appeals, let me conclude the explanation around the first part of the system, the main part of the system, because we want to get it right on the first time for young people so that they do not have to appeal. Douglas Ross said that I ignored the points that he made. I simply refused to go along with his misrepresentation of what that means in practice. If a school's results are reviewed because they appear at face value to be out of step with previous years, that is not the operation of an algorithm automatically downgrading pupils, as would have happened last year. That simply triggers a checking by teachers, and if the teacher judgment is that the original grade stands, that is the final decision here. It is simply that at that stage, before results go to the SQA, it is about a quality assurance process, but fundamentally it is the teacher judgment that stands. At that point, the SQA is not involved, and when the SQA does become involved, no algorithm, no past performance influences a young person's grade. It is really important that that is set out clearly because that matters to young people across the country. On appeals, I understand and I absolutely recognise that there are different views on the appeals process. I think that where there is consensus is that it is right to offer a universal availability of appeals free of charge this year, but there are two issues that have divided opinion, and I understand that. Great care has been taken. One is on the no detriment versus symmetrical system, which Douglas Ross was asking about. On balance, in common with other parts of the UK and past experience, it has been decided to adopt the symmetrical process because that is fair because it is based only on the attainment of young people. The second issue is whether there should be a ground of appeal based on exceptional circumstances and what the system tries to do is build that into an earlier stage, so that a young person who suffers a bereavement, for example, does not have to rely on appeal. They have an extended time to submit the evidence for their original grading. We have taken great care around all that. We will continue to do that. By all means, we have raised all those issues. It is really important that they are scrutinised, but do not try to confuse the different issues to make a point that does not stand in reality. I am glad that I have permission from the First Minister that I am allowed to raise issues such as education in Scotland. The effect is having on young people right now and in the weeks and months ahead. Despite what she tried to suggest in her answer, I will not stop listening and engaging with young people of this country and giving them a voice in this Parliament because they seem to be ignored consistently by the First Minister and her Government because the only thing that young people, parents and teachers watching today will have heard is that they are wrong and the Government is right. Why should they trust this First Minister? We just have to look at what happened. Pupils were told no exams this year, except that everyone knows that they have exams in all but name. Parents were promised no historical data would be used, except that we know exactly what is happening. Teachers were told that grades would be based on their judgment alone, except that there is an algorithm lurking in the background. Young people feel cheated by another deeply unfair system that judges them on where they are from, not how they did. The life chances of tens of thousands of young people are at stake. The 2021 exam crisis has already started but this Government acts as if nothing is wrong. So just what will it take for the First Minister to step in and act before this Government lets down Scotland's young people all over again? The First Minister does not need anybody's permission—certainly not mine—to raise issues in this chamber, but it is a responsibility of leadership to engage in issues responsibly, not to misrepresent them, particularly when it is the life chances of young people that we are talking about and not to try to confuse issues in order to back up political points that frankly do not stack up in reality. People listening here, whether they agree or disagree with the judgments and decisions that the Government is making, will not have heard me say that everybody else is wrong and that the Government is right. They will have heard me try to set out, camly and rationally, the position as it is to take on some of the misrepresentation that we have heard from Douglas Ross today and to readily concede that some of those issues divide opinion and we have had to make judgments based on what we think is the right situation overall. In fact, many of the judgments that we are making are the same judgments, albeit in different education systems, at different Governments of different parties in other parts of the UK are arriving at as well. Those are not straightforward issues, but they are hugely important issues. This is not a case of me stepping in to do something. I, with the education secretary, engage on these issues each and every single day, listening to teachers, listening to parents, listening to young people above all else and arriving at the best overall judgments that we can. Doing that responsibly on the basis of the situation as it is, not on the misrepresented situation that Douglas Ross has put forward today. That is what we will continue to do in the interests of young people all over Scotland. I join the others in wishing the Scotland men's team all the very best for the European Championships. This is their opportunity to catch up on the great leadership that was shown by the women's team in recent years. I wish good luck to Steve Clark and to Captain Andy Robertson and thank them because they will give us, I hope, a sum of hope, optimism and cheer after what has been a difficult year for us all. The Government can try and deny it, but we are in the midst of a second exams crisis. In an unprecedented letter this week, many children's organisations, the Scottish Youth Parliament, the parents' groups and leading academics beg the First Minister to listen and ensure exceptional personal circumstances can be used to appeal grades. One such example is Ellie, a sixth-year in Glasgow. Her case demonstrates why this is so important. She lost her mother in March of this year, and despite being promised by this Government that there would be no exams, she found herself nearing to several assessments, exams in all but name. There was no evidence available of her prior performance due to lockdown. Her lost education time has been exacerbated by grief. Does the First Minister believe that such circumstances would impact on Ellie's performance in assessment? Yes, I do. This is not a question of whether or not the system recognises that. It is a question of how the system is recognising that. I absolutely concede that there are differences of opinion on this, but just to be clear about it, instead of somebody—and obviously I do not know all the circumstances—of Ellie's position, somebody in that position, instead of them going through the process to submit all of their evidence, getting a grade and then, if it is not the grade that they think they deserve, having to appeal, the system has built in contingency arrangements so that instead of having to submit that evidence by 25 June, which is the deadline, they can have access to an extended period until September. It takes account of those circumstances. It gives young people longer to get that evidence together and longer for their grade to be determined. That is not a question of whether those kinds of circumstances should be taken account of. It is simply the method that the system is using. There are differences of opinion. We continue to listen, but it would not be accurate for anyone to say that the circumstances such as Ellie's are being ignored in the system that we have. I thank the First Minister for that. I will come to a moment about why September is not itself a problem. The problem that we have is that the process that the First Minister has outlined simply is not good enough. The cast iron guarantee that the education secretary made this week means nothing without changes to the actual system. Ellie is just one example. Let me give another example to the First Minister, which highlights the problem about September. A mother was in touch regarding the year that her son has had. Due to terminal illness in his family, he was required to shield and not returned to school in person. He was told that this would have no detrimental effect on his education. He performed well earlier in the year before he had to shield. Three weeks ago, his school informed him that his grade in one subject would be submitted as a class average of 68 per cent, despite his grade earlier in the year being far higher. The only option that he has in the system that the First Minister has outlined is to present more evidence in September. However, if he waits until then, he risks losing his conditional apprenticeship place. Does the First Minister believe that this family has been treated fairly? Does she accept that by forcing him to wait until September, she has created a failed system that risks this young person losing his future? I think that these are important issues. We have to consider all of these particular cases to make sure that the system overall can respond. If I can go to the end of that, at the September point, there is a need and this is recognised for the pupils that will be taking advantage of that contingency arrangement to engage with universities, colleges or employers about any knock-on effects. If Anasarwar wants to send the particular case, I can make sure that that is happening, but that should be happening and that is something that we have to make sure happens, so that there is not disadvantage at that end. I come back to the more fundamental point, because my apologies that I did not catch the young man's name that Anasarwar talked about. In that case, if the fundamental issue here is because of the understandable circumstances, the evidence of attainment has not been able to be provided within the timescale. That gets to the heart of it and appeal is not going to rectify that, because appeal can only look at the attainment evidence that is there. That is why extending the timescale for evidence to be accumulated and submitted is seen to be a fairer way of doing this. That is genuinely in an imperfect situation, because the lack of exams, the situation that the pandemic has created, is far from ideal, but in an imperfect situation finding the best overall way, there will always be individual circumstances that we need to look at and make sure that we are taking proper account of. I have given assurance today that we will make sure that that happens, but we are seeking to do this in as fair a way as possible. I have highlighted why relying on appeals for exceptional circumstances is not always the best way to do that and the way that we are choosing to do that. Absolutely not perfect is in many ways preferable. The issue is that this is not an individual case. We all accept that the situation is not perfect, but an imperfect situation does mean that someone is losing their life chances, because this is the key point of their lives where getting attainment and what they do with their future life will be impacted. That is one example of that case of reference. There are lots of examples of why the September system simply does not work. This Parliament voted to incorporate the UN convention on the rights of the child into law. If that is to mean something, we must listen to what young people are telling us right now. Earlier this week, the children's commissioner said that he is concerned that the exams process does not uphold young people's rights. Cameron Garrett, the only young person on the group that developed this year's process, says that young people have been ignored. This SQA crisis has all the hallmarks of last year's crisis, the use of historical data and moderation, a non-functioning appeals process and a Government refusing to listen and engage. Young people across Scotland have had the hardest year of their lives. You have had a year to develop a system that worked, but there are now just days to improve the flawed process. Will the First Minister now finally listen to Scotland's young people and introduce a note detriment's appeals policy and make personal circumstances part of the appeals criteria? Or will young people be forced to take to the streets again this year to force them to change their mind? We will continue to listen. We have paid very close attention to all those points of detail and come to difficult judgments but the judgments that we think are right overall. Again, those are really important points, but describing an appeal system that hasn't even started yet as non-functioning, I don't think helps with the delivery of a system and the proper discussion of some of those issues. I recognise the issues for some people with the September extension but that is not the same as saying that making exceptional grounds a ground for appeal is the way to fix that for the reasons that I have set out. I am struck. I think that I quoted it last week, Jim Thewlis from the School Leaders Association making the point that the system, while not perfect, is the best one in these circumstances and he makes the point that few people have come up with alternatives to what is in place. We will continue to look at all of that. Hard lessons have been learned from last year. I would caution against what we have heard from Douglas Ross and just a loody two at the end there from Anas Sarwar. There is no algorithm that is determining young people's results and I don't think that it is fair to young people to create the impression that there is. This is a system based on teacher judgment. That is correct. The appeal system is open to all free of charge. We have taken a very difficult decision around the no-detriment symmetrical system. The Welsh Government has done the same in a different education system. I am not making that as a party political point but to recognise that those are actually not political decisions. We are trying to do the best and coming to these judgments and often from different political persuasions coming to the same judgments. We will continue to listen. We will continue to look at all of the detail of this and we will strive to make sure that every young person gets the service from the education system and the exam system that they deserve so that they do have the opportunity to make the most of their life opportunities, notwithstanding the difficulties of this pandemic. In light of the growth in short-term teaching contracts, how many of the 3,500 teaching and classroom assistant posts that the Scottish Government has committed to creating will be given permanent contracts? First of all, and this follows on all of our discussions so far today, that our education system is at all times reliant on the hard work and dedication of teachers. That is particularly true right now and we all recognise the effort and resilience that they have shown to support young people during the pandemic. The reality right now is that we need all possible teaching resources at our disposal to support education recovery. Therefore, in a moment while I am couching it in this way, I would expect permanent employment opportunities to be the priority. We are working closely with COSLA regarding the employment of teachers for the next academic years. Local authorities are currently undertaking an assessment of their own staff requirements to support education recovery. The reason that I am couching it in that way is just the reality that the recruitment and deployment of teachers and other support staff in local authority schools are matters for councils, because they are the employers of those teachers. However, I would expect the number of jobs and permanent posts and jobs to be absolutely maximised within that discretion that local authorities must have to meet their own needs. I am afraid that that is just not good enough. The First Minister takes all the credit for recruiting 3,500 extra teachers, but it is nowhere to be seen when their terms and conditions turn out to be shoddy. This week, in an open letter, 2,000 temporary teachers said that they were having to take extra jobs just to put food on the table. One in 10 teachers are now on short-term contracts, bobbing from one precarious job to the next for years on end. That is no way to treat those who are responsible for educating the next generation. We all know that, if the money is temporary, the teachers will be temporary. If the Scottish Government makes the money permanent, the teachers will be permanent. Will the First Minister fix that and treat those teachers with respect and decency for a change? The Scottish Government will make the funding for our commitment available, but will he not gloss over the point that I made? At least he should be honest about his position. If his position is that he wants the Scottish Government to take from local authorities responsibility for the employment of and the terms and conditions of teachers, he should say so. In which case, it would run counter to everything that he has said up until now about opposing the centralisation in his word of the Scottish Government taking powers away from local authorities. That is the reality. However, he should also listen to what I am saying very clearly. We will make through our budgets funding available for the commitment that we have made to teachers. Given the need for teachers to support economic recovery, I would expect that what we see are permanent posts and permanent jobs. If I were to stand here right now and mandate that, then maybe not today, because it would not suit the question that he is asking today, but at another stage, Willie Rennie would be accusing me of taking powers away from local authorities and centralising things here in the Scottish Government. To ask the First Minister where the Scottish Government will support and fund the roll-out of body-worn cameras for police officers and ambulance crews. We support the efforts of Police Scotland and the Scottish Ambulance Service to protect the safety and welfare of front-line responders and, of course, the general public. The issue of body-worn cameras for police officers is a policy and operational decision for the chief constable, acting under the oversight of the Scottish Police Authority. However, as part of our budget allocation for policing this year, we have provided one-off funding of £0.5 million to support their use amongst armed officers. We engage regularly with the Scottish Ambulance Service, obviously, and if this is something that the Ambulance Service wishes to pursue in the future, we will engage with them fully in that. I thank the First Minister for her answer. Last year there were 6,942 assaults on police officers and staff and 250 on ambulance crews in Scotland. Senior police officers that I have spoken to believe that body cameras are a vital tool in increasing officer's safety, deterring attacks, securing convictions against those who carry out assaults and boosting public confidence in engaging with officers. Whilst NHS England announced last week that we would roll out body cams for ambulance crews to deter and protect, should the current public consultation back and extend the roll-out of body cams, will the Scottish Government commit to ensuring that Scottish police officers and ambulance crews are given the protection that they need and deserve? I am not going to pre-empt any of those decisions completely, but what I will say is that we will engage to support police officers and should there be that requirement for the Ambulance Service them to. I think that I have indicated through my initial answer on the funding that we have already made available to the police that there is a commitment to do that. It is of course unacceptable that police officers or ambulance staff should be attacked or abused while going about their duty. Anything that we can do to improve their safety, to help protect them and of course protect the general public is important to be done and we will continue to engage both with the police and with the Ambulance Service in those issues. To ask the First Minister to comment and report that local authorities are validating teachers' estimated grades using a school's prior attainment data in order to meet SQE quality assurance processes. Firstly, can I welcome Sharon Dowey to the chamber? Again, as I have done in response to earlier questions, given assurance to young people that grades given to them by their teachers will not be marked down or up because of their school's past performance and I am absolutely clear about that. If a learner has demonstrated that they deserve a certain grade, then that is the grade they will receive. Teachers and lecturers will be letting young people know their provisional results by the 25th of June. As I have set out before this, there is a quality assurance process under way. I have explained how that will work and it is important to emphasise again that the SQE and Education Scotland are not involved at that stage. Once the provisional grades have been submitted to the SQE and again they are based on teacher judgment and not algorithms, they will not be changed because of the past performance of a school. I thank the First Minister for that answer. It is not just pupils that have an uncertain year ahead but teachers too. For new teachers who have now finished their probationary year, new jobs have only just been advertised with interviews in the next few weeks. Not only does this create uncertainty for teachers, it causes problems for head teachers trying to fill posts and disruption to classes. Rural schools, such as the Bariney campus in Cymruc, face even greater challenges due to their location. Will the First Minister commit to a review of the teacher recruitment process, consider the possibility of increasing the powers available to local authorities to attract new teaching talent and confirm the funding that has been allocated to the councils? As I have been told, it is not. The councils do not need the Scottish Government to look after recruitment, they need to confirm funding so that they can recruit permanent positions. On the specific point about reviewing recruitment processes, I will happily take that away and give that consideration. On the point about funding, the funding will be available to councils. Given the commitment for the entire Parliament, we have made a commitment for the first 100 days and we will be in discussion with councils about the funding for that. It is important that councils have clarity in order that they can recruit. I repeat the point that I made to Willie Rennie, though we are in a situation right now where teachers are required and therefore there should be employment opportunities for teachers. I would expect those in the main to be permanent posts, but employers are councils and therefore they also have to have the ability to assess needs in their local areas and to take decisions based on that. On the point about asking for further consideration of certain matters, I will certainly make sure that that is done and revert to the member as soon as possible. To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government is doing to improve trans and LGBTQ plus healthcare. We are committed to advancing equality for LGBTI people. Everyone should be able to access the healthcare that they need when they need it as part of that overall commitment to equality. As part of the remobilisation of the NHS, we are considering the impact of the pandemic on sexual health services and how we improve those further. That includes, for example, widening access to PrEP. We are also working with NHS Scotland to improve gender identity services, including reducing waiting times, which I think that everybody recognises are far too long and that causes additional trauma and anxiety. We will shortly be writing to the national gender identity clinical network for Scotland to ask them to review and update the gender reassignment protocol. I thank the First Minister for that answer. I would like to take this opportunity to wish everyone a happy pride, but we should always remember that pride started as a protest. We have witnessed attacks on organisations such as Stonewall in recent weeks with some particularly wild and untrue allegations. It shows just how far we have to go to make Scotland a truly equal society. Attacks like those cause great emotional pain and have to stop. Trans people are our friends, colleagues and family, and they deserve to be able to express their identity in peace. Will the First Minister stand with me to support trans people and agree that the current situation that many trans people face when trying to access gender identity services is unacceptable, including typical waiting times of years for a first appointment, and will she give a clear commitment today that the Scottish Government will take the steps needed, including through providing funding and redesigning those services, to make a person-centred multidisciplinary approach going forward for trans people in Scotland? Yes, in general terms I do agree with all of that. I absolutely stand here, full square, behind trans people in the discrimination and stigma and prejudice that they face and in the on-going battle for equality, for which they have as much an entitlement as anyone else in our society. There are many things that we have to do, not least reducing waiting times for gender identity services, and I have already commented on that. All of us have to recognise that progress, unfortunately, in our society, is rarely all one way. We always have to protect and continue to win and re-win the progress that we made. I also wish people a happy pride month. It started as a process and the organisation Stonewall, of course, was right at the heart of that, and to this day it does very good work for people who rely on its services and its support. We do not have to look too far today whether it is on LGBTI issues or around sexism and misogyny or racism to see that there are many forces wanting to take us backwards. I think that all of us have a duty to stand up for equality. However difficult that may be on occasion to make sure that our progress as a country continues to be in the forward direction and that Scotland is a place where everybody feels valued and respected and able to be who they are. That is the country that I want to not just lead, but the country that I want to live in as a citizen. I think that we have all got work to do to make sure that it is reality and not just rhetoric. Question 7, Sarah Boyack. To ask the First Minister what action the Scottish Government is taking to address the reported backlog of NHS dental appointments for children and young people. Obviously we have a commitment for patients including children and young people to receive NHS dental care and treatment as quickly as possible. We are supporting a range of measures to remobilise the NHS overall, but that includes dental services. As part of that I can confirm today actually a funding package of up to £5 million for improved ventilation in dental premises. We will also continue to fund free PPE for the dental sector and from July increase that supply by up to 50 per cent. We will also be reintroducing the child smile programme. So across the whole NHS there is a significant challenge to tackle backlogs and get the service back to normal and that is the case in dental services as well and we will continue to take the steps necessary to support that. Sarah Boyack. First Minister I wrote to the Scottish Government last week about waiting times for dentistry and how the Scottish Government analyses them and the answer was it doesn't. Dentists have warned of years and years of delays so given that dental care is a vital part of health and wellbeing for children how is this acceptable? Longer and longer waits for NHS treatment for children and adults mean that many choose to go private. Isn't this just privatisation by stealth? I think it is important and right that we are vigilant around that. It is essential that the NHS provides the services that people need whether that is for healthcare generally or for dental services in particular. I have not personally seen the letter that Sarah Boyack refers to so I am happy to have a look at that and at the response but I know that the health secretary met the British Dental Association just this week to discuss these very issues so there is a real recognition of the importance in dental services as there is across the NHS to support recovery and to support recovery as quickly as possible. Prior to Covid just to give some context here NHS dental services provided over 4 million courses of treatment every year. There is a record number of people registered with an NHS dentist that covers more than 95% of the population but there are pressures there some of them are Covid related some of them undoubtedly predate Covid and through funding through efforts to protect from the impacts of Covid and also where necessary through redesign of services the government will support the profession to make sure that people get the care and treatment they need and that they get that on the national health service. We move on to supplementary questions and I call Jenny Minto to be followed by Graham Simpson. Thank you Presiding Officer. To ask the First Minister to join me in this national carers week in recognising the immense contribution carers make to the health and wellbeing of our loved ones across the country and to give an update on the SNP Scottish Government's commitment to establishing a national care service. First Minister. Jenny Minto, very much for that important question and what of course is national carers week and I want to highlight and thank unpaid carers for the incredible contribution they make. We introduced the carers allowance supplement to support carers who are in receipt of carers allowance I recognise that is not every unpaid carer but the carers allowance supplement has helped over 100,000 carers since 2018. The pandemic has added to the pressure on carers which is why last year we provided an extra payment and of course we planned to do the same this year. It's establishing a national care service to ensure that the social care system consistently delivers high quality support for carers and those needing care is vital in terms of the update in the first 100 days of this administration. We will start the consultation on the necessary legislation and we will establish a social covenant steering group which will include those with lived experience of care services and unpaid carers to ensure that the new service is designed around their needs. Grim Simpson, to be followed by Jackie Baillie. Can the First Minister explain why domestic cruise ships can drop off and pick up passengers from Scotland in England but not Scotland and why this ban on domestic tourism is in place at a time when thousands of football fans are quite rightly going to be allowed to gather in Glasgow? I think I said this the other day and I want to reiterate it because I understand as we come out of restrictions and start to hopefully continue to get back to normal bit by bit. People will look at different circumstances, different events and say why is something allowed here and not allowed there. Sometimes we get these things wrong, which is why we review on an on-going basis but every event or category of events has to be assessed based on its own characteristics and we try to do that as best we can. The Scottish Government position on cruises has been well known and communicated to the industry. It was reiterated this week at the request of the industry. It didn't change in any way this week. Domestic cruises will restart when the country as a whole is in level 1 of our levels of protection. However, why not simply allow cruises right now? That comes down to the particular characteristics. They represent a long duration, close proximity form of leisure that our advice says has a particularly high risk of transmission and when that is combined with the fact that cruises go to multiple locations and can disembark on multiple locations, increases the risk of spreading of the virus to different parts of the country. That is really difficult for the cruise industry because they are an important part of our economy. We want to support them back to normal as much as possible. However, I am just giving the explanation of why the advice is that it is still prudent to have these restrictions in place right now, while in other circumstances and for other events, with the right mitigations, a different conclusion might be reached. I recognise that this is difficult for people, but we continue to try to take these decisions based on the best advice and applying the best possible judgment overall. Jackie Baillie to be followed by Bob Dora. In July, October and in December 2020, I asked the Cabinet Secretary for Health about long Covid clinics. At the time, I was told that guidelines would be published at the end of that year, and specialist clinics would be set up. Six months on, and I am not aware of any specialist clinics, there are 60 in England, a further 20 planned, long Covid has affected some 87,000 people in Scotland, they are desperate, and those with the means are turning to the private sector that just exacerbates inequality. Can the First Minister tell me how much longer they will need to wait, many of them in pain for specialist long Covid clinics? People who are suffering symptoms that may be associated with what is known as long Covid should be accessing their GP services and being referred on as appropriate. The issue of specialist clinics is important. I have discussed this in some depth with the National Clinical Director and Chief Medical Officer. I cannot comment on exactly what the nature of the clinics are in England, but one of the issues around establishing specialist clinics at this stage is that there is still a lack of understanding about exactly what specialisms are needed to respond to long Covid, because we clinicians and experts do not yet fully understand all of the symptoms and the cause of those symptoms. What we are doing in Scotland is funding a number of research projects to develop that understanding, and then from that understanding we will establish the longer-term provision. It is really important that we do that as quickly as possible, but one of the discussions that I had with the clinical advisers is that one of the constraints right now with the lack of understanding is that nobody can say for certainty exactly what specialisms are needed in a specialist clinic, because we have to do the research, we have to learn more about that condition before we can go to that stage. However, that is important work, and it is work that we are committed to doing and doing properly. Bob Doris, to be followed by Tess White. Presiding Officer, I know that the First Minister is aware of the Freedom to Crawl campaign that calls in the Mears group and the UK Government to cease using a mother and baby unit in Glasgow, which houses asylum seeking mums and their children. I back the campaign. It is a cramped unit with limited personal space and unsatisfactory communal facilities, which for instance sees 20 families sharing just three washing machines, has restricted visiting hours, and there are various other worrying concerns. I ask the First Minister if she welcomes that the Children's Commissioner is now investigating the impact on families living within the unit. Does she agree that the current system of housing asylum seeking families is deeply flawed, and does she agree that mothers and their babies should be supported in our community, and how it should be within appropriate self-contained accommodation? I agree very much with the context of that question, and it is not for me to comment on what the commissioner may do, but I support any efforts to improve the situation and the condition of the children of asylum seekers. The Freedom to Crawl campaign was raised with me in the chamber last week or the week before. I have since looked into that, and I am sure that every other member is receiving lots of letters from constituents asking me to support the Freedom to Crawl campaign. The concerns that have been raised are very legitimate. Again, all asylum seekers—particularly young children—must be provided with accommodation that properly meets their needs, ensures that they get support and can access the services that they need, and enables them to be part of the community. I think that the issues that are underpinning or underlying the campaign need to be resolved quickly in the best interests of mothers and babies. We have repeatedly called on the Home Office to deliver more humane and flexible asylum and immigration policies, and we make clear again that our strong preference is for the delivery of asylum accommodation by the public or the third sector. I have a constituent with significant health issues who has had real problems getting to see a GP. It took two high-po episodes, three e-consults and four telephone calls over one week before an appointment with the GP was obtained. That is somebody who knows how to use a computer. Will the First Minister be able to say when surgeries can see patients in person, namely those who need to see a doctor and do not have access to a computer to complete an e-consult online form? Obviously, I do not know all the circumstances of the individual case, but it sounds as if it is not an acceptable experience for any patient. I would be happy to look at it in more detail if the details are provided. GP practices, though it is important to say, have remained open during the pandemic, although they have had to change the way in which they cater for patients. They continue to provide clinical care, making more use of NHS near me and telephone consultations, but we are very clear that where clinically necessary, it must always be an option to have a face-to-face consultation. The chair of the BMA's General Practitioners Committee has commented that face-to-face appointments are an essential part of what GPs do, and they are committed to ensuring the availability of those. Obviously, individual GP practices have to assess their own circumstances and risks, but it is absolutely essential that patients get access to face-to-face appointments where that is in their interests. On the specific case that has been raised, I repeat the offer to look into that in more detail if the patient wishes her or his details to be passed to me. Students on Dundee University's Oral Health Sciences degree are facing a year's extension due to their court restrictions of the pandemic. They have been informed that their students' support will not be extended, despite that extension being given by the Government to students studying to be dentists alongside them. Does the First Minister agree that that must be fixed before ensuring that those students now being forced to leave the course are able to continue? Will she ask ministers to meet with me to resolve the issue? I am going to hopefully do something that is more helpful than to try to resolve the issue without the requirement for a meeting. I know that we did have an issue with this previous issue. I am trying to bring all the details to my mind right now around dental students where that problem was resolved. If there is a problem with other parts of the cohort, I will take that away today and see if we can resolve that without the need for a meeting. If that is not possible, I will come back to Michael Marra with the reasons why not. That concludes First Minister's questions, and I suspend this meeting until 2 o'clock.