 The next item of business is First Minister's Questions, and I call it question number one, Douglas Ross. Thank you, Presiding Officer. Rules of this Parliament prevent me from asking crucial questions about the scandal over the SNP finances, so I cannot dwell on this here, but I do want to give the First Minister an opportunity to be transparent with my opening question today, because last night, the First Minister became the SNP's treasurer, so while this is still a party matter, it is also now a government matter if the First Minister is compromised, if his hands are tied, if the party of government is about to go bankrupt, or if he himself may become involved in the police investigation. Yesterday, the Deputy First Minister said this, going forward, the governance of the party needs to be about transparency, openness, and people should be able to question about the accounts. We agree and believe that there are legitimate questions that the Scottish public deserves to know answers to. In the interests of transparency, will Hamza Yousaf agree to make a statement to Parliament on the financial scandal in gulfing the party of government here in Scotland? What I would say to Mr Ross is that, obviously, in terms of standing orders, First Minister's questions is the opportunity to put questions to the First Minister that fall within the responsibilities of the First Minister as First Minister and, of course, the responsibilities of his Government. Therefore, I am not entirely clear that that question has met the requirements of standing orders. I am looking at the First Minister to see if he wishes to add to what I have said. I am happy to answer the question. I know that there are some, of course, serious issues for the party that I lead the SNP to address, so I am not going to shy away from that, Presiding Officer. That is why, in my very first act, as SNP leader attending my very first national executive committee, I am pleased that we have agreement from that committee that oversees the party that is elected by our members to our review into transparency and governance, and not only into transparency and governance review, but one that has external input, particularly on the issues of financial oversight. Of course, that is an important job and an important role for me to take forward as leader of the SNP, but let me also say that what I am doing and what the Government I lead, what we are doing collectively, is focusing relentlessly on the day job. That is why, in the first few weeks of being First Minister, I did not just double the fuel and security fund, I made sure that we tripled the fuel and security fund. Now, I know that Douglas Ross will not want to talk about that, because, of course, it lays bare the harm that Tory cost of living crisis is doing to households up and down the country. That is also why, in the first few weeks of being First Minister, I made sure that I focused— I will suspend proceedings, First Minister. Please resume your seat. We will resume proceedings. Please continue, First Minister. Douglas Ross will be pleased. It was me that got interrupted for once, no doubt. That is why, in the first few weeks of being First Minister, I also announced £15 million for school-aged childcare, targeted towards the lowest-income households, £25 million additional, £25 million to support the just transition, additional funding to support GP practices that are in our areas of highest deprivation, £25 million to be able to buy back or long-lease empty properties for the social rented sector. Those are priorities for me, the priorities of the Scottish people. While I take my responsibility as leader of the SNP extremely seriously, I and the Government that I lead will be focused relentlessly on the priorities of the Scottish people. Douglas Ross. The first words from the First Minister when he stood up were, he was happy to answer the question and then basically refused to do so because I was simply asking for a statement and transparency and I do think that it is needed from the First Minister because the secrecy must end. I am going to move on to one of the matters of substance that the First Minister should be focusing his attention on instead of his huge distraction within the party. Last year, an SNP Government agency introduced guidelines that encouraged more lenient sentences on under 25s, even in some of the worst crimes. The Justice Secretary was just asked about this in the session before FMQs. So can I ask the First Minister, does he fully support the policy that was brought forward for consultation when he was just the Secretary of State? Of course, this is a very important issue indeed and while I will not comment on individual sentencing decisions, it would not be right for me to do so as First Minister, let me just clarify some issues around the sentencing guidelines which I think are really really important. I heard Angela Constance make these points in response to a question earlier on. Sentencing guidelines are, of course, rightly entirely the responsibility of the independent sentencing counsel. Decisions about whether to approve those guidelines are, of course, for the High Court. The new cabinet secretary for justice and home affairs has written to the chair of the sentencing counsel to discuss the important work. That letter knows that she will discuss how the counsel plans to keep those published guidelines under review. However, it is also important that, when it comes to decisions on sentencing, not only are they rightly for the independent judiciary but that they are evidence-based. For anybody who has read that sentencing guideline, I am assuming that Douglas Ross has done so, you can see a comprehensive guideline that is evidence-based in terms of its sentencing of young people. The last thing that I would say on that sentencing guideline, of course, notwithstanding all the good that is in there, it is very clear that there is no bar on imposing a custodial sentence on a young person where, of course, the judiciary considered that to be appropriate. However, that must be a decision not for the First Minister, not for Government ministers, neither I would say for Opposition colleagues. It is a decision rightly for the independent judiciary. A few weeks ago, my party and almost everyone in Scotland was outraged at the case of a 13-year-old girl who was raped at a park in Dalkeith. Her attacker, Sean Hogg, was found guilty of rape but he did not go to prison. All he had to do was carry out 270 hours of unpaid work. The judge said that if Hogg had committed the crime when he was over 25, he would now be behind bars. That confirms that the problem here is his sentencing guidelines that were introduced. It is very clear that the Scottish National Party's justice system is broken, so will the First Minister fix it? Before I ask the First Minister to respond, I would remind everybody in the chamber that this is a live case. Therefore, any reference there should be made with extreme caution. With that caveat in place, let me also say that, in my reaction to that case, I can understand why people do have concern, but I must go back to the central point that sentencing decisions are, of course, rightly for the independent courts and the independent judiciary. The Lord President reminded me of that when he made some remarks on the public record when I attended the Court of Session to give my oath as the First Minister of Scotland. I committed to upholding the independence of the judiciary, a responsibility that I take with the utmost seriousness. I also read the very distressing account of the 13-year-old victim at the time, and I also heard from her family on the public statements that have been made. I think that everybody, frankly, would sympathise with the strong feelings of the victim. It is important to say at this stage, talking in the general, not about that specific case, that 98 per cent of all those who are convicted of rape—work convicted of rape between 2018 and 2021—did receive a custodial sentence. It is important that we continue to give the judiciary the independence that they have. It is important to have that separation between Government and judiciary. In the letter that Angela Constance has sent to the sentencing council to the Lord Justice clerk, the Government would like to discuss the issues around how the sentencing guidelines are kept under review, and I take the point that Douglas Ross makes. There is clearly a public interest in that sentencing guideline. The First Minister mentioned that he had seen the comments from the victim and her family, and this is all in the public domain and is very legitimate to raise here in the chamber. The grandfather of the victim said this. With the new ruling that they have, any person under 25 can go out and do any crime that they want, however horrendous it may be, and there is a good chance that they will get a community payback. The survivor of the rape said this. When I was told that he had been found guilty, I felt a wave of emotions. I didn't know how to react. I cried with relief. Now it makes me think, why did I even bother reporting the rape in the first place? She continued, whoever is in charge of the justice system needs to sort this out. You say you care about victims like me, but how can a serial rapist receive 270 hours of community payback? Her final line was, why is it okay to rape anyone and not go to jail? The First Minister seems to be hailing 98 per cent of people convicted of rape going to prison. It should, it must be 100 per cent of rapists convicted of that crime going to prison. Let me repeat the words of the victim as my question to the First Minister. Why is it okay for anyone to rape someone and not go to jail? I agree with the sentiment that, if somebody commits rape, they should go to jail. I believe that, but I also believe very firmly that it is up to the independent judiciary, it is up to judges, it is up to those in the high court to make a decision about what the appropriate punishment is for an individual for the crime that they have committed. Let me again refer back to the sentencing guideline, which is the central issue that Douglas Ross raises with me. The guidelines make it clear that, as well as looking at issues around rehabilitation and consideration of sentencing for young people under 25, they make it very clear in that sentencing guideline that other factors, including punishment, protection of the public and expressing strong disapproval of offending behaviour should also be taken into account. The courts can still, even with the guideline in place, impose a custodial sentence on a young person if they consider that to be appropriate in light of all the facts. I take what has been said by the victim and her grandfather very seriously indeed. That is why we are looking to improve the justice system when it comes to particularly those individuals, particularly women, who are often the victims of sexual offences and rape. We will shortly introduce our criminal justice reform bill, which seeks to make those changes to the court system, to the justice system, in order to be able to improve the experience and improve outcomes of justice for victims of sexual offences and rape. I hope that I will get support from right across the chamber. On Tuesday, Humza Yousaf tried to convince the country that he represented a fresh start at 16 years of command and control, financial mismanagement and a complete lack of transparency. That is not just how they governed their party, it is how they governed the country. Just one example, the on-going ferry crisis, £200 million over budget with no ferries in sight. Last week I was in the Western Isles and I heard directly from people about the consequences of the failure. Canceled ferries, meaning missed cancer appointments, lack of supplies coming in, produce not getting out and businesses going to the wall. In 2017, the then SNP Minister for Transport and the Islands said that resolving the Western Isles ferry crisis was a priority. Six years on, they are still waiting and it has got worse. Who was that incompetent transport minister and where are they now? I recognise the challenges that ferry services and those who rely on ferry services at island communities have suffered in the past few weeks, particularly given the Easter tourism season. I also speak clearly to those island communities that we understand not just the frustration but that we are taking action to ensure that we bolster the ferry network services. That is why this Government has bought and deployed an additional vessel in the MV Lock Freezer. That is why we chartered the MV Arrow to provide additional resilience and capacity. That is why we commissioned two new vessels for Islay and for the Little Minch routes. That is why we progressed key investments in ports and harbours. That is why we confirmed additional revenue funding for the operation of local authority ferry services. That is why, of course, we are looking forward to the MV Alfred and provided additional funding to CalMac for the MV Alfred to provide additional resilience not just for the next few weeks but for the next nine months. That is, of course, a very serious matter raised by Anna Sauer, but we are a Government that is taking action to ensure that we have resilience on our ferries network. Anna Sauer, that was the great example of what has become typical of this leadership in the past three weeks—comical alley. Everything is fine while the house burns down behind us. Island communities will not believe those excuses from the minister. The First Minister and his Government are totally out of touch. Six years ago, Humza Yousaf's transport minister made a promise to fix this, but this SNP Government has failed to get a grip and its financial mismanagement has cost us hundreds of millions of pounds, but it has also cost people on the islands dearly, too. The impact on the local economy has been devastating. One report has estimated that the loss of the lock boys' deal to Malay ferry alone costs nearly £50,000 a day. That is almost double the average annual salary on the islands. As one business put it, no ferry means no income, no jobs, no people, and the businesses in the US have asked the Scottish Government to compensate them for their losses. Last year, Transport Scotland took millions of pounds in fines from CalMac because of the lack of services, so will the First Minister commit to compensating islanders and, at the very least, passed on the fines that the Government has collected from CalMac to the people affected by the crisis? I will look at any proposals that are suggested by anybody across the chamber, including the one that Anasawar just mentioned. I completely accept and am unequivocal in saying that the Government understands and regrets any delays and disruptions that have impacted our island communities. What does not help our island communities is sound bites and easy sound bites from Anasawar, not in any attempt to provide any solutions, but silly personal attacks around Comical Alley. That will not help those in our island communities one single bit. What will help our island communities is delivering six new major vessels to serve Scotland's ferry network by 2026. That is a priority for this Government. Let us look at the facts, because, of course, there has been disruption. I am not denying that at all, but in 2022, there were 170,000 scheduled sailings across the CHIFS network, and around 6.6 per cent of those were cancelled. Over half of those were cancelled due to weather related issues, and around 1.1 per cent of the total scheduled sailings were due to technical issues. The vast majority of scheduled sailings take place when they are meant to. The ferry service network should bolster and we will bolster in relation to its resilience. That is why I look forward to the charter of the MV Alfred coming on board in the coming days. What I will say to Anasawar is that I will end where I started. Any sensible suggestions from across the opposition from across the chamber will be listened to by the Government. Anasawar. The harsh reality is that the island communities just do not believe them. The island communities feel completely let down, and they have heard those excuses for years. They cannot wait more years of Government failure. That is impacting the lives of islanders right now. Businesses are failing right now. Millions of pounds are being lost right now. Exports are stuck on the islands right now, and people need support right now, and that is why they need that compensation scheme. That is no fresh start. Humza Yousaf has served in Government for over a decade. A failed transport minister with hundreds of millions of pounds wasted on ferries that never sailed. A failed justice secretary with millions of pounds wasted on botched prosecutions and court delays. A failed health secretary with over £300 million wasted on delayed discharge while people wait to get life-saving treatment. Just three weeks in, a failed First Minister bogged down in scandal, unable to lead and completely out of touch with the priorities of the people of Scotland. I ask the acting SNP treasurer why should Scots keep paying the price for SNP failure? Can I say once again to Anasawar that we are acting now. That is why the MV Alfred, an additional vessel that we have helped to fund CalMac for, is coming on board in the next few days. That is tangible action, which will make a difference to our ferry networks right here and right now. He says that the people of Scotland do not trust us. He was in the Western Isles. Can I remind him that the Western Isles has an SNP MSP, so the people of the Western Isles absolutely do trust us. Members, we need to hear the First Minister's response. He says that we have not been getting on with the job. I am afraid that people in Scotland disagree with him. When I stood here on Tuesday and announced and articulated our policy perspective, I am delighted that it has got support from the SCVO and some of the policies that I announced have got support from Dr Liz Cameron, the chief executive of the Scottish chambers of commerce, from Transport Scotland, Transform Scotland, forgive me, in relation to the pilot for peak rail fares being abolished, from the Scottish Whiskey Association, from the Chartered Institute of Housing in Scotland, from the Scottish Empty Homes Partnership, from Crisis Scotland, from Reform Scotland, from the Poverty Alliance, from Stop Climate Chaos, from Parkinson's UK. That is a time for new leadership, of course, which I am delighted to bring to this Government. A time for a fresh start. The people of Scotland recognise that. Maybe it is time that Scottish Labour should recognise that too. To ask the First Minister whether he will provide an update on what recent engagement the Scottish Government has had with the UK Government regarding the proposed development of the Rosebank oil and gas field in light of the Scottish Government's draft energy strategy and just transition plan. Licensing, exploration and production of the offshore oil and gas sector of course remain reserved regrettably to the UK Government. The Scottish Government is clear that unlimited extraction of fossil fuels is not consistent with our climate obligations, it is not the solution to the energy crisis, meeting our energy security needs, or indeed ensuring a just transition for our oil and gas workers as North Sea production inevitably declines. That is why we need a new plan for Scotland's energy system. The draft energy strategy and just transition plan seeks to do that. The Scottish Government is absolutely committed to a just transition and ensuring that we take workers with us on that important journey to net zero. We will not do to the north-east what Thatcher did to mining and sealing communities right across Scotland. While recognising that licensing is reserved, the draft energy strategy and just transition plan sets out a position that, in order to support the fastest possible and most effective just transition, there should be a presumption against new exploration for oil and gas. Since the draft plan was published, the UN Secretary General has said, our world needs climate action on all fronts, everything, everywhere, all at once, ceasing all licensing or funding of new oil and gas, stopping any expansion of existing oil and gas reserves and shifting subsidies from fossil fuels to a just energy transition. Whether it is Rose Bank today or other proposals to drill tomorrow, does the First Minister agree that a just transition on a liveable planet depends on our firm commitment to a fossil fuel free future? I agree that we should all want a fossil fuel free future. I agree on that. Delivering on our climate obligations is, of course, an absolute priority. One of the first things that I did in my second official visit as First Minister, I went to the north-east of Scotland. I spoke to those who are absolutely committed to that just transition, particularly in the north-east. I want the north-east of Scotland to be in the net zero capital, not just of Europe, but the net zero capital of the world. I believe that it has the potential to do so. Maggie Chapman is absolutely right that, first and foremost, we have to make sure that any decisions that are taken by the UK Government must be taken in relation to our climate obligations. We want the UK Government to strengthen its climate compatibility checkpoint. We have asked for tougher, more robust climate tests. Secondly, we should ensure that they align with our energy security needs. Thirdly—this is really central, and I believe that Maggie Chapman will absolutely agree with that—we must take the workers of the north-east with us. As I have already said, we will never do to the north-east what Margaret Thatcher did, to our mining and steel communities. We will not decimate sectors. We will not leave a single worker on the scrap people. That is why I will continue to invest in the just transition and to accelerate that just transition as quickly as we possibly can. Supplementary Liam Kerr. New exploration and production in the North Sea would protect over 70,000 Scottish jobs. It would help our energy security and it would have a positive impact on emissions rather than offshoring our responsibilities. Therefore, will the First Minister reexamine the plans in his threadbare energy strategy to close the North Sea, or will he continue to be dictated to by a cabal of green MSPs? That, of course, is not what is in the draft strategy. However, if we were to unleash and truly unlock the green economy, we are talking about tens of thousands of jobs over the next couple of decades. We want to take the workers of the north-east in particular with us on that journey. What a cheek that Liam Kerr stands there and talks about Scottish jobs when it comes to energy when his party, when the party that he belongs to, the UK Government have continued to block, have continued to delay, have continued to dither when it comes to the Scottish cluster and the ACON project, which they have refused to give commission to and have relegated to track to. Let me just say once again that Tories can never be trusted when it comes to protecting Scottish jobs. I'm supplementary, Fergus Ewing. Presiding Officer, here in Scotland and the UK, we will need and continue to need and rely on gas for decades to come. The gas is imported in many cases from the USA, but its gas is produced with over four times the carbon emissions of Rosebank. Therefore, does the First Minister agree with me that sacrificing development of our own gas resource would not only decimate tens of thousands of highly skilled, well-paid jobs in a form of economic masochism advocated by the wine bar revolutionaries in the Green Party, but also make climate change worse—actually worse, not better. Before the First Minister responds, I would remind all members of the requirement to treat each other with courtesy and respect. I've got a feeling, Presiding Officer, that's not the first time you've had to tell off your brother at one's suspects, but let me, at some point of agreement with Fergus Ewing, say that nobody in the Scottish Government—certainly not just in the Scottish Government, but also in the Green Party—has said that extraction has to stop tomorrow, because we understand that a just transition means that we have to take the workers of the North East with us. Of course, the point is that it's a just transition. It has to be just, and that's why we believe that we must accelerate that just transition with further investment in those non-fossil fuel alternatives. I would say that independent research based on industry projections found that production in the North Sea will be around a third of 2019 levels by 2035. We know that it is a declining base, and hence why we have to make sure that we are accelerating that just transition. Meanwhile, as of 2019, only 16 per cent of the oil and gas that is coming into Scotland, including imports from Norway and beyond, is consumed in Scotland. Reducing our energy consumption while ramping up our energy generation capabilities through renewables and hydrogen will mean that a net zero Scotland will not only be less reliant on importing oil and gas but, hopefully, be a net exporter of cleaner and greener energy to the rest of the UK and beyond. To ask the First Minister, in light of his recent visit to the port of Aberdeen, what engagement has he had with the business community since taking office? Resetting the relationship with business is a core priority for this Government and, Tuesday, I set out plans to agree a new deal for businesses and the introduction of a new group co-chaired by the Cabinet Secretary for the Wellbeing, Economy and Fair Work and Energy. That will explore how Government can better support our businesses and communities using all the policy levers that we have to our hands. During my visit to the port of Aberdeen, I announced £25 million, as I have already referenced, to be invested for the just transition away from oil and gas. That was the first of many meetings that I have planned as part of an extensive programme of engagement with business and industry leaders across all of Scotland's sectors to identify those priority areas of both challenge and opportunity. Later today, I will also meet the main business organisations to personally reiterate my commitment to this new working relationship and how we can deliver on our mission of a fairer, greener and indeed a growing well-being economy for all of Scotland's people. I thank the First Minister for his response. The Scottish Government's commitment to agree a new deal for business has received an extremely positive response from the business community, and we all agree that it is absolutely vital that we work together constructively to develop our well-being economy. Given the substantial pressures that many businesses are facing from rising costs and a disastrous Brexit, it is clear that urgent and sustained action is needed to maximise the support available to them. Can the First Minister say any more about the steps that the Scottish Government is taking to ensure that it can best support our businesses using the full policy levers that it has at its disposal? Does he agree that with full powers over our economy resting with this Parliament, we would be much better placed to support our businesses to thrive? Of course we would. I can hear groans and jeers from the Scottish Conservatives. Let's read what the chairman of the OBR said about the impact of Brexit on the UK economy. He said that it was on the same magnitude as Covid, as a Covid pandemic, an energy crisis that the pandemic has had. He said that, of course, in fact, the centre for European reform said that they found that Brexit has cost the UK a staggering £33 billion in lost trade. That is not just the opinion of the SNP-led Scottish Government, it is the opinion of those experts in the economy, who are saying that Brexit has seriously impacted trade in the UK and trade here in Scotland, too. Businesses are the backbone of the economy. I am a proud son of a small business owner, and that is why the new deal for business, which I articulated in our policy perspectives on Tuesday, is so important. It is crucial. Through the Scottish budget, we responded to businesses' biggest ask and non-domestic rates by freezing the poundage in 2324. That is estimated to save rate pairs £308 million. We will continue to use the powers of devolution that we have to the absolute maximum effect to grow and transform our wellbeing economy. However, I agree that we need significantly increased policy levers to ensure that Scotland will be wealthier, fairer and greener, and that the wellbeing of our people is enhanced. Until we do that, I am afraid that the Scottish Conservatives will continue to have the levers that we can see them use to harm our people and to harm business and trade here in Scotland. Thank you, Presiding Officer. Connectivity between the port of Aberdein and the free port in Cromarty will be vital for the north-east economy. Will the First Minister grow a backbone, stand up to the Greens and fully dual the A96 as promised? That goes to the heart of the Conservatives' hypocrisy. The demand that we go further on tackling the climate emergency—anything that we do, including a review, for example, of sections of the A96 for climate compatibility—is opposed. It does not matter what the Scottish Government tries to do to ensure that we tackle the climate emergency, so we leave a cleaner planet, a sustainable planet for our future generations. The Conservatives will always oppose it. Let me say very clearly that we are absolutely committed to the drilling of the A9, but also the A96 inverness to Nairn and Nairn bypass. I have already said to my good friend, Fragus Ewing, that we will bring forward a timetable on that as soon as we possibly can. To ask the First Minister whether he will provide an update on the Scottish Government's plans for highly protected marine areas following the end of its public consultation. Our initial consultation on highly protected marine areas closed on Monday. It is only right, of course, that we do take some time to carefully consider all the responses, and there has been a substantial number of responses before we set out our next steps, as I say, especially given the strength of views that we all know have been expressed on this issue. Our seas, of course, must remain a source of prosperity for the nation, especially in those remote coastal and island communities. It is vital that those communities help to shape the creation of those areas, which is why we chose to consult very early on in this process. My officials have held over 40 meetings relating to the process. My colleague, Manny McCallan, will continue to engage directly with coastal and island communities before we decide our next steps together. To be clear, no sites have been selected. That will not begin until we have considered the consultation's feedback and until that engagement is complete. We are determined to ensure that as many voices as possible are heard in this process. Earlier this week, the First Minister said that HPMAs should not be imposed on communities that do not want them. First Minister, not one community in the Highlands and Islands wants these, not one. We all acknowledge the need to protect our marine environment, but those proposals will devastate coastal communities and threaten their very way of life, particularly the fishing sector. It is no wonder that this policy has been compared to the clearances that people cleared off the land and the sea. Given the anger that this has caused, given the widespread opposition to those plans, including from many in his own party, and given that he wants to be First Minister for the whole country, will he now scrap those plans once and for all and start again? The point is that there are no plans yet. There is a consultation. We do not have set sites. We do not have set criteria yet. What we want to do is to work with coastal communities, island communities and fishing communities at a very early stage and in the section stage. Ultimately, I believe that there is agreement on the outcome. The outcome that we all want is a sustainable marine environment. What we want is our fishing industry and our seas to be sustainable for the future. We want that industry to continue, but we can only do that if the marine environment is sustainable. I believe that there is an agreement there. Of course, our island communities and coastal communities have often been at the forefront of that effort around sustainability. We want to work with them and engage with them, all that being said. I reiterate what I said on Tuesday that the Government will not impose a policy on any community that they are vehemently opposed to. My colleague Mary MacAllan will engage with those island communities and coastal communities, and we will analyse those responses carefully. However, for all those who have expressed their opposition to highly protected marine areas, we are willing to engage, we are willing to listen, and let us hope that we get to the agreed outcomes together. Does the First Minister agree that the no-take zone in Amlash Bay has had no adverse impact whatsoever? Indeed, she has shown that conservation can help to revitalise our fishing sector and that identifying potentially highly protected marine area sites would allow more effective direct engagement with concerned fishers and communities. Far from having any adverse impact, it has shown us the benefit for both the marine environment and the people who rely on it. I go back to that point. I think that a very good example in relation to Amlash Bay was the community that wanted that no-take zone. That goes to the central point that we will work with communities, hopefully, to get to the outcomes that we all agree on, which is a sustainable marine environment. Based on studies that were co-ordinated by the community group at Amlash Bay, it has been noted that, since protection commercially important species such as the king scallop, such as the European lobster, they have increased in size, they have increased in age, and they have increased in density. The 2008 designation of the Lamlash Bay no-take zone off the coast of Arran, as I said, was a result of campaigning by the local community. I think that that is a good model for us to take forward our work around highly protected marine areas. Earlier this week, the Orkney Islands Council joined counterparts in Shetland in the western Isles in voicing the strongest possible opposition to the Government's plans for highly protected marine areas, given the potential impact on island communities. On the same day, the First Minister announced welcome, if long overdue, U turns on his deposit return scheme and alcohol advertising sanctions. Can I therefore urge him not to spend months defending the indefensible and confirm in light of the significant and growing opposition in coastal and island communities that his Government will now rethink its plans to arbitrarily designate 10 per cent of Scottish waters at HBMAs by 2026? Lee McArthur will be well aware that when I was a transporter in the islands minister, I introduced and brought forward island proofing. It is something that I believe in to my very core. Therefore, we will not impose on any community, island or otherwise a policy that they vehemently oppose. Let's analyse the consultation responses. Let's agree on the outcomes. I think that there is generally broad agreement on the outcome, that we want to have a marine environment that is sustainable. We want to have a fishing sector that is sustainable in the long term. Of course, protecting our biodiversity helps us with that outcome. I will continue to engage personally. Maree McAllan will also engage personally. She will have no doubt travel right across the country, including to Orkney and Shetland, to meet those who have expressed concerns and together. I hope that we can get to a place where we all agree on the outcome and then move forward to protect our marine environment to make it more sustainable for the future. To ask the First Minister what immediate action the Scottish Government will take to improve the situation regarding ferry services across the highlands and islands in light of recent reports of unprecedented disruption. As I have already said in response to the question from Anna Sarwe, I recognise the significant impact that delays disruption have during the annual overhaul programme. It is regrettably had on our island communities. We know that island communities of course rely on those lifeline services, not just individuals but businesses too. I am committed to investing in our ferry services. Indeed, we are going to be delivering six new major vessels to serve Scotland's ferry network by 2026 as a priority for me and for the Government that I lead. We have already procured MV Locfisa, previously chartered the MV Arrow, and we look forward to shortly welcoming the MV Alfred into service, providing some additional resilience to the network. In the meantime, we will continue to press CalMac to consider all options to minimise the impact on communities and indeed businesses. I know that the Minister for Transport is engaging very closely on the issue. He has held resilience calls with CalMac, with Transport Scotland in light of the latest disruption, and he has proactively engaged directly with local stakeholders, with our operators and CMAL, on improving reliability and resilience across the network. Rhoda Grant. The Transport Minister refused to take responsibility for the ferry crisis, and he also refused compensation payments to local businesses, who are actually going to the wall because of those ferry failures. Now that Constituents in the US will have no mainland services from Sunday, that is two days' time, is the First Minister going to do the same, or is he going to tell us what emergency provision he is going to put in place? Has he asked the MOD for help and what compensation is he going to give to businesses that will close as a result of this? I have already said in response to the question from Anasawa that we will consider the issues around compensation and what more we can do to support businesses when there is disruption, but I do not agree with the premise of our question. I know that Kevin Stewart has been directly involved and engaging with CalMac, but also with the island communities that have been affected. I go back to my response to both Anasawa and Rhoda Grant that we have the MV Alfred coming on board, I hope, within the coming days, and that will provide some further resilience to our network. However, I take the points that have been made and raised, and any disruption to our ferry network is regrettable. The other point that I know that Kevin Stewart has been engaging on is that we want to ensure that we improve CalMac's communication with islanders when the disruption takes place. The Scottish Government has now officially asked the UK Armed Forces to step in and provide a temporary replacement service across the Coron Narrows. While this is a Highland Council-run service, it highlights the lack of resilience and the growing crisis in Scotland's ferry network. So can the First Minister advise me if he was involved in signing off that request to the MOD and, if so, when he did that? Given the need to ensure that this kind of disruption and the severe impact that it has on local communities does not happen again, will he commit today to either he or his new transport minister visiting the area at the earliest opportunity to meet with local residents and businesses? I have just a slight correction to Jamie Halcro Johnston's question. It is our MOD, our Scottish taxpayer money, that helps to fund the MOD. It is important that, when he talks about the MOD stepping in, our assets that Scottish taxpayers help to contribute towards. That is a really important point of clarification. Of course, the Scottish Government has been as helpful. We have helped to facilitate that engagement between Highland Council. We know that the Coron ferry is its responsibility. The MOD, in fact, was my colleague Ian Blackford, the MP for Ross, Skye and Lochaber, who has helped to ensure that facilitation between Highland Council, the MOD and the Scottish Government. We will do everything that we possibly can in relation to that MACA request. My understanding is that there are currently initial assessments that the MOD are doing. Whatever the next steps are in relation to the process that involves the Scottish Government, we will be as helpful as we possibly can. I remind Jamie Halcro Johnston that the former Deputy First Minister announced in his final budget that the Scottish Government would provide full revenue funding to councils that run their own ferry services. Our officials are in very proactive engagement with the Highland Council about those costs. We would be happy to visit the Highlands and talk to local community about the Coron ferry route. To ask the First Minister what urgent action the Scottish Government is taking to ensure that everyone who is eligible for any cancer testing and screening programme is receiving their invitation on time, in light of recent reports, that 13,000 women who are mistakenly removed from the national database are being offered an appointment for a cervical smear. I thank Beatrice Wishart for raising what is an incredibly important issue indeed. The national audit of the cervical screening programme is under way as a result of an incident that was brought to our attention in 2021, in which a small number of women were incorrectly excluded from the cervical screening programme after having subtotal hysterectomies. At this final stage of the audit, it is precautionary that it follows an initial audit in 2021 of those women who are considered to be at the highest risk of being wrongly excluded. No cervical cancers were detected as part of that audit and the risk to participants in that audit is very low. The actual number of patients who need to be reinstated to the screening programme obviously will not be known until that audit is complete and all affected individuals are contacted. Funding has been made available, particularly to GP practices, to ensure that they can absorb any increase in demand. I thank the First Minister for that answer and I recognise the complexity of the case, and we were talking about a statistically small number, but every number is a person who will no doubt be concerned when they receive a letter. Does the First Minister assure those with concerns that measures are in place to ensure that similar errors are not repeated, that all those affected will be contacted as swiftly as possible? Can he indicate what work is under way to improve access to screening, including the introduction of self-sampling, to ensure that this news does not further impact uptake? Beatrice Wishart is absolutely right, although the numbers may be small. If you receive that letter, I can imagine the impact, the concern and the worry that you have. That is why I was very keen to reiterate that the women who were called and the first audit were the ones that were most at risk. If you are receiving a letter or are being asked to come back in for screening, there is low risk, but that, of course, there is still risk. That will be a concern for those who receive the call-up as part of the audit. Beatrice Wishart is also right to ask what we have done in relation to ensuring that this error does not occur again. This is an error that has occurred. I am afraid that we know in the system for many years. We have made improvements to the IT systems in relation to the cervical cancer screening programme. We have also improved the record-keeping process. All 14 territorial boards have taken action in relation to their audit activities. We expect the audit to be fully completed in the next 12 months. We have started with those at the highest of risk. In relation to cervical cancer, she has already mentioned some of the initiatives that we are taking forward. We are also seeking to do more in relation to mobile screening units, which we know are particularly important in rural, remote and island communities. Beatrice Wishart raises a very important point indeed about the fact that we need to make sure that screening of all cancer, cervical cancer of course included, is accessible as possible to as many people as possible. We will now move briefly to general and constituency supplementaries. I call Fiona Hyslund. The First Minister will be aware of an article in this morning's telegraph by Conservative Pierre David Frost, which proposes to reduce and remove powers of devolution and undermines this Parliament. How does the Government intend to defend the powers of this Scottish Parliament from unelected Tories at Westminster, intent on dismantling devolution? Does he agree that it is for all MSPs, from all parties, to defend this Parliament from an attack on democracy? Absolutely. Lord Frost, unelected Tory Pierre, gave the game away. He said the quiet bit out loud. He said what every single Scottish Conservative really thinks. He said—and I will quote him, Presiding Officer—not only must no more powers be devolved to Scotland, it is time to reverse that process. He said that ministers should make it clear that if they are re-elected, they will review and roll back some of the currently devolved powers. It is hardly a surprise that the party that did not support the Scottish Parliament now wants to dismantle the Scottish Parliament, but let me be abundantly clear whether it is on the section 35 veto, whether it is there in ability to grant an exemption under the IMA, under the internal market act, whether it is the fact that it wants to curtail our excellent international development work or external engagement with the SNP-led Scottish Government, we will always defend our democracy and we will always defend the voice and the will of the Scottish people. The First Minister will be aware of the NSPCC Scotland report, keeping the promise to infants 0 to 3. The report states that in Scotland we have a baby blind spot in the care system. It also states that despite the youngest children in Scotland being the most vulnerable to harm, the 0 to 3 age group can often be overlooked, which is shocking, especially when a quarter of all child protection orders are for infants under 20 days old. It makes reference to the need to improve support and redesign of services to keep the promise. Given the public commitments that were made by the previous First Minister, what will the current First Minister do to ensure that the baby blind spot in Scotland is removed once and for all? It is a very important issue raised by Ros McAll, indeed, and she is right to scrutinise what the Government is going to be doing to keep the promise. I made an unapologetic and unequivocal commitment in relation to this Government's determination to keep the promise. I, of course, have appointed a minister that has responsibility for keeping the promise, and Natalie Dawn will report directly to me as First Minister on that particular issue. We will lay out as a Government in detail what we can do for care experience young people. Of course, there has been some legislation passed by this Parliament on issues such as, for example, sibling separation, but what I heard from care experience young people in particular was that we need to go further in terms of implementation of that legislation on the ground, and Ros McAll's rightly raised the issue of the baby blind spot, as it is referred to by NSPCC. Of course, that is another issue that I am determined that we do more on. I will give, as I said, an unequivocal commitment to ensuring that this Government keeps the promise, not just for babies and young people. That is important, but of course, care experience is lifelong. Scottish hospices are facing a perfect storm of rising staff costs, increased energy and running costs, and a tough fundraising environment. They need urgent funding to match the NHS pay uplift so that they can offer their staff the fair wage that they deserve. Hospice UK met with the First Minister in his old role as health secretary some five weeks ago, but all they have had since are holding responses. Time is running out and hospices will need to make decisions in order to sustain their services. Will the First Minister act swiftly, indeed today, and provide hospices with the additional funding that they so urgently need? Of course, we are investing a record £19 billion in a health and social care system this year that has only been possible because of the progressive taxation that we have brought forward as a Government. I will speak with Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care to see what more we can possibly do, what funding we are able to provide, but every single penny of our funding has been allocated. I understand that the issues raised by Jackie Baillie on behalf of hospices UK are very important. I value the work that hospices do across the country. I have had personal experience when I lost an uncle to pancreatic cancer, forgive me, many years ago.