 1. Douglas Ross I ask the First Minister if she has full confidence in the Scottish Qualifications Authority. Yes, I do. On the issue of qualifications this year, it is important that I and the Government recognise first of all that this is a really anxious and a really difficult time for pupils and indeed for their parents across the country. It is really important that we and indeed the SQA continue to listen. We are doing our utmost to deliver fair grades in what are very difficult circumstances. I will try, if there are further questions on this today, to answer all of the questions as clearly as possible, because scrutiny and understanding is really important. I am going to try to stay away from partisan politics, not least because many of the arrangements that we are putting in place are very similar to those being put in place in England and Wales under Governments of all parties. I think that reflects the fact that this is a difficult situation. Perhaps, in setting the context for this, I can do no better than, quote, Jim Thewlis, who is, of course, the General Secretary of School Leaders Scotland. He said this, and I think that this is an important context as we go into, I am sure, some of the detail of this. He said that the system that replaced exams was never going to be perfect, but all of the way along no one has come up with a better way of doing it than the alternative certification model. This is a difficult set of circumstances, but the Government is continuing to do all that we can to support pupils in these difficult times, and that approach will very much continue. Douglas Ross said that the First Minister has full confidence in the Scottish Qualifications Authority. That answer will not be shared by tens of thousands of pupils and parents across Scotland who were so badly let down by the SQA and its exam-grade disaster last year, and it will not be shared by thousands more who are now facing what looks like another year of grades chaos and confusion. Last night, Leon Cameron of the Glasgow Youth Council said, and I quote, "...we are extremely angry at the people with authority, the Scottish Government, the SQA, that they keep saying that everything is okay when it's not. They are clearly in denial over this issue." Leon continued, "...we have been put through hell." The First Minister said that she would answer all questions clearly on this issue. Who does the First Minister agree with Leon Cameron that her Government and the SQA are in denial about this? I do not agree with that, but it is my duty to persuade young people and their parents across the country that, although no Government can take away all the impacts of a global pandemic on our young people, this Government, working with teachers, with local authorities, with representatives of pupils and parents and, of course, with the SQA, is doing everything we can in a highly challenging set of circumstances to deliver fairness for pupils. That work will continue. The alternative certification model was developed by the national qualifications group that brought together teacher representatives, parents and pupils. We are often asked rightly to listen to teachers and say that it gives pupils the best opportunity to demonstrate what they have learned. The Government will continue to listen to young people. That is why, for example, the SQA has put in place an appeals process that gives every young person a direct right of appeal free of charge. There have been some very difficult decisions to take around, for example, whether there is a no-detriment appeal system or a symmetrical appeal system. The SQA has proposed a symmetrical system, which is the same as in England and Wales. There is also concern being raised—we are listening very carefully to this—about the specific grounds of appeal and the specific point that has been raised that there is no ground of appeal that takes account of exceptional personal circumstances. The reason for that is that we do not think that a young person who has suffered exceptional circumstances should have to rely on an appeal. That is why an exceptional circumstances arrangement has been built into the model, so that if somebody has, for example, a bereavement that means that they cannot put forward assessment by the date in June, they have a window of time until September. We continue to work to try to take account of the concerns and put in place the best possible arrangements in a highly imperfect set of circumstances. I take very seriously the responsibility that we have as a Government to listen on an on-going basis to young people. Last year, for example, it was unacceptable. One of the key changes this year is that grades are based on teacher judgment, not on algorithms, not on statistical models, not on historical performance of school. Teacher judgment informed by the work of pupils. Those are important changes. Of course, we continue to work hard with everyone in the education system to make sure that concerns are properly addressed. The First Minister will not agree with young people. Instead, in her own words, she will try to explain to them and persuade them while they are wrong. That is absolutely appalling from a First Minister who is unwilling to listen to criticisms of her Government and their handling of that from the young people who have been most affected. Last summer, it took a week before the SNP finally admitted that their grading system was broken and that it had a U-turn. This year's children should not have to go through the same issues all over again. When he is out, summerable is in, but it is the same old shambles. This SNP Government needs to learn from its mistakes, but it is determined to repeat them. The Scottish Children and Young People's Commissioner has said on the threat of downgrading that it is an unnecessary and disempowering barrier to young people. That is a concern that will be echoed in homes and classrooms right across Scotland. Is the First Minister seriously going to defend an appeal system that risks pupils receiving lower grades and demands a gamble on their future? What is appalling is for Douglas Ross to mischaracterise what I have said. I did not say that the Government's job was to persuade young people that they were wrong. What I said is that the Government's job is to engage with young people. Yes, to seek to persuade that the arrangements that are in place are the right ones, but to listen as we go. For example, it is because we have listened to young people that there is a fundamentally different system in place this year, not one based on algorithms but one based on teacher judgment informed by the attainment and the work that young people have done. We are often challenged to listen more to teachers. Some schools make use of SQA assessment instruments, but teachers are able to draw on whatever evidence they regard as valid in determining grades. Unlike exams, the evidence does not need to be produced in a one-off event. That was a critical point, and in fact the judgment of teachers cannot be challenged by the SQA. On appeals, giving young people the direct right of appeal, free of any cost, was also something that was called for. On this important issue of whether we have a no-detriment system where appeals can only be upgraded, not downgraded or a symmetrical system, I would make three points on that. First, the symmetrical system is one that ensures that the attainment of pupils is central to this process. That is the fairest way of proceeding. That is not new, and that has been the approach taken in past years. Douglas Ross says that it is indefensible. Is it exactly the same approach that has been taken by the UK Government for the English system? That is another important point. However, this one is perhaps more important for pupils. The downgrading of grades and past experience shows that this is exceptionally rare. If you take 2019 out of more than 11,000 appeals, only two of them were downgraded. In 2018, 13,000 appeals, seven were downgraded. That is an exceptional occurrence, but it ensures that we have a system that, from start to finish, is intended to focus on the actual attainment of pupils. Of course, the appeals system should only be used in exceptional circumstances, not because we want to put pupils off using it, but because we want to get the grades right at the first time, which is why the judgment of teachers at the centre of that is so important. This year has been difficult for everyone, but especially so for young people. What has this Government and the SQA done for them over the past 15 months? Exams replaced by exams, an appeals process, late and flawed, no lessons learned, no understanding, no fairness, pupils dismayed, punished for being ambitious, teachers scunnered, their concerns ignored, parents furious with this Government not listening to them. Will the First Minister do the right thing? Conceit that she has got this bad way wrong? Guarantee that no pupils who appeal will be downgraded, because no matter how rare she says it is, it will be a risk for young people if they appeal. Once she does that, finally agree that no pupil who appeals will be downgraded, will she start to fix the deeper problems in Scottish education, beginning by replacing the SQA? Wider reform of education, including potential reform of the SQA, this Parliament will debate these issues this afternoon. The education secretary will say more about all that when that debate happens later today. We will continue to listen to young people, to teachers, to parents, and we will continue to address concerns as far as we can. I am afraid that this is inescapable. This is a highly imperfect situation, because we are in the midst of a global pandemic that has made exams impossible. We have to put in place an alternative. As Jim Thewlis, who I quoted earlier, said, no alternative is going to be perfect, but nobody has suggested a better one than this. All of the things that Douglas Ross says are fundamentally wrong here are the same arrangements, by and large, recognising that we have different education systems, but by and large, exactly the same arrangements that are being put in place in England and in Wales under Governments of different parties. That reflects the fact that we are all trying to do our best for young people in very difficult circumstances. We have learned lessons from last year about teacher judgment and replacing the algorithm approach that was fundamentally flawed last year, recognising that there must be a much more accessible appeals system, but also recognising that at the heart of that has to be the attainment of pupils. That approach has not been easy for anybody, particularly for young people themselves. Of all the impacts of this pandemic, I wish I could take away the impact in our young people is very near, if not at the top of that list. We are all doing the best we can, and we will continue to engage with young people as we seek to do that. Last week, we heard damning evidence from Dominic Cummings about the UK Government's response to Covid-19. He painted a picture of chaos and confusion, poor preparation and almost criminal levels of negligence that led to avoidable deaths. He outlined a series of failures, a lack of PPE, insufficient testing, Covid-positive patients being sent into care homes and inconsistent and delayed decision making. Last week at First Minister's Questions, the First Minister was rightly critical of the chaos that Dominic Cummings described, but does she accept that many of the same decisions were made in Scotland by the First Minister and the Scottish Government? I have always accepted that we made mistakes in the handling of the pandemic. I have never tried to shy away from that. The point that I was making last week was not to point the finger at any politician. It was to make the general point that one of the lessons all of us in decision making positions should have learned over the past more than a year now is that taking quick decisions is really important. That applies to me just as much as it applies to anyone else. We have sought to learn lessons as we go, as our understanding and knowledge about this virus has developed. As we have candidly said that we perhaps made mistakes in how we did things in the early parts of that. I have been candid about that. There will be, as I think is right and proper, a process of full, robust scrutiny of that, both for the interests of accountability, which is really important, but also in the interests of learning lessons for the future. We need to make sure that the lessons of this pandemic are there for, hopefully, future generations to use, because hopefully none of us will have to deal with another pandemic. All of those things are important. I have not, and I will not shy away from the responsibility I bear for every aspect of the handling of that. I welcome the First Minister's response, and I recognise what she says about the importance of having good decisions being made really quickly and how important they are. Today, we are publishing a timeline comparison, which shows that at key moments and on the big decisions, the UK and Scottish Governments were in lockstep. It is important to stress that none of that is the fault of our hardworking NHS and care staff. What we are questioning is the decision-making of the Scottish Government. Let's look at some of those specific decisions. In early March, both Governments were talking of a strategy of herd immunity. On March 12, 47,000 fans attended a European football match in Glasgow. That same day, the Scottish Government said that stopping mass gatherings was not the best way to contain the virus. They were made illegal 11 days later by both Governments. Untested and Covid-positive patients were being sent into care homes. The UK Government announced routine testing on 15 April. The Scottish Government waited until 21 April. The result is one in 10 of our care home residents in Scotland losing their lives to Covid. That is not a protective ring—3,774 deaths, a third of the total. Does the First Minister accept that those were decisions made in Scotland by the First Minister and the Scottish Government? I am glad for him that the NSRO has got the time to do timelines. He has just told me that I do not know. There is nothing that I have sought to shy away from. I lived through that period as the lead decision maker in the Scottish Government. I take responsibility for all the decisions. I have never tried to shy away from them. I will live with the consequences of those decisions for as long as I live. Those decisions will be subject to serious scrutiny. That is right and proper. We sought all along to do the right things based on the knowledge and the understanding that we had in light of developing knowledge—some of those things—if we could turn the clock back, we would do differently. In addition to that, as I have said all along, we will have made straightforward mistakes, and I will regret any mistakes that we have made forever. I do not know what point Anna Sarwar is seeking to prove. I have taken responsibility and will continue to take responsibility. I have done my level best every single day of this pandemic to get the decisions right. If I could turn the clock back, would we go into lockdown earlier than we did? Yes, I think that that is true. We did move on mass gathering slightly before the UK Government, and we announced the position on school slightly before the UK Government. When we look at the different pandemic curves, although we went into lockdown on the same day as the rest of the UK, it was slightly ahead of the pandemic curve for Scotland. If I could turn the clock back, there are many things that I would love to have the opportunity to do differently. Of course, the irony now from many of the same people who criticise me perfectly legitimately for not acting quickly enough or for being not cautious enough at an earlier stage are the same people who often criticise me now for being too cautious and for going too slowly in lifting lockdown restrictions. That is what comes with the responsibilities of this job. I am not complaining about that, but this is not an easy situation for anybody to be in. I will continue, as I have done from day one, to take the best decisions I can, and I will never shy away from the responsibility for that. I am not sure why the First Minister is critical of the development of a timeline, but I hope that, given the scale of the civil service, there will be a Scottish Government timeline about decision making so that we can learn from mistakes and so that we do not repeat those mistakes again. Large events matter because, on the day that we had 47,000 fans in Glasgow, Ireland was announcing an end to large gatherings. It heard immunity matters because New Zealand took a very different approach and had very different outcomes. The Edinburgh University study has shown that, if Scotland had acted earlier, we could have prevented 2,000 Covid deaths. Those are important points that we should be bringing to the chamber and asking for a response from Scotland's Government. I gave three examples of decisions that were made in Scotland about strategy, mass gatherings and care homes. I could have given more, a failure to have adequate PPE supplies, a failure to adequately ramp up testing, a failure to introduce strict testing in quarantine at our airports, and an ineffective contract tracing. NHS and social care staff and the Scottish people deserve more than just rhetoric—they deserve answers. They deserve more than being told that the Government cares—they deserve answers. We cannot allow Scottish exceptionalism to stop us from learning critical lessons. It is always easier to focus on failures elsewhere. We must learn from mistakes here at home. We do not need to wait for the UK Government. Work can begin right now to establish a judge-led Scottish-specific public inquiry on the decisions that are made in Scotland. Surely, after everything that the First Minister just said in those answers, she agrees. People can make up their minds whether they are hearing from me an inability to face up to mistakes or Scottish exceptionalism. I think that what they are hearing from me is a candid admission that we would not, like many other Governments across the world, have got everything right and not just a willingness, but a desire to face up to that and learn from that. I could paper the walls with bits of papers and timelines, but my focus right now, as First Minister, is getting the vaccination programme delivered to keep people safe in the future, to make sure that we are taking the right decisions, criticised by many for being too cautious and too slow, to keep people safe, as we could be in the foothills of a third wave of this virus. That is my responsibility as First Minister. Of course, we have lessons to learn, and I have never said otherwise. Perhaps Anas Sarwar was standing here and saying that, if he had been standing here back then, he would have got everything right. Who knows? Maybe he would have done, but I suspect that, just like everybody else, he would have grappled with those difficult decisions. On the issue of a judge-led public inquiry, I have given that commitment, that commitment stands. I want to see that up and running before the end of this year. The UK Government has announced plans for a public inquiry and has asked for four nations discussion about remit and where there might be overlaps. Usually, from the Labour benches here, I am being encouraged to take part in constructive four nations discussions. We have agreed to do that, but the commitment to a public inquiry is firm and strong. I think that I was the first of the First Ministers across the UK to give that commitment. Having led this country to the best of my ability, far from perfectly, through this pandemic, I want, as much as anybody wants, to make sure that we learn the right lessons. It is very easy—if I was in opposition, no doubt I would be doing the same—it is very easy when you are not the one taking the decisions and when you have the benefit of hindsight to tell us what we should have done. However, when you are taking the decisions in the moment, you have to act on the basis of the best information and advice that you have. That is what we have done. We will learn lessons and we will be judged. We have just been judged on our leadership of this so far in an election and we will be judged with the fullest possible scrutiny. Right now, my focus is on continuing to lead this country as best I can through an on-going pandemic. Before I move on to question 3, I am very eager that we involve as many members as possible in First Minister's questions, and I would be most grateful for succinct questions and more succinct responses. I call question 3, Lorna Slater. Today, the First Minister will attend the UK Recovery Summit, and I welcome that she will be asking for furlough to be extended. That is essential for Scottish workers, but we need so much more. The TUC published analysis this week of public spending on the green recovery and job creation in the G7 countries. Predictably, the UK is far behind, with Germany investing three times more per person and France four times more. Failure to invest in a green recovery would be a disaster for our planet and for our economy, as businesses and workers are held back by Tory austerity while our European neighbours race ahead. Yesterday, Parliament voted in favour of my call for a major increase in public investment in Scotland and across the UK to secure a green economic recovery. Can the First Minister assure us that she will make this demand at the recovery summit later today? Yes, I will. Within the Scottish Government's own resources, we are maximising our investment in the actions needed to support a green recovery and transition to net zero. In the last session of Parliament, we have established the Scottish National Investment Bank, which has that transition as its primary mission. We should continue to be challenged to do everything that we can within the powers and responsibilities and resources that we have. However, there is no doubt—this is not my choice, but much of what we are able to do in terms of spending is determined by the spending decisions of the UK Government. We are asking to ensure that we can continue to lead through this pandemic with public health absolutely at the fore, that furlough is extended for as long as necessary, but that there are commitments given on public spending so that we have certainty and clarity about public spending for the future and clarity that we are not going to see austerity cuts imposed by the UK Government. That is important for green recovery, but that is important for so many other reasons as well. I share the doubts that the UK Government will deliver, but that could not be more important. I hope that the First Minister will keep demanding the investment that we need, working in partnership with the other devolved countries just as the Scottish Government did to secure an extension to furlough last year. However, there is still more that we can do here in Scotland with the powers that we have to secure a green recovery. Look at the industry that I come from, as noted in my register of interests. Scotland could be a world leader in marine renewable energy, but the industry was undermined by the Tory Government when it scrapped essential tariff support in 2015. The Scottish Government have long committed to a public energy company that could provide the tidal energy with the demand that it needs. Tidal energy technology was developed in Scotland. We are the world experts, but if we do not act now, we will lose this industry to other countries. First Minister, when will you deliver a public energy company? We will take forward a range of different ways in which we are going to support the vast renewable energy potential that Scotland has, and, honestly, it is absolutely right to point that out. Indeed, I hope that those are issues that will feature in the discussions that we have about the co-operation between our parties over the course of this Parliament. Scotland is a world leader in renewable energy, but there is much more that we need to do, both in terms of the generation of the energy, but also in making sure that we properly seize the economic benefits that come from that. That is one of the areas where, candidly, we have not yet done well enough, so there is lots of work to be done here. We are determined to get on with that as we lead up to COP and then beyond COP. I very much look forward to working with the Greens and, indeed, with others across the chamber, to make sure that Scotland continues to lead the world in renewable energy, but also on that wider transition to net zero. Can I ask the First Minister what engagement the Scottish Government has had with the UK Government regarding the extension of the deadline for applications of the EU settlement scheme? Can I take the opportunity to welcome Siobhan Brown to the chamber and congratulate her on her first question. We have been very consistent in calling for the EU settlement scheme to be replaced by a declaratory system that would alleviate the risks of EU citizens becoming unlawfully resident here. In my view, EU citizens simply should not have to apply to retain their rights. Due to the pandemic, many people have struggled to obtain identity documents or retrieve required evidence, and we know that many have yet to apply that there is also a backlog in processing applications. We will continue to do all that we can to support EU citizens. The Minister for Culture, Europe and International Development has already raised the issue with the UK Government on more than one occasion, but let me put this simply. The UK Government, I hope, has learned the lessons from the Windrush scandal, and it must make sure that it does everything to avoid repeating that scandal, and part of that must be extending during the 30th deadline. Siobhan Brown, I thank the First Minister for that answer. There are grave concerns that some EU citizens, such as the elderly or infirm and children in care and foster homes, will fail to apply for settled status by June 30, because they are either incapable of doing so or their guardians are unaware of a deadline at all. Can the First Minister advise how the Scottish Government, together with local authorities, has worked with local care homes and children's care services to prevent any potential miscarriages of natural justice over the issue, especially given the life-changing consequences that missing the deadline can have? That is such an important question, and it potentially impacts on the lives of many people across the country. The Government has worked closely with local authorities and care providers to increase awareness of the settlement scheme. That has included funding a case worker at COSLA to assist vulnerable people who have contact with local authorities. There has been a particular focus on identifying and supporting looked-after children. In addition, citizens advice Scotland has written to care homes to alert them to the upcoming deadline. The Stain Scotland marketing campaign has also restarted as well as using social media, the campaign uses radio and local press to reach people who might not be online. We will provide support and information, but it is really vital that we also continue to press the UK Government to make changes to the scheme that are so important to safeguard the rights of EU citizens here. To ask the First Minister what steps the Scottish Government is taking to ensure that there are sufficient resources in place to prevent schools from exceeding maximum class size limits during the next academic year, in light of reports that a number of schools are currently exceeding those limits. We are determined to do everything that we can to ensure that schools have the resources that they need, but it is important, first of all, to note that the law here is clear. Other than in very specific circumstances, class sizes are mandatory and must be adhered to. On resources, last year, teacher numbers increased for the fifth year in a row. There are now more teachers than at any time since 2008. The ratio of pupils to teachers is at its lowest since 2010. We have provided, since the start of the pandemic, over £200 million to councils, which has supported the recruitment of 1,400 additional teachers and over 200 support staff. Of course, over the first 100 days of this term, we will fund councils to increase teacher numbers by a further 1,000. That is part of our commitment to 3,500 additional teachers and classroom assistants over the parliamentary term. Of course, that is over and above those recruited during the pandemic so far. Oliver Mundell, thank you for that answer, but let's talk about reality, not ratios. While the First Minister seeks to manipulate the figures by including those whose main job is supporting classroom teachers, schools across the country are left with no choice but to cram extra young people into classrooms, going against everything that the SNP used to promise. How does the First Minister explain reports suggesting that numerous schools have over 30 primary school children in a class at a time while the attainment gap widens? With qualified teachers across Scotland currently looking for teaching posts, why won't the First Minister move faster in reversing teaching cuts and guarantee that this will be the last year that we see our young people so badly let down? Teacher numbers have increased for five years in a row and the commitment to continue to increase teacher numbers is there. On the issue of class sizes, I was talking about teachers and classroom assistants in terms of the numbers of teachers and classroom assistants that we were recruiting. However, the point that I was making on class sizes is a clear one. Class sizes are mandatory. Primary 1 to 3 class sizes are set in statute and class sizes for primary 4 to 7, including composite classes, are part of the terms and conditions of the Scottish Negotiating Committee for teachers. Councils have a duty, a legal duty in many cases to ensure that those limits are adhered to. We will continue to work hard often over the past years. We have worked hard to deliver that in the face of the austerity cuts that have been imposed on this Government by the Conservatives at Westminster. We will continue to work hard to ensure that there are more teachers in our schools and that we support councils to deliver the education that children and their parents want and deserve. To ask the First Minister whether the Scottish Government will consider issuing a formal apology to the historic victims of forced adoption. Yes, we will consider that. Like everybody else, I feel deep sadness that, in the past women were forced to give their children up for adoption due to the prevailing moral and social attitudes of the time. Major shifts have occurred in adoption policy and practice and that ensures that focus is now placed on providing secure permanent relationships for some of our most undersupported children. We are engaging with the campaigners calling for an apology so that we can better understand their experiences in order that we can then consider the issue more fully. I give the commitment that we are and will continue to do that. We have come a long way in recent years in improving outcomes for looked-after children and young people, but I know that there is still much more to do, which is why I and the Government have committed to implementing the findings of the promise to ensure that all looked-after children grow up safe, happy and loved. Neil Bibby. I thank the First Minister for her response. My constituent, Mary McMillan, was one of 60,000 Scottish mothers compelled to give up a baby for adoption simply because they were unmarried. What they went through was horrific and many have experienced a lifetime of grief and pain. Mary has worked with victims of forced adoption from around the world, reunited mothers with children and given evidence that helped secure the world's first Government apology for forced adoption in Australia in 2013. Yet there has never been a formal apology for the injustice of forced adoption here in Scotland in the UK. Marion is now in her 70s. She is eternally ill. Her dying wishes that the victims of Scotland receive the apology they deserve and that it happens soon. I therefore urge the First Minister to take swift action to confront this shameful chapter in Scotland's history and deliver as soon as possible a formal statement to Parliament issuing a Government apology for forced adoptions on behalf of our entire nation. I will give that commitment. I take it seriously, but I hope that Neil Bibby and I am sure that he will accept that it is important that, if we are doing something like this, we get it right and that we listen to those who understandably are calling for an apology. I have also read Marion McMillan's experience. It is absolutely heartbreaking and it is not isolated and unique. That happened to too many women back in days when attitudes were very different to those that prevail today. I do not know all the detail of that, but I know that in the Republic of Ireland, for example, there was a concern that work around that did not deliver what campaigners had been calling for. It is really important that we understand what an apology would seek to cover, how that can be framed in a way that gives the campaigners the closure if that is an appropriate word that they are looking for. I am very committed to considering that properly and fully, to doing it quickly but to doing it in a way that delivers what the campaigners actually feel is important to them. To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government's response is to a recent survey stating that 29 per cent of police officers are experiencing moderate burnout and a further 16 per cent are enduring high levels. As I am sure, we all do appreciate the hard work and dedication of our police officers and, indeed, police support staff at all times, but especially throughout the pandemic. I support the initiatives being undertaken by the chief constable to ensure that officers and staff are physically and mentally healthy. That includes, for example, the introduction of wellbeing champions in a wellbeing hub to raise awareness of the support available. In addition, Police Scotland was one of the first police services in the UK to implement mental health and suicide intervention training for all officers. Officers and staff are doing an excellent job in difficult circumstances, and I welcome the fact that Police Scotland provides their workforce with a range of services to help them to look after their mental and physical health. When we highlighted devastating research 18 months ago, ministers told us that they were very satisfied with the mental health support that is available for officers. Now-experts researchers have again concluded that many front-line officers are suffering from chronic stress associated with their circumstances at work. Police Scotland was co-sponsor of this long-term research, but I have learned that support was withdrawn because the research programme was keen to understand the impact of Covid on the workforce, but Police Scotland said that it was, quote, too soon and so withdrew support. Does the First Minister accept that Scotland's police officers have been badly let down and that they do not have the mental health support that they so obviously need? The chief constable and the Government have a duty to listen and to respond. We take that very seriously. Liam McArthur talked about 18 months ago, which predates Covid, which has exacerbated the stress, anxiety and trauma of many of our public service workers, including the police and their support staff. There is a range of support services in place. I mentioned some of them in my initial answer, and it is really important that the chief constable—this is a matter for the chief constable, first and foremost—continues to listen to the experiences of the police service and deliver that support to make sure that, in the very challenging work that they do, our police officers have the support to keep themselves mentally and physically healthy. That work will continue, and I fully support the efforts that the chief constable is undertaking. Thank you. We move on to supplementary questions, and I call Alastair Allen. Last weekend saw a major disruption to the haulage from the technical issue with envy, heavy and being aisled to a backlog of lorries, many of which contain perishable goods and had to be left behind. While the return of envy locks eforce to the route should help, this incident does raise wider concerns about what happens when the next Kalamac vessel either goes into dry dock or suffers a similar breakdown, such as the one that is seen of seaforth out-of-actions for seven weeks. Given all this, will the Scottish Government consider the chattar of a freight vessel for this runway that all is going through it? Let me say that I absolutely recognise and understand the frustration of communities at this and, indeed, at other recent disruption and the impact that that has had. In relation to the issue with the envy hebridean aisles, I understand that all goods were shipped early Saturday morning on the envy aisle of Lewis. I can also update the chamber that the envy lock seaforth returned to service on 31 May, and, as of today, all vessels are now back in position. Transport Minister has met the member and, indeed, with constituency MSPs and other stakeholders to hear concerns and has agreed to continue regular dialogue. We are actively exploring opportunities for chartering additional tonnage, and, in addition, have confirmed new investment in ports and vessels to support and improve Scotland's ferry services over the next five years as part of our wider infrastructure investment plan. Thank you. Jamie Greene, to be followed by Faisal Cowdery. This week, Chief Superintendent Mark Richards said that a marked increase in body-worn cameras on police officers will, in his view, see a spike in guilty cases and reduce pressure on our much-backlawed criminal courts. However, he did warn that financial and structural constraints seem to have prevented their roll-out thus far. Will the First Minister agree with that assessment of the situation? Are there any imminent plans to increase police protection and speed up the justice process by heeding his recommendation? We will continue to discuss these matters with the chief constable. I certainly welcome Police Scotland's on-going work to consider how newer and improved technologies can be harnessed to further strengthen its ability to keep the population safe. We will continue to support that, but we will also consider the implications of that for police officers. It is important that we take the time to discuss and consider all of those issues fully. Faisal Cowdery, to be followed by Emma Harper. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I congratulate you on your new role. With the spread of new variant, the need to address low uptake on the Covid-19 vaccine amongst particular ethnic group is crucial, especially for those who may be at higher risk. To do so, the programme must be accessible. In which translation is information about the vaccine programme available and what targeted action is being taken to reach a diverse minority group within our communities? First, I welcome Faisal Cowdery to the chamber. I agree very much with him on the importance of accessibility to the vaccine programme. I will write to him personally or ask the health secretary to do so to give detail of the various ways, including materials being available in different languages that are being made to ensure high uptake in our minority ethnic communities. I represent a constituency with a very high proportion of ethnic minorities living within it. I also represent a constituency where there has been a significant outbreak of Covid in recent weeks. Some of the work that has been done there around surge testing and, particularly, approaches to improving uptake of the vaccine—a vaccine clinic, for example—based inside Glasgow Central Mosque is an important part of that. There is learning that we can take from that to apply to other parts of the country. Overall, uptake of the vaccine is extremely good at the moment, and we need to make sure that that national picture is fully reflected in all of our different communities. The vaccine really is the most important thing that we can do now to guard against this virus and to get the country back to normality. Overall, in Scotland, taking today's figures into account, there is now more than 60 per cent of the total population of Scotland, and 60.2 per cent has had a first dose of the vaccine. Obviously, we are speeding up the administration of second doses as well. However, the points that the child rate has made are important, and we will continue to take them into account. To ask the First Minister what her response is to the eight cases of Covid-19 delta, B1617.2 variant, formerly known as the Indian variant, which has been identified in NHS Dumfries and Galloway health board area, which has been described as a variant of concern by the world health organisation. The First Minister is telling me that he spoke to Dumfries and Galloway yesterday. It is important that everybody recognises right now that the new variants are going to unfortunately happen with the virus, but it is really important that we take the same basic steps to contain new variants as we have taken to contain the virus all along. In respect of the delta variant, we now think that it represents well over half of all new cases in Scotland, so we will see that in many different parts of the country, including NHS Dumfries and Galloway health board area. However, the way that we stop the virus spreading is the same for every variant. It is all of the basic measures that we know about—hand hygiene, face coverings, distancing and making sure that we are all following the guidance that is in place. Of course, testing regularly—everybody can access lateral flow tests now—and also coming forward for vaccination as soon as you are invited. The two-rosies of the vaccination is the best protection that any of us can have against the virus. Presiding Officer, the latest figures for waiting times for child and adolescent mental health services are deeply disturbing. In NHS borders, the average wait for CAMHS is 31 weeks, and only 48 per cent of young people are being treated within the 18-week target. In NHS Lothian, the target was missed by over a third. The figures also showed that one in five children are still being turned away from CAMHS completely. Three years ago, the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Sport described the present system of rejecting referrals as completely unacceptable, yet there has been no improvement. When is the First Minister and her Government going to get a grip of the children's mental health treatment crisis in Scotland today? I welcome Craig Hoy to Parliament. On the issue of mental health waiting times for children and adolescents generally, but also on the issue of rejected referrals, I will turn to those in reverse order. The Scottish Government, of course, accepted all of the recommendations in the 2018 audit of rejected referrals, and we are working to deliver on all of those recommendations, including asking Public Health Scotland to work with health boards to develop a new patient-level data set so that we do not just understand the overall numbers, but the reasons for rejected referrals. There is also the service standard, which makes it clear what should happen if a particular referral does not require specialist treatment. There is on-going work to tackle rejected referrals. On the issue of waiting times more generally, in summary, our approach is twofold. First, more investment into CAMHS, but secondly, redesigning the service so that there is much greater support provision for young people in communities so that, hopefully, they do not then require specialist services. I am happy to ask the health secretary to provide more detail of all of that, given that I have limited time here, but this is an important strand or strands of work that has been taken forward with urgency. To ask the First Minister whether attendees of the Euro 2020 fan zone in Glasgow will require testing for Covid-19 ahead of entry, given conflicting information provided by the Scottish Government and the organisers' Glasgow life. I will write to Pam Duncan-Glancy and make this available to the whole chamber of the arrangements that are in place. Those arrangements are still under consideration to make sure that any fan zone proceeds safely with all the correct mitigations in place. On the issue of testing, let me repeat again that not just for people attending a particular event, our advice to the whole population now is to order them free through the NHS informed website, lateral flow tests and test yourself twice a week so that, if you have the virus without symptoms, that can be identified. You can go for a confirmatory PCR test if the LFD test is positive and that helps to break the chains of transmission. It is really important to get that message across to the public at large, not simply in relation to particular attendancies at particular events. Jackie Dunbar to be followed by Liam Kerr First Minister, Scottish communities are, to this day, paying the price of the Scorched Earth Policy inflicted on Scottish industries in the 1980s by Thatcher and our hypocritical Scots Tories. What assurances can the First Minister provide to my constituents working in the oil and gas sector that no one will be left behind as we make a necessary and just transition to renewable energy? First Minister, can I take the opportunity to welcome my good friend Jackie Dunbar to this chamber? I think that she has just demonstrated in that question what a powerful contribution she has going to make here and I'm not sure that the Tories are going to like it but I think that most of the rest of us will. This is a really important issue. I grew up in Ayrshire in the 1970s and 80s and I saw first hand the impact on communities when a Government did not care about protecting individuals and communities from the impact of economic transformations. We must not make that mistake again. Failing to plan for the transition to net zero is not an option. That's why we are working with trade unions, businesses and communities to develop just transition plans to ensure that our approach is a fair one. That commitment to just transition is vital. I have already appointed our first just transition minister. We will implement the recommendations of the just transition commission and maintain the commission to advise right throughout this Parliament. I believe that a majority in this Parliament are committed to that transition to net zero but I also hope that a majority are committed to making that transition fairly because that is in the interests of every individual and community across our country. In February, I asked the First Minister when there would be a review into oil and gas work at quarantine to avoid them spending in some cases 10 out of 14 days and three quarters of their wages in a hotel on return from work overseas. I received no clear answer. I asked again in March no clear answer. As travel restrictions ease, is the First Minister now in a position to give our key energy workers the review that they so desperately crave and at least permit those essential workers to isolate at home? We will continue to keep all of those things under review but my principal obligation, and we have just heard from an earlier part of FMQs, perfectly legitimate questioning and criticism over the suggestions that decisions we might have taken at an early stage were not cautious enough. We need to make sure that first and foremost we are protecting people as much as possible against the spread of this virus. That is particularly important when it comes to international travel because that is the key risk right now of importing new variants. Those are all difficult issues for anybody who is having to quarantine in a hotel. It is really difficult but public safety and public health is paramount here and I would hope that the Tories would accept that. As with last week, I have been unable to call all the supplementary questions that I would prefer to. I therefore intend to discuss that with business managers. I will look at ways in which I can ensure that more members are able to participate in FMQs. That concludes First Minister's questions and I suspend this meeting until 2 pm.