 Good morning. The first item of business today is general questions and we'll start with question number one from Bill Bowman. To ask the Scottish Government how much will arise in Barnett consequentials from the reduction in business rates that was announced in the UK budget and whether it will allocate all of the support to Scotland's retail sector. We received £42.9 million consequentials from the UK retail discount scheme. Itutaeth ddechrau i Llanhwg gymryd wedi'i gyfnodi gweld i £2 mille sy'n perdag i Caledrithu hwn. Asgwrth Gwyrdeddion yn gŵr, y baronych ym ddymaer hwn yn ddod yn gweithio i ddyn nhw'r gwahae ymddai tari sy'nlivelyw, oedd mae'n torny hefyd cyfleu gwasanaeth a'r dyn nhw yn cychydig sy'n dewis. Yr ymddai sydd yn credu gweithio i'r ddyn nhw'n gweithio i ddyn nhw, a nhw'n credu i ddyn nhw'n prices bwysig, oedden nhw'n sequentials other than health? Bill Bowman. As reported in the press this week, according to Scottish Retail Consortium, 11.1 per cent of Scotland's shop units were vacant last month compared to the UK rate of 9.6 per cent. In October, footfall plumanted by 7.5 per cent on high streets. While the UK plans to give £900 million towards business rates relief, cutting a third of expenses for small retailers, the SNP has doubled the large business supplement, costing businesses hundreds of millions of pounds. With Scottish Retail facing real difficulty, why can't the Scottish Government commit now to having the large business supplement and matching the UK's rate support for retail and give some good news for firms in Dundee's high street, reform street and elsewhere? Of course, the UK Government is working wonders in the British economy right now, isn't it? No wonder that the UK has got the lowest forecast GDP performance of any EU nation at the moment, so I will take no lectures from the Tories on how to run an economy, any part of the economy. It is really interesting that Bill Bowman mentions Dundee high street. Of course, Dundee high street, like most other high streets, would have benefited from the small business bonus that has protected so many of our retail properties across the country, apposed by the Conservatives on their failure to support our successive budgets, which have ensured that Scotland has the most competitive package of business rates anywhere in the United Kingdom, and I will keep that reputation as we go towards the Scottish budget. However, if I replicated all the decisions that the Tories make in terms of Barnett consequentials, that means replicating the cuts as well, and this Government makes different choices on our public services. We will make the right decisions by the people of Scotland and support our economy in a far more credible way. Can the Government set out how many recipients there are on the small business bonus scheme in 2018-19, and how much is being provided in relief over this period, and how does this measure up to the SNP's manifesto commitment to lift 100,000 properties out of business rates altogether? I will take great pleasure in updating the chamber on those numbers. The small business bonus scheme has provided a record £254 million in relief to 119,400 properties in 2018-19. Therefore, we have met our manifesto commitment, lifting 104,500 recipients out of business rates altogether. Support for the retail sector will not be helped by the fact that there are 470,000 people in Scotland not being paid the living wage. That is an unacceptably high figure and means a large portion of those people do not have the money to spend and support those shops. Will the cabinet secretary support Labour's plan for a £10 an hour living wage? What consideration will the cabinet secretary give in his draft budget to address the unacceptably high number of people who are not being paid the living wage? First of all, it would just be better if real devolutionists ensure that the power to set the living wage rested with this Parliament rather than Westminster. However, I am looking at the decisions that we can take around the living wage. Of course, it is the living wage foundation that sets the rate that we have pledged to follow. We will continue to do that. I am looking at those other matters and retail and specific sectors as well, recognising that some sectors have more challenges than others in the delivery of the principle. However, when it comes to a fair work agenda, I think that this Government has delivered more than any other in the UK and any previous administration has done in taking forward the living wage and fair work agenda. To the Scottish Government, what action it is taking to reduce the inequalities faced by autistic people and people with a learning disability? We are committed to transforming the lives of autistic people and people with learning disabilities. We have listened to their aspirations and needs and want to address the inequalities that they face throughout their lives. Our programme for government sets out our priorities. We want autistic people and people with learning disabilities to have the same freedoms and opportunities as other citizens of Scotland. Next month, we will launch the refreshed the keys to life implementation framework, and it recognises that people with learning disabilities have the same aspirations and expectations as any other person. Linda Fabiani, I thank the minister for her answer. Can she assure me that discussions are being held right across portfolios in government, in education, health, employability, social security and other departments so that the holistic approach can be used to make sure that people with autism and learning disabilities are given good life opportunities and improving their independence? As the member has highlighted, autistic people and people with learning disabilities need holistic support right across health, social care, employability, education, criminal justice, social security and social connectedness. In refreshing both the autism and the learning disability strategies, wide engagement has taken place across relevant Scottish Government portfolios. Examples are the cross-policy links with employability and equality colleagues, which led to a commitment to half the disability employment gap. Another was the engagement with social security colleagues, which led to the inclusion of autistic people in designing the new social security system. Gail Ross, to ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on its involvement with the Highland Council regarding the Stromferry bypass in Wester Ross. Paul Wheelhouse, the A890 at Stromferry is a local road and is the responsibility of Highland Council. Transport Scotland has provided technical advice to council officials and their consultants on the transport appraisal process since 2013, and I can confirm that they are in receipt of the final appraisal report. The report reflects the substantial amount of work undertaken as part of the appraisal process and are responsible for what will be provided in the near future. As roads authority for the A890 at Stromferry, final responsibility for a decision to upgrade or improve the route ultimately lies with the Highland Council. Gail Ross. I thank the minister for that answer. Given that, the report into the condition of the rock face is now in the public domain, will the Scottish Government agree to work on a sustainable, economically viable solution to this lifeline route with the Highland Council and Network Rail? I recognise the importance of the route to communities across Ms Ross's constituency. The Highland Council has just recently provided Michael Matheson, as I said, the Cabinet Secretary for Transport, Infrastructure and Connectivity with a copy of the report prepared by the consultants ACOM. Officials at Transport Scotland are currently reviewing the report, along with the transport appraisal that is prepared by the council, which includes the options that have been identified therein, and they will continue to provide technical assistance as necessary to identify the correct solutions. They have also worked very closely with the Highland Council and Network Rail to identify a temporary solution on the crossing on the railway, but, as roads authority for the A890 at Stromferry, the final responsibility for a decision to upgrade or improve the route, as I said earlier in my previous answer, ultimately lies with the council. I give a commitment to Gil Ross that will continue to work closely with the council. Edward Mountain, in the past, blasting has been used to remove the overhanging rocks at Stromferry. That is weak in four specific areas. A permanent solution to that will cost £5 million. Will the minister offer to help the Highland Council fund the £5 million to sort out the four overhangs until Transport Scotland can respond to the report that was submitted over a year ago? I cannot give any commitments on funding today. As the member will appreciate, the cabinet secretary is not here, but I will certainly relay his question to him. We certainly recognise the importance of trying to provide as much relief to local users of the infrastructure in the meantime, while a longer-term solution is provided. Certainly, as I said to Gil Ross, we are committed to providing as much technical support to the council and the network rail to identify a solution, but I appreciate that discussions about funding will have to take place. That is a matter for the cabinet secretary. To ask the Scottish Government what progress has been made since the establishment of the action group for the Mitchell implant in Dundee. On Monday, I convened the first meeting of the action group where the members agreed to purpose, remit and actions. We will pursue all possibilities for retaining and or repurposing the plant as a matter of urgency and are actively working with pace and vigour on our proposition. I have again pressed the UK Government to bring what it can to the table, including seeking additional resource via city deals or indeed industrial strategy resources, and I will keep members advised accordingly. Can the cabinet secretary confirm that the options will include looking at more than one option to put to Mitchell in, including retention and repurposing? Can the cabinet secretary outline what commitments were made by the UK Government at the action group meeting, including any additional resources that could be made available, either through the taste cities deal or other funding sources, and how that sits with the comments that were made to the media after the meeting by the Secretary of State for Scotland? Can he share any light on that? Shona Robison asks a really important question around the range of options that has been clear at the action group and with members. The company, Michelin, does not wish to revisit its decision but is interested in the proposition that we will put to it in approximately two weeks' time, so we are looking at a range of options to put forward based on the best intelligence that we have. In relation to the contribution of the UK Government, we are relying on the UK Government to help us to co-produce that proposition with the intelligence and the support that it can bring to bear. Of course, I have made requests around additional resources as well with the clarity that we have on the taste cities deal, industrial strategy and sector deals. I can neither confirm nor clarify the remarks of the current Secretary of State, because at the action group meeting and in the private meetings that I have had, I was given assurances that the UK Government will assist us to co-produce that proposition and would look at funding streams so to do. I also got that agreement from Greg Clark, the UK Government's business secretary. My next call after First Minister's questions is with another UK Government minister in relation to the industrial strategy. I cannot square what the UK Government has said to me in terms of bringing support for Michelin with what the Secretary of State said to the courier on the day of the action group. I hope that the support is forthcoming and that is what I am working on so that we can genuinely work in partnership to put the best possible proposition to Michelin so that we can secure an on-going presence by the company at the site. I think that we should be all absolutely united. Dean Lockhart, according to media reports, the Scottish Government has invested £8 million in the Michelin plant. Can the cabinet secretary confirm the status of the investment and can he confirm that the investment will be used as leverage to secure as many jobs as possible at the plant? What a disappointing response from the Conservatives, I have to say, in terms of our collective efforts. The leverage that we have with Michelin right now is genuinely interested in our industrial proposition for this country, the work in research and development, the skills that we have, the legacy, the workforce that we have in Dundee and the goodwill across that action group to put forward the best possible proposition. I have said before that there are Scottish Enterprise grants that were there to help the plant to transform and it was doing that. If we come to the issue of leverage around clawback, then of course that will be used, but right now the priority has to be focusing on continuing with the commercial manufacturing function at the Dundee site and ensuring that the company has an on-going presence and we do everything that we can to retain as many jobs as possible in view of the position of the company not to revisit the original decision. I will leave no stone unturned. I will explore every avenue to put the best possible proposition to Michelin and I will be doing with support from the UK Government to get the best possible outcome for the people of Dundee. I reiterate the support of the Labour benches to the work of the action group that the cabinet secretary has convened. Would the cabinet secretary agree with me that all parties at the group are committed to working together to get the best possible proposal and result for the Michelin workforce and for Dundee? Yes, they are. All attendees at the action group and the other business and industry experts that will help to feed into that are given as the necessary intelligence and assistance to put forward the best possible proposition. It is that sense of solidarity and unity where the workforce is key as well, the local authority members and others. I appreciate the cross-party support that we have enjoyed so far to take forward that work and that will keep us energised as we get to that opportunity to present the case to Michelin. To ask the Scottish Government when recommendations will be published for the location of three national neonatal intensive care units, as outlined in 2017, the best start reports five-year plan. The Perinatal subgroup of the best start implementation programme board is currently undertaking an options appraisal to identify the locations of the neonatal intensive care units. That work will move into a testing phase shortly, after which recommendations on those locations will be made to me. I thank the cabinet secretary for that answer. In three recent written questions, I asked the cabinet secretary whether she thought that it was acceptable for prematurely born babies to travel between the north-east and the central belt for emergency neonatal intensive care treatment. She did not answer, instead citing potential transport links between the two. Let us be clear that we are talking about life-saving treatment for the most vulnerable babies. Will she not accept that any attempt to remove this lifeline service from the north of Scotland would be ill-advised and would be simply dangerous? Mr Mason will recall in the answer to those questions. I also made it absolutely clear that no neonatal units will close as a result of the best start recommendations for neonatal intensive care. The best start does not recommend a reduction in the number of neonatal care centres in NHS Grampian or, indeed, anywhere else. The point that I am making is that the testing for intensive neonatal care is in the option appraisal stage at this point, it will then move to a testing stage and those recommendations will come to me at that point. At that point, I will make what I consider to be reasoned decisions based on those recommendations in that testing, but let me repeat that no neonatal units will close as a result of the best start recommendations that came from a group of highly experienced practitioners, the Royal College of Midwives, the Royal College of Nursing, obstetricians, consultant anaesthetists and many others, and I will work with their clinical judgment about the best maternity care and configuration for women and babies in Scotland and not Mr Mason's. Question 6. To ask the Scottish Government what funding it provides to arts and culture facilities in Glasgow. The Scottish Government continues to provide extensive support to the arts in Glasgow. Four out of the five national performing companies are based in Glasgow receiving over £20 million of grant a year. We have also invested extensively in Glasgow's cultural infrastructure, including £6.25 million towards the Kelvin Hall refurbishment, enabling the National Library of Scotland to have a co-represence in Glasgow for the first time in a joint project with Glasgow museums and the Hinterian. We are currently investing £5 million in the Borough Renaissance project and £6 million in the Citizen's Theatre redevelopment. All of that current investment is on top of the festival 2018 cultural programme in Glasgow as part of the highly successful European Championships, supported with £63 million of Scottish Government funding. I thank the cabinet secretary for that response. She will be aware that there is no central funding for the day-to-day running of the national facilities in Glasgow. That compares to the tens of million that goes to facilities in Edinburgh. At the same time, there has been a 20 per cent cut in Glasgow's budget. Will she review the funding of our arts and culture facilities in Glasgow to look at running costs? I think that the member is mistaken. If he had listened to my answer, the national facilities that are in Glasgow are four out of five national performing companies. They receive over £20 million of grant a year. Glasgow is well-funded. I did not mention the £27.5 million of funding from Creative Scotland for regular funded organisations. The £8.5 million grant for their RSNO at the Glasgow Royal Concert Hall or the £4.5 million grant for Scottish opera as part of Glasgow's theatre royal. I think that Glasgow is doing extremely well from support for arts and funding from the Scottish Government. The cabinet secretary will be aware that the arts in North Ayrshire received only £192,000 in grants last year compared with the £20 million that she mentioned for Glasgow. Byr Capita, Glasgow receives almost 25 times as much as North Ayrshire. What steps will the Scottish Government work in conjunction with Creative Scotland take to build capacity in North Ayrshire and help to close that gap? One of the things that we are supporting is the Creative Scotland place partnerships. North Ayrshire is part of that. We have protected in the last year Creative Scotland's budget. Indeed, we have increased it by £6.6 million to make sure that we rectify the shortfall from the UK national lottery funding. Of course, more can be done to make sure that the reach and range of cultural funding reaches communities across North Ayrshire and other areas. I am happy to supply the member with more information about that. Thank you very much, cabinet secretary. That concludes general question.