 gyda'r cyfryddion y byd hirio y dyfodol, sy'n awdraed o'r drifu hwn. Mae geni'r cysylltu o'r cyfrifiad dim yn ystafell ac yn ystafell, mae'r cyfrifiad bydd eich cysylltu yn festiwyr eich cyfrifiadau. Aeth angen i gyfraedolaeth â gaff Tambor yn ystafell ar y cyfrifiad, sięg ymgynghyn trio'r cyfrifiadau sy'n Support? Ysgrifenni cyfrifiad iddo i iechyd o'r cyfrifiadau, yn fawr i gael i chi i gael i'w cyntafol. Mae'r gwahau erioedd yn diolch i gael i gynghreifftol Pauline Cafferkeyd i ebola o'r 29 deisbeth, ac roeddwn i gael i ddweud o'r sefydliadau i gael i gael i gael i ddweud o'r ddechrau i gael i gael i gael i gael i ddweud o'r ffustif pwydau, ac i gael i gael i'ch gael i gael i gael i'r ffordd, dywedog, gyntaf, achos ddysgu, llwyll, drwng, tragedy that occurred at George Square on 22 December and to the sinking of the cargo vessel in the Pentland Firth on 3 January. I am sure that I speak on behalf of everyone in the chamber when I convey my sympathy to all those affected and especially to the families of those who have lost their lives. The Glasgow tragedy in particular touched all of us deeply and as the funerals of the victims have been taking place. I know that our thoughts will have been with those who lost loved ones just as they continue to be very much with all of those who are recovering from injury and trauma. Both of those tragedies and indeed the response to the Ebola diagnosis remind us yet again how much we owe to our emergency services, including the Coast Guard and the RNLI and to all of the staff of our national health service. We value their professionalism, compassion and commitment every single day of the year, but I think that we do so especially at times like these. I am sure that the chamber will join with me today in thanking them sincerely for the contribution that they make. Michael Matheson has, as the chamber has just heard, already responded to a topical question about the George Square tragedy, and Richard Lockhead has answered a question on the incident in the Pentland Firth. However, given the wider public health implications of Ebola, I thought it appropriate to make a full statement about Ms Cafferkey's diagnosis, about our response to it and indeed about Scotland's general state of preparedness for handling the risk that Ebola poses. Let me start with a brief recap of the background to this case. It was confirmed on 29 December following her return to Scotland that Pauline Cafferkey, who had been working in Sierra Leone to help those affected by Ebola, had tested positive for the condition. Early that morning, she had reported feeling unwell, and at around 8 am, she was admitted to the Brownlee infectious diseases unit at Gartnavel hospital in Glasgow. In early hours of 30 December, following confirmation of diagnosis, she was transferred by military aircraft to the UK's high-level isolation unit at the Royal Free Hospital in London. First and foremost, our thoughts are with Pauline Cafferkey and her family during this extremely difficult and distressing time. My officials have spoken to the Royal Free Hospital earlier today, and they report that her condition remains critical. I know that we all wish her a full and as speedy as possible a recovery. I also want to take this opportunity to thank all the NHS Scotland staff who helped to treat her, including those in the Scottish Ambulance Service, the Brownlee unit and Health Protection Scotland. I also want to take the opportunity to thank the Ministry of Defence for arranging her transfer from Glasgow to London and the staff at the Royal Free Hospital, who continue to ensure that she receives the best possible care, treatment and attention. Our chief concern at this time is, of course, as I have already said, for Pauline Cafferkey's wellbeing. However, her diagnosis inevitably raised wider issues relating to public health, the response to this particular case and to our general preparedness to handle cases of Ebola and it is to those issues that I now want to turn. The first point to stress, Presiding Officer, and it is, as I'm sure all members will agree, an important point is that the risk to the public in Scotland from Ebola continues to be very low. The Ebola virus cannot be contracted from someone unless they are displaying its symptoms. Furthermore, it is not an airborne virus. Even if someone has a fever, the disease can only be transmitted by direct contact with their blood or bodily fluids. In the case of Pauline Cafferkey, she was screened on leaving Sierra Leone and then again on arrival at Heathrow. On her initial screening, her temperature was found to be within the acceptable range and she was clear to fly from Heathrow to Glasgow. However, due to concerns that she may have had an elevated temperature, she was reassessed and her temperature had taken a further six times over a 30-minute period. Her temperature remained within the acceptable range and she was again cleared to fly. I'll come back to this point later on. However, as has already been made clear, because she was not at that point displaying any symptoms that would have given rise to onward transmission, the risk to other passengers on her flights was extremely low. However, given the nature of Ebola, a highly precautionary approach has been rightly, in my view, adopted by health authorities across the UK. It is in this context that a decision was taken to contact all passengers on the flights that Ms Cafferkey had taken from Casablanca to Heathrow and then from Heathrow to Glasgow. I am grateful to Staff at Health Protection Scotland, who have now contacted all of the passengers on the London to Glasgow flight and ensured that they have the appropriate advice and reassurance. Ms Cafferkey had contact with only one other person on her return to Scotland and he has also been contacted and given advice and reassurance. NHS 24 established a special helpline, which was up and running within two hours of notification of the positive diagnosis. The helpline provided advice, assistance and reassurance to more than 100 people on the evening of 29 December. It has received 179 calls in total. Only three of those calls have been received since hugmanay, so the helpline will be closed from 6pm tonight. It can, however, be reactivated very quickly should the need arise in future. The prompt response to this diagnosis demonstrates a wider point. Scotland is well prepared to deal with cases of this nature. We have well tested NHS systems for managing unusual infectious diseases when they arise. For example, we have established three regional units for the management of possible or confirmed cases of Ebola, one of which is the Brownlee unit. We participate in UK protocols around more highly specialised high-level isolation facilities and, where necessary, we fund treatment for Scottish patients at the Royal Free. We have also updated the Scottish Ambulance Services procedures for transferring patients with suspected or confirmed Ebola. A new testing system for diseases such as Ebola has been available in Scotland since 1 December. What that means is that samples no longer have to be transferred as they were previously to port and down in Wiltshire. Test results instead now go to the NHS Lothian testing facility and therefore can be confirmed much more rapidly. All of those systems and procedures have worked effectively in recent days. In addition, the Scottish Government works closely with the UK Government to ensure that we have a fully co-ordinated approach, as well as chairing meetings of the Scottish Government resilience committee on Monday and Tuesday of last week. I participated in a Cobra meeting and was in close touch with the Prime Minister. I am very grateful to counterparts in the UK Government for their co-operation, and I know that they also appreciate the good work done by the NHS and other agencies in Scotland. We will continue to work with UK Government colleagues to review the handling of this case and to see what lessons can be learned for the future. For example, and this is a point that I said that I would return to. Questions have, understandably, been asked about whether Ms Cafferkey, even though her temperature readings were within an acceptable range, should have been allowed to travel to Glasgow given the concerns that she had raised. Those are important questions that deserve to be properly considered, in line with the highly precautionary approach that we all agree should be taken to possibly Ebola cases. Health Protection Scotland is therefore currently working closely with Public Health England to review screening procedures. Indeed, protocols at airports have already been revised in light of this case. The guidance has been strengthened to ensure that anyone from a higher risk group who feels unwell will be reassessed. Advice will also be sought immediately from an infectious diseases specialist and the passenger referred on for testing if that is considered appropriate. Procedures will be reviewed again in the coming days to assess the effects and the effectiveness of those changes, and we will continue to work with the UK Government on further improvements to how we manage the risk of Ebola going forward. I think that in all of this there is a final but very important point to make. I hope that it is one that the whole chamber will agree with. By far, the most effective way of reducing the risk of Ebola in Scotland and, indeed, in the rest of the UK is to halt its spread in West Africa. That is why the Scottish Government has donated £1 million in money and equipment to support the Ebola response there. It is why we are so deeply grateful for the quiet heroism of Pauline Cafferkay and many others like her from Scotland, the rest of the UK and, indeed, from many other countries who make all of us safer by placing themselves at risk. They are not simply helping people in West Africa, although they are certainly doing that. They are also helping people right around the world. We owe it to them, as well as owing it to the wider public, to ensure that the measures that we are taking to tackle Ebola here in Scotland are as good as they possibly can be. I want to assure you and the chamber that the Government will ensure that those measures are robust and that the public continues to have accurate and up-to-date information about Ebola, that screening procedures are as effective as possible and that, when it is necessary, which is hopefully rarely, patients will get the best possible care and treatment. The Government will keep the chamber informed of further developments as they arise, but for now I am happy to answer any questions that members have. Thank you. The First Minister will take questions on issues raised in her statement. I intend to allow around 20 minutes for the questions after which we will move on to next side of business. It would be helpful if members who wish to ask a question were to press their request-to-speak button now. I thank the First Minister for the statement and send the sympathy and thoughts of those benches to all the families affected by tragic events at George Square and, indeed, in the Pentland Firth. I would also like to pay tribute to our staff in NHS, the Coast Guard, the RNLI and our emergency services for all their compassion and dedication. I, too, would like to pay tribute to Pauline Cafferkey. Her bravery is extraordinary. Hero is a word that we use too readily, Presiding Officer, and in so doing diminishes its value. The definition of a hero is someone who risks their own life for others, someone who puts themselves in danger for the benefit of others, someone who does not think what it will cost them personally but acts because they must, because someone must. Pauline Cafferkey is a hero, as are all the aid workers helping to fight Ebola, heroes whose names we will never know. I also take this opportunity to recognise the vital work of UK charities such as Save the Children, Oxfam and Christian Aid, which are doing so much to respond to the outbreak. Ebola has taken hold in countries that are least equipped to cope with it. The outbreak has devastated health systems in Liberia, Sierra Leone and Guinea, leaving many unable to receive treatment for conditions such as measles in malaria and thus increasing the death toll. There is a huge difference between the response and care that the NHS is able to provide here and the equivalent in western Africa. I am proud of the UK's international development work and I very much welcome the £1 million that the Scottish Government has committed to that end. Can I therefore ask the First Minister to tell us more about how this money will both help tackle the outbreak in western Africa and guard against another in the future? I thank Kezia Dugdale very much for her contribution, for her question and indeed for the tone in which she asked it. I agree very strongly with her comments about the heroism certainly of Pauline Cafferkey but also of all of the health workers, the aid and charity workers. Indeed, it is fair to say that those representatives of media organisations across the world are covering this issue in order that the rest of us can be updated on its progress. All of them, without exception, put their lives on the line to do that. We hope that they will be safe. The procedures and the protocols are in place to ensure as best as can be done their safety, but they all take a great personal risk and all of us should be very grateful to them and very appreciative to them for that. As I said in my statement and as Kezia Dugdale has echoed, they are not only helping people in the affected countries in west Africa, but they are also helping all of us to stem the spread of that disease. In terms of Kezia Dugdale's specific question, I have already indicated that the Scottish Government has to date donated £1 million in cash and equipment to the effort to halt the spread of Ebola in west Africa. That breaks down to £500,000 that we have made available to the World Health Organization, £300,000 in medical equipment and a further £200,000 that we contributed to the deck appeal not long before Christmas. All of that money will be used by those organisations and those individuals on the ground to make sure that the facilities are in place with the right equipment, that the right staffing expertise and skill is there to do what needs to be done on the ground to do everything possible to halt the spread of that disease. I should say that, although that is what we have done, I remain as the Government remains very open to anything more that we can do, not just to prepare in Scotland for any further cases of Ebola but to make sure that we are playing our part in what is a co-ordinated international effort to do everything that we can to halt its spread. Finally, on 29 December, I telefoned all of the party leaders to update them with what we knew on the Pauline Caffer case. That is very much the spirit in which we will continue to deal with it and I would be very happy at any time to give either the party leaders or the health spokespersons and I know that Shona Robison will be to any briefing on what we are doing to help in west Africa or, indeed, our preparedness here in Scotland. Can I thank you, First Minister, your ministerial colleagues, officials and all those in the emergency services who went about with quiet dignity whatever their role faced with the various traumas that we have been discussing this afternoon? I think in the way that we and they face these matters, it still creates a great sense of quiet pride in Scotland in the face of really enormous tragedy. I do wonder on this social media age if the First Minister would agree with me that, while it can be a useful information tool, it would be better if those who know nothing say nothing and those who have no need to be in the vicinity stay away and I think that that would be a useful lesson for the wider public in the future. In respect of Pauline Caffer, can I say her thoughts are with her and I know that that trips off the trunk so glibly, but it shouldn't. She is deserving of nothing less than the support, love, affection of everyone in this chamber in Scotland and the wider United Kingdom. She and all those like her who selflessly put themselves in the phase of great hazards in the service of others really deserve our total support and I know that we all wish her well in the fight that she now has back to greater health. My only further question in respect of that would be given her experience as a healthcare worker and I think that the First Minister did touch on this, should the concerns that she herself expressed when arriving in the UK, not just in case of other passengers on the flight but in her own case perhaps have saved her the trauma and the somewhat sensationalist coverage of her return to the Royal Free hospital in London, a more excessively precautionary case would have been given her experience if perhaps that had been taken more seriously and she had perhaps had the opportunity to stay in London and be properly assessed at that point. I am grateful to Jackson Carlaw for his comments and his question, which I will come to very directly in a moment. I am sure that all of the front line NHS staff and indeed the police and the fire services who have dealt collectively with those challenges will appreciate his words of support. I do think that it is important that when tragedy hits, we all try to come together to present the right response to that collectively and I think that Scotland can be proud of itself and how it has done that in recent times. I agree with him about social media as an avid and possibly prolific user of social media myself, as I know Jackson Carlaw. It is a wonderful innovation, it is good for democracy, it opens up our public debate to many, many more people than otherwise would be able to participate in it, but it has its downsides. I think that everybody, particularly at times like these, should behave responsibly and be careful about the information that they are communicating and be careful about their actions. Many people will remain nameless in all cases who would have been better to stay off social media in the aftermath of some of what we have seen over the past couple of weeks, but they are the minority, the tiny minority. I know that in the aftermath of the Glasgow tragedy, social media was very helpful in, for example, encouraging people who were in the city centre to contact their loved ones to let them know that they were okay and take the pressure off the helpline that the police had set up for those who really needed it. In relation to Jackson Carlaw's substantive question, the short answer is yes. I think that that is a reasonable point and I did touch on that in my statement. I think that it is important to stress—as Jackson Carlaw would expect, that is a point that was interrogated very closely by myself, by Government colleagues and indeed by colleagues in the UK Government. It is important to stress that the guidance and the protocols around screening were adhered to in the case of Pauline Cafferkey. The question that arose though is whether those protocols and that guidance were precautionary enough. We did have an experienced health professional here. The question that has arisen and has been looked at is whether there is concern that somebody who has been in an affected area should be treated more precautionarily. That is behind the changes that I have already spoken about and will be very much behind the on-going review of the screening protocols that will be under way in the days to come. That all underlines the approach that all of us are taking to this. The risk is low. I do not think that we can say that often enough at the moment in terms of public reassurance. The risk to all of us right now is very low. The risk to people who came into contact with Pauline Cafferkey last week was low to the point of negligible, but nevertheless the understanding and the learning about this virus is still developing. Given the stage that we are at, we need to act on the highest possible basis of precaution. That is exactly what we will do. Is others done? Can I also pay tribute to the selfless work of Pauline Cafferkey and others and pray that Pauline makes a full recovery? I understand that 25 healthcare workers will return from Sierra Leone in the next fortnight or so with speculation in the media over a range of new safeguards that may be put in place, including when to isolate potentially at risk individuals. Does the cabinet secretary agree with me that additional safeguards should be proportionate based on emerging scientific evidence and kept under on-going review? Finally, that information is vitally important and that families of healthcare workers that are involved in the fuel can Sierra Leone are also deeply worried at this time for their family loved ones that they are given adequate information to reassure them. I absolutely agree with Bob Doris's point, particularly the last point, about making sure that there is information not just for the general public but for those who have loved ones in the affected countries or returning. I should say two things quickly. Firstly, we will keep all the procedures under review. It is important that we learn lessons from the case of Pauline Cafferkey and that we learn lessons from any other cases that might arise. I hope that there are no other cases identified in Scotland or the UK, but it is likely that we will see other cases—a small number of additional cases—and we need to keep learning from the experience of dealing with them. I have already made my comments about the screening process and how we need to learn lessons around it. I think that the only other point that I would make here is that we have robust arrangements in place for monitoring people who come back for the entirety of the incubation period for Ebola, which is 21 days. Depending on the risk category that somebody coming back from one of the affected countries is in, there will be restrictions on travel. In all cases, there will be monitoring of temperature, for example, and in some of the higher risk categories there will be daily contact with local occupational health services or with Health Protection Scotland. We have robust arrangements in place, but we will continue to keep them under review. Finally, I agree with Bob Doris's point, that we must make sure that everything that we do is driven by expert advice and by the science of those who are looking very carefully at this disease. We agree with the medical advice and with the First Minister that the risk is very low in Scotland, but I know that she is as concerned as we are about how prepared our health service is. Guidance for primary care and for hospitals is on the Health Protection Scotland website. Is the First Minister confident that our health professionals in all our communities across the country are familiar with those lengthy guidelines so that they can respond swiftly, confidently and accurately if a potential case of Ebola were to be presented? It is her job and the job of the health service to make sure that that is the case. I am not going to stand here and with any hint of complacency say that there is no improvement that we can make as we learn more about the virus and as we have the experience of dealing with a case, because there clearly will be. I know that all of us who have been involved in dealing with this over the past few days have thoughts of our own about how we improve things going forward. However, what I know from the experience of Pauline Cafferkey's case is that the health professionals in Scotland who dealt with that case did so very professionally and in line with all the guidance and the protocols in place. Clearly, the staff at the Brownley unit at Gartnavel were in the front line of that and deserve our enormous thanks and gratitude. The Scottish Ambulance Service was also in the front line and will be in terms of transporting patients the guidance that they follow has been updated. I am confident that what we saw last week was a very professional and very expert response, but not just those of us in Government, those of us who were dealing with that in the front line will want to make sure that we continue to ensure that everything is as it should be. In all cases of unusual diseases, there is an on-going need to make sure that the guidance is up-to-date and is developing in line with developing knowledge and understanding, but that health professionals are familiar with and conversing in that guidance so that if they find themselves in the position of dealing with a case, they know what to do. I associate myself with a comment regarding Pauline Cafferkey and others by other members. Given their previous comments, perhaps the First Minister can elaborate what discussions have taken place to ensure robust screening for passengers arriving at Scottish airports whose journeys are possibly originated within countries of high contamination or concentrations of Ebola virus contamination? In terms of the issue of screening at Scottish airports, we will keep that under review, obviously, but it is important to point out a couple of things. The estimate is that somewhere in the region of 97 per cent of travellers to the UK from affected countries are captured by the current entry screening arrangements that are in place in England with many of the remainder screened elsewhere in Europe before travelling on here. There are very small numbers of travellers to Scotland who arrive here via routes that do not include English hubs, so that is the first point. One of the things about screening that people have to be aware of is that however important it is—and it is important—there is a risk around screening that leads to false reassurance, because, as I have already said, the incubation period for Ebola is 21 days. Somebody has been screened and found to have their temperature within normal range. That means that they are okay then, and it does not mean that they will not go on to develop the symptoms of Ebola later on. That makes the monitoring arrangements so important. I have already gone into a little bit of detail about them. They are, I think, the most important arrangements in terms of the notification from Health Protection Scotland of expected returners and then the system that kicks in with Health Protection Scotland and local health boards to make sure that people are monitored depending on the degree of risk that they are in. I am confident that those arrangements are robust and that they worked well last week, but, as I have already said in response to other questions, we will keep them under on-going review. Jim Hulme, followed by James Kelly. I joined with others in the chamber in saying that our thoughts are with Pauline Caffricy and her family. Of course, the families and friends of all those who have suffered from the Glasgow tragedy and the one in the Pentland first, and, of course, thanks to our brave emergency services. As we know, Save the Children are currently investigating how Pauline contracted the disease. Clearly, it is crucial that the source can be isolated as quick as possible to safeguard the wellbeing of our overseas brave volunteer staff who are caring for Ebola victims. Can the First Minister therefore provide an assurance that the Scottish Government will support Save the Children in that investigation and, if needed, will provide medical expertise or technical resources to support the charity in doing so? Regarding Health Protection Scotland working closely with Public Health England in reviewing their screening procedures, can the First Minister give an indication of when that review could be complete and reported on? First, Jim Hulme raised the question about how Pauline Caffricy contracted Ebola. Save the children are to be commended for the very swift and rigorous review that they have embarked on, and that obviously has to be allowed to take its course. The Scottish Government would be very happy to provide any support and assistance that they thought was required, and that is an offer that I freely make. Jim Hulme is right to raise this point, because, of course, we can have all the procedures that we want in place here, but we hope that people who are working on the front line do not contract it. For that to be the case, that means that the protocols and procedures there have to be absolutely robust. On the second question, the review of the screening procedures will be on-going, and, as I have already said, some changes to the procedures in place have already been made to deal precisely with the situation in which somebody in a high-risk category is concerned, so that a more precautionary approach is taken. How that revised procedure operates will be reviewed over the coming days and weeks, and we will continue to keep that under review. Any substantial changes to the protocol and procedures in place, I am sure, would be communicated in the normal way, but it is not a case of doing a review, and that is it. It is a case of making sure that those arrangements are kept under on-going review. James Kelly, followed by Dennis Robertson. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I join others in paying tribute to Pauline Cafferkey, my constituent, whose courage and compassion is an example to us all. I am sure that our thoughts are with our family and we wish her a full recovery. The First Minister said in a statement that all passengers who travelled on the flight from Heathrow to Glasgow had been contacted by Health Protection Scotland and provided with advice and assurance. Can I ask if there has been any follow-up to that to ensure that none of those passengers in the intervening period are exhibiting any signs of being at risk from Ebola? First, I agree, as everybody does, with James Kelly's initial statement about Pauline Cafferkey and how difficult a time this is for her family. On the question that James Kelly asks, in terms of the follow-up with passengers on the plane, there were effectively two categories of passengers who were considered to have been in close proximity, which were to cut the short passengers in the two rows behind and in the two rows in front of where Pauline Cafferkey was sitting. I think that there were from memory eight passengers in that category. They have been contacted and they are being monitored. The other passengers who were considered to be not in close proximity were contacted principally to be offered advice and reassurance and told what they should do, should anything untoward be experienced by them. That is the same approach that was taken by Public Health England in respect of the Casablanca to Heathrow flight. A similar approach was taken to the one other person that Pauline Cafferkey had been in contact with. The only other point to make there, which is one that I have already made implicitly, was something that was done on a highly precautionary basis. It was not intended to give any indication that there was any concern about the health of the passengers on the plane. Simply because we are operating on that highly precautionary basis, it was deemed to be the right thing to do and I certainly think that it was the right decision. Dennis Robertson, followed by Richard Simpson. As the First Minister, if she is aware that if all her health boards have the necessary procedures in place to isolate patients who are considered to be potential carriers of Ebola whilst they are being tested? The short answer to that question is yes. Health Protection Scotland has assessed the capacity within NHS Scotland to accommodate suspected cases and all NHS boards have appropriate plans and equipment in place. As I said earlier, as the health secretary said earlier on as well, we have established three regional units for the management of either possible or confirmed cases in Glasgow, Edinburgh and Aberdeen. Across those three units, we have 14 negative pressure rooms and more than 50 isolation rooms. Patients that require high-level isolation will go to the Royal Free, all four UK nations co-operate in UK protocols. The Royal Free is a very specialist facility. In the United States of America, which is a population of 300 million people, there are only four units of the same type as the Royal Free. That is how specialist those units are. Many other European countries do not have facilities of the standard of the Royal Free. It is absolutely right that, where patients need that treatment, that is what they get. Of course, my final point just for the record, NHS Scotland pays for any treatment in the Royal Free that is got by Scottish patients. Richard Simpson and Finlay Stewart-Maxwell? I very much welcome the way in which the Government Health Protection Scotland and all the health professionals have dealt with this issue. The fact that the First Minister has made it clear that the protocols are going to be updated, because I was very concerned about the fact that someone having an elevated temperature, even within an acceptable range, although I have no idea what that means, was then allowed to fly on to Glasgow without further testing. My question is that there are not just health workers going to return from West Africa, but there are constant travellers coming from West Africa. What advice has been given to them or displayed to them so that we can ensure that those who are travelling back to this country are aware that, if they develop a temperature, that could be—obviously, the most common thing would be malaria—but it could possibly be related to Ebola if they have travelled from West Africa. What information has been given not just to the 97 per cent who fly through England, but also to the other 3 per cent who are travelling from other areas directly? It is an important point. Obviously, one of the benefits of screening—I have talked already about the danger around screening of false reassurance, but notwithstanding that, one of the big benefits of screening is the contact that it gives to people who are coming from affected countries to make sure that they have the right information, advice and guidance on what to do should anything of concern arise. The monitoring that I have already gone through—Health Protection Scotland has also worked very proactively with stakeholders so that people who are likely to travel to affected countries—whether that is aid workers, oil and gas workers or students—are registered into the Ebola monitoring programme, which then triggers the notice and the information that is given when people return. They are given information before they leave to advise them on what they should and should not do, and they are then contacted on their return so that the risk assessment can be carried out and appropriate advice. Given that there are information posters and leaflets that have been developed by Health Protection Scotland and deployed at ports of entry to provide information to travel, there is a whole range of work that has been done to raise awareness of what people should do, and that work will continue in the weeks and months to come. Presiding Officer, the First Minister has detailed the work under way in the UK at present. However, given the international nature of the threat, can the First Minister tell me what steps are being taken at the European Union level to co-ordinate a response to Ebola and what response and influence the Scottish Government has in those discussions? It is a very good point, because in order to combat Ebola at source, there is and there is, but there will continue to be a very co-ordinated international response. Public health specialists from Scotland are involved in discussions at European level on the response to Ebola, and they will continue to be so. That includes, crucially and very importantly, participation in the European Health Security Committee, where those matters are discussed. I can reassure Stuart Maxwell that we will continue to play a full part in all aspects of the international response, as well as making sure that we are doing what is required to be done at home to ensure that our preparedness is up to scratch. That ends the statement from the First Minister on Ebola. We now move to the next item of business, which is a debate on motion number one.