 We turn now to First Minister's Questions. Question 1, Ruth Davidson. Thank you to ask First Minister what engagement she has planned for the rest of today. This week we mark an auspicious occasion. It is two years since this First Minister took over office, and I congratulate her on doing so. But I wonder if today I could raise a few individual cases that have been sitting in her inbox i gyd. Firstly, on apprenticeships. This week, the UK Government confirmed the sum that the Scottish Government will get to spend thanks to the new apprenticeship levy. It is £220 million. We said what we would do. We would ring fence those funds for training and apprenticeships. We, and most importantly Scottish employers, still don't know what the Scottish Government would do. Why the delay? First Minister. There is no delay whatsoever. The UK Government decided to introduce the apprenticeship levy without consulting the Scottish Government in any way, shape or form. We have been waiting to find out their plans. We have, as Ruth Davidson is aware, been consulting with employers and others about how we best use the apprenticeship levy. Of course, the detail of that will be made clear when we publish the budget in a few weeks' time. Two points are worth making to Ruth Davidson. First, she stood up today and crowed about the fact that the Scottish Government is going to get £221 million. That is indeed true, but it is only two weeks ago since Ruth Davidson was telling us that we were actually getting £300 million. The amount has reduced since Ruth Davidson last spoke about this issue. The second point is more fundamental. It is important that all members understand that. Although it is important that we use that money and that we will use it to support skills, training and employment in Scotland, that is not additional money. The apprenticeship levy is substituting for money that the UK Government was previously using to support apprenticeship. It is not additional money, but it comes through the block grant. It will replace money that was previously coming through the block grant. That said, we will make sure that we use that money to support training and skills in Scotland. That is exactly what people would expect us to do. Ruth Davidson. If it is all Westminster's fault, First Minister, why are Scottish trade bodies accusing you personally of a leadership vacuum on this issue? And why have just this week, both the construction industry and the oil and gas industry, said that they had no idea from you what was going on? Anyway, secondly on education, back in 2015, back in February of 2015, that is 21 months ago, I challenged the First Minister about giving more autonomy to schools. When she replied, I quote, I'm very happy to discuss the issue with the parents. We were talking specifically about the parents of St Joseph's primary and Mulgai who want to run their own school. Nearly two years on, they're still waiting for an answer. Can I ask again why the delay? First Minister. First lady, before we do the anyway, let's move on from the first subject she raised. Let me just remind Ruth Davidson, I'm not sure if she was aware of this, that the Scottish Government has carried out and recently concluded a consultation specifically on how we use the apprenticeship levy funds and we will come forward with the detail of that when we publish the budget in a few weeks time. But let it not simply be allowed to slip away that Ruth Davidson previously claimed £300 million, it's now £221 million but it is not additional money, it is substitute funds. Let's move on now to education and to St Joseph's. First lady, again, let's not ignore one important fact that I know that Ruth Davidson will not want to share with the chamber. The reason we've been talking about St Joseph's is that Conservative councillors in that council voted to close St Joseph's. Ruth Davidson's approach is that Conservative councillors vote to close schools and then she comes and looks to the Scottish Government to clear up their mess. That clearly is Ruth Davidson's approach to politics. On the specific question of autonomy for schools, Ruth Davidson presumably, although given that she doesn't appear to have been aware of the consultation and apprenticeship levy, shouldn't take this for granted. Presumably she is aware of the consultation underway right now, concludes on January 6, into the governance review where we are specifically looking at how we change the balance of responsibility in education to move to a presumption of decisions being taken in schools and a decision on St Joseph's will be taken in the context of that governance review. That is the right and proper way to do things. Not doing what Ruth Davidson is appearing to do today, to turn a blind eye to what her Conservative councillors are doing and then come and ask the Scottish Government to clear up their mess. Ruth Davidson's approach is that there is your modern SNP need a complaint on the size of a chocolate bar that is right on it, but a decision on a school waits two years for a decision on a school. Third, on welfare, just after the Smith agreement was signed, again two years ago, the First Minister stood there and demanded of me, of Labour, of the Lib Dems, that Westminster transfer welfare powers as soon as possible. They would be outraged if they were not delivered immediately. Those welfare powers are ready to go, but now we learn that SNP is not anywhere near ready to take them. They have pleaded with Westminster to hold on to them for another three years. They are good at demanding, but they are not very good at governing. Let me ask again, for a third time on welfare this time, why the delay? First Minister. First Lady, before Ruth Davidson gets away with moving on from St Joseph's, let me remind her that there would not be a decision to be taken on St Joseph's if Conservative councillors had not voted to close the school. The accuracy of it, yet again this week, is really quite breathtaking. Let's turn to welfare. There is no delay on transferring welfare powers. We have to build a system to ensure that we can safely and securely deliver welfare powers. That is what we will do. We will do that on the timetable that we have always said. When we have a Scottish social security agency delivering only 15 per cent, it is better than nothing of welfare. We will take better decisions on welfare than the Government in London that Ruth Davidson supports. On welfare interestingly, Jeane Freeman laid out this in detail to the relevant committee on 29 September. Anybody, which I hope is everybody in this chamber interested in this, should go and read the official report. When she set out the process of doing this, one Adam Tomkins said that he welcomed what she had said, particularly he welcomed Jeane Freeman's remarks about not using this issue as a political football. Perhaps Ruth Davidson should listen to Adam Tomkins once in a while. Ruth Davidson. The timetable that we have always said. Read the official report. I will read the official report. The official report, November 27, 2014, Nicola Sturgeon. I say genuinely to all parties, as a Parliament, ask the Westminster Government to transfer the powers as soon as possible. Today's official report, massive screeching u-turn, waits three more years. Here's the First Minister's record. On apprenticeships, no clear plan to tell employers. On education reform, wait and see. On welfare, a three-year delay. On frank's law, clear as mud. On NHS reform, coming soon. An investment deal with China, a Scottish shambles. Decision on fracking will get back to you. The SNP dithering, not delivering. Two years ago, when the First Minister accepted the role bestowed on her by this Parliament as First Minister for all of Scotland, she stood up and said, I intend to lead a Government with purpose, a Government that is bold, that is imaginative, that is adventurous. First Minister, what happened? The only real question that has to be asked about today's First Minister's question so far is how many own goals is Ruth Davidson going to score. She's just stood up, and I think this is a direct quote. She's just stood up and accused me on, I think, the apprenticeship, Levy, wrongly, of having no clear plan. Imagine a Tory having the nerve to get up and accuse anybody right now of having no clear plan. That sums up the entirety of Theresa May's Government right now. On welfare, what Ruth Davidson apparently appears to be saying is that we should take responsibility for delivering disability, benefits, carers allowance and other important benefits before we have the system in place to actually ensure that these benefits can be put into people's hands or bank accounts. She may want to act irresponsibly in that respect, but I'm going to act responsibly so that we can have in Scotland, not for the entirety of welfare, unfortunately, but for those benefits that are going to be devolved, we can have a fair, humane and dignified welfare system. How much of a difference will that be to the one that is being presided over by the Conservatives in London right now? Question 2, Kezia Dugdale. To ask the First Minister when she'll next meet the Auditor General for Scotland. First Minister. I have no current plans, but the permanent secretary meets the Auditor General on a regular basis, and the Cabinet Secretary for Finance last met the Auditor General on 30 August. Kezia Dugdale. This morning, Scotland's rail network was thrown into chaos, a broken down train disrupted the travel plans for tens of thousands of commuters across the central belt. It has been yet another shambolic day, causing misery for passengers. The Transport Minister, Hamza Yousif, who crosses the country in his ministerial car, took to Twitter this morning to admit that the ScotRail performance is not good enough. Does the First Minister really understand just how angry Scotland's commuters are today? First Minister. Yes, I do. I and indeed Hamza Yousif took part in a conference call with ScotRail earlier this morning. I know they are extremely sorry for the disruption that passengers have experienced this morning, and I share that sentiment. The problem this morning, as Kezia Dugdale has alluded to, was caused by a train breaking down between Waverley and Haymarket station just at Princess Street gardens. All the lines into Edinburgh were blocked by the train that had broken down. ScotRail described it to me this morning as probably the worst location in the country for a breakdown like this to happen, because there was no other ways for the trains to get into Waverley station. The train was removed at around 8.30 this morning. There has been a restricted train service running on many routes since then, while the network returned to normal. I was advised by ScotRail just before I came into the chamber that the service is more or less returned to normal right now. It has caused significant disruption. What I would say and say this seriously is that there are wider performance issues around ScotRail right now. We have discussed them in this chamber before. That is why there is in place an improvement plan that Hamza Yousif is monitoring very closely. I hope that all members would accept that, however regrettable it is and deeply regrettable, on occasion trains will break down whatever party is in government. The priority when that happens is to get services back to normal as quickly as possible. That is what ScotRail has been focused on this morning. Kezia Dugdale I can accept that today's disruption might be a one-off. Yesterday was considered just a normal day on Scotland's rail network, and you can bet that there are wider performance issues. Scottish Labour can reveal that the performance figure for yesterday was 79 per cent. That means that on a normal day more than one in five trains failed to arrive on time. In rural areas, yesterday's performance figure was 60 per cent. That's against a target of 91 per cent. It's not even close, First Minister. Passengers deserve better, and it is this Government's responsibility to fix it. When I challenged the First Minister on this six weeks ago, she said that the Government had an improvement plan. Hamza Yousif said that he had confidence in that improvement plan, while passengers are fast losing confidence in him. How bad does it have to get before the First Minister steps in and sorts out this mess? The First Minister The Government does accept our responsibility in this matter. We are working with ScotRail to make sure that train services are of a standard that the travelling public has a right to expect. I repeat the apology that ScotRail has expressed for the disruption this morning, which was caused by an extraordinary set of circumstances. As I have said in this chamber before, the standard that ScotRail is expected to meet is 91 per cent against punctuality standards. That generally at the moment is about 89 per cent, although, as Kezia Dugdale has just narrated, there will be variations to that. That is not good enough. That is why the improvement plan is in place. That is why Hamza Yousif continues to work with ScotRail to improve it. This week, we heard plans about additional trains coming into services, about ScotRail rightly ceasing the practice at peak hour time of missing stops where trains are running late. Those are serious issues that affect the travelling public on a daily basis, and we are absolutely determined to make sure that we work with ScotRail to rectify them. On a wider sense, as I again have said in this chamber previously, there are options for the contract to be broken early, and we will keep that option under review. Thanks to the pressure of this Government, in future we will also have the option of having a public sector organisation bid for the rail franchise, and I think that is a step forward. I think that we have had an apology from ScotRail, but I think that commuters would like to hear an apology from the First Minister. Rail passengers do not feel like they have seen any sort of improvement over that six-week period. Last week, ScotRail cancelled trains because it expected the rails to be slippery due to excessive moisture. Rain in Scotland, Presiding Officer, who could have predicted that? For Scotland's rail passengers, this is not a laughing matter any more. Overcrowded trains delayed trains. That is the SNP's idea of a world-leading deal for passengers. Isn't it clear, more than ever, that Labour's policy for a people's ScotRail run for passengers, not for profit, is the best solution for Scotland? Firstly, people watching this will have heard me say that I am sorry for the disruption that was caused this morning, and also sorry for the disruption that any passenger faces on any day of the week. That is ScotRail's position, and it is also mine. In terms of some of the decisions that Kezia Dugdale alluded to, ScotRail has a responsibility to ensure the safe running of trains. It is easy to make jokes about moisture, but they have that responsibility, and it is important that they discharge that responsibility. In terms of the wider issues, I absolutely accept that things are not good enough. That is why the improvement plan is in place, and that is why we will stick with that until things are running to a standard that the public have a right to expect. On the wider issue of a people's railway, let me point out again that the reason it was not possible for a public sector organisation to bid for the rail franchise when a bellio bid and won that contract was that we did not have the power to do that. We had asked the previous Labour Government at Westminster to change the law or to give us the power to change the law here, and they refused point blank to do that. Kezia Dugdale can shake her head, but I am afraid that that is the reality of the situation. We are going to have that power, and we have made it clear that, by the time that contract comes up for renewal, whether that is on schedule or early, there will be the ability of a public sector organisation to bid for it. That is the progress that we have made, progress that was impeded by Labour for a long, long time. The First Minister will wear the announcement by Shell to close its finance operations at Walthill Street in Glasgow, in my constituency, with the loss of 380 jobs. I have phoned up Shell and have asked to have a meeting as urgently as possible. Can I therefore ask the First Minister what support the Scottish Government can give to those 380 workers at this very difficult time? I am very disappointed. I was very disappointed yesterday to learn of the closure of Shell's finance operations office in Glasgow. I know that this will be a difficult time for the employees who are affected by the families and, indeed, for Glasgow as a whole. Scottish Enterprise is engaging with Shell to offer its full support. The Scottish Government's pace initiative stands ready to help those affected through providing skills development and employability support. The Transition Training Fund, which we set up specifically to help to respond to the downturn in oil and gas, is available to support individuals who wish to retrain and secure new opportunities in the oil and gas or wider energy and manufacturing sectors. Sandra White has said that she has sought a meeting with Shell. The Economy Minister would also be happy to meet her and keep her updated on developments in this case. Jamie Greene Mr Randall is 78 years of age and lives on the Isle of Arran. He was diagnosed this year with a heart condition in May of this year. He received a letter saying that the next available consultation to see a cardiac consultant is in December 2017. Unfortunately, that was not a typo. He wrote to the health minister to complain about the waiting time, who said that, while she could not intervene on the case, it was not because, I quote, we are uninterested. What does the First Minister have to say to people like Mr Randall who have to wait up to 19 months to see a consultant because I am very interested? The First Minister Not surprisingly so am I. I am very happy to look into the particular circumstances of that case. I do not say that to avoid answering it in the chamber, but it is important in those cases that we get the opportunity to look at the details. There was a case raised by Anas Sarwar last week that, on the face of it, appeared to be completely unacceptable, but when we looked into it, it turned out to have very particular circumstances attached to it. I am not saying that that is the case in this situation, but I will look into that and the health secretary will liaise with the member once we have had the opportunity to do so. On the face of it is a completely unacceptable waiting time and one that I would expect the health board to rectify. Question 3 To ask the First Minister when the Cabinet will next meet. Around the world, the vast majority of developed countries and health organisations recognise that access to safe legal abortion is absolutely critically important to a great many women's health and where that is not available, women's lives and women's health always suffer. And yet, within the UK tragically, there are women who do not have access to this important right. Many women in Northern Ireland find themselves left with no option but to travel elsewhere in the UK to access legal and safe abortion. The time and the stress that this costs them is bad enough, but there are also significant financial barriers with some organisations supporting these women estimating that at the low end it costs at least £400 and in many other cases more than £2,000. Does the First Minister agree that the NHS in Scotland should be exploring what can be done to ensure that these women are able to access abortion in Scotland if that is where they choose to travel to without facing these kind of unacceptable financial barriers? I'm very happy to explore that with the NHS to explore both what the situation would be right now in terms of accessing safe and legal abortion for women from Northern Ireland within NHS Scotland and whether there's any improvements that are able to be made. I believe, like Patrick Harvie, that women should have the right to choose within the limits that we currently set down in law and I believe that right should be defended. When any woman opt to have an abortion and let's stress that that is never ever an easy decision for any woman, then abortion should be available in a safe and legal way. That is my view on the matter. Patrick Harvie has asked me to explore a particular issue around NHS Scotland and I'm happy to do so. I'm grateful for that answer and I look forward to hearing an update once that issue has been explored. Does the First Minister agree with me that abortion should be regarded as a part of the normal range of healthcare provided and should not be stigmatised or treated as something exceptional? In that context, is there any other part of the normal range of healthcare provision where the NHS in Scotland would turn people away simply because of where they happen to live if they are in Scotland and seeking to access that service? Should we not regard abortion as a normal part of the range of healthcare rather than stigmatising it? I certainly agree that no woman should be ever stigmatised for having an abortion. No woman ever wants to have an abortion. There will be a variety of circumstances in which a woman will find herself in that position and I absolutely agree that safe abortion is of paramount importance. I also agree that abortion should never be seen in isolation. It is a part of healthcare and delivering abortion safely is a fundamental part of healthcare. As I say, I'm happy to go away and explore the particular issues about how NHS Scotland would deal with women coming from other parts of the UK and right to Patrick Harvie whenever the opportunity to do so. To ask the First Minister what issues will be discussed at the next meeting of the cabinet. Matters of importance to people of Scotland. During the election campaign just a few months ago, the First Minister agreed with me that big changes were required in mental health services. Now leading health campaigners have serious concerns about the new draft strategy. Children in Scotland say that there is widespread concern that the proposals are too narrow in their focus. The Royal College of Nursing says that the strategy is not aspirational. The psychiatrist says that it does not amount to transformation and support in mind says that it is neither visionary nor ambitious. Does the First Minister accept that the draft strategy is just not good enough? No, I don't accept that, but it is a draft strategy. If there are views from organisations such as those very respected organisations that Willie Rennie has cited here today, then those are views that we should take seriously and we should work with those organisations to make such improvements as they think should be made. I give an undertaking today that we will do that. Despite the disagreements that we have on that, on a range of other issues, I think that we have managed to obtain and achieve a degree of consensus across this chamber about the importance of mental health and about the importance of improving mental health treatment, prevention and care in this country. The Government is serious about doing that, and the mental health strategy is an important part of doing that. We will work with organisations on the basis of the draft strategy to look at ways in which we can strengthen it further. Willie Rennie says that there is a degree of consensus. There will never be consensus when you get health organisations like that saying the things that they did. The signs are not good enough. The Government failed to renew the mental health strategy on time. However, there has not been one for almost a year, and now those health campaigners are unhappy. If you look at the use of mental health drugs, it has reached a 10-year high. New figures show that almost 1 million prescriptions were issued last year, which is up 50 per cent. A majority of health boards do not meet the 18-week target for non-drug psychological therapies. The Government has let the strategy lapse. The use of drugs is up. The alternatives are not available for everyone. Charities say that there is not a community focus. This is a serious set of concerns. What chance has the Government got of getting the services right if it cannot even get the strategy right? I ask her this. What will she do differently to meet those aspirations that she set out during the election campaign just a few months ago? I agree with Willie Rennie that there is a great deal of improvement that we need to make around mental health services. Scotland is not unique in that. Some of what he narrates here today—the increase in drug prescriptions, for example—is partly down to the fact that more people are coming forward with mental health difficulties. While that puts a responsibility on us to make sure that the services are there, we should welcome the fact that the stigma is reducing and more people are coming forward. It is also why we are seeing pressure on waiting times, although waiting times for CAMHS are improving, but there is significant work still to be done. The Mental Welfare Commission published a report just this week, in fact, where, yes, there is work to do, but it welcomed the sharp reduction in the number of children being treated for mental health in non-specialist wards. There is progress being made, but I readily accept that there is much work still to do. We published strategies in draft form for a reason, because we want to engage with the experts on the front line so that we can strengthen those strategies and publish the final strategy in as good a shape as we possibly can. It is not unusual for organisations at the draft stage of any strategy to push us to go further. That is why we publish in draft, and that is why we engage with those organisations. We will do that, and indeed, if Willie Rennie wants to submit specific suggestions for how we could change the draft strategy, we are very happy to listen to those suggestions from him or anyone else. Kate Forbes Tori Bacbenchers at Westminster have supported SNP calls to halt cuts to employment and support allowance and universal credit. Will the First Minister join me in extending an open invitation to reasonable Tories in this chamber who recognise the worrying impact of these cuts and wish to add their voices to demands for the Chancellor to postpone changes until alternative support for sick and disabled people is in place? The First Minister I was struggling with the term reasonable Tories in this chamber, but once I got over that, this is a really serious issue. The autumn statement is next week that the cuts to ESA will impact on many, many people. I hope that the new Prime Minister has said that she is anxious to help people who are just managing. At this group of people that we are talking about, in many respects, are not even just managing, so I would hope that the Chancellor will suspend those changes. I hope that he hears the views of this Parliament when he is making the decisions on the autumn statement. Clare Baker I know that the First Minister takes the issue of domestic abuse very seriously and that she would welcome the positive work that has been done by Police Scotland and the Procurator Fiscal in recent years in taking forward tackling the crime. Will she then agree with me that the way in which Callum Steele of the Scottish Police Federation has expressed his concerns, describing court cases as a rigmarole and a charade, and saying that the police hoover up everything in the hope that we miss nothing, is deeply upset? Will she join me in supporting the approach that is being followed, which has resulted in a conviction rate for domestic abuse that is upwards of 80 per cent? Yes, I agree with that. Of course, police officers must have discretion when they are called to any incidents in terms of the action that they take, but I do believe that we should have a zero-tolerance approach to domestic abuse. I think that the police and, indeed, the Crown Office are to be commended for the fact that more perpetrators of domestic abuse are being brought to justice and convicted and I think that is something that we should all welcome. We are investing more resources in tackling domestic abuse, which we are about as a Parliament to look at new legislation around domestic abuse. I think that it is really important that a united message goes from this Parliament that domestic abuse is never, ever acceptable and it should always be treated with the utmost seriousness. In 2011, the Government took the decision to remove business-related travel from air discount scheme support. This decision, taken without any prior consultation, pushed up transport costs for businesses and the public sector in our islands, including in Orkney. Hytrans have now made a compelling case for reversing the decision and allowing island businesses to compete on a more level playing field. Does the First Minister accept that case and will she agree to overturn this earlier wrong-headed decision? I am very happy to ask the transport minister to look at the case that has been put forward by Hytrans and to correspond with the member. Of course, we want our islands to be as accessible as possible for business travellers as well as for others, so we will look at the case that Hytrans has put forward and the transport minister will respond in due course. To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government's response is to the recent survey by Neilson, indicating that 69 per cent of spirits sold in Scotland fall below a minimum unit price of £50. One of the reasons that we have pursued a policy of minimum unit pricing is that we have been well aware for some time how much alcohol is sold very cheaply relative to strength. Minimum unit pricing is precisely designed to target that issue. Very cheap, very high strength alcohol does real damage to individuals and to our communities, and that is why I look forward to the implementation of this life-saving policy as soon as possible. I thank the First Minister for that answer. Minimum unit pricing is clearly the most effective and proportionate way to reduce the harm caused by cheap, high strength alcohol. Now that the Court of Session has ruled in favour of the Scottish Government following the Scottish Whiskey Association's legal action on the issue and assuming that there is no appeal by tomorrow's deadline, can the First Minister advise the chamber when she envisages this policy being delivered as agreed by this Parliament? Well, Kenny Gibson correctly identifies that the main, the only stumbling block to minimum unit pricing now being introduced is whether or not the Scottish Whiskey Association and its co-litigants in this case seek leave to appeal to the Supreme Court. Kenny Gibson says that the deadline for that application is tomorrow, although I think it's important to say that even if such an application seeking leave to appeal was put forward, that doesn't make it inevitable. That appeal will proceed all of the way to the Supreme Court, but the SWA can still now, even at this late stage, choose not to apply for leave to appeal, and I hope very much that that's the course of action that they choose to take. I hope that they and others will reflect that minimum unit pricing was passed with the overwhelming support of this Parliament. It has been tested in Europe, it has now been approved twice in the Scottish courts, and I think that industry itself would receive widespread and very justified approval and respect if it accepts that the time has now come to implement this measure, a measure that will save lives across Scotland. Question number six, Annie Wells. Thank you. To ask the First Minister what action the Scottish Government is taking to tackle cyberbullying. As we mark anti-bullying week, I want to make clear that all types of bullying are unacceptable no matter where the bullying takes place. We need to protect young people from harm and ensure that practitioners have the skills to prevent and respond to online and offline bullying. We already have an internet safety action plan and work is under way to update it. The refresh plan will recognise the impact of online bullying and how it can be addressed and prevented both in schools and at home. At the same time, respect me Scotland's anti-bullying service continues to provide advice and training on bullying and internet safety for local authorities, parents and carers and all those working with children and young people. Annie Wells. I thank the First Minister for that answer. Can I ask Police Scotland to play a front-line role in reporting of cybercrime? What specific conversations has the Scottish Government had with the police in their dealing with this issue? The Scottish Government will have discussions on a whole range of matters with Police Scotland. I am happy to write to the member to set out any interactions that we have had with Police Scotland specifically on the issue of cyberbullying. With cybercrime, as with any other crime, it is down to the discussion of the police, how they investigate and take forward allegations of criminal activity and, of course, down to the Crown Office in terms of what crime is prosecuted. However, there is absolutely no doubt that cybercrime is an important issue. It is an issue that is increasing and one that we all have to take seriously. I know that the Equalities and Human Rights Committee of this Parliament has shown a great interest in the refresh strategy that the Scottish Government is working on. We look forward to working with them and others to make sure that we have the right policies in place to tackle this growing problem. Julian Martin. Tory Chancellor Philip Hammond is expected to reveal a £100 billion Brexit hole in his budget. What representations has the Scottish Government made to ensure that Scotland's finances are protected and we do not pay the price for the Tory's Brexit mess? First Minister, we won't take that question if you don't mind. Supplementaries have to be on the same topic of outlining the written question. Question 7, Donald Cameron. To ask the First Minister what action the Scottish Government is taking to ensure that people with diabetes receive regular monitoring of their condition. First Minister. Well, this week marked World Diabetes Day, which reminds all of us of the need to ensure that everyone living with diabetes receives vital healthcare checks. Those checks are essential in reducing the risks of complications from diabetes. New quarterly monitoring processes were introduced at the start of this year as part of our diabetes improvement plan. This monitoring ensures that we continue to increase the number of people who have regular checks, including blood sugar levels, weight, foot ulceration and diabetic retinopathy screening. Donald Cameron. Two years ago, the Scottish Government released its diabetes improvement plan, which stated that monitoring diabetes was a clear objective. However, the First Minister may be aware that the recently published NHS Scottish Diabetes Survey highlighted that in 2015 fewer than 40 per cent of Type 1 diabetes patients received the full number of check-ups and around half of people with Type 2 didn't receive the full number of check-ups. Will she accept that, two years on, the Scottish Government's current strategy on monitoring diabetes just is not working? First Minister. No, I don't accept that. As I said in my original answer, the quarterly monitoring processes were introduced at the start of this year. That was part of the diabetes improvement plan. What the quarterly monitoring does is look at measures, specifically among other things, for the number of people receiving the nine care processes and also receiving structured education. The member, of course, is right to underline the importance of people getting all the checks that they should be getting. That is why this monitoring has been introduced to ensure that that is the case. Of course, there are other important actions that we are taking around with diabetes, for example increasing access to insulin pumps. We will continue to take all of that action to try to prevent diabetes and make sure that people with it have access to good services and in particular services that reduce their risk of complications. That concludes First Minister's Questions. We will now move to Members' Business. I would ask Members to say a few minutes to change seats.