 A fyddwn i mi ddim yn ddim yn bwyllfa, gallwch i gaelio'r gallu'r gaelifith P spices, Saïdra Múnattas-Neem, Cymru'n Sŵricolol. Felly, mae'n i ddim yn ddim yn ddim yn ddim yn ddim yn ddim yn ddim yn ddim yn ddim yn ddim yn ddim yn perthygau i Gaelifith Raws. Felly, rwy'n cael ei wneud ar gynghentio gyda digwydd ac yn ei ddim yn dim ei ddim yn ddim yn ddim yn ddim yn gynghentio gynghentio cyfraddwyr. Mae hyn yn chi'n gweithio i'r rhai yn Scotland. Mae nicoe Sturgeon yn 2016, daith o'r cwntrach i'r fferio i Fergusyn marrind. Felly, mae'n rhaid i'r lluftrwyd i'r rai yn ystafellol, ond bod i'r rhaid i'r rhaid. I still believe that the Scottish Government was right to do everything to save Ferguson's shipyard, but for those decisions, Ferguson's shipyard would not still be open, not still employing significant numbers of people as it is today. Douglas Ross and I may well take different views on this, but I do think that it was right for the Scottish Government to protect and save jobs and protect that shipyard. As I set out in questions last week, the delays to the timetable for the construction of those ferries and the cost overruns is a matter of deep regret. The Audit Scotland report published last week set out much of the detail of that and the Scottish Government's CMAL is certainly intent on learning all lessons, but I do not regret the fact that Ferguson's shipyard is still operational and still employing lots of people. It is good that people continue to be employed. We welcome that, but not a single mention in the First Minister's answer about the island communities that have been waiting for years for lifeline services. That is where the regret should be from this First Minister, but it does not even merit a mention. The deal that she is so proud of has become a disaster because we now know that the Government waved a crucial safeguard that would have protected taxpayers' money. International guidelines say that the refund guarantee is the financial cornerstone of a shipbuilding project. The guidelines state and this is a direct quote, that it is unlikely that any shipbuilding contract would be signed if there was no such guarantee, but that is exactly what this First Minister did, knowing the risks. Last week, when I asked about the guarantee, she said and I quote, that decision was clearly taken based on a balance of risks. In other words, she dropped a vital safeguard standard for these types of contracts in order to cut a deal. Five years on, does the First Minister accept that the risks were far too high and that was a bad deal? Firstly, in my initial answer, I did express deep regret—those were my actual words—about the delay in the construction of the ferries and the cost overrun. Clearly, those most impacted by the delay in the construction of the ferries are those who live in our islands. That is where my deep regret rightly lies. On the wider question, I set that out in full last week. Of course, there was a failure on the part of FML to offer the full refund guarantee. There were a number of steps taken as I set out in detail last week to mitigate the risk that was caused by that. I set out the three key steps in mitigation that were taken. First, changes to the final payment that was to be made to FML for delivery of the vessels was increased from 15 per cent to 25 per cent of the contract price, which effectively seamaled, therefore withholding more of the payment until the later stage. Secondly, seamaled to take ownership of all equipment, machinery and materials as they arrived at the shipyard. Thirdly, FML would require all major suppliers to offer the full refund guarantee with seamaled as the payee. Those were the steps in mitigation that were taken. Then there was a requirement for ministers to take a decision on a balance of judgment. As the paperwork that has been in the public domain now for some time makes clear, the view of seamaled—seamaled, of course, did articulate concerns about that—is all laid out in the paperwork and in the Audit Scotland report. However, there was also a view that the negotiations with FML had led to the best deal that was capable of being struck with FML. Had that decision not been taken, I express again my deep regret at the delays and the cost overrun in the construction of those ferries. Lessons have been learned and will be learned, but I do not regret the fact that that shipyard still exists and that that shipyard is now employing more than 400 people. As well as learning lessons from this experience, we are also determined to ensure that that shipyard has a bright future. Douglas Ross The First Minister stands there and says that lessons have been learned, yet the Audit Scotland report from last week said that there is no evidence that the Scottish Government, Transport Scotland or Seamaled, conducted a formal project review exercise after the original contract failed. That is how you learn lessons, yet her Government did not do it. She could not, despite a very long answer there, accept that this was a bad deal. She mentioned Seamaled and its public statements both in the public domain and in the Audit Scotland report. They know that this is a bad deal because they have said, and this is a company owned by the Scottish Government. They have said that they would not agree another contract with those conditions. A Government-owned company is saying that. Do you know what else they said in the Audit Scotland report? Regardless of what Scottish Government ministers tell them, they are so opposed to this deal that they can see the pitfalls even if her Government and her ministers told them they would not do that. They get how bad this deal is that the First Minister does not. It is important to islanders and island communities. Those ferries are vital for their way of life and work. Let us look at what happened here. Nicola Sturgeon signed off a contract against advice of experts. She started building ferries without agreeing a design. She threw good money after bad, and quarter of a billion pounds has been spent with nothing to show for it, and worst of all, the person with the ultimate responsibility, the First Minister, removed the essential safeguard that would have protected Scottish taxpayers. A former Scottish Government shipbuilding adviser says that the final cost could rise to between £350 million and £400 million. First Minister, can you guarantee to Scottish taxpayers that that will not be the final bill? The chief executive of the shipyard and SEMA, as I understand it, is significant, because this is the first time that this has happened, has endorsed the latest cost estimates that the finance secretary set out to the chamber last week and the latest updated timescale. Those are the cost estimates, and all the efforts of those in the yard are now ensuring that those ferries are delivered. Douglas Ross says—firstly, I am not standing here and saying that there is not a great deal to deeply regret about the conduct of the contract. That is clearly the case that this has not gone the way anybody would have wanted. Douglas Ross says that there is nothing to show for it. There are, as of this year's middle of March, 462 people in Ferguson shipyard that have employment. I think that that is something to show for the actions of this Government. We will now get on with learning the lessons. Douglas Ross says that no lessons have been learned, and then, of course, he narrates the lessons that SEMA has already learned and are putting into practice. We will continue to learn the lessons, and most importantly, we will continue to focus on completing the ferries, which is the most important thing for our island communities. We will also focus on making sure that Ferguson shipyard and all those who work there now and in the future have that bright future that I think people across Scotland want. I know that the First Minister does not like First Minister's questions, because people hold her to account and seek answers, but not even an attempt to give a guarantee that a former Scottish Government adviser says that this will go to £350 million to £400 million, nothing from the First Minister to say in her answer that she would guarantee Scottish taxpayers that that will not happen. What should have been in the First Minister's own words a proud achievement has become a sign of this Government's incompetence? The Deputy First Minister, John Swinney, said in 2014 that the SNP would replace 12 ferries with £250 million. It has not even built one for that amount of money. It has ignored the experts and islanders remain stuck with a rotten ferry service with no sign of improvements. Her Government struck a deal on the balance of risks that has been catastrophic for Scottish taxpayers. Any evidence as to why that call was made has mysteriously vanished. Audit Scotland could not find a shred of evidence. It is in their report. Nicola Sturgeon's whole claim here, even after she has lost £250 million without building a single ferry, is that the deal was the best option available. First Minister, are you seriously saying that you would sign the same deal all over again? That was the view at the time that the contract was signed. Obviously, we would not repeat what has happened. I think that that is self-evident. On the issue of the costs—Douglas Ross has quoted, and I know that he is quoting somebody else—costs between £350 million and £400 million. I simply do not recognise those numbers. The cost estimates are set out by the finance secretary, and those are the cost estimates that we stand behind. I have been very clear about that. Our focus now is on ensuring that the ferries are completed in the interests of our island communities and on ensuring that Ferguson's shipyard and all those who work in it have a bright future. We will learn the lessons from this. I have said several times today that I deeply regret the experience of this, and I am standing here and taking, as I did last week, full responsibility for that. However, my focus, the Government's focus, is on learning the lessons and securing the future of that shipyard. The waste of public money—a quarter of a billion pounds so far by the Government of Ferguson's—does not end with the award of the ferry contract. In August 2019, Tim Hare was appointed as turnaround director at the Yard. Those emails obtained through a freedom of information show, the appointment was rushed through without the usual competition in just a few days. Mr Hare was selected from a short list of only three people, all recommended by corporate advisers PricewaterhouseCoopers. In the process of negotiating his salary, he started by offering a rate of £2,000 a day but ended up being paid just under £3,000 per expenses and expenses per day. Those emails also show that the First Minister was informed about all of this and did not raise a single objection. As people across Scotland tighten their belts, can the First Minister explain why she thought it was right to pay Tim Hare over £2 million, meaning that he earned in just 11 days what the average Scot earns in a year? First Minister, those decisions were taken at the time in line with proper processes and procedures and people paying the market rates—I do not set the market rates for what people are paid—but we will continue to focus. There is a new chief executive now in place at Ferguson's. He has updated this Parliament on the revised timescales and the revised costs for the ferries. We will continue to update Parliament and hold the Government and the company, which is now in Government ownership to account. We will concentrate on learning the lessons, but more than anything we will concentrate on completing the ferries and securing a good future for that shipyard, which is something that the STUC has already said is of huge significance and that the Government was right to intervene to secure the future of the shipyard. Market rate—£3,000 a day. Were you signing Lionel Messi? Who is the First Minister kidding? I do not hear any apology or any regret for paying this man £2 million. Let us not forget that £2 million was to turn around the yard, but the ferries that are still not delivered are costing more and are delayed again. The email, which was also found from freedom of information requests, shows that Government advisers suggested that Tim Hare needed a decent pay package so that life was not, and I quote, unnecessarily painful for him while he swapped Hampshire for Port Glasgow, shocking and out of touch. Families right now are having to count every penny. At the same time, Tim Hare says—and it seems that the First Minister is suggesting—that he was value for money. Does the First Minister honestly think that he has been value for money, and if not, what is he going to do to recover £2 million of taxpayers' money? First Minister made clear that I do not think that the experience of this contract has been acceptable in any way, shape or form. However, the focus now under the new chief executive of the shipyard is to get the ferries completed in the interests of island communities and to secure the future of the shipyard. That is what the Government is going to focus on. We continue to focus on that, and that is in the interests not just of island communities, but in the interests of those who work in that shipyard. We should not lose sight of the fact that, but for Government intervention, the shipyard would no longer be operational, it would no longer be open and there would be nobody employed. Right now, we have more than 400 people employed in that shipyard, and we intend to do everything we can to ensure that it has a bright future, which I think is what people in Port Glasgow and across Scotland will want to see. We are all for protecting the jobs, but let's be clear. This was a PR stunt to protect Nicola Sturgeon's job, Derek Mackay's job and SNP MP's job, because, while people see their bills going up, they see a Government paying a quarter of a billion pounds and still no ferries. Contracts and jobs going abroad and £2 million paid to one person. This Government and this First Minister is all about spin and PR while the public pay the bill. Nicola Sturgeon is normal and done by the book, but Audit Scotland says the opposite. She says that she is open and transparent, but Audit Scotland does not agree. Nicola Sturgeon says that the delays are unacceptable, but then accepts the delays. She says that she wants to learn lessons, but does not want a public inquiry. She says that the Government takes responsibility, but not a single person has. Why does she think that it is acceptable that, while people need help with the cost of living, they are instead paying the cost of her Government's failure? I do not think that Anna Sarwar really does support the protection and retention of employment, because if we had followed what he has just said, there would be no Ferguson shipyard and there would be nobody employed in that shipyard. From the point of public ownership to November 2020, the number of permanent jobs at Ferguson Marine more than doubled. It has been sustained at a level over 350 permanent staff since then. There are currently around 400 permanent employees and additional agency workers. There have been 42 apprentices learning a trade in that yard since August 2021, and the yard has plans to take on more apprentices later this year. More than 70 per cent of all the people employed live in Inverclyde, so those are people employed right now that would be finding the cost of living crisis much harder had the Government not saved the shipyard. That is a reality. The contract and the experience of that is deeply regrettable. What is not regrettable is saving the shipyard and those who work in it, the jobs of those who work in it. We will now move to supplementary questions, and I call Gordon MacDonald. Thank you, Presiding Officer. In my constituency around the Dreadcon and Redford barracks, there are many MOD family homes that have been left empty for many years. I wrote recently to the Tory Defence Secretary to highlight this issue again. Will the First Minister support my calls for the UK Government to consider the use of hundreds of empty MOD homes in Edinburgh and across Scotland to be used to house people being displaced as a result of Russia's war in Ukraine? The humanitarian crisis here on the scale of it means that it is important that all housing options are fully explored. Yes, I think that MOD housing should be considered as part of this process. I would therefore welcome the UK Government, which has sole responsibility for MOD property making empty homes available to support displaced people from Ukraine. The Scottish Government is already bringing together key partners to ensure effective co-ordination of plans to address the accommodation needs of people who are settling in Scotland. We are committed to working with all partners to ensure all arrangements in place are safe, sustainable and offer true sanctuary for those fleeing the war. The First Minister will be aware that the war in Ukraine is having an impact on agricultural commodities, closely linked to global gas prices. Borders farmers are facing rising costs for inputs, including manufactured fertiliser. The UK Government has announced steps to assist farmers to help to address that uncertainty amongst growers and to keep the costs down for farmers. We haven't heard anything yet from the SNP Government, so what action is your Government taking to support farmers at this very challenging time? I continue to work with farmers to give whatever support we can, but I think that it is important to point out that, although the impact of the war in Ukraine is obviously being felt on our farming community, that is a community that is also and was already suffering the impacts of Brexit. In many respects, the real responsibility lies with the UK Government. To ask the First Minister what steps the Scottish Government is taking to ensure that international students are not subject to racial profiling when trying to access accommodation in Scotland. Nobody, students nor anybody else should be subject to racial profiling, and we would take a very dim view of any evidence that that was happening. I would be very happy to hear more of the information that lies behind the question and to look into it if that is necessary and to consider what action may be necessary as a result of that. The First Minister is aware of the extreme impact of fuel poverty in the Western Isles, where 88 per cent of households are not connected to the gas grid. Although electricity prices will rise sharply across the whole of Scotland from tomorrow, the price of heating oil has already more than doubled since this time last year, and there is little to no competition within my constituency, leaving consumers without any choice of supplier. Can the First Minister give an assurance that the Scottish Government will continue to make representations to the UK Government to urge them to introduce proper regulation and price caps for the heating oil industry? Yes, I can assure Alasdair Allan that we will continue to make representations to the UK Government on what is a very important matter. This is an unregulated market, and the powers to introduce regulation remain with the UK Government. However, the Scottish Government recognises the impact of price increases on off-gas-grid energy consumers, and I am very aware of the severe impacts that fuel poverty has in rural and island communities. We have confirmed that we will continue our fuel insecurity funding to support those struggling with bills, regardless of what fuel they use. We will also continue providing assistance for households to move away from dependence on heating oil, where a low-carbon alternative is available. This week, we saw the publication of another deeply troubling set of cancer statistics. They revealed that less than 80 per cent of urgent referrals are being treated within the two-month target, shamefully short of the target set by the Scottish National Party Government. Yet this is not something for which the Scottish National Party Government can use the pandemic as justification. The target has now not been met for almost a decade and is the worst performance since 2008. For all the time, the target remains unmet. Patients and their families are left in limbo. First Minister, what steps will you urgently take to restore 10 years of missed targets? On the issue of cancer waiting times, which is extremely important, as the member will be aware, there are two key targets—the 31-day target. We actually exceed that target on the 62-day urgent suspicion of cancer referral to treatment targets. While, in percentage terms, that target is not being met at the moment, we are working hard to do that. There are actually more people being seen within that target than was the case a year ago and two years ago. We have announced additional funding—10 million pounds of additional funding in this year—and a further 10 million pounds in the coming financial year, which has a particularly strong focus on colorectal and urology, which are two of the pathways that are having most challenges in terms of waiting times. The initiatives that that funding is supporting include upskilling nurses, investing in diagnostic tests, for example. We have also established three pilot early cancer diagnostic centres and continue to invest in our detect cancer early programme. There is a range of initiatives backed by funding under way, as we seek to ensure that we shorten, in particular, the waiting time under the 62-day target. It is important to point out that the median weight under that target is 46 days, so the median is obviously well within that. Thank you, Presiding Officer. This week, the RCN reported record vacancies in nursing in Glasgow and that spending on bank and agency nurses has risen to £76.5 million. That is unsustainable and unacceptable. It means delays and a lack of continuity of care for patients, increased pressure on existing staff and more strain on an already extremely tight budget. Can the First Minister say what new actions the Government will take to address the crisis urgently, because current plans are working? I know that the health secretary also met the RCN yesterday. We have a range of initiatives in place. I have spoken about them in the chamber, as has the health secretary, in recent weeks to support recruitment in our NHS, which is very, very challenged at the moment for a variety of reasons that members are well aware of. Overall, though in Scotland right now—and this excludes vacancies, obviously—nursing in midwifery staffing is at a record high. It has increased by 14.5 per cent since this Government took office NHS staffing. Overall, it has increased by more than 20 per cent a record high since this Government took office. We have record numbers working in our NHS right now, but we want to recruit more. We have targets to recruit more, and that is why we are investing heavily working with NHS boards on targeted initiatives to make sure that that recruitment is successful. To ask the First Minister what changes the recent shifts in fossil fuel prices and the need for energy security have made to its plans for decarbonisation. The Scottish Government takes a comprehensive approach to meeting our net zero targets. Our draft energy strategy and just transition plan will consider technologies to transform Scotland's energy system through our heat in buildings programmes. We are driving decarbonisation of homes and buildings and have enhanced support and advice schemes as part of the £1.8 billion investment in this Parliament. The cabinet secretary for net zero and energy recently wrote to the UK Government outlining Scotland's proposals for decarbonisation, including accelerating the electricity network, increasing financial resources for renewables and resolving unfair network charges that are not aligned with net zero. I thank the First Minister for that response. There is urgent need for action. People are facing a cost of living crisis now. Energy bills are going up from tomorrow. All this, while the UK Government seems determined to abandon climate commitments and increase the growing profits of oil and gas companies. A crisis of this nature needs a concerted holistic response. We must deliver at scale measures to help those most in need. We must insulate Scotland, retrofit buildings, invest in low-carbon heating and grow our renewables potential. Can the First Minister outline what the Scottish Government is doing now to supercharge renewables and energy efficiency programmes? What plans are in place to ensure the necessary workforce and skills? Does she agree that the oil and gas companies should not be profiting from the cost of living crisis? We believe and have set out ways in which the UK Government should be doing more to help people right now with the cost of living crisis. We are taking a number of actions ourselves, but the levers and resources in the main lie with the UK Government. We also believe that this is a time to try to accelerate the transition to net zero, not in any way to move off that ambition. As I said in my earlier answer, we have extensive plans in place across the energy sector to meet those targets. That includes, for example, investing £100 million in the hydrogen sector, boosting support for households to improve their own energy efficiency and to transition away from fossil fuel heating. We have our Green Jobs Workforce Academy supporting existing employees to undertake necessary upskilling and reskilling to secure green jobs opportunities. We have also called on the UK Government for an extended windfall tax on organisations, including oil and gas companies, that are making significant profits right now. Of course, our most recent budget sets out record levels of investment to address the climate emergency and deliver a just transition to net zero. Fergus Ewing Thank you, Presiding Officer. Will the First Minister welcome the 11 per cent reduction in emissions from North Sea operations achieved? Does she agree that more gas produced here in the UKCS means less imported LNG, cutting emissions by nearly 300 per cent? Should we in Scotland not be in the lead on decarbonising opportunities offshore wind to power platforms, hydrogen technology and carbon capture storage, which the climate change panel says is vital to get to net zero? Does she recognise in conclusion that, without a thriving oil and gas sector, Scotland may simply lose those major opportunities to lead on net zero because it is their skills, their technical expertise and their operational experience that are essential to deliver them? The First Minister I certainly welcome the efforts of the oil and gas sector to decarbonise their own activities. I think that that is something that we should all welcome. Of course, we have to also think about the impact on the environment of the use of oil and gas. That is an important part of getting to net zero as well. I do agree and have made clear my agreement that the skills, expertise and infrastructure of the oil and gas sector will be extremely important in making sure that we make that transition to renewable and low-carbon sources of energy. We need to make that transition as quickly as possible for a variety of reasons. The importance of that has been underlined in recent weeks, but we need to do that fairly and justly. When he was a minister with those responsibilities, Fergus Ewing played a really important role in helping to ensure that the Government is on the right track. Nobody wants to increase dependence on imports of oil and gas, but we must therefore ensure that we are investing properly in the transition to renewables, and that is what this Government is seeking to do. The First Minister just said that nobody wants to increase dependency on imports, but reports this week suggest that, without political backing, the UK could be wholly dependent on imports of oil and gas within 15 years due to a lack of confidence to invest. Given that the cambo field is priced in to the climate change committee's net zero projections for decarbonisation, it could help to reduce the cost of energy bills and create around 4,000 jobs and would significantly help the UK's energy security. Will the First Minister consider giving her political backing to production from cambo? I have made clear my views on cambo. I think that they are well-known and well-reported. I am not the decision maker on cambo, but I have made my views clear on that. I think that everybody accepts, even the member's colleagues in the UK Government accepts the importance of moving away from reliance on fossil fuels as quickly as possible, but we need to do that justly. The question is how we best do that. Of course, a significant proportion of what is produced in the North Sea is exported right now. We need to invest more in renewables and low-carbon sources of energy. As Fergus Ewing rightly has said, we need to invest in carbon capture and storage. It is again regrettable that the UK Government has not prioritised the Scottish cluster, the ACORN project. That is inescapable, and the war in Ukraine has just reminded us of how important it is to transition away from fossil fuels. There will be differences of opinion about how we best do that, but it is inescapable that we do that, and for this Government, the investment in and support of renewables is a crucial part of it. To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government anticipates, the impact will be of the register of persons holding a controlled interest in land that will launch on 1 April. The new public register will increase transparency around land management and ownership. It will be held by registers of Scotland and free to access. It will provide information about those who ultimately make decisions about the management or use of land, even if they are not registered as the owner. In short, it will mean that those who are in control of the land, who are taking the decisions about the use of the land, are not able to effectively hide their identities because they are not the registered owner. It will include overseas entities and trusts irrespective of when the land was acquired, and the information will enable individuals and communities to identify and engage with those who make decisions about land that affect them. It marks a significant milestone in making land ownership in Scotland more transparent, which is, of course, a key objective for the Scottish Government's land reform ambitions. I thank the First Minister for answering and welcoming this legislation to put this in practical terms. The First Minister will be aware in many small towns, such as Gallifield's, in my constituency. The town centres are blighted by many long-term, vacant large retail outlets, but the actual owners of land wars cannot be traced, preventing organisations such as Energize Gallifield and, indeed, the local authority redeveloping the town centre either through voluntary or, indeed, compulsory purchase. Is this the type of difficulty that the legislation will at long last help resolve? That is certainly one of the issues that the register will help to resolve. As I said earlier on, the main purpose of it is to improve transparency so that the public has information about people who are making the decisions about use of land, wherever that land is, regardless of who owns it or who is the registered owner of it. Anyone, including local authorities, who wants to contact the person who controls or influences those decisions, will be able to use the register to find the contact details where they are on the register. That will make it easier for communities to find and contact those who control land and property, and then influence the decisions about the land and property that impact on them or their communities. To ask the First Minister what immediate improvements the Scottish Government plans to deliver for passengers when it takes control of ScotRail on 1 April. The transition of ScotRail passenger services into public ownership tomorrow will be a very significant milestone. It will also fulfil the manifesto commitment of this Government and mark a new beginning for ScotRail. It provides an opportunity to modernise and deliver passenger services that are efficient, sustainable, safe, fit for the future and which reflect the changing world that we live in. Obviously, from tomorrow, services will continue as normal. It is important that we provide reassurance and familiarity to passengers in the immediate term as we recover from the disruption and impact of the pandemic. Later this spring, we will launch a national conversation offering rail, staff, passengers and communities an opportunity to contribute to the future vision for Scotland's railway and help shape this new beginning for ScotRail. We know that the SNP is no good at running things. He just has to look at the ferries for that. Given that fiasco, rail passengers should be worried that that rail will turn out to be CalMac on wheels. On Sunday, Transport Minister Jenny Gilruth was quoted as saying, from day one, you might not necessarily see anything that looks different, but the major difference is accountability. Well, Ms Gilruth obviously didn't get the memo that this Government doesn't do accountability. So far, what we do know is we're going to have rising fares, service cuts and ticket office closures. What part of that is an improvement? This Government has already delivered significant improvements on our railways. That's even before the railway comes into public ownership, as it will tomorrow. I know that the Conservatives like being reminded of that, so I'm going to deliver again on that. Since 2009, under this Government, the communities of Allawa, Lawrence, Kirk, Armadale, Blackridge, Caldercroats, Conranbridge, Shoffair, Exkbank, Newton-Grange, Gorebridge, Stow, Gallashale, Tweedbank and Cintour, all reconnected to the rail network through the reversal of cuts. In the next three years, Reston, East Linton, Dalkros, Cameronbridge and Leven will follow. Railway workers in England, under the Tories, faced a pay freeze. Fair pay deal was delivered in October last year for ScotRail staff. Lastly, we've taken action to keep rail fares down. ScotRail fares are, on average, 20 per cent cheaper than in those areas of the UK that are governed by the Conservatives. John Mason. The public ownership of ScotRail is very welcome to all reasonable members in this place and to the public at large. Will the First Minister think that this will increase opportunities for the railway and it will better serve Scotland's people and economy? Yes, I do. Bringing ScotRail into public ownership and control is a historic moment, and I am delighted that it is happening under this Government, but many others, including the rail unions campaign for this to happen, and I think that it's important to pay tribute to them as well. Our commitment is clear. We've invested £9 billion in the railway since 2007. I've just listed the stations that have been reconnected since 2009, with five more to follow. Of course, we've delivered a pay deal for staff in contrast, a pay freeze south of the border. Of course, we will continue to press for full devolution of rail powers, including full devolution of network rail in Scotland, so that we can then truly deliver the railway that Scotland wants and deserves. To ask the First Minister whether the Scottish Government will provide an update on what the £10 million long Covid support fund has been allocated for and how much has been spent. First Minister, services and support are already being provided across Scotland for those with long Covid. We know more is needed, not just now, but also for the long term to support people in the most appropriate way. Our long Covid strategic network brings together clinical experts, NHS boards and those with lived experience and will determine how we target the support fund at the areas where additional resources are needed and can make the biggest difference in the long term. The first tranche of funding will be allocated over the coming weeks, the next few weeks. That will be used by boards to strengthen the co-ordination of services across supported self-management primary care, rehabilitation support and secondary care investigation and support. Jackie Baillie Can I thank the First Minister for her response, but long Covid sufferers described there being very few services in place? This funding was announced in September 2021. No indication was given at that stage that it would be six months later and not one penny of money has been allocated to health boards to develop services. Instead, as we have heard, the money is going to be spread over the next three years with numbers of those suffering from long Covid, estimated by the UNS, to be £119,000 and rising. Why has the pace been so slow? Can the First Minister indicate that when every health board in Scotland will have dedicated long Covid services to help patients and their GPs? First Minister, we set up, as I indicated in my initial answer, the long Covid strategic network. That was deliberately so that the targeting of this funding would be driven and determined by clinical experts on the front line and by those with lived experience of long Covid. Of course, in addition to that, we have already launched a long Covid information platform to help people to manage symptoms. We have done work to raise awareness of long Covid and signpost people to appropriate support. NHS Scotland is already delivering care in line with the recommendations of the clinical guidelines developed by NICE, for example. That is underpinned in Scotland already by the full range of NHS services. That includes primary care teams and community-based rehab services, with referrals to secondary care where it is necessary. Long Covid clinics are one model that NHS boards may consider already, but no one single approach is going to fit all the areas and circumstances. We will continue to support the development of multidisciplinary support services, because that is something that will be required for the long term. Long Covid is becoming the biggest mass-disabling event since World War 1. Nearly 120,000 sufferers need clinics, care pathways and long Covid nurses, but we are still nowhere. I have asked the First Minister about this every month since the funding was announced in September, and she said that her action plan was being implemented. We have just learned that not one penny has left the Scottish Government bank account of that £10 million. I ask the First Minister if she will now apologise to Scotland's long Covid sufferers and wake up her ministers on the issue and get help to sufferers fast. No, I won't, because we continue to support the development of services that are appropriate for those who will need this support, not just now, but in the long term. This has already been underpinned by the full range of NHS support services. I have outlined the work that has already been done and I have outlined why we took the decision to allow clinical experts and those who are living with long Covid to direct the nature of the funding that is being made available. I have been encouraged in this chamber to follow the example that is allegedly being taken south of the border. A report was published just last week by the all-party parliamentary group on Covid, saying that the pathways that are established by the UK Government, including long Covid clinics, do not meet the demand. Some of those clinics may be experienced in temporary or even permanent closures. The reason we are doing it in the way that we are is so that we are not somehow suggesting that there is one single model. This is support that needs to be delivered across the entirety of the NHS. Of course, we still need to understand more about the nature of long Covid, which is why the chief scientist's office is funding nine Scottish-led research projects in order that we can continue to develop our understanding and ensure that services develop alongside that. To ask the First Minister what immediate safeguarding measures will be in place to ensure that arrivals from Ukraine are protected from organised criminal activity, human trafficking and exploitation. Any form of human trafficking or exploitation is abhorrent. People must be protected from it. Police Scotland's national human trafficking unit continues to engage with internal and external partners and enforcement agencies to maintain a very high visibility of human trafficking and exploitation risks at points of entry around Scotland. Anyone with concerns about human trafficking should contact Police Scotland. In terms of safeguarding, where people are opening their homes to displace people from Ukraine, hosts can apply for expedited disclosure checks of the same level of scrutiny as the initial checks carried out for those working with children and vulnerable adults. That is, under the new regulations introduced last week, to ensure that we have in place a safe, speedy and free vetting system. I thank the First Minister. I think that we all thank the huge number of Scottish families who have come forward to open their homes to the Ukrainians who are coming here through the UK wide scheme, but I think that we also have to be realistic that sadly not everyone who offers help will be well-intentioned. In fact, organised criminal gangs may see what's happening in Ukraine as more of an opportunity than a tragedy. A number of very important organisations, including Tara, survivors of human trafficking in Scotland and Scotland Against Modern Slavery, have always quite valid concerns about the vulnerability and desperation of those arriving, and the real potential for harm posed by luring arrivals into low-paid, illegally or sexually exploitative activities. They are even worth simply being abused in private homes. What work will be undertaken by the Government and its public agencies to adequately vet, prepare and educate host families before the arrival of those coming to Scotland? After they have arrived and settled, what on-going safeguards will be in place in the medium to long-term to ensure that we are tracking, tracing and monitoring both the wellbeing and the safety of those who have resettled in Scotland to make sure that none of them, absolutely none of them are being exploited in any way whatsoever? First Minister, this is a really important issue and we are designing and have been designing support services that make sure appropriate safeguarding is in place, but also that we take account and the partners we are working with can take account of the on-going wellbeing needs of those who come to Scotland. Disclosure checks are an important part of that, but having that multi-agency approach to make sure that people get the support that they need not just on arrival and when they are first being accommodated but throughout the time that they may be in Scotland. One of the reasons for us agreeing the super-sponsor route with the UK Government is so that we could have an approach that gets people to Scotland quickly, then temporarily accommodates them while in slightly and I stress slightly slower time, we put in place all of the wider support and do all of the appropriate checks. So we have support arrangements already in place starting with the welcome hubs that have been established. The big hold up at the moment and I say this, we are working constructively with the UK Government to try to resolve this. I met with Michael Gove earlier this week on this particular issue. We've got the super-sponsor route, we have the support in place, we are being held up at the moment by the slow pace of the granting of visas and that is what I know the UK Government is seeking to speed up. I hope that that happens quickly so that we can start to welcome significant numbers of people to Scotland with all of the support that Jamie Greene rightly identifies as being vital for them. Thank you, that concludes First Minister's questions. There will be a brief pause before we move on to members' business.