 Y Llywodraeth Cymru nr 1, Kezia Dugdale? Do you ask the Scottish Government how it supports victims of rape in Edinburgh and the Lothians? Cabinet Secretary, Shona Robison. The Scottish Government provides funding of £100,000 per year for the period 2012-2015 to Edinburgh Women's Rape and Sexual Abuse Centre. In addition, the Scottish Government is supporting the rape crisis helpline, which receives £260,000 per year for 2012-2015. Kezia Dugdale. I thank the minister for that answer in mentioning Edinburgh Women's Rape and Sexual Abuse Centre. I wonder if she is aware at the extent of the cuts that they are currently facing, which are threatening essential front-line support services. They are now heavily reliant on donations just to stay afloat. Will the minister meet with the centre management to discuss their situation with the focus on a possible resolution? Cabinet Secretary. I am aware of the issues that have been raised previously in the chamber. I am now by Kezia Dugdale. The Edinburgh Women's Rape and Sexual Abuse Centre currently receives funding from the Violence Against Women's Fund and the Rape Crisis specific fund. I am aware that Rape Crisis Scotland has funded a consultant to work with Edinburgh Women's Rape and Sexual Abuse Centre to support them on a range of issues, including their funding strategy. The money that is available for violence against women is currently all-allocated. However, I am more than happy to meet with the local centre managers and staff to hear their concerns. We will take that forward as soon as possible. Margaret Mitchell Can the minister confirm what progress, if any, is being made with a proposal to give legal advice to rape victims at the point at which their medical and sexual history is requested? Cabinet Secretary. I think that what I will do is write to the member about that to give her an update, so that I can be accurate in that information. Malcolm Tisham To ask the Scottish Government when the work under way in 2012 on the start-up cost of an independent Scotland will be completed. Cabinet Secretary, Michael Sturgeon The Scottish Government has undertaken a range of work to prepare for the transition to independence and our approach is set out in Scotland's future. Pages 343 to 350 in particular explain that a number of factors will influence the size of the one-off investment that Scotland will make in the transition to independence. Those include the negotiations that will take place between the two Governments on apportioning assets and securing public services in Scotland and the options chosen for improving systems and providing more modern and responsive public services for people in Scotland over the period following independence. Malcolm Tisham It is right to point to Patrick Dunleby's critique of the treasury numbers. Has he not also made clear that the First Minister's £200 million without the aid of a fag packet would not cover everything? Why is there a cover-up of whatever figures did emerge from the work that we know took place? Cabinet Secretary Malcolm Tisham As Malcolm Tisham I know will be aware, he will certainly be aware if he heard this being discussed at the economy committee yesterday. There are a number of factors that influence this issue, all of which will in turn be influenced by the negotiations between two Governments. Those factors have been explained before. I am happy to do so again. First, much of the infrastructure associated with delivering reserve services already exists in Scotland and will transfer to the Scottish Government. I have pointed to welfare and pensions as being examples of that. Secondly, we will have choices to make about the timescales of transition and options about more efficient delivery. Thirdly, there is the issue of wider negotiation about allocation of the UK's £1.3 trillion worth of assets. We are taking a sensible approach. That approach is set out in the white paper. I note that Professor Young, one of the other academics that the UK Treasury relied on, pointed in a blog to the degree of preparation in the white paper. The UK Government, by contrast, is guilty of attempting to mislead people on this particular issue, or, as the permanent secretary of the Treasury said, misbrief people. I know what option I prefer, and if the poll in the daily record today is anything to go by, it is clear what option is winning favour with the Scottish people as well. Question 3, Gavin Brown. What value was delivered on the ground in 2013-14 by non-profit distribution financed capital investment? The Scottish Futures Trust will update the forecast capital spend at the time of publication of the draft budget 2015-16. It has commenced the update process and will publish the value of investment on the ground in 2013-14 along with future forecast capital spend at that time. In 2013-14, the value of projects that entered construction post financial close was approximately £640 million and projects in procurement totaled approximately £1,390 million. Almost four years on from the NPD pipeline being announced, can the cabinet secretary tell us how many of the 47 projects are built and operational? The first revenue-funded finance project was opened in 2013-14, which was the Aberdeen health village project. As Mr Brown knows, there are a whole range of different projects that are now under way. There is the City of Glasgow College, the Inverness College, the M8, M73, M74 motorway improvements and a range of other projects around the country. I have made no secret of the fact that it took the Government longer to implement the non-profit distribution programme than we originally predicted. I have been absolutely open about that with Parliament over time. I have answered numerous questions from Mr Brown and others on that question. The question that we should really focus on is why did the Government have to embark on the non-profit distribution programme? We had to embark on it because of the savage cuts in capital expenditure that were applied by the Conservative Government when they came to office £1 billion every year on our capital budget. The only reason why the City of Glasgow College has been built just now and the Inverness College has been built and that the M8, M73, M74 motorway improvements have been undertaken is because this Government took the decision to proceed with an NPD programme and we are now in the process of delivering that programme. The support of the fishing sector and its position is on the suggestion that the European Fisheries Fund should be spent elsewhere. Richard Lochhead, any suggestion that Scotland does not require a fair share of European Fisheries Funds is simply outrageous and, of course, is not in Scotland's interests. Going forward, CFP reform will be the biggest challenge a fleet has faced and it is only right and proper that available European funding reflects the task in hand to put the available funding into context. Scotland has 8 per cent of EU landings by value, but it currently only receives 1.4 per cent of the current European Fisheries Fund and Scotland receives 21 euros per ton of fish landed, the second lowest allocation in the whole of Europe. I thank the minister for that response. I am wondering if he could give me a bit more detail on how the rest of the fund is spread around Europe. Clearly, that is down to negotiations and, unfortunately, as the chamber is aware, the UK Government negotiates on behalf of Scotland on access to European Fisheries Funds. Many other countries, with not nearly as significant fishing indices as we have in this country, receive much bigger shares of European Fisheries Funds and we get way below our fair shares. I think that that says a lot about the priorities of the UK Government and how those issues are decided and, therefore, we should have our own voice in Europe so that we can get a fair share of European Fisheries Funds. Does the minister agree with me that the European Fisheries Fund's intention has always been to support struggling fishing communities and that those communities that are struggling in Scotland, those parts of the fishing industry, will have access to this important funding stream? Does the minister further agree with me that the Scottish fishing fleet is strong and that a part of our commitment as EU members is to support those fishing communities across the union that are struggling rather than subsidising some of the strongest fishing communities that are already sustaining themselves with great success? That is a startling intervention from Jamie McGregor that will be noted by every single fisherman in Scotland and a sea fishing sector more widely as well. The fact that a Scottish Conservative MSP has just stood up and said that there is justification for Scotland not to have a fair share of European Fisheries Fund absolutely beggars belief and just shows that the Conservative Party and Jamie McGregor clearly do not have the fishing industry's interests at heart. To ask the Scottish Government what plans it has to extend support for the adoption of environmentally friendly public transport such as hydrogen and electric fuelled buses. The Scottish Government is investing in the EU's largest integrated hydrogen transport project, which will refuel Europe's largest fleet of zero tailpipe emission hydrogen fuel cell buses in the city of Aberdeen from late 2014. The Scottish Green bus fund is helping our bus industry invest in the latest emission reducing technology and is another clear indication of this Government's commitment to Scotland's bus industry. I recently announced round five of the fund and a budget of £4.75 million, the largest yet. In addition, operators receive the bus service operators grant at double the standard rate for services operated by low-carbon buses. I thank the minister for his answer but given that the technology and the opportunity to take that forward further and faster in Scotland is increasingly obvious. Will he take the opportunity this year to look at the total amount of money allocated to the support of bus services in the round and see what can be done to ensure that that resource is focused on extending environmentally friendly services? I think that that is exactly what we are doing. As I said, five rounds of the Scottish Green bus fund, which not only has helped us to introduce low-carbon buses in Scotland but has allowed the manufacturers, which have won those contracts, one of which is indigenous ADL in Falkirk, to develop the technology to help them to win orders abroad, something upwards of £700 million of orders. That is substantially to the benefit of the whole of Scotland. However, we are looking at further measures. I have mentioned the hydrogen project for the buses in Aberdeen. We are also looking to see where that can be used in terms of ferry services as well. We have a very good record in supporting the bus industry, whether it is through the bus service operators grant, of course the concession of travel scheme that we have, and those investments in hydrogen buses, low-carbon buses and one or two fully electric buses, such as the one in Strunrar. I think that we have a record to be proud of, but of course we will try to do more in the future. Stuart McMillan Thank you, Presiding Officer. To ask the Scottish Government what action it is taking to promote an awareness of problem gambling, given its impact on communities. Derek Mackay I have recently led a summit that included one aspect of this, the prevalence and concentration of betting shops in our town centres. Following that, we are considering a range of proposals aimed at tackling the problem, such as looking at what planning policy can deliver. We have also, together with other devolved administrations recently written to the UK Government, to encourage them to maximise all the options available to address the public health concerns associated with gambling. Stuart McMillan I thank the minister for that response. The minister will be aware of my members' debate recently on the issue of problem gambling and the fixed odds betting terminals. I subsequently wrote to all 32 local authorities asking them to consider and writing speakers from gamblers anonymous into schools to speak with pupils. A number of authorities have agreed to do that, including Inverclyde. Does the minister agree with me that providing education on the dangers of gambling at a young age is important? Does he welcome the move by those councils and provide any further details on the thinking that he has had as a consequence of the summit that he recently held? Of course, the summit will produce a report of all the issues that we discussed, hearing from many experts and communities directly working very closely with local authorities. The Scottish Government would agree that a preventive approach to the issue of problem gambling is important, because preparing young people for adulthood does involve alerting them to the risks that are involved. We thank Mr McMillan for his proactivity on the issue and hope that local authorities do all that they can in partnership with us to raise the awareness of the risks. Before I call question 8, there is an opportunity to ask slightly longer supplementaries and slightly longer answers, if necessary. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. To ask the Scottish Government what proportion of Scottish farm produce is sold elsewhere in the UK. The Scottish Government does not hold specific information on the trade that Scotland's farmers have with the rest of the UK. However, estimates reported in the growth sector database, which are derived from the latest Scottish Government global connection survey, suggest that, in 2012, Scotland exported approximately £655 million worth of crop, animal and hunting-related products to the rest of the UK. I thank the cabinet secretary for that response and, indeed, those are the figures that I had identified, which represent nearly 90 per cent—I think that the cabinet secretary will agree—of the Scottish farm produce sold out with Scotland. My constituent, John Forbes, farms near Stonehaven and provides around half of all broad beans that are sold in the UK supermarket, as well as peas, pork and beef. All of that is marketed and sold as produce of Britain under a British brand. Can the cabinet secretary simply confirm that, in the event of a yes vote, it would no longer be possible to market any of those foods anywhere as produce of Britain to British farm standards? Can I just say that post-independence Scotland will continue to a major export of our fantastic Scottish food and drink produce? I notice the comments that Mr Forbes has described in Scottish Farmer as a member of the Better Together campaign. In his comments, Mr McDonald did not mention the name of the supermarket that allegedly made those claims. We are unaware of any supermarkets that made those claims. I just say to Mr McDonald that independent France exports £3.8 billion worth of food and beverages to England, independent Netherlands exports £3.7 billion worth of food and beverages to England, Germany £3 billion worth, the Irish Republic £2.7 billion worth, and independent Spain £2.2 billion worth. Independent Scotland will continue to export to England and the rest of the world with our fantastic food and drink produce and lose McDonald's to stop talking down our food and drink sector in this country. Cabinet Secretary is aware of the success of Scotland's food and drink, which he salutes as do I. Does he share my concerns, though, that given the loss of cattle and sheep from the hills and uplands of Scotland that enough product may not over time be available to meet the growing export demand for Scottish produce? Cabinet Secretary. Yes, I do share some of those concerns expressed by John Scott, and that is why I was utterly appalled by the poor budget deal negotiated for Scotland's farmers by the UK Government in Europe during the renegotiation of the common agricultural policy. It is also why yesterday during the statement of how we will implement that new policy, in Scotland we have announced substantial support for Scotland's livestock sector to give confidence to our producers to produce for that wonderful international market opportunity that does exist, including our unprecedented support for the beef sector, with a £45 million investment over the next three years to help to develop the beef sector for Scotland and capture the wonderful market opportunities that John Scott refers to. I recently visited a food business in my south of Scotland region. They sell three quarters of their food with the union jack on it, and one quarter with the salter told me that, if Scotland became independent, it would have to move its production with its 200-plus employees down south in its own words. We also know that their words themselves, Scottish produce, Scottish beef, Scottish lamb, has the benefit of being able to be marketed as being sold in Europe, produced in Scotland, produced in the UK. Will the minister come back to this Parliament and tell us how much of Scottish meat is sold with the union jack on it? I just remind Jim Hume that, since the Government announced the referendum, Scotland's food and drink industry has absolutely boomed. I also remind Jim Hume and the other scaremongers in the Better Together campaign that the success of Scotland's food and drink sector is built on the back of the Scottish brand, not our political constitutional arrangements, and that success will continue beyond independence. To ask the Scottish Government what assistance it gives to local authorities updating their transport appraisal guidance reports. Transport Scotland provides advice if requested to local authorities and others on the application of the Scottish transport appraisal guidance at any stage of a transport appraisal study. That includes providing advice on transport appraisal reports. Over the last two years, has Fife Council made any representation to the Scottish Government, Transport Scotland or through Sestran, to promote the leaving of rail link? Can the minister tell me if it is Fife Council's top priority? Scotland has regular meetings with Sestran to discuss real issues, and there have been two meetings of that type this year. Neither meeting has included a specific discussion about the proposed reopening of the leaving mouth rail link. In fact, I am not aware of any representations made by the council through Sestran or to Transport Scotland on that issue. I should say that we have had discussions, of course, with local community groups about St Andrews. We have also had a member-led debate in this chamber on the issue of hall beef, but we have had no representations that I am aware of from the council in relation to the leaving mouth project, although we have had discussions with individual members who have shown our interest. As we stand, of course, people can make an application to the station's investment fund and it would confirm that no such bids have been made by Fife Council so far. In the context of transport advice that the Scottish Government gives local authorities, does the minister agree with SNP councillor and head of economic development, Frank Ross, that extending the Edinburgh trams is a no-brainer? It is obviously a question for the councillor if he would like to extend the trams. He made it perfectly clear, as John Swinney said some years ago, that we have contributed half a billion pounds towards that project and will not fund any more. I think that we made the position clear. It is obviously up to the councillor if he wants to look for further extensions. Thank you. That ends the general questions. We now move to First Minister's questions. Question number one, Johann Lamont. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. To ask the First Minister