 D stresses, hoff diwrnodd. The first item of business this afternoon is portfolio questions. The first portfolio is COVID-19 recovery and parliamentary business. There's a fair bit of interest across all the portfolios. The usually appeals for patient brevity in the questions and similar brevity as far as possible in the responses. Any member wishing to ask a supplementary question should press the request and speak buttons during the relevant question. I call question number one, Claire Baker, To ask the Scottish Government how it is progressing its Covid recovery strategy commitments to improve financial security for low-income households. Minister Ben Macpherson, the Scottish Government is prioritising funding to help household finances across the country. We are taking action to increase financial security for low-income households by, for example, increasing the Scottish child payment to £25 per week per eligible child, doubling the fuel and security fund to £20 million and providing local authorities with additional funding for discretionary housing payments. In total, the Scottish Government has allocated around £3 billion this financial year to contribute towards mitigating the increased cost crisis. Over £1 billion of its support is only available in Scotland, with the remainder being more generous than provided elsewhere in the UK. Clare Baker. I thank the minister for the response. As he said, the pandemic and the cost of living crisis has exacerbated the situation for low-income households, and last week we had devastating poverty statistics published for Scotland. On 5 October 2021, that is when the strategy was published. A lot of the commitments have been delivered within 18 months, but there are still gaps in delivery around free breakfasts and wraparound childcare, for example. Will the minister reevaluation of the remaining commitments? Will he be brought forward with new timescales and is the strategy still relevant? I refer the member to recent ministerial statements on both aspects. Of course, there is a continued process of work with regard to wraparound childcare and school meals. That is coupled with the £428 million that the Government has allocated to up-rate all benefits in Scotland that the Scottish Government is responsible for by 10.1 per cent. Of course, the £442 million for the Scottish child payment to be increased to £25 per week per eligible child, as well as action to tackle the high cost of housing with regard to rents and a continued social housing programme. A huge amount of work has been done, and more work will need to be done in order to meet those obligations and continue to provide for low-income families in Scotland and lift children out of poverty as a priority for all of us. Given that inflation is now 10.4 per cent and many families are struggling to pay increasing bills, can the minister say if the Scottish Government has all the powers that it needs to deal with this, or does Westminster need to act as well? The Scottish Government's position is that the UK Government's budget statement does not fully address the cost of living crisis nor provide the support that people in Scotland need, and there is more that can be done. The Scottish Government, as I have alluded to in some of the policy commitments that I have outlined, has been using its limited powers and restrained financial resources to provide more help and ensure that people receive the help that they need. Although the constraints of the current devolution settlement prevent the Scottish Government from borrowing, and certainly the more that we argue for collectively as a Parliament for borrowing powers, the more that we will be able to do. To ask the Scottish Government what impact it anticipates that the increase in inflation to 10.4 per cent will have on the delivery of the priority outcomes set out in the Covid recovery strategy. The current financial situation, including high levels of inflation, is particularly challenging due to our lack of fiscal powers. The Scottish Government has prioritised spending that supports those who need it the most, guiding part by the principles of the Covid recovery strategy. In the 23-24, the Scottish Budget provides funding that helps families, backs businesses and protects the delivery of public services. The Scottish Government is committed to making progress towards the shared Covid recovery strategy outcomes in partnership with local government and other partners, and will continue to prioritise spending that is targeted to support those who need it the most. One of the priorities of the Covid recovery strategy is financial security for low-income households, yet recent DWP figures reveal that poverty has risen in the UK with the number of people in relative low-income increasing by £1 million from £13.4 million in March 2021 to £14.4 million a year later. What assessment has the Scottish Government made of the impact of the Tory Government and Labour Party's continued obsession with Brexit on its ability to deliver on the strategy's priorities? I am sure that the member will recall that the Scottish Government made representations, as did many people in Scotland to the UK Government, not to come out of Europe in the midst of the pandemic, because that would only compound the hardship that people were facing. Now, subsequently, we have inflation and the cost of living crisis. Despite that, the Scottish Government continues to take action to support low-income households. We have increased the Scottish child payment to £25 per week, doubled the fuel insecurity fund to £20 million and provided local authorities with additional funding for discretionary housing payments. That is just some of the actions that we have taken with our limited powers to help to mitigate the detrimental impacts of Brexit and, indeed, the cost of living crisis. Glasgow's Centre for Population Health report on life expectancies that highlighted that mortality rates have stalled since 2012 when the Scottish Government's recent Health Inequalities report found that the gap in health outcomes between the most and least deprived communities is the widest in monitoring began in 1997. Can the minister advise how the Government plans to tackle this unacceptable disparity in health outcomes between the best off and worst off in our communities in line with its commitment to addressing systemic inequalities through the Covid recovery strategy? The member highlighted some of the challenges that we have faced in recent years. He will be aware of course that there have been many reports about the widening gap between rich and poor throughout the whole of the UK. That is not a unique issue in Scotland, largely down to austerity from the UK Government since 2010, compounded by Brexit, which Scotland did not vote for. As I said previously, there is the impact of the pandemic and the inflationary cost of living crisis as well. Many of those external factors have impacted on poverty in Scotland, which we do not have the full powers to address. Indeed, inflation has affected the Scottish budget, but there is a 4.8 per cent reduction in the Scottish budget in real terms compared to 2021-22 because the UK Government will not allocate money to Scotland to reflect inflation. There are a number of issues that need to be addressed, and we agree with the sentiments from the member, but we want this Parliament to have all the powers so that we can address poverty in Scotland and the challenges of life expectancy in many parts of the country. Thank you, Presiding Officer. The Covid recovery strategy states that the pandemic has highlighted the importance of our parks and libraries, particularly for those on low incomes. Will the minister join me in condemning the SNP administration at Aberdeen City Council for closing six libraries, which will hit those on lower incomes hardest? I do not know if the member was listening to my previous answer and where I explained that the UK Government has not allocated funding to Scotland to reflect the impact of inflation, and indeed there is a 4.8 per cent real-terms reduction in the Scottish budget. We have given a fair settlement to local government in recent budgets, and I do not know if his party put in alternatives to address some of the issues that he wanted addressed, but we do believe in local democracy, and it is for local decisions to be taken by local government in this country. I would urge him to make representations to his Conservative colleagues in the UK Government to make sure that we get a much better settlement in Scotland to help us to support our local councils as well as central Governments. To ask the Scottish Government how its cross-government co-ordination of Covid recovery policies is addressing the needs of those affected by long Covid. The Scottish Government is supporting a recovery that is focused on supporting individuals and communities that were most affected during the pandemic, including those with long Covid, and reducing systemic inequalities across Scotland. The Scottish Government recognises the impact that long Covid can have on the health and wellbeing of those affected, and is investing in its scientific efforts to understand long Covid. We have made an initial £3 million available to NHS boards and their partners to deliver the best local models of care for assessment and support for the on-going management or treatment of the symptoms. Clare Adamson. Thank you, minister, for our answer. One of my other on-list constituents who are in horrendous Covid experience and are suffering from long Covid is unable to get back to work as a pilot due to hearing loss. He has had one cochlear implant fitted following Covid complications, but that would not make the requirements for his profession. Current NICE guidelines follow the health improvement Scotland stipulate that he must have another condition that impacts on cognitive ability to be eligible for a second bilateral implant. Those guidelines are from 2019 before the pandemic. As part of Covid recovery, the Scottish Government commit to working across parliaments to review guidelines in place so that people like my constituents may be economically inactive due to long Covid have their circumstances considered. First, let me say that I am really sorry to hear about the impact that long Covid is having on your constituent. Health care improvement Scotland is a national improvement organisation and supports the health and social care system to design and provide high quality, sustainable and compassionate care for the people of Scotland. The National Institute for health and care excellence NICE guidelines are developed by expert panels taking into account the relevant evidence and in Scotland sign the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network guidelines contain recommendations for effective practice based on current evidence, but NHS boards in Scotland can choose to consider other guidelines such as NICE guidelines, where there is no current sign guidance at present. I am not aware of any plans to review that NICE guideline. A number of colleagues that want to ask supplementaries, the appeal to be brief, both in the questions and the answers, stands first. Minister, in November, Humza Yousaf wrote to me and outlined how much long Covid support funding was provided to each health board. Whilst I was happy to see a roll-out of long Covid rehabilitation pathways, there remains a lack of dedicated long Covid clinics across Scotland. Will the minister heed the call of health professionals like NHS Grampian Head of Health Intelligence, Gillian Evans, and provide dedicated long Covid clinics across Scotland? The members are aware that it is the role of NHS boards to develop and deliver the models of care that are most appropriate for their local population's needs. We are providing the resource to boards through our long Covid support fund to enable them to do that. Initiatives being supported by the funding include key elements of that care that are also offered by long Covid assessment clinics elsewhere in the UK, including single point of access for assessment co-ordinated support from services and including physiotherapy and occupational therapy. The member will also be aware that the sign guidance, which was developed collegiately on a four-nation basis across the whole of the UK, says explicitly that a one-size-wick fits all approach, such as long Covid clinics, is not appropriate for all the areas. As of May last year, NHS England had allocated £224 million to support the assessment and treatment of long Covid, with £90 million of that allocated in 2022-23. Applying the Barnett formula to those figures would produce funding of £21.7 million in Scotland, yet the SNP Government has only provided less than half of that amount, despite the number of people with long Covid growing threefold. Can the minister explain where are the missing millions? The member will be aware that long Covid support fund has targeted additional resources for NHS boards to further enhance the assessment and support that they are already delivering for people with long Covid across a range of services. In 2022-23, £18 billion of funding was provided for the health portfolio. That is a record level of front-line health spending in Scotland. It is £323 per person, which is 10.6 per cent higher than in England. We engage with NHS boards on a regular basis regarding their capacity needs and will continue to do so in order to inform the allocation of the long Covid support fund. Media reports of a new study show that 150 Scots have long Covid. On that basis, it could be estimated that around 460 people are living with long Covid in Scotland. What consideration will the Scottish Government give to providing specialist long Covid services in our rural and island areas? One of the challenges that we have is getting accurate data on long Covid prevalence, distribution and symptoms that are needed to forecast and plan NHS services. Achieving that objective is complex, but we currently do not have the full picture. The Scottish Government is happy to work very closely with NHS Scotland and any other board in order to help to provide information so that they can plan adequately for their local needs. I emphasise, as I have in previous answers, that it is for the local health boards to respond to the need in their communities and to ensure that services can deliver for the people that they serve. In England and Wales, the NHS has set up long Covid clinics. The evidence so far demonstrates that this is definitely the right way to proceed ensuring that the individual goes first. Will the minister agree to look at the evidence and come back to Parliament and say whether or not that is a way that Scotland can follow? In Scotland, we follow the clinical guideline as referenced in an earlier answer, which exists for long Covid. It was developed rapidly, published by Sign, NICE and RCGP in December 2020. That living guideline includes not only recommendations and guidance on the clinical management of those with long Covid, but recommendations for those who are planning services. I reiterate that that guideline notes that one model would not fit all areas. However, it is perfectly possible for local health boards to come forward with a long Covid clinic model should they think that that fits their local needs. That development of that model would absolutely be supported. To ask the Scottish Government as part of its cross-government co-ordination of Covid recovery policies what steps it is taking to ensure that the public has confidence in Scotland's response to any future pandemic. The Scottish Government has taken action to ensure that we are prepared for any future pandemic. For example, we are currently working on a four nations basis to review the countermeasures, the capabilities that are required to address new pandemic threats, and we retain stockpiles of consumables and pharmaceuticals to support a pandemic response in the event that it is required. We are also engaging fully with the independent Scottish public inquiry into the handling of the pandemic in Scotland. The 2023-24 Scottish budget made provision for work to ensure preparedness, assessment and co-ordination of concurrent risk across Scottish Government. I thank the minister for that answer. Revelations of lockdown parties and rule-breaking in Downing Street have tarnished the UK Government's Covid response. A recent EU Gov poll showed that 82 per cent of Scots believe that former Prime Minister Boris Johnson is dishonest. Given that, does the minister have any concerns that his blatant disregard of the Covid rules will have dented public confidence on all Government's planning for future pandemics? I thank the member for her question. I think that it is a perfectly plausible theory, yes, but the Scottish Government, I want to put on record again, is very grateful for how people across Scotland responded during the pandemic. They supported their families and their communities as safely as possible during a very challenging time. We are working to ensure that we are prepared for any future pandemic, and we will absolutely learn from our experiences during the Covid-19 pandemic to ensure that the public absolutely have confidence in the measures that will be taken by the Scottish Government. We can get back to the Scottish Government's responsibilities. Recently, the national clinical director, Professor Jason Leitch, indicated that it was his view that the Scottish Government might have gone too far in closing schools during the Covid pandemic because, on the negative impact that had been both on education and on young people's social development, given that we are learning lessons for the future, does the Scottish Government agree with that analysis? In terms of learning lessons for the future, that is a process that will continue for many years to come as we look back on this period in our history, which has been one of the most challenging periods globally in modern times. Undoubtedly, there will be reflection, but I think that the member's view is somewhat simplistic in suggesting that there was an option between causing harm and causing no harm. I think that, when I have heard Jason Leitch elaborate on this subject, what he says very clearly is that we are not sure at the moment what the unknown harms might have been from not taking measures. I am absolutely certain that everybody in the situation of being decision makers made the best decisions that they possibly could, based on incomplete information at the time. To ask the Scottish Government what plans it has for the Covid recovery and parliamentary business portfolio. In order to answer the question, the allocation of ministerial portfolios is a matter for the First Minister. The Parliament is due to consider the appointment of ministers tomorrow during which the First Minister will likely speak to his plans for portfolios across Government. I thank the minister for that response. The Covid recovery portfolio has had its difficulties during its short existence, whether that be Covid vaccine passport scheme, which punish businesses, confuse the public and cost taxpayers dearly, or the power grab bill that granted the Scottish Government permanent emergency powers. Therefore, can I ask the minister how he expects the Covid-19 inquiry to evaluate the performance of the portfolio over the past two years? It is not for me to speculate on future inquiries, but in answer to some of the questions that have been asked there, the Scottish Government's efforts and ambitions around Covid recovery have always focused on enhancing the wellbeing of children, young people and increasing financial security for low-income households, creating good green jobs and fair work and supporting the reform of our public services. Those priorities are reflected in the 2023-24 Scottish budget, which focuses on reducing child poverty, making progress towards net zero and ensuring that public services are ffiscally sustainable. To answer everything else, the Scottish Government, led by our new First Minister, will determine how best to support the people and communities across Scotland. To ask the Scottish Government what impact the UK Government's spring budget will have on implementing the Covid recovery strategy. The UK Government's budget statement is another missed opportunity that has failed to tackle the cost of living crisis and provided support that people in Scotland need. We have consistently called for the UK Government to provide additional support to people with the cost of living crisis. The Scottish Government has prioritised spending that supports those who need it most, guided in part by the principles of the Covid recovery strategy. The 2023-24 Scottish budget provides funding that helps families, backs businesses and protects for delivery of public services. This week, the chairman of the Office for Budget Responsibility compared the scale of the impact of Brexit on the UK economy to the same magnitude as the Covid pandemic and energy price crisis. Will the minister comment on what assessment the Scottish Government has made of this comparison on how the on-going effects of leaving the EU will impact on the delivery of the Covid recovery strategy? The OBR is forecasting the largest two-year fall in real living standards since ONS records started in the 1950s. That would mean that living standards in the UK by 2027-28 would still be around 0.5 per cent lower than pre-pandemic levels. The UK's decision to leave the EU, something that Scotland did not vote for, is forecasted that it would reduce the UK's productivity by 4 per cent, and the UK's trade intensity is set to be 15 per cent lower in the long run. Despite those challenges, the Scottish Government will continue to prioritise spending, which is targeted to support those most in need and make progress towards the Covid recovery strategy outcomes. To ask the Scottish Government whether it plans to propose the scheduling of time for a ministerial statement on the Green Jobs Workforce Academy. Minister George Adam. Since its launch in 2021, the Green Jobs Workforce Academy has been supporting people in green careers. The Scottish Government will publish an update to the climate emergency skills action plan this year, setting out the next steps to deliver skills for a just transition. Proposals for government business and Parliament, as always, are agreed by the Scottish Cabinet subject to consideration by the parliamentary bureau and in turn approved by the Parliament. I thank the minister for that answer. Green skills are vital in Scotland's fight against a global climate emergency and in equipping our workforce with the skills of the future. I visited Borders College Hoyt campus last week, where they are teaching building to passive house standard, solar panels on heat pump installation and maintenance, and using emerging technologies like heat scanning and 3D printing. Can the minister provide an update on how the Green Jobs Workforce Academy will help to enhance that work and how it will support those living in De Friesen Galloway and the Scottish Borders? The heat and building strategy that was published in 2021 sets out our vision for decarbonising the heat supply of Scotland's buildings. A skilled workforce in all areas of Scotland is central to the delivery of that strategy. We are already taking action to ensure that the education skills system is providing individuals with the right skills and pathways into careers in green heat, including through the Green Jobs Workforce Academy. We will set out our next steps in the climate emergency skills action plan update. That concludes portfolio questions on Covid-19 recovery in parliamentary business. We move now to portfolio questions on finance and the economy. Again, the usual appeal for brevity in questions and in responses. Anybody looking to ask a supplementary issue, press the request-to-speak button during the relevant question. I call question 1 Stephen Care. To ask the Scottish Government what steps it is taking to ensure value for money in government projects. The Scottish Government is committed to managing taxpayers' money efficiently and effectively while delivering on its commitments. Accountable officers are responsible for ensuring that resources are utilised economically, efficiently and effectively. The Scottish Public Finance Manual, which applies to the Scottish Administration and bodies sponsored by the Scottish Government, sets out the framework for securing best value for money. That is underpinned by the utilisation of business cases and pre-expenditure assessments for significant projects. The Scottish Public Finance Manual sets out our programme and project management principles, as well as guidance on procuring, monitoring and major investment projects. Those are embedded in the project assurance processes supplemented by a robust analysis of data to help to drive value for money. Grateful to see the minister in his place in thanking for his reply. I am not going to mention ferries and I am not going to mention so-called free bicycles. I am going to mention an institution owed money by GFG Alliance, which collapsed last week. I am not referring to the Scottish Government, despite the evidence of the last chaotic weekend. What assessment the Scottish Government has made of the UBS rescue of Credit Suisse on GFG Alliance's refinancing efforts and what impact UBS's takeover of Credit Suisse may have on GFG's operations in Scotland and GFG's ability to repay the loans made to it by the Scottish Government? The member is absolutely correct to raise the important issue of the recent disturbing and destabilising developments in the international banking sector. I know that there has been, in related areas, engagement from Scottish Enterprise, particularly around the issues pertaining to the tech sector. On the specific points that he raises, I am not in a position to give him a detailed answer at this point. However, I will ensure that a written response is given to the member to provide him with an update. The National Audit Office has reportedly warned that the revised plans for HS2 used in Terminus would cost almost £5 billion. The trains are not expected to run into use until 2041. That is 15 years late. Crossrail was late. The Elizabeth line was billions over budget, too. Does the minister share my view that we do not need to take lessons from the Tories who are wasting billions of pounds of public money in the hope that nobody in Scotland notices? That is not relevant to the question. Question 2, Collette Stevenson. To ask the Scottish Government what discussions it has had with the UK Government following the announcement of the UK spring budget. My colleague John Swinney, the former Deputy First Minister, spoke with the chief secretary to the Treasury on the morning of the UK spring budget, having earlier written to the chancellor setting out Scottish interests. The spring budget was a missed opportunity to lift families out of poverty, invest in their public services and help businesses. In addition, it was hugely disappointing that, despite earlier commitments given to the Scottish Government, the spring budget was silent on the carbon capture usage and storage Scottish cluster. As such, we wrote to the Prime Minister calling on a concrete timeline for the Scottish cluster. Can I assure Parliament that I will be taking up these issues with the UK Government in the days and weeks ahead? Collette Stevenson. I thank the minister for that response. Instead of fixing the doctors' pension issue, the chancellor increased the pension lifetime allowance across the board, resulting in a massive giveaway for the wealthiest people in society. Yet another example of Westminster's poor pensions policies. The UK has one of the lowest state pensions in Europe. High levels of pensioner poverty and the rise in pension age negatively impacts poorer people in Scotland. Does the minister agree with me that, with control over pensions, this Parliament could make a system that works for the people of Scotland and that the only way to guarantee that is for Scotland to become independent? The minister for the responsibilities of the Scottish Government. Collette Stevenson raises very important issues with regard to the decisions that are taken around pensions. The Resolution Foundation has called the changes to the pension tax allowance, and I quote, an unneeded tax break for wealthy pension savers. It suggests that scrapping the lifetime allowance could cost around £1.2 billion, that the employment gains may be, in a quote, overstated, and that the changes could even encourage some people to retire earlier. That is simply a tax break for high earners, while low-income households are left behind. I agree with Collette Stevenson that we need the pension system to meet the needs of all people in Scotland. As with so many other issues, the needs of Scotland can be the best-addressed if this Parliament is in a position to do so. To ask the Scottish Government what consideration it has given to the tax implications of pay awards currently being administered by local Government. The tax implications of pay awards, particularly relating to those agreed later in the financial year, are routinely discussed throughout pay negotiations with relevant parties. Employers are responsible for administering pay deals through their payroll operations. We understand that, due to resource pressures, some local authorities may not be able to process payments before the end of the tax year. Any employee who is concerned about the issue should contact an employer and engage with his Majesty's revenue and customs. Last week, Tess reported that teachers in half of all Scotland's councils will not receive their back pay until next financial year. That delay will prove costly in tax terms for teachers. During the pay campaign, I heard from teachers who were barely managing to make ends meet. Some were even resorting to food banks. It was this Government who treated our teachers with disdain throughout a year-long pay dispute, and now teachers are having to pay the price for the tactics of delay and dither from this Government. What advice does the minister have to those people who are suffering as a result? We have always sought to engage constructively with our trade union colleagues, and in doing so we have delivered a pay settlement for Scottish teachers. I recognise the issues that he raises pertaining to the report in Tess last week. Of course, the matter of administration of payrolls is for the employer, in this case, the local authority. The Scottish Government is not in a position to intervene, however. I am sure that the Parliament will join the Government in encouraging and hoping for local Government to address those issues of payroll as quickly and in as timely a fashion as possible. To ask the Scottish Government what its position is and whether Scotland's digital economy will benefit from the UK Government's revised digital strategy. We welcome any commitment by the UK Government to strengthen the UK's digital economy. We believe that lessons can also be learned from our approach here in Scotland. Our digital strategy and the Scottish tech ecosystem review advanced ambitious programmes of work, including £42 million to deliver our national tech scaler network, for which no equivalent exists elsewhere in Europe, and we also welcome work under way by the British Business Bank to create a new £150 million investment fund for Scotland to provide growth capital for high-potential companies, and we will continue to work with them and the UK Government to boost our tech sector. As he will know, the digital single market that we were part of in Europe is worth £400 billion each year and provided access for Scottish companies to huge opportunities to develop their tech sectors. The UK Government's digital strategy does not make a single reference to establishing the promised digital single market in the UK, and its claims for growth in the tech sector in the UK are paltry in comparison. Can the minister assure me that, despite the significant barrier, we will continue to make every effort to grow and develop the tech sector here in Scotland and to provide the support to Scottish companies who wish to access European and international opportunities in the digital and technology sectors? Yes, I can give the member that assurance, and that is why, back in 2020, Mark Lohan was commissioned by the then Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Economy to undertake his short-life review into how Scotland's technology sector can contribute to Scotland's economic recovery following the Covid pandemic, and that resulted in the Scottish technology ecosystem review, which was an acclaimed industry-led blueprint for the growth of the Scottish tech sector. Of course, the loss of the digital single market at the time was very regrettable, and the European Parliament estimated the potential gains of a digital single market could be in the range of €415 to €500 billion per year as a result of higher productivity due to faster flow of information, greater efficiency in traditional economic sectors and higher levels of e-commerce. At the time, our most recent analysis in Scotland suggested that that would provide a 1.9 per cent boost to GDP in this country, equivalent to £2.9 billion. It is an extremely important sector, and I hope that the member can take assurance from the steps that we have taken since to ensure the importance of the sectors recognised and supported. To ask the Scottish Government whether it will commit to carrying out a review of the use of public-private partnerships for public infrastructure projects. Minister Tom Arthur. We have been clear about our concerns about the flexibility and value for money offered by historic PFI contracts. That is why the Scottish Futures Trust is working in partnership with public bodies to realise contract management improvements, including reshoping services, sharing and insurance cost savings, and optimising a risk transfer in legacy contracts. As the minister will be aware, even the UK Treasury is now describing public-private partnerships as inflexible, overly complex and a source of significant fiscal risk to government. However, Scotland is still entering into versions of such arrangements. Will the Scottish Government stop such partnerships and commit to a model that puts quality, value for money and accountability at its heart? We seek to put quality and value for money at the heart of all infrastructure projects that we engage on. It is important to recognise that options that are available to the UK Government and other sovereign Governments are not available to the Scottish Government, for example, of the significant capital borrowing powers that would allow for a different approach. As the member will have reflected on in our recent discussion on the future of our town centres and retail, there is much that the public sector can do, but there is also a need to make sure that we are bringing in private investment as well. However, we want to do so in a way that ensures the best value and best outcome. As I said, we have asked the Scottish Futures Trust to undertake work in this area, looking at the legacy of PFI contracts. That is the work that has been undertaken and we are committed to engaging in a way that is constructive to ensure that all other infrastructure projects deliver best value. In 2006, North Ayrshire Council signed up to a public-private partnership deal to build four new schools with a capital cost of £81 million, to which the people of North Ayrshire will pay over £400 million in charges over three decades, whether financials then own the schools. Does the minister agree that, with a Labour-controlled council, Labour Government at Westminster and a Labour-led administration at Holyrood, when the shady deal was done, it is astonishing that the Labour MP at the time, Katie Clarke, is now asking this SNP Government to sort out a mess of our party's own making? It is a... I am very grateful to the member for his supplementary question. It is a... An enduring frustration that we have to contend with the legacy of PFI contracts signed by the previous administration, admittedly an administration that was last in power some 16 years ago. What compounds that frustration is that at a time when there was a Labour Government at Westminster and a Labour-led Government here, there were access to resources to capital powers that simply are not available to this Parliament in isolation. Indeed, that was a time when Labour was routinely returning money allocated to the Scottish Parliament back to Westminster. So, this is unfortunately a legacy that we have to contend with, but it's mistakes that we will not repeat. The mismanagement of public infrastructure projects has the real consequences in communities on the ground. The Scottish Government's incompetence at leaving islanders without working ferries and leaving highlanders with a lethal undual day nine. Infrastructure is not a priority for this green SNP Government, so when will they start taking seriously the waste within their Government and the desperation of the people of Scotland who have been so badly let down by them? The member raises a lot of questions around infrastructure and that's often something that I reflect on when driving on the M8 that is completed under an SNP Government, or on the M80 that is completed by an SNP Government, or on the Aberdein Western and Peripheral that is completed by an SNP Government, or going across to the Queensferry crossing that is completed by an SNP Government, or riding on the Borders Railway that is completed by an SNP Government, or enjoying the electrified line between Queen Street and Haymarket again under an SNP Government. Even recently—I would be delighted to see that it is completed—we electrified line between Barhead and my constituency in Glasgow Central, all examples of this SNP Government delivering infrastructure for the people of Scotland. I noticed that one member who asked a question earlier on in his portfolio has since left the chamber without an explanation. I remind the chamber that if you have a question either on the order paper as a supplementary, you are expected to remain in the chamber for the duration of that portfolio question time. To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on its commitment to deliver superfast broadband to 100 per cent of premises by 2021. As outlined just last month in response to the same question from Mr Rennie, all homes and businesses across Scotland had the ability to access a superfast broadband connection by the end of 2021. I am pleased to announce that, by the end of February 2023, there are 100 contracts with built connections to more than 20,000 properties across the length and breadth of Scotland, with almost 3,000 connections also delivered through the 100 vouchers. Yes, it was exactly the same question as last time, and it is exactly the same insulting answer as I got last time. R100 has not been delivered, and the minister fine well knows that. My home still does not have superfast broadband, despite numerous attempts to get so, and thousands of other homes across the country have not got it either, and many are not going to get it until 2028, that is seven years late. The First Minister said that he wants to reach across the chamber and bring transparency to government. Rather than reading out the official answer, will the minister tell me exactly what he really thinks? The member may wish to recall that the Scottish Government's very ambitious and huge commitment to this roll-out was a result of a lack of action by the UK Government who have actually had responsibility for telecommunications. At the moment, 95.4 per cent of premises across Scotland are now able to access superfast broadband speeds, and in total, the digital Scotland superfast broadband scheme has connected 951,000 premises across Scotland to fibre broadband. That includes 30,680 of those premises in the north-east-fife constituency, with 28,368 capable of accessing speeds of 24 megabytes per second and above. I do not know whether the member has applied to the vouchers that are available and what conversations he has had with Openreach. I know that Openreach have actually connected people over above those in the contract as well. Work has continued, of course, where particular issues have been come across in terms of the actual works themselves, which can take a bit longer in some cases than anticipated once the Openreach are on the grounds. That is fantastic progress that has been made by the Scottish Government over the years, plugging a gap that was left by the UK Government's inaction. We should be very proud of what have achieved in this country. The SNP has promised that delayed R100 broadband remains years away, and access to fast-reliable broadband is still a postcode lottery for many homes and businesses across my Highlands and Islands region. What does the minister say to my constituents, who, despite promises, repeated promises from the Scottish Government, are still waiting for a service that delivers even the most basics of what they need? What I would say to the member is that the Scottish Government has been working flat out and invested over £600 million in this due to the fact that, despite telecommunications that is reserved to the UK Government, for many years little if any action was taken by his own party's Government south of the border. The 95 per cent of households and businesses or premises in Scotland that now have access to superfast speed speeds have benefited from the effort that has been taken by this Government. Yes, more needs to be done. I mentioned some of the physical barriers that have come across, but open reach still has to be addressed. It is very complex in some parts of the country. I know that from my constituency, which the member will also be familiar with, and there are a number of homes where there are particular challenges. They could, of course, since many cases apply to the vouchers, but there are different choices that they can take. It is really important that we continue to work to overcome those barriers to ensure that everyone in Scotland has access to the superfast broadband that they require. Residents in Shetland and other island and rural areas face being left behind in the roll-out of superfast broadband. One constituent who runs a business from home has been told that she simply lives too far away to make a connection economical. Reliable internet is not a luxury and it is certainly not economical for her business. The Scottish Government is responsible for the roll-out of superfast broadband. When will all my constituents be able to get that? I am aware that, of course, in Shetland there are particular challenges for those who are very far from the infrastructure. It is important that those constituents are made aware of what help is available in terms of the vouchers, but it is really important that open reach and colleagues in the Scottish Government continue to focus on those that are the hardest to reach in Shetland. I am happy to ensure that she receives an update of the situation on the island as soon as possible. To ask the Scottish Government what assessment is made of the potential lost taxation revenue from the proposed land and buildings transaction tax green free ports relief, which were published for consultation on 17 March 2023. The green free port LBTT relief will support the objective to encourage investment in and regeneration of underdeveloped land within clearly defined tax sites. The Scottish Government will set out further information on the potential cost of the relief at the time any legislation is laid before the Scottish Parliament. I thank the minister for that answer. The minister may be aware that there is a concern from trade unions that this proposal could risk a race to the bottom on workers' rights and tax. So can the minister provide an assurance today that workers in leaf and around the fourth will not see any of their rights weakened and can he confirm whether all employers who receive public funding or tax incentives in Scottish green free ports will be required to recognise trade unions? On the latter point, because of the reservations on employment law, we cannot compel recognition of trade unions. However, both of the successful bids have made clear commitments to fair work principles and that will be subject to robust monitoring and reporting requirements. To ask the Scottish Government what steps it is taking to address the reported second year of consecutive contraction in the number of businesses that are based in Scotland. The latest statistics show that, despite the challenging economic conditions, the total number of businesses in Scotland rose to 360,910 in 2022, 5.2 per cent increase on the previous year. However, we know that businesses in Scotland are struggling because of Brexit and the UK Government's mismanagement of the economy. That is why the Scottish Government is doing all it can through our limited powers to provide immediate support to businesses, including the lowest non-domestic rates poundage in the UK. At the same time, we are delivering our national strategy for economic transformation to achieve our long-term ambitions for a stronger, fairer and greener economy. The activities that we are delivering are supporting businesses, encouraging and cultivating new businesses and attracting more businesses to Scotland. We are working closely with delivery partners and businesses in the third sector and trade unions to successfully implement the strategy and transform our economy. The reality is that the figures show that Scotland is the only part of the UK with declining business numbers. Perhaps that is not surprising, given that Kate Forbes and Ivan McKee were overruled and forced to remove the very word growth from the national strategy for economic transformation. Now they themselves are removed, not just their words. Perhaps it is not surprising that, speaking to the Herald today, Ivan McKee said that it was frustrating having to talk to businesses every day without having the ability to do anything about it. Ivan McKee is right. The Government needs to reset its relationship with business, does it not? Is anyone left on the Government benches with any experience of running a business at all? Let me commend my colleagues Kate Forbes and Ivan McKee for the tremendous service that they have given to this Government and the people of Scotland. They have certainly done more for business in Scotland than any member of the opposition parties. I know that they will continue to make a valuable contribution. We are absolutely committed to supporting business in Scotland and ensuring that, in doing so, we work together, collaboratively, in partnership to build a wellbeing economy that works for all people in Scotland. It is a shame that that is something that the Labour Party cannot commend and cannot support, but it is something that Scottish SNP Green Government will be absolutely focused on and will deliver. There are a couple of supplementaries. I intend to get them both in. They will need to be brief to all the responses. First, Colin Beattie. Considering the difficult economic circumstances, businesses need support right now to manage the pressures that they are facing. However, as we well know, many of the powers needed to provide this support are currently reserved. Can the minister provide any further information about what assessment has the Scottish Government made of the UK Government's spring budget in terms of the measures that it includes to support businesses and does he share my concern that it does not go far enough? We agree that the UK Government's spring budget does not go far enough. It was a missed opportunity. The reality is that this is not just a cost-of-living crisis, it is a cost-of-everything crisis, and it is impacting on businesses not just for length and breadth of Scotland but across the UK. We are doing all we can with the limited powers that we have in this Parliament. It is time that the UK Government stepped up to the mark and did the same. Minister, when it comes to attracting more people to come to Scotland to work in Scotland, can I ask what analysis the Scottish Government is doing about why it is that we are not getting the benefit in as great a detail as down south when it comes to net migration? Why are not more people coming to work in Scotland? I recognise this as an area that Ms Smith raised previously with the Deputy First Minister in the last few weeks. It is something that the Government is undertaking careful analysis of, and we have our commitments to work to actively grow the population of Scotland. Of course, we want to ensure that Scotland is the most attractive place not just in the UK but in one of the most attractive places in Europe for people to come, to locate, to work, to contribute, to start up a business. One of the challenges that we face, notwithstanding the points that Ms Smith made, is that access that we had to a huge pool of Labour—over 500 million people across the European Union—has been lost to us. Despite voting overwhelmingly to remain in the European Union to enjoy freedom of movement, to enjoy the single market, that has been denied to us by the UK Government, and it is something that we will regain with independence. Minister, that concludes portfolio questions on finance and the economy. It is time to move on to the next portfolio, which is net zero energy and transport. Again, there is quite a bit of interest, so there are questions. Deputy Presiding Officer, can I apologise for leaving during the portfolio questions? I did have to take an urgent phone call, so I apologise to myself and to the rest of the chamber. Thank you very much indeed, Ms Stevenson, for that explanation. I think that it is worth clarifying that where a member does need to leave the chamber, at short notice, that is perfectly permissible, but I would advise members that they need to alert the chair to that. However, thank you very much indeed, Ms Stevenson. With that, I would advise again members wishing to ask a supplementary question, to press the request to speak buttons during the relevant question, and I call question number one, Siobhan Brown. Can I ask the Scottish Government what measures it is taking to ensure that public transport is accessible? Minister Patrick Harvie. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I will be covering a number of questions in place of the Transport Minister today. The Scottish Government is committed to ensuring that people with disabilities can travel with the same freedom, choice, dignity and opportunity as other citizens. Scotland's accessible travel framework was launched in 2016, aiming to help to achieve that. There have been a number of delivery plans that have been developed working together with disabled people's organisations and the Mobility and Access Committee for Scotland to provide a focus for action. The third delivery plan is currently being prepared. It will be published later this year, and it will run until the end of the current accessible travel framework in 2026. I have a constituent who unfortunately lost her sight during Covid and can no longer drive, so relies on public transport. She has been in touch as she struggles to know what bus is coming along and where to get off the bus. Simple measures such as talking bus stops and on-board announcements would be helpful. Can I ask what measures the Scottish Government is taking to work with providers to make sure that people with vision impairments are supported to use public transport? I thank Siobhan Brown for raising the experience that her constituent and others around Scotland have been having. Bus travel should be accessible for all. I agree very strongly that accessible audio-visual information should be provided on bus routes. Accessible information on bus routes is reserved to the UK Government. It used the Bus Services Act 2016 to amend the Equality Act 2010 to require operators to provide audio and visual information on board bus services across Great Britain. In 2018, the UK Government consulted on proposals to improve information for bus passengers. My colleague Michael Matheson, who at that time was Cabinet Secretary for Transport and Infrastructure on Connectivity, responded to that consultation. Given the importance of ensuring clear and consistent information to all bus users, it is disappointing that the UK Government's proposed legislation has still to be introduced. However, I have noticed that the Department for Transport has confirmed in a written answer earlier this year that it intends to introduce regulations that will require the provision of audible and visible information on local bus and coach services across Great Britain. Transport Scotland's officials are continuing to engage with UK counterparts on that issue. To ask the Scottish Government what steps it is taking to support the reopening of railway stations in Dumfrieshire. The regional transport partnership Swestrans has undertaken three transport appraisals, which have considered potential rail stations at Betuck, East Rix and Thornhill in Dumfrieshire. Transport Scotland officials have engaged with Swestrans on those and will respond on the three appraisal reports in the coming weeks. I thank the minister for that answer, but, along with campaigners, I am disappointed that the proposed new stations were not considered strategically important enough to feature in STPR2. Following a recent cross-party visit that was co-ordinated by the Betuck station action group, I wonder whether the minister would sign the new transport minister and fail that commitment himself to meet with myself, Colin Smyth, Emma Harper, as well as representatives of the different campaign groups to better understand how those projects can now be taken forward and how we secure the funding to see them reopened. I am sure that the new transport minister will be keen to continue to engage on a cross-party basis with colleagues about those issues. However, as was discussed on a number of issues when we launched STPR2, some members may have been disappointed that regional or locally important projects were not considered as part of the STPR2 process, which is about strategic national level review. However, we have been clear throughout the process and since publication that there remain paths open for regional and local projects to come forward and for consideration of business cases in relation to those projects. Therefore, officials have begun reviewing the appraisals that were previously submitted and, as I said, officials are intending to respond on those within the coming weeks. I am sure that the member will continue to engage with the new transport minister on that as well. Does the minister not accept that the real frustration of communities is that they were told that new stations would be part of STPR2 and that they were told that they were not? Therefore, it is not clear to me why there has been a delay in taking forward new stations if there were never going to be strategic projects as part of STPR2. He also says that the STAG report response will come from Transport Scotland in the weeks. That has been with Transport Scotland since last August. Why has it taken so long? Clearly, the Government has not yet even allocated any funding for those pipeline projects. How much funding is going to go towards new stations in the coming months and years? The member will be aware that there has been substantial investment in rail infrastructure and substantial further investment to come in terms of new lines and reopening stations. I remind the member that STPR2, a whole Scotland review of nationally strategic important infrastructure, generated more than 13,500 ideas. Clearly, not every stakeholder or local campaign group would have seen their proposals included in STPR2. Members, for example, of the BTEC station action group, will, as with other campaigns around the country, be owed significant praise for their work and their efforts in support of their aims. Other paths for the development of local and regional significant projects are still open, so we will be coming forward with work to feed back to SWES trans on those issues. As with Mr Mundell, I would encourage Mr Smith to engage with the new transport minister on those points. I know that you are trying to be helpful, but a little bit more brevity in the responses would help. I need to get in a couple more supplementaries first, Emma Harper. As Oliver Mundell has intimated, we are all very interested in improving the infrastructure and the rail in Dumfries and Galloway and across South Scotland. I am just interested to know what the regional transport partnerships like SWES trans, what additional work can they do to help to make the reopening of BTEC railway stations for us? Emma Harper will certainly want to engage with the new transport minister. I hope that members understand that, in today's context, I am not able to give as detailed an answer as the transport minister would be able to. Of the 45 STPR2 recommendations, 34 are applicable to South of Scotland. That includes a range of port improvements as well as the existing rail infrastructure and improvements to the road that are focused on safety, resilience, reliability and climate change adaptation. Despite the Government's commitment to improving transport links to encourage public transport use, the poor bus and rail connectivity in Ayrshire is still forcing drivers to remain on the roads. For example, Cumnock, East Ayrshire's second-largest town, currently lacks a train station. What plans does the minister have to improve public transport in Ayrshire? Will he give consideration to supporting the reopening of train stations in Cumnock in Lachlan? I appreciate that there is some linkage, but the question was in relation to railway stations in Dumfrieshire. If the minister can add anything to what he has already said in response to the question. The core answer in relation to all areas is that the opportunities exist for local and regional projects to come forward. Transport Scotland and the Scottish Government's officials are keen to engage with any constructive proposals that come forward. I am sure that the new transport minister will respond to all members who have expressed their interest in that as soon as possible. To ask the Scottish Government whether it will consider procuring a lower specification or standardisation of ferries. Development of new vessels is led by CML, Transport Scotland and the relevant operator CML. Appoints naval architects and technical consultants to devise on design, safety and classification, as well as route-specific issues. Various hull forms, propulsion options, fuel types and on-board arrangements are assessed. That also includes opportunity for input from community voices and other stakeholders. CML is aiming toward more standardised specifications as it continues to deliver the significant vessel investments in the coming years. The four Islay-class vessels under construction and the on-going work to develop the small vessel replacement programme are significant steps toward achieving that. The minister will be aware that the Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee has been undertaking a short inquiry on ferries at the moment. The committee has heard a substantial amount of evidence on over-specification and the relative expense of monohulls. For many routes, communities favour two smaller vessels instead of one large one. That is for many reasons, but, obviously, to aid things like resilience, and that catamarans may be a more appropriate route to go down. Are alternatives to monohulls actively being considered and which routes would be appropriate for those type of cheaper vessels? I am aware that some people have suggested that the Government and CML in particular have a predisposition against the use of catamarans. I would like to make it clear that that is not the case. As stated, CML and Transport Scotland are looking for the delivery of the most efficient and economic vessels that will reliably provide a service on the routes that they serve. The Minister for Transport will update members further on future vessel contracts when that is possible. I have a few supplementaries. I want to get them all in, but brief questions, please, and responses. Vessels need to be fit for purpose and comfortable for both travellers and crew. However, their lack of standardised designs lead to a domino effect to cover breakdowns. CalMac have just today announced service changes over six routes due to a domino effect, culminating in no services at all between Loch Boysdale and Malik for six weeks and only one weekly service to the small isles. That is absolutely unacceptable. Will the minister say what the Scottish Government is going to do to mitigate those effects? Instead of vanity projects, will he ensure that the build ferries that are interchangeable provide resilience and are fit for purpose? Well, as I said in the first answer, the development of new vessels is led by CML as well as Transport Scotland and the relevant operators. There is considerable debate and a number of factors that need to be considered in relation to standardisation of specifications. CalMac, for example, is considering the debate about live-assure and live-on-board models. That is just one of a number of factors that are under active consideration. I hope that the member will once again acknowledge that the new transport minister, once appointed, will be the person to engage with on some of the specific issues that she has raised. What islanders need are sustainable, decarbonised, reliable ferries and, for some communities in Shetland, short tunnels between islands. Will the minister listen to island community groups around Scotland to understand their needs? I am quite certain that the Government as a whole, as well as the new transport minister, will be keen to listen to community groups coming forward with those proposals, as well as the views of the relevant local authorities. The problem is that CML has no mind for an industrial strategy, and that is the critical part of the problem. We need to have more funding beyond hulls 801 and 802 for Ferguson Marine. We need to have Scottish Government plans to do investment to meet the productivity standard set by First Money International. We need the Scottish Government to offer builders refund guarantees to when export work and commercial work. We need the Scottish Government to award the small vessel replacement programme on a standardised basis, or the company Ferguson Marine will collapse. Does the minister therefore agree that those fundamental principles need to be at the heart of the strategy to get a sustainable shipbuilding industry in Scotland? I am sure that all of those issues and more will be at the forefront of the mind of the new transport minister. To ask the Scottish Government what community benefits citizens should expect from energy-related developments in their local area. The Scottish community has received over £88 million in community benefits from renewable projects since 2019, with a record £25 million paid out last year. That will continue to rise as we realise our ambitions for growth over the coming decades. Our good practice principles promote the equivalent of £5,000 annually per installed megawatt for onshore developments index linked to the lifetime of the projects, although some businesses will choose to offer more flexible benefits packages. Although we prefer to mandate greater community benefits, we have no direct powers to do so as energy regulation is reserved. I appreciate that the energy regulation is reserved. Will the minister agree with me in principle that it might be time to consider updating some of that guidance so that it is not just companies that benefit from development but those in the vicinity should see reductions of their energy costs so that it is truly benefiting the communities that they are in? I agree with that. Right now, we should all agree across the chamber that the people of Scotland are not just communities but households who should seek much greater benefit from the energy resources and their own doorstep. That issue is given a lot of profile in the current draft energy strategy and just transition plan that is out for consultation until early May. There are a number of mentions of community benefit in that and the fact that the Government has an ambition to be much more radical on that agenda. I very much welcome the views of not only Ruth Maguire but members from across all the parties on how we can achieve that in Scotland. We have limited ability because of the lack of energy regulation devolved to this Parliament, but there is more we can do. We should absolutely do it and people should see the benefits of the energy resources on their own doorsteps. Thank you again. A number of supplementaries. I want to get them all in. They will need to be brief as so will their responses. First, Maurice Golden. Not every community is able to host a renewable project and so not every community can receive those direct benefits. We need a system that allows everyone in Scotland, no matter where they live, to get a fair share of the rewards renewables can bring. That is why I have been calling for the introduction of a Scottish renewable energy bond for the past six years. Does the minister agree that it is time to look at this and ensure that everyone has the chance to invest in and benefit from renewables? I have a lot of sympathy for that. I met an organisation and I was on the panel with the chief executive of the organisation. I think that it was called Ripple just a couple of weeks ago, and it encouraged communities to take out shares in local energy projects. I think that there is a case for the whole of Scotland to be involved in such initiatives. Clearly, there is a lot of work to be done to make that happen. The member nodding and agrees with that, but I think that we have to be a lot more radical and a lot more ambitious. The time is now, the time is right for that. I would be very much in favour of a wholesale review of community benefit and shared ownership in Scotland. There are many pointers to that and draft consultation at the moment. I welcome that Cumbria has been designated by the Scottish Government as one of the six islands that it will support to become fully carbon neutral by 2040. At the heart of the carbon neutrals islands policy is the need for community engagement and benefit, yet there has been no consultation or engagement over the proposed solar farm development on the island. Will the Scottish Government call for this development to be paused until proper engagement has taken place with islanders? I just returned from a wonderful weekend in Milport just a couple of days ago. I am aware of the strength of the qualities of that part of the world, particularly local pubs and bars and hotels. I think that the member makes a very good point. Of course, as part of the just transition, it is very important that the future energy profile of any communities co-designed with the community is at heart, and other factors as well. I am happy to look into the matter that the member raises, because I do not know the detail of what is happening locally and get back to the member. Albeit, I may have to say that the relevant minister will get back to the member in due course. The repowering and extension of onshore wind farms is going to see a dramatic increase in capacity as we head towards that 20 gigawatts by 2030 target. Given the cost of wind generation has fallen dramatically over the years, does the minister see an opportunity for communities to renegotiate some of those historic community benefit deals that still exist? What support can the Government give to communities to help to achieve that renegotiation? I will say briefly why there is such a prominence given to the whole issue on community benefit in the draft energy strategy and just transition plan that is out at the moment. Yes, there should be a renegotiation where there is a case for that. Of course, there are voluntary agreements and we also have the community renewable energy scheme, which is about shared ownership, and there are over 600 communities and locally owned projects out of Scotland, and they have been offered funding of over £58 million. Yes, I would be sympathetic to that kind of renegotiation. Thank you, Presiding Officer, and can I refer members to my register of interests? To ask the Scottish Government what measures it has put in place to support island communities in advance of hulls 801 and 802 and other ferries coming into service. While delivery of investments in new vessels and port infrastructure is being progressed, the Transport Minister has authorised the purchase and deployment of MB Lockfreezer, has chartered MB Arrow for overhaul and resilience cover, and recently agreed a nine-month charter of MB Alfred. Additional funding has been committed for enhanced maintenance of vessels and work with CMAL and the operators will be continued to identify potential additional second hand tonnage to support the fleet. Those measures combined with our fare freeze demonstrate that the Scottish Government is absolutely committed to improving the lifeline ferry fleet and better meeting the needs of island communities. Ministers, of course, like everybody else, fully appreciate the level of anger and disappointment that some of the recent issues in relation to lifeline ferry services have caused within these communities. Well, can I thank the minister for his response? A new ferry capacity is, of course, welcome if long overdue, but the trouble is this. The latest solution chosen by the Government, the MV Alfred, if it passes its berthing trials, will cost £9 million for a nine-month charter when it was bought outright for only £14 million. There are outstanding safety questions following its grounding in the Pentland Firth last year when at least six passengers were injured. The catamaran is being time-chartered from an operator that refuses to recognise trade unions whose crew are believed to be hired on terms and conditions significantly inferior to CalMac crews. No wonder last week the RMT accused the Scottish Government of adopting P&O-style tactics through the back door. What did the Government know of this? Can the minister today give an undertaking that should the MV Alfred see service? There will be value for public money, its crew will be employed on the same terms and conditions as CalMac crew that they will be free to join a trade union and that at all times the health and safety of both the public and the crew will be paramount? The Government takes extremely seriously the issues that Richard Leonard is rightly raising and he is right to be concerned about them. Of course, most people recognise that while longer-term infrastructure is coming into place, the charter gives additional very important capacity and that is going to be extremely welcomed by most people who rely on the services. However, the terms and conditions for crews under a charter are a matter for the operators. CalMac has confirmed that they are receiving the living wage and Transport Scotland officials are monitoring the situation and will keep the transport minister appraised of any further action that is required. A number of supplementaries. I want to get them all in. We are going to go beyond time but the questions will need to be brief and so will the responses. First, Emma Roddick. Thank you. I was delighted to hear of the charter of MV Alfred and I think any measures to secure additional tonnage for the fleet and improve the resilience of our lifeline ferry services is welcome and demonstrates the Scottish Government's commitment to the communities which rely on them. Given that Alfred's design means that she can only operate at some ports, can I ask the minister where on the network the vessel may be deployed and what benefits the Government envisages its charter will bring? Emma Roddick is quite right to welcome the fact that the charter is now in place. The primary focus will be to support resilience across the Clyde and Hebrides network. That should help to mitigate the impact of disruption or where islands are reduced to single vessel service. Birthing trials will be completed before the vessel enters service to confirm the routes on which it can operate with a likely deployment on Arran and Islay. CalMac will be engaging with network community representatives over the next few weeks to discuss deployment options to support resilience across the network. Can the minister say who it was agreed to pay £9 million to hire a ferry for nine months? Minister? I am not able to provide a name. The Scottish Government is responsible for the decision to charter the service, and I suspect that if we had not put that extra capacity in place, we would be getting an earful from the member and others across the chamber for other reasons. It was once that ferries were just late in over budget, but now they are on fire and we are paying £9 million for a nine-month contract. This is an outrage. The MV Alfred cannot even run on all the routes. The minister has not answered the question, when will the islanders be told who will lose out this summer because of this Government's incompetence? I have just explained to the chamber what will be on-going with community representatives as well to identify where the additional capacity will be deployed. I suspect that most people who rely on the service will be glad that it is there. To ask the Scottish Government when it last met EDF in the nuclear industry association regarding the future of Tones nuclear power station. The Cabinet Secretary for Energy and Transport met EDF on 16 December 2021 at that meeting. The Cabinet Secretary met EDF Generations Managing Director and Head of Onshore Wind and Solar at the meeting. EDF's decision to bring forward the closure of Tones power station was discussed. The Scottish Government has not met the Nuclear Industries Association regarding the future of Tones power station. I am very grateful to the minister for that answer and that we are now in 2023. Does he accept that Tones nuclear power station has one of the lowest life cycle carbon emissions of any power plant in Scottish history? If the member is making a point over the cases as to whether or not it should be closing, I should emphasise that the decision to bring forward the closure of Tones power station to 2028 was ultimately EDFs. They made this decision based on a range of factors, including crucially the safety of the plant going forward. As the member will be aware, the Scottish Government does not support nuclear power in its current form in Scotland and believes that we have many other alternatives, but it is really important that we support local workforces in the local community going forward as the power station heads towards closure. Thank you. The minister knows that nuclear technology has advanced significantly since the last deployment of a nuclear power station in Scotland. Does the minister not acknowledge the need for the Scottish Government to diversify its long-term energy strategy? That should include consideration of those advantages, such as small-mole-mole nuclear reactors and research into nuclear fusion. Or does the HUMSA use of administration content to be led by the Scottish Green policy based on ideology rather than science? It is really important to note that National Grid conducted a study of the impact of the earlier than expected closure of traditional nuclear generation in Scotland, which concluded that the energy system in the country would remain secure. What we know is that, looking at Scotland's legacy of nuclear waste, it is a very expensive technology, a very dangerous technology. Even if we were to choose new nuclear power stations that would take decades to build them in Scotland and we do not have decades to waste, we are facing a climate emergency. That is why Scotland should make the most of the abundance of renewable energy and green technologies. We have our own doorstep and have a clean, green and more affordable future. To ask the Scottish Government what discussions it has had with the UK Government regarding funding for carbon capture projects in Scotland. There are regular discussions between the Scottish and UK Government on support for carbon capture and storage projects in Scotland. Indeed, I know that that is very relevant to the member's constituency. That is why the UK spring budget was bitterly disappointing, as none of the £20 billion that was announced to support carbon capture and storage is for Scotland. Further delays are impacting both investor confidence and employment opportunities for up to 20,000 jobs and is compromising Scotland and the UK's ability to meet our climate obligations. The UK Government must, as a matter of absolute urgency, provide the Scottish cluster with the certainty that it requires to move forward. Thank you for that answer. For more than a decade, the Tory Government has promised carbon capture and storage to the people of the north-east, and time and again we have been overlooked. My constituency boasts great projects, including SSE's plans for new CCS stations at Peterhead and the Acorn project. Today, the Times reported that the UK Government had, at the last minute, moved an announcement tomorrow for further funding from Aberdeenshire to England. Will the minister join me in calling on the UK Government to finally get behind the Scottish cluster? Yes, I do join the member on calling on the UK Government to get behind the Scottish cluster. I remember Sir Ian Wood saying that the previous announcements of missing out and snubbing Scotland's project was like a football team leaving their best player on the bench. What we have found is that the UK Government is very good at briefing the press about its intentions but has still not had the courtesy to share its plans with the Scottish Governments. UK officials, of course, requested the meetings with their officials on Monday, but provided no details beyond what they had already briefed to the media. The Scottish Government absolutely backs the member's call for funding of Acorn and the Scottish cluster to be included in the upcoming announcement. It is vitally important to meet Scotland's climate emissions targets and to achieve net zero by 2045 and, as I said before, to secure the future of up to 20,000 jobs. The UK Government has put over £41 million of funding into supporting the Scottish cluster so far. Precisely how much of the £80 million that the Scottish Government promised to put in in February 2022 has actually been paid over, Richard. Due to the lack of support from the UK Government, the Scottish Government has made available an offer to progress the project in Scotland. I cannot believe that a member of the Conservative Party, whose Government is holding up the project, has got the audacity to stand up and criticise the Scottish Government on it. We are losing out on 20,000 jobs. Can I ask the member to please make representations to his masters in London to press the green light and allow the project to go ahead to Scotland? 8. First of Childry Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. To ask the Scottish Government when it next plans to meet with all parties involved in the proposed Winchboro train station development. The member may be aware that Transport Scotland is supportive of the proposal for a developer funded station at Winchboro. The Transport Minister met with Winchboro Developments Ltd, as well as Fiona Hyslop MSP, Transport Scotland Network Rail and West Lothian Council on 6 December to discuss progress in developing plans for the new station. Network Rail has been working on an estimate for the next stage of station design development, and that has been handed over to Transport Scotland just this week. I anticipate that further meetings will then be scheduled once that detailed estimate has been reviewed. Winchboro has been promoted as a commuter town for the city of Edinburgh and the estimated population forecast of Winchboro in the next eight years is 13,000. A train station with a direct link to Edinburgh would provide a public transport link for Winchboro's growing population. Currently, with only the possibility of motorway exit, residents have no choice but to commute with cars. A train station in Winchboro would directly contribute to the Scottish Government's net zero target and elevate traffic congestion within Edinburgh. Can the minister advise why the Scottish Government has not taken advantage of this opportunity to meet with net zero target and give residents the opportunity to opt out of private transport? The member's arguments are indeed the reason why the Scottish Government, as well as Transport Scotland, is supportive of the proposals for a station. Just as we have seen additional communities reconnected to the rail network, including stations at Conanbridge, Rob Royson, Kentor, Reston and Inverness airport. Over the next two years, new stations at East Linton, Cameronbridge and Leven will also open. There is a clear demonstration of the Scottish Government and Transport Scotland's commitment to reconnecting as many communities as possible to the rail network. That will include newly growing communities like that at Winchboro. That concludes portfolio questions. There will be a brief pause before we move on to the next item of business, which is a member's debate to allow front benches to change.