 ne��oncydda. We'll turned now to First Minister's questions, question number one from Jackson Carlaw. In his October budget, the Chancellor slashed business rates for thousands of small shops, pubs and high street stores. Business rates are devolved to Scotland so those reductions do not automatically apply here, but thanks to the Barnett formula that the election government received or will receive is £42 million as a result of the Chancellor's decision. Ahead of the Scottish budget next week, will the First Minister confirm that small firms in Scotland will feel the full benefit of this funding? The First Minister will set out the draft budget to Parliament next week, and our proposals on business rates will be set out as part of that budget. However, the following information might be of interest to Jackson Carlaw and to members across the chamber. The Scottish Government currently offers the most generous package of business rates relief in the UK. It is currently worth £720 million a year. That is up from £660 million in 2017-18. The average value of relief received by businesses in Scotland this year is over £4,500,000. The comparable figure in England is less than £4,000, and lastly, even after the announcement in the Chancellor's budget, the average relief in England will still be lower than it is in Scotland this year, before the Scottish Government's budget for next year. I am not sure that that will be the most productive line of questioning for Jackson Carlaw, but nevertheless I hope that I have been helpful in providing that information. In response to the answer that the First Minister has just given, business leaders in her own Glasgow constituency described rate bills as crippling, and they warned her that 20,000 jobs are at risk in the hospitality industry alone. Let me focus on just one. The Capercaillie restaurant and bed and breakfast in Cillan contacted us this week. They need support and they need it now. They are not eligible to receive the Scottish Government's small business bonus. They have been told their current business rates of £333 a month could now rise to as much as £1,750 a month next year, an increase of more than £17,000 a year. This is a business employing 16 local people now under threat and being put up for sale because of this devastating rise in rates. Faced with those increases, how does the First Minister expect small businesses like this to survive across Scotland? What Jackson Carlaw describes is a result of the revaluation process, not a result of policy decisions taken by the Government. As Jackson Carlaw should be aware, the revaluation process is independent of the Scottish Government. We have placed caps on increases for businesses in the hospitality industry, which was widely welcomed. I am sure that the finance secretary will have something to say about that when he lays out his budget next week. None of this takes away from the fact. If we go back to policy decisions of the Scottish Government, the rates relief that we provide for businesses is worth more to businesses in Scotland on average than is the comparable situation in England. We have the most generous package of relief in the UK. As I said earlier, it is worth £720 million. A small business bonus scheme provided record relief to almost 120,000 businesses across Scotland in this year. It has lifted more than 100,000 recipients out of rates altogether. The total relief under that scheme rose to £254 million. We provide a fair deal to Scottish businesses. The budget for next year will be set out next week. As with any tax issue, it is really incumbent on the Scottish Conservatives to say to us, if they want us to cut taxis in the budget, what public service do they want us to take that money from? Perhaps Jackson Carlaw would like to have a go at answering that question. The First Minister again clearly did not impress business leaders in her constituency with that response, nor will she have impressed the business that is now closing and up for sale in Kilham. First Minister, we are seeing the impact of high non-domestic rates in firms and businesses. What about the impact of higher domestic rates on households across Scotland? We all know that the SNP will once again next week flutter their eyelids at the Greens to get them over the line. We all know that they will, but we also know the price. Patrick Harvie has spelled it out—a brand new tax on households across Scotland. Will the First Minister make it clear today that there will be no new tax on homes of hard-pressed ordinary Scots? At the risk of repetition, the finance secretary will set out the budget to Parliament next weekend. We will see very clearly that not just businesses but taxpayers across Scotland will continue to get a very fair deal from the Scottish Government. Of course, this is the Scottish Government that for many years froze council tax levels in Scotland. There is now a cap this year on council tax increases of 3 per cent, which is much lower than the maximum increases allowable in England under a Conservative Government. Of course, average council tax bills in Scotland are lower than average council tax bills in England, so perhaps Jackson Carlaw would do better to lecture his own colleagues in the Westminster Government rather than this Government. I will come back to a central point here, and I notice that Jackson Carlaw sidestepped the issue in his last question. If we had followed the Scottish Conservatives advice to when we set last year's budget, on tax, we would now have £550 million less to invest in our national health service, in the education system, in local government services. The Tories never said where that money should come from. If they are standing here today just under a week before the budget, and they are asking for tax cuts from the budget, then, while he has got one opportunity left, will Jackson Carlaw tell us which public service he thinks we should raise to fund those tax cuts? If he does not, I think that people all over Scotland will draw their own conclusions from that. Jackson Carlaw? I will tell you where the money comes from. It comes from businesses such as the one in Killan, which is going to be closing down as a result of the First Minister's crass indifference. Yesterday, speaking to the Financial Times, Derek Mackay declared ominously that he wanted to set tolerable levels of tax in next week's budget. He sensed that he could squeeze people more. I sensed a shudder down the spine of taxpayers everywhere. Tracy Black, director of CBI Scotland, said this. One-off tax rates may look appealing, but there is only so many times that you can read the cookie jar. The First Minister's budget is now going up. She has the money to spend. The fact is that no further tax rises are necessary. The Scottish Government has the cash. Is not the right choice this year to commit to no further increases on Scottish taxpayers? First Minister? First Lady, on the comments by Derek Mackay in the Financial Times yesterday, he said that the decisions that we have taken on tax policy do not risk a reduction in revenue. I asked directly if he thought that Scotland was some way from that. He said that that is my sense. How Jackson Carlaw can translate that into squeezing people with more taxes is beyond me, but, presumably, he can explain it. Let me get back to the fundamentals here. If we had followed Tory tax suggestions in this year's budget, we would have £550 million less to invest in public services. If we were to follow what he appears to be suggesting for next year, that would remove hundreds of millions of pounds more. He has not said yet today where he thinks we should take that from. Is it the national health service? Is it front-line local government budgets? Is it the education budget? We do not know, because the Tories refuse to tell us. It seems as if Jackson Carlaw is taking a different approach to his leader Ruth Davidson, because, remember in May this year, she said that if the choice is between extra spending on the NHS or introducing further tax breaks, I choose the NHS. Again, perhaps Jackson Carlaw needs to clarify. Does he have a different opinion to Ruth Davidson, or is he changing the Tory position? The Tories come to this chamber, week in and week out, and call for extra spending on this service and that service, and then in the same breath call for tax cuts. The Tory tax set policy, the Tory spending policies are not credible, but then we are in a position where the Tories generally are no longer credible. Can the First Minister tell the chamber, since she came into office, is the number of specialist teachers supporting children with additional support needs in Scotland schools up or down? I do not have that figure to hand. What I do know and can tell Richard Leonard today is that, of course, in the last two years we have seen increases in the numbers of teachers working in Scotland's education system. We will have this year's figures for the number of teachers in Scotland's education system published, I think, next week, so Richard Leonard will be able to look carefully at them. There are more teachers working in education delivering an excellent education system for Scotland's young people, and I, for one, welcome that. What the First Minister did not say was that the number of specialist teachers supporting children with ASN in Scotland schools is down. In fact, there are 122 fewer under Nicola Sturgeon. At the same time, the number of pupils identified with additional support needs has gone up by over 40,000. So, needs up by over 30 per cent, but qualified teachers down by over 6 per cent. Just yesterday, I spoke with the mother of a 13-year-old boy called Callum. Callum has low functioning autism. He struggled last year with his move to high school. He was placed in a department of additional support. Callum's family believed that the teacher in charge of his class did not have the appropriate training for it, and so he did not make the right decisions for Callum, for his schedule, for his work or for his environment. His mother told me that, I quote, this resulted in Callum going into meltdown on a daily basis. The teacher would shout and things would escalate further. Callum would be manhandled to a soft room. The door would be closed on Callum, which again escalated his anxiety. First Minister, can you tell Callum's family why specialist teachers have been cut under your Government? First, I thank Richard Leonard for raising Callum's case. The Deputy First Minister would be very happy to talk to Callum's family to understand his experience and to consider the implications of that for the decisions that the Scottish Government takes. If I can come back to the central question that Richard Leonard asked me about the numbers of qualified people working with young people with additional support for learning needs, if you look at all staff supporting pupils with ASN, that includes teachers, but it also includes educational psychologists, behaviour support staff, home school link workers and the type of staff that are so vital in ensuring that young people with ASN needs do have a good educational experience. He asked me about when I became First Minister, so in the year 2014 there were 15,871 staff supporting pupils with ASN. In 2017, the most recent year that we have figures for that was 16,600. The overall numbers of staff supporting pupils with additional support needs have increased, and I think that that is important. Of course, we always want to do more. We want to understand the experience of young people like Callum, which is why the Deputy First Minister would be very happy if Richard Leonard wants to pass on his details to speak with that young man's family. Callum is only 13 once, so we need to get this right. There are children across Scotland just like him. What they need are the qualified teachers who have been identified in report after report, and they cannot wait if they need action now. Week after week, the First Minister stands up in this Parliament and claims that education is her top priority. Week after week, people in the real world teachers and parents get in touch with me to tell me about the impact of her cuts, and that is why the budget that is presented to Parliament next week must guarantee no more cuts to schools, no more cuts to teachers and no more cuts to additional support for pupils. Will the First Minister today give that guarantee? The First Minister spoke about the increase in the number of staff supporting pupils with additional support needs. We are also seeing the overall number of teachers that I said a moment ago in our classrooms increasing. That has been the case for two years in a row, and we will see the most recent figures when they are published next week. Education authorities have already increased funding on additional support needs. If we look at the local government financial statistics for 2016-17, that showed that local authorities increased funding on education. Of that, £610 million was an additional support for learning, which was increased from £584 million in the year before that. That was a 2.3 per cent increase in real terms. That is an important point. Achievement in schools for pupils with additional support needs continues to rise. Despite their challenging circumstances, children and young people continue to achieve. We see more than 87 per cent of school leavers with additional support needs having a positive destination, which is an increase of five percentage points since 2011. All that information is important. Of course, that does not take away from experiences like that of young Calum that Richard Leonard has narrated to this chamber, which is why I repeat the offer that the Deputy First Minister will be very happy to speak to his family and understand that experience in more detail. We will continue to support local authorities to take the right decisions to give the support for learning that those young people need and deserve. Can the First Minister provide an update to Parliament on the work of the Michelin action group, including the new joint agreement with Michelin and what the next steps are going forward to maximise employment opportunities on the Michelin site in Dundee? First Minister. Derek Mackay convened a very productive third meeting of the Michelin Dundee action group last Friday. Michelin will work in partnership with the Scottish Government, Scottish Enterprise, D-City Council and others to develop the next phase of their presence in Scotland. Our shared aim now is to secure a long-term future for the site and to generate significant employment there. We will work together to transform the site into a key location for new economic employment opportunities in manufacturing, remanufacturing, recycling and low-carbon transport, and to ensure that the workforce is fully supported to benefit from the new opportunities. Michelin will sign a memorandum of understanding with the Scottish Government to deliver on those commitments, and we are looking to sign that before the end of this year. Derek Mackay will keep the chamber fully updated on progress, including local members such as Shona Robison. I thank Shona Robison and others for the very constructive role that they have played in reaching the point that we are now at. First Minister may be aware of an alarming situation at the weekend when a fire station in Edinburgh was forced to close due to a lack of available firefighters, while two appliances at two other stations were also stood down. Now, a representative of the FBU has said that firefighters are, and I quote, embarrassed at what this service has been reduced to. That is against the background of 500 fewer firefighters in Scotland since the regional brigades were centralised. Is the First Minister concerned about the safety implications of these shortages, and will she commit to fully supporting the fire service? We fully support the fire service, and we will continue to do so. In the budget for this year, of course, the Scottish Government increased the spending capacity of the fire service by £15.5 million. We will continue to support the funding of the fire service, and we will continue to support it in its efforts to transform the way that it delivers services. The member is asking me about the Marionville closure, where that station was closed on Saturday 1 December. Of course, the fire service maintains a service to allow it to respond to every emergency call. It is fully committed to addressing any crewing challenges wherever they occur. Fire appliances, of course, can only be safely deployed if there is a full crew available. There are instances in which appliances are off the run if crew levels fall short. That might be through, for example, unplanned absences such as sick leave or planned activities such as crew training in specialist activities. Of course, the strength of a national service is that it allows the mobilisation of appliances and personnel from other stations across the area or further afield if required. It is worth looking at what Her Majesty's fire service inspectorate said that the fire service is operationally effective and more equipped to deal with major incidents than the previous legacy services. At the last point, I would make in terms of numbers of fire officers, Presiding Officer. We are never complacent about this, and we will continue to support the fire service. However, if we look at the number of firefighters per head of population, that figure is higher in Scotland than in other parts of the UK. In Scotland, there are 11.8 firefighters per 10,000 population. In England, that figure is just 6.3. We will continue to ensure fair funding for our firefighters and to do everything that we can to support them in doing the excellent job that they do to keep us safe. Kezia Dugdale is followed by Bob Doris. This week, the care inspectorate produced a progress report into services for older people in Edinburgh following its damming report 18 months ago. Its findings are stark and deeply distressing. The city is failing hundreds of its most vulnerable residents. When NHS Lothian repeatedly failed to improve its performance, the Government sent in a task force—isn't it time that the Government sent in a task force to fix Edinburgh's social care crisis? First Minister. I expect all recommendations or observations of the care inspectorate to be heeded by health boards and by integrated joint boards. It is absolutely essential that NHS Lothian does that in relation to older people. The Cabinet Secretary for Health and Sport will have regular discussions with the health board about that. I will ask her to correspond with the member to update her in those discussions and to take forward any further concerns that the member has. Bob Doris is followed by Margaret Mitchell. First Minister, a number of my constituents in the mind of the state have been disconnected from their community hot water and heating supply by SSC for various reasons, but several have struggled with debt and bills. One constituent of mine, a one parent, has been dealing with friends because her house is too cold. She has offered £600 towards clearing her debts, but SSC has previously insisted that she clears 50 per cent of her debts alongside a £272 reconnection charge. After some pushing, they now might show some flexibility to reconnect her. First Minister, as we enter the Christmas period, can the First Minister urge Scottish and Southern energy and other providers to be as flexible as possible, show some compassion and do what they can to help not to punish those struggling to heat their homes? I thank Bob Doris for raising an important question. I am always very concerned to hear of any disconnections, especially at this time of year when, of course, temperatures are low. This Government will always prioritise tackling fuel poverty, and we offer assistance to households through our funding for home energy Scotland. The Scottish Government is also preparing to bring forward regulations for heat networks in Scotland. We have already had positive discussions with the United Kingdom Government to consider how provisions in reserved areas such as consumer protection can be implemented in Scotland. However, in response to Bob Doris's specific question, I would call upon SSC and all energy suppliers to be as flexible as possible and to be fair and compassionate in dealing with any customer struggling to pay their fuel bills, making sure that people have heat and are warm during the winter should be the most important priority for any of us. Margaret Mitchell Is the First Minister aware that companies in the waste management sector, such as Patterson of Greenock Hill in Coatbridge, have complied meticulously with the provisions relating to landfill tax, since it was devolved to Revenue Scotland in 2015, are now facing retrospective tax of £1.2 million in penalties of £700,000 for regulations that were not confirmed until 2016? Does she consider that to be successful? The First Minister I do not have all of the detail of that in front of me just now. If Margaret Mitchell wants to send me more detail, I will have the relevant minister look into that and correspond with her as soon as possible. I will give her an assurance and undertaking today that we will look at it as quickly as it is feasible to do. Thank you. I am pleased that the First Minister chose to go to Poland this week for the Global Climate Change Conference. As I raised that issue, I have no doubt that the First Minister will again seek praise for the progress that has been made and complain that the Greens should stop demanding more action. Scotland has indeed made a decent start. We are ahead of the pack, but, as global emissions reach yet another all-time high, being ahead of such a complacent pack is no great claim. In the new year, this chamber will debate the new climate change bill, which sets no date for full net zero greenhouse gas target, proposes no increased urgency over the critical period in the coming decade and does not commit to the radical new actions that are needed to achieve that progress. For the Greens, the case is clear. That bill must be upgraded to a climate emergency bill, net zero by 2040, emission cuts of more than three quarters by 2030 and a radical new programme of action to be rolled out within a year. If the Government does not back a real climate emergency bill, how will the First Minister, who believes in the principle of climate justice, respond not just to me, but to the Pan-African Climate Justice Alliance, which has challenged her to accept that her current bill does not go far enough? I thank Patrick Harvie for raising this. This is the biggest issue that the world of humanity faces, as David Attenborough said eloquently in Poland earlier this week. I do not criticise the Greens for challenging us to go further. It is right that they do so. Every single day, we challenge ourselves to go further and to go as far as we possibly can, as fast as we possibly can. When I was in Poland earlier this week, the Environment Secretary will be there early next week, I was struck again by the fact that people, experts from many other countries and from the United Nations—not people who are susceptible to Government spin on this issue, people who know exactly what we are doing in Scotland—think that we are leading the world and acting in line with the Paris commitments. Earlier this year, it was Laurent Fabius, the architect of the Paris agreement, who described the climate change bill as an, I am quoting, a concrete application of the Paris agreement. That praise is based not just on the headlines of the targets in the bill, which is carbon neutrality by 2050, and obligations on us to get to net zero of all greenhouse gas emissions as quickly as we feasibly can do that. That praise is also based on the more rigorous approach that we take to meeting those targets. Annual statutory targets are the only country in the world that has those. The inclusion of aviation and shipping is one of the few countries to do that. Of course, the emphasis that we have on domestic effort, not on international credits, is that we want to go further. We are anxious to go further. That is why we have asked the UK Committee on Climate Change for updated advice before Parliament will vote on the climate change bill. That advice will, of course, be available to all members. We have asked it for advice not just on the long-term targets but on the nearer-term targets, too. It is right that we continue to debate this. It is right that we continue to challenge ourselves and each other, but absolutely nobody should doubt Scotland's ambition and Scotland's commitment to continuing to be a world leader on the most serious of moral obligations. The First Minister was indeed present when David Attenborough warned that the collapse of our civilisations and the extinction of much of the natural world is on the horizon. I believe that she takes that warning seriously. The First Minister also says that Scotland gets praise for the actions that it is taking. I say that Scotland has made a decent start, but we need to join the dots between the warnings about the need for increased urgency in response to this emergency and the actions that are being taken, because we are not yet close to where we need to be. The science is clear that the critical period for progress is the next 12 years and the Government's climate bill proposes no change to the existing targets in that period. There is a growing awareness that what we are doing to our world threatens all of our futures and changing light bulbs and even changing cars won't cut it. We need to change our whole economy and the fossil fuel age must be allowed to die, yet the Scottish Government is still handing tens of millions of pounds to the oil and gas industry. This week, while the First Minister was still in Poland for the climate change conference, her colleagues at Westminster were arguing the case for yet another Tory tax break for the fossil fuel industry, handing tens of billions of pounds over the coming decades to the giant businesses that are lining their own pockets while causing this crisis. Is it not clear that we need a stronger climate change bill—a climate emergency bill, as the Greens propose—to accelerate our progress to end the handouts to the climate criminals and to show the urgency that so many people understand is needed? I do not criticise anybody's passion on this issue. I share that passion, that concern and that ambition for Scotland to do the right thing here. Obviously, as the First Minister and this is a responsibility shared with the Environment Secretary, we have a duty to be ambitious in our targets, but we also have a duty to make sure that we have the credible plans in place to meet those targets, and that is work that we take very seriously. The other point here—and it is relevant to the oil and gas point that Patrick Harvie raises, and I understand why he raises that—is the point about just transition. One of the things that Scotland was being praised for in Poland earlier this week was our establishment of the Just Transition Commission. We are trying to learn from previous economic disruptions and transitions where the most vulnerable in our society have been left behind. We want to make sure that, as we lead the world in the transition into a carbon-neutral future, we are doing that in a way that does not risk people's jobs, which transfers them into other jobs and has the justice of that transition very much at heart. Those are important issues. I have no hesitation in saying that I was not present when David Attenborough spoke, but I have no hesitation in agreeing that this is the biggest—we might all be consumed by Brexit at the moment—but this is the biggest issue that this planet faces. All of us have to live up to that moral responsibility. I am determined that the Scottish Government will do so, but we will do that in a meaningful way so that, when we set targets, we are confident that we have the plans in place to meet those. I expect that we will have a very robust debate in this chamber about the new bill, and I welcome that, because I think that those discussions will mean that we will end up at the end of that process with a bill that is right and, hopefully, a bill that the whole Parliament can take pride in uniting behind. I can encourage members and the First Minister to have slightly shorter questions and slightly shorter answers, and slightly shorter answers and slightly more succinct answers to. Willie Rennie. I was pleased that four parties in this Parliament put our differences aside yesterday to oppose Brexit. I was pleased that this Parliament has also backed a people's vote. The Prime Minister's deal will face certain defeat next week. I have never felt more confident that we can stop Brexit. Last night, I was disappointed to see the SNP leader in Westminster arguing for the Irish backstop to be extended to Scotland. That is the discredited Irish backstop from Theresa May's discredited Brexit deal. Can the First Minister assure me that this is not the policy of the Scottish Government? First Minister. Right. Again, I am going to try, in very simple terms, to explain the Scottish Government, the SNP's Brexit position to Willie Rennie. I say this more in sorrow than anger. Willie Rennie and I agree on the issue of Brexit, and I think that it is regrettable that he keeps trying to find points of disagreement when it would be more powerful for us just to come together and unequivocally agree. My preference, like Willie Rennie's preference, is that Brexit does not happen. I want Scotland and the UK to stay in the EU. The only difference between us on that is that, if the rest of the UK decides to go ahead and leave the EU, I still think that Scotland should have the right not to be dragged out of the EU against our will, which, of course, is a right that would have if we were an independent country. With the responsibilities of the Government that I have, I also have to contemplate how we protect Scotland if the UK leaves the EU and drags Scotland out with it. That is why I have always said that, in those circumstances, if we are in the realms of looking for at least worst options, staying in the single market in customs union falls into that category. I have argued that case consistently for two years. It does not take away from the fact that I would much rather see the whole UK stay in the European Union. On the Irish backstop, we know why the Irish backstop is in place, but the point that I have made is that, if we get into the realms where that backstop is activated—I hope that that does not happen, because, like Willie Rennie, I hope that we now have an opportunity to see Brexit reversed, but, if it does, the worst possible situation for Scotland to be in would be at a competitive disadvantage with Northern Ireland, which is why we need to have at least the same relationship with the single market in customs union that Northern Ireland is going to have. Anybody in any doubt about that only had to listen to the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland in Belfast at the end of last week, saying that the Brexit deal, the Prime Minister's Brexit deal, gave Northern Ireland—I think that I am almost directly quoting her here—an unrivald advantage in attracting foreign direct investment. There is the risk to Scotland in a nutshell. To summarise—I know that I am taking too long, Presiding Officer—we want to stay in the EU, but, if that cannot be achieved, we want to see solutions that do the least damage to Scotland. Surely Willie Rennie could agree with that. She might want to try to explain all that to her Westminster leader. She should not try to ride both horses. We have got the Conservatives on the run. Even the Tories do not agree with those Tories over here, so we should not be hunting for a compromise that has already been discredited. Every kind of Brexit will damage the economy. That is why we should be opposing every kind of Brexit. I am frustrated that I need to keep raising this with the First Minister. I know that she wants to be reasonable, but how is it possible to be reasonable when it puts jobs at risk? Can I plead with the First Minister to reject all and every kind of Brexit? I do oppose all and every kind of Brexit. I do not want Brexit to happen. I want Scotland and the whole of the UK to stay within the EU. Where I would agree with Willie Rennie is that I think that there is a greater prospect of achieving that aim now than there has appeared to be any other time over the past two and a half years, which is why the SNP will do everything that we can to bring that about. Willie Rennie describes as riding both horses. When your First Minister, what that actually is, is working out how you protect Scotland's best interests in all possible circumstances. If we can achieve keeping the UK in the EU, then I have an obligation that I accept that Willie Rennie does not have. I have an obligation to look at what then best protects Scotland's interests. If he cannot see that, that is perhaps a very good reason why everybody hopes that he will never be standing here as First Minister. It surely can escape Willie Rennie's notice that the only reason why we are standing here at all having these discussions is that Scotland finds itself in a position of possibly facing being taken out of the EU against our will. That would not be possible if Scotland was an independent country. If Willie Rennie wants to ensure whatever the outcome of this Brexit process and we both hope it ends with us staying in the EU, if Willie Rennie wants to make sure that Scotland never faces this prospect again, then the sooner he backs independence for Scotland, the better. There are still a number of supplementaries that we are probably not going to get through very many, but we will try. James Kelly? The Herald newspaper reported on Saturday that Presswick Airport was advertising posts that were paid less than the real living wage, at £785, significantly less than the £9 rate of the real living wage. That is unacceptable, given that the airport is owned by the Government and the First Minister and our ministers are always willing to talk up their so-called support for the real living wage. Will the First Minister ensure that that advert is withdrawn and that posts are re-advertised at least the rate of £9 on our real living wage? The Scottish Government fully supports the policy of the real living wage, and we expect and encourage all employers to do that. Of course, Presswick Airport is running at arm's length from the Scottish Government, but as I understand it—I will have the transport secretary right to the member with more detail of this—Preswick Airport is committed to the real living wage and is working towards having that paid to all those who work within the airport. The sooner they get there, the better, because we encourage all employers—without exception—to pay that rate to their workers, because it is a core part of the fair work that all of us should be committed to, and this Government is committed to. Bruce Crawford Thank you, Presiding Officer. As highlighted in the daily record this morning, the universal credit's minimum five-week waiting period for payments means that anyone making a claim this week will need to survive until January without the money they need to live and which they are entitled to. Will the First Minister undertake to write urgently to the DWP asking it to ensure that hardship payments are made available to everyone at the point of claiming that utterly disgraceful situation has got to be sorted out? The First Minister I am grateful to Bruce Crawford for raising this very important issue. It is utterly disgraceful that a family applying this week for universal credit—by definition, a family probably already struggling to make ends meet—is going to have to wait until after the Christmas period before they get the money that they are entitled to. How the Tories sleep at night knowing that is absolutely beyond me. That five-week waiting time at the best of times is unacceptable but at this time of year it is particularly unacceptable. I saw the Prime Minister at Prime Minister's questions yesterday trying to suggest that there wasn't a five-week waiting time. I suggest that she gets out and about and speaks to more people applying for universal credit than she clearly has because people in the real world know exactly what the situation is. In response to Bruce Crawford's question, yes, we will write to the DWP making this point, but we write to the DWP repeatedly on these matters and the DWP doesn't listen. I make a point that I have made many times before. The sooner we are in a situation where we don't just have to write to the DWP asking them to do the right thing but we have responsibility for these matters in this Parliament, the better all of us will be. Question 5, Gillian Martin. To ask the First Minister how Scotland is working with the international community to tackle climate change. First Minister. I was pleased to take Scotland's strong messages on climate change to the international talks in Poland earlier this week. During my time there, I participated in an event with the UN Secretary General and took part in Al Gore's 24 hours of reality to raise awareness of the actions that we all need to take to address what Sir David Attenborough recently referred to as humanity's greatest threat. While there, I also announced funding for the Marrakesh partnership for global climate action, which supports implementation of the Paris agreement and announced a £1 million partnership with Solar Impulse Foundation's 1,000 solutions project. That builds on our recent work with the international community, where we have contributed to the UN framework convention on climate change to Al Noa dialogue and the EU's consultation on its long-term climate strategy. Gillian Martin. As the First Minister said at COP 24 in Katowice, Governments, businesses and individuals have a moral obligation to do what they can to reduce and mitigate the effects of climate change. Can the First Minister outline what pressure her Government has put on the UK Government to join Scotland in finding practical and just solutions in working towards net zero emissions as soon as possible? At the time of the climate change bill's introduction in May, the Environment Secretary wrote to the UK Minister of State calling on the UK to work with Scotland in reaching net zero emissions as soon as possible. That is necessary, as I am sure all members know. There are several areas where Scotland simply does not have the devolved competence to act unilaterally, for instance, when it comes to decarbonising the gas grid, which is controlled by the UK Government. We wrote again in September to restate those calls in advance of the IPCC special report. We will continue to press the UK Government to match the ambition of the Scottish Government so that we can continue to work together towards net zero emissions as soon as possible, which I am happy to restate is the goal and ambition of the Scottish Government. To ask the First Minister what action the Scottish Government is taking to ensure that student access to Scotland's universities is based on the principles of equity and excellence. The Scottish Government is firmly committed to equal access to higher education. Every child growing up in Scotland, regardless of their background, should have an equal chance of going to university. That is why we established the commission on widening access and accepted all 34 of its recommendations in full. The latest UKAS data shows that the number of Scots getting a place at university is at a record high, as is the number of students from deprived areas. That is testament to our commitment to maintaining tuition-free university education for eligible students from all backgrounds. Thank you, First Minister. I think that we should welcome the most recent statistics that show those trends. However, what we do not welcome is the fact that there are recent statistics that show that there are serious shortages of graduates in the key sectors. One in four GP practices has a vacancy. Hospitals are short of 2,400 nurses and midwives, and half of Scottish businesses say that they have a digital skills gap. First Minister, the Scottish Government has been receiving letters from the parents of an increasing number of extremely well-qualified Scots domiciled pupils who are being turned away from university in Scotland, even when places might be available because they are Scots domiciled and fall foul of the SNP's capping policy. Does the First Minister think that that is fair and beneficial to the economy in Scotland? First Minister. Before we move on from the latest statistics, let me just dwell on them for a moment, because I think that I hope that people across the chamber will want to welcome them. The statistics issued by UCAS this morning show that the gap between those from the richest and the poorest backgrounds getting a place at university is now the smallest on record, and it has closed for the last three consecutive years. On the wider question, I think that the way that Liz Smith has characterised that betrays a misunderstanding of the way that the Scottish Government's policy works. Yes, there are a set number of places funded by the Scottish Government every year for Scottish domiciled students. That is not a new policy. That is ring-fenced. It is not subject to competition from students from the rest of the UK or international students. Of course, the most important point is that the total number of funded places in Scottish universities for Scottish domiciled students has increased in the year between 2018 and 2019 from the year before that, by 715 places. Since 2012, there has been an increase of almost 2,500 places, with many of those targeted at areas such as teacher education and nursing. The latest statistics also show that the number of Scottish domiciled students entering first-year medicine at Scottish HEIs has also increased. Of course, resources are always finite, Presiding Officer, and they will be even more finite if we follow the Tory tax policies. Of course, we are going back to our earlier discussions, but we will continue to take decisions that support record numbers of Scottish young people getting to university. The final point that I would make, Presiding Officer, is just this. If there are shortages in key sectors of the economy for skilled workers right now, I suspect that that has got a lot more to do with the Tory's Brexit policy than it has to do with anything else. I am conscious that there are a very large number of members who wish to ask supplementary questions today that I was not able to reach. I have just appealed to all members to keep their questions succinct, and to the First Minister, please also to keep the answers similarly succinct, and we will get more people in. That concludes First Minister's questions. We are going to move on now to members' business in the name of Emma Harper on the 30th world AIDS day. We are just going to suspend business for a few moments to allow the gallery to clear and to allow members and ministers to change seats. A few moments of suspension.