 The first item of business is portfolio questions, the usual mantra, short questions, succinct answers, and we'll get through every question 1. Pauline McNeill, please. Thank you. To ask the Scottish Government what action it can take to allow young people access to cheaper transport and what its position is in the discounts that are currently offered by the bus and train operators. Cabinet secretary. The Scottish Government continues to take positive and targeted action to help young people access cheaper transport through initiatives such as the national concessionary travel scheme for young people, which offers discounts on bus and rail services. We welcome the range of discounted fares offered to young people by operators, which are a commercial matter for the individual bus operators, and on rail are offered under the terms of the ScotRail franchise contract. The Scottish Government is also seeking to introduce free bus travel for young modern apprentices and for young carers in receipt of the planned young carers grant once it comes into force. Pauline McNeill. On turning 16, a young person is welcomed into adulthood by asking to be paid full fares on all public transport. Many young people at 16 are still not working and at school the discounted fares that the minister talks about are not deep enough. Surely it's time to recognise that teenagers, 16 and 17-year-olds in particular, welcoming what the minister has said on apprentices and carers across the board, need a fairer deal on busses, trains and ferries. The member will be aware that the national concessionary travel scheme for young people was introduced back in January 2017, and it is delivered through the Young Scot smart card programme. It provides all 16 to 18-year-olds and full-time volunteers up to the age of 25 with discounts on bus travel. There is also the rail card, which is available for young people. We are always keen to make sure that we try to support young people and be able to access public transport. Of course, a very specific measure that the member has proposed is one that no doubt will falter through in the process of which budget they want the additional money to come from in order to provide even further discounts over and above what we provide in the present time. To ask the Scottish Government what progress has been made in advancing the case in funding for a new leaving mouth rail link. Transport Scotland is leading the transport appraisal work for the leaving mouth sustainable transport study in close collaboration with Fife Council. The findings from the transport appraisal work will identify whether there is a rationale for progressing the leaving mouth rail link. Since I last spoke on the study in Parliament, the initial appraisal report has been published and stakeholders have been updated on the findings of this report at sessions in November. Stakeholders continue to be updated monthly by email and on Transport Scotland's website. The draft preliminary options appraisal report, which includes rail link options, is currently being reviewed by Transport Scotland and Fife Council. The final stage is the detailed appraisal, the time scale for which very much depends on the outcome of the current stage. Alex Rowley I welcome the progress that is now being made and I hope that we can see that progress continue because in terms of community support, there is strong support from the community. There is a recognition of the opportunities that this would bring both economic and social. Can I ask the cabinet secretary whether he would be willing to meet with the community organisation that is behind the campaign and come to leave mouth? I understand that he said that he was meeting with one of the constituency SPs today to discuss that issue, but will he come to leave mouth? The one thing that those people are clear about is that this should be a non-partisan campaign, so could you come and meet with everyone? I have already given agreement to the request that came from the constituency member to visit leaving mouth. Last week, when I was in Fife, I was approached by a member from the leaving mouth rail group asking if I would visit and I confirmed to them that I am more than happy to do so. I recognise the cross-party support for this particular proposal and, no doubt, as the work is taken forward, we will identify what is the best option in progressing this matter. David Torrance To ask the cabinet secretary if he would, like Alex Rowley, visit my constituency to meet members of the leaving mouth rail campaign and see potential economic benefits, a rail link would bring to the area of high deprivation. Excellent. Question 3 has been withdrawn. To ask the Scottish Government how it promotes active travel. The Scottish Government has doubled the active travel budget from £39.2 million in 2017 to £80 million in 2018-19 and 2019-20. The majority of the funding is allocated to local authorities to deliver high-quality walking and cycling infrastructure, enabling people to walk and cycle more. Our funding also includes more than £10 million to support local authorities and communities to deliver behavioural change programmes, including cycle training and increased access to bikes and facilities to encourage more people to walk and cycle. We have recently appointed Scotland's first active nation commissioner, Lee Craigie, who will become the national advocate for the benefits of walking and cycling, including for everyday short journeys. Annie Wells I thank the cabinet secretary for that answer. It is estimated that, at the current rate of progress, it will take around 239 years to reach the Scottish Government's target for 10 per cent of journeys to be made by bike by 2020. Although setting an ambitious target is positive, and the steps that the cabinet secretary has already said, how will the Scottish Government ensure that the necessary support is in place to achieve it? I thought when the member said 239 years that she was talking about the Brexit negotiations in the state of affairs. I can say that we have a very ambitious programme in taking forward driving up active travel. This was a stretched target that we set, one that is very ambitious. We have seen progress towards that, but clearly not at the spirit at which we would all like to see it being made. Hence the reason as to why we have doubled the budget in order to drive it forward in the coming years. I am very much committed to making sure that we do everything that we can to increase the number of people who are taking active travel options when it comes to taking journeys. Claudia Beamish Thank you, Presiding Officer. While I welcome the doubling of the budget, I would like to highlight to the cabinet secretary that I visited the community links plus south cityway, which was supported on a cross-party basis. Accessibility and visibility were really inspiring there. Can the cabinet secretary tell us a bit more about how marginalised communities in active travel opportunities will have affordable options? Claudia Beamish The member raised an important issue here, because it is important—I have made this point on a number of occasions now—in helping to promote and encourage active travel. We are reaching out to those hard-to-get communities and individuals who may not initially think that they are going to take up an active travel option. In my recent discussion with the stakeholders who are responsible for taking that forward, one of the challenges that I have put to them is to demonstrate in greater detail how they are ensuring that they are reaching into our more deprived communities to ensure that they are providing them with the options to look at greater active travel options. For example, where we have got social housing provision being made available is looking at how we can build into that infrastructure the necessary provision to help to support active travel. Whether that be cycle routes or walking routes, can we work with housing associations to look at creating e-bike hubs? Can we also look at the introduction of, for example, the provision of electric vehicles through a car club model, which could be delivered through social housing? Those are all issues that I have challenged them to go and look at developing in a much more detailed way. I am very clear about the need to make sure that active travel is not just about those who have got a predisposition to being active but also to reaching out to those communities that are more deprived and more difficult to get to to ensure that they get the benefits that can come from this type of investment as well. To ask the Scottish Government how Transport Scotland supports and promotes tourism. Transport Scotland works with partners. It supports tourism by investing in our transport network to promote Scotland as an accessible and attractive place to visit. For example, Transport Scotland works closely with Scotland's airports to help to secure new routes that improve business connectivity and inbound tourism, such as the Edinburgh to Beijing international route, operated by Hanan Airlines, introduced in 2018. Another area in which Transport Scotland has direct involvement is the use of brown tourist signs on roads. We know from VisitScotland research that those are valued, and VisitScotland said that they play a role in enabling visitors to reach tourist destinations safely by car. However, a small business in my Islands and Islands region has recently been quoted almost £50,000 by Transport Scotland to direct just four signs for their businesses. Does the cabinet secretary think that this valued scheme is sufficiently affordable and accessible to tourism-focused businesses? If he doesn't, what action will he take to support those businesses to whom cost is a prohibitive factor? Cabinet secretary, there is obviously a clear criteria for the use of road signage, but if the member wants to furnish me with the specific details that he is referring to, I am more than happy to get Transport Scotland officials to look into the matter. Thank you very much. Does the transport secretary believe that Transport Scotland's sanctioning of the replacement of the Hamnavo on the Strumanness Christaer route with a freighter vessel with only 12 passengers as capacity, either meets the needs of tourists or indeed the local community in Orkney? Cabinet secretary, I recognise that in some of the vessels there are challenges, particularly at key points in the year when we see visitor numbers significant and increasing. We are continuing to look at how we can expand and improve on the ferry network within Scotland and the vessels that we have in construction at the present time. However, I recognise that there are particular challenges on points on the network as a result of the increasing demand that we are seeing, both in terms of freight and also passenger numbers, and we will continue through the ferry's plan to try to address those issues appropriately. In question 6, Donald Cameron and Mr Cameron do not need to press your button when you have been pulled from the list. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update following the last meeting of the A83 task force. I chaired a meeting of the A83 task force on 15 November 2018. A full and frank discussion was had and I appreciate the opportunity to listen to local concerns. At the meeting, I made a commitment that the Argyll and Bute region would be prioritised in the forthcoming strategic transport projects review 2. I also announced that we will review the potential for additional physical landslide mitigation measures at the rest and be thankful. I asked for transport Scotland officials to report back to me by mid February with the findings of the review in advance of the next task force meeting on 27 March 2019 to enable discussion of the findings at that meeting with local and regional stakeholders. Since 2007, we have invested some £70 million in the maintenance of the trunk road, including £11 million at the rest and be thankful on the landslide mitigation measures and the local old military road diversion. Those measures have worked, having already successfully stopped landslip material from reaching the road and keeping this important route opened on an estimated 50 to 60 days when it otherwise would have been closed. I thank the cabinet secretary for the answer. He will be aware that as the winter snap begins to hit the Highlands and Islands regions, routes such as the rest and be thankful section of the A83 will inevitably become more trecherous. Given there is some scepticism about the mitigation measures, what assurances can he give to frustrated residents and businesses that they will be able to travel that route without fear of major delays or road closures? Cabinet secretary? I am surprised at the member's reference to scepticism, because the mitigation measures that have been taken forward are the ones that were recommended by the task force, including local stakeholders. That work continues to be implemented. There are almost £4.5 million spent on additional measures that are being put in place. However, the history of the site is a very clear one, where there has been significant problems as a result of landslide. The mitigation measures have had a positive impact and have not eliminated all of the matter. However, for example, the catch pits that are continuing to be installed will again provide additional resilience and assurance in there. The review work, which has been undertaken at the present time by Transport Scotland and the near expert advisers, will inform us that, while there are further measures that we can put in place in order to mitigate further landslide risks on this particular route as we go forward. To ask the Scottish Government how many staff employed by Caledonian McBrain are currently resident within the Western Isles. CalMac Ferries Ltd is a major employer in our island and coastal communities, employing some 242 staff who reside in Skye, Rasey, Lwis, Harris, The Use and Barra. I thank the cabinet secretary for his reply. Can he commit to examining ways in the future to further encourage more staff working for CalMac? Indeed, the Government's Ferries division to be given the option in the future of living and working in the communities that it serves. I will be aware that CalMac already proactively undertake work in schools, in our island communities and also in careers fairs in our island communities, not to encourage people to think about apprenticeships with them and also through their cadet programme. CalMac is always keen to try to seek to encourage local island-based applicants for jobs with them. However, I am always more than happy to encourage more of those who reside in our island communities to consider applying for those posts and to look at ways in which we can further support that in going forward. I will ensure that my ministerial colleague Paul Wheelhouse gives further consideration to that issue and whether further measures will be taken, as has been suggested by the member, to try to increase the number of people who live in our island communities who are employed with CalMac. The cabinet secretary confirmed that notwithstanding the valid points that my good friend and colleague Alasdair Allan has just proposed, the HQ of CalMac will remain in Gwyrwch in my constituency. CalMac made a firm commitment in its bid for the Clyde and Heavadine ferry service contract to retain its head office in Gwyrwch, and CalMac is an integral part of that. I recognise of the local community in Gwyrwch Clyde, where they employ some 266 people. I assure the member that we are keen to ensure that those communities who have a close link to CalMac maximise the benefits from them, not only in the member's constituency but also in his parliamentary colleague's constituency in our island communities. To ask the Scottish Government when was the last time it met with First Bus. The last meeting Scottish Government officials here with First Bus was on Monday 14 June this year. Cabinet Secretary, you may be aware that a growing number of my constituents have been complaining about the quality of the bus service from the south of Glasgow into the city centre. I asked First Bus to attend a public meeting that I had arranged only for them to refuse. Does the cabinet secretary not agree with me that, since First Bus is receiving substantial amounts of public money, the nation will be more accountable to the public and be prepared to listen to their needs? I am getting ahead of myself. The last meeting officials had was on 14 January, not in June of this year, if I can correct your record on that matter. I do regret the fact that First Bus did not agree to attend the meeting that was organised by the member, and I encourage them to continue to pursue First Bus on the issue. It is important that they engage with local communities where they deliver services to. I know that in the member's constituency, a particular area such as Casimolc, access to bus transport is extremely important in being able to access the city centre. I would certainly encourage First Bus to engage with the member and his constituents to look at addressing the issues of concern that his constituents may have and to ensure that the service has been delivered in such a way that reflects the needs of the local community. To ask the Scottish Government what its initial assessment is of the impact of the AWPR on north-east transport. Transport Scotland will be undertaking an evaluation of the AWPR project in line with the Scottish Trunk Road's infrastructure project evaluation guidance against both the transport planning objectives and wider evaluation criteria. The evaluation will consider the impact of the scheme by comparing conditions year 1 and then year 3 and year 5, after opening, with forecasts made during scheme design and development. He will be pleased to note that we are already seeing a significant reduction in heavy goods vehicles traffic in the Peter Couter and Tory parts of my constituency and in Market Street in the centre of Aberdeen, which has had unacceptable pollution and emissions levels. Will the cabinet secretary say when those will next be measured so that we can see the environmental as well as the economic benefits of this Government delivering the AWPR? I am pleased to hear that the member's constituents are already seeing the benefits of this particular scheme on the ground and the feedback that I have received reflects that. The Government's project evaluation will include consideration of the impacts of AWPR against a number of criteria that will include economic safety and environmental matters. The local authority has a responsibility to consider issues relating to local air quality monitoring and report periodically on the Aberdeen air quality management areas as to the levels in those areas where monitoring has been undertaken. Therefore, air quality monitoring at a local level is a matter that will be undertaken by the local authority. However, I can assure the member that we are continuing to work with Aberdeen city council in looking to progress the introduction of a low-emission zone by 2020 in the city, in line with its programme for government commitment, which is about helping to improve air quality within city centres, because we know of the potential impact that it can have on individuals who may have a pre-condition that is related to problems associated with taking in contaminated air. Jamie Greene, that must be brief. I simply ask the cabinet secretary to update Parliament when this delay project will be fully open to traffic and, for the record, what the total estimated cost of the project will be. The member will welcome the fact that 85 per cent of the road is now opened and the north-east economy is now getting the benefits of that. The contractors have advised that they have completed the remedial work on the crossing over the River Don. They have still to provide assurances over the remedial work that has been undertaken and enhanced monitoring arrangements that they are putting in place for that. Once they provide that information, that information will then be passed to Transport Scotland, which should then be considered for opening the final section of the road. I am sure that the member will welcome the fact that the majority of the road is now open. Of course, it still stands at £745 million as the contract set out. As the member will recognise that the contractors have stated that they have made a claim, and as I have made very clear that any claim, which is not unusual for a major infrastructure project of this nature, has to be substantiated and evidence-based. In today's time, the contractors have not provided that evidence to substantiate any claim. Therefore, it still stands at the present financial cost. I have to move on to the next section of questions. I apologise to Gil Ross for not reaching a question justice in the law of his questions. To ask the Scottish Government how many proceedings have been raised against Scottish limited partnerships for failure to comply with the Scottish partnerships register of people with significant control regulations 2017, and how many convictions there were? As at last Friday, the Crown had received no reports of alleged offences under the 2017 regulations, and, accordingly, the Crown in Scotland has not raised any proceedings under those regulations. Andy Wightman I thank the Lord Advocate for that answer. As of 10 December 2018, according to work undertaken by investigative journalist Richard Smith, of 18,000 active SLPs, just over 2,700 had not submitted any information. As the Lord Advocate is aware, this is an offence. In a recent answer from him on 19 March 2018, he said that over the last 10 years there had been no prosecutions for failure to meet statutory provisions. He also said that the Crown Office and Procurative Fiscal Service has recognised companies house as a specialist reporting agency, and is working with them to facilitate the reporting of alleged offences. What progress has been made with that work, and are any prosecutions anticipated as a consequence given that the offences are very evident? There have been a number of cases reported to the Crown since that question was asked and answered under section 451 of the Companies Act 2006 by companies house, and those cases are currently being considered. The Crown continues to work, and there is continuing engagement with companies house with a view to facilitating the reporting of other alleged offences, including those under the 2017 regulations. It is a matter of companies house as the specialist reporting agency to determine its approach to enforcement of the regulations. Rona Mackay All steps to improve transparency around the SLPs are, of course, welcome. Does the Lord Advocate agree that the proposed reforms announced by the UK Government in December last year snuck out under the cloud of Brexit chaos still falls far short of what is necessary to close the many loopholes that exist? That is a question that will be more appropriate to direct to Mr Mackay. Questions of substance about the proposed reforms to the law are matters for him. I can deal with issues relating to the investigation and prosecution of alleged offences under the regulations. Indeed, Lord Advocate. To ask the Scottish Government when it will next publish the police strength statistics for Scotland. The next edition of the series is the police officer quarterly strength Scotland 31 December 2018, which will be published on Tuesday 5 February at 9.30 am in line with the requirements of the code of practice for official statistics. That publication date has been announced by the Scottish Government's official statistics forthcoming publications webpage. Peter Chapman. I thank you, cabinet secretary, for that answer. The latest police numbers show that the number of local divisional officers in the north-east has been cut by 42 officers in the last year alone. That is a clear demonstration of the SNP's policy of centralisation to the detriment of communities in my region. Can he assure me that I won't discover further reductions in the next set of statistics? Cabinet secretary? Can I just on the local issue say that local policing in the north-east division has 1,158 full-time police officers as of 30 September 2018. That is an increase of 2.3 per cent since 2013. I have to say that there is a lack of self-awareness from Peter Chapman on asking this question. In the SNP's led Scottish Government, we have 913 more officers than we had in 2007. That is compared to the Conservative-led UK Government, which has utterly decimated police services in England and Wales. 20,000 less officers, that is a reduction of 13 per cent. Just to put that into numbers, in Scotland we have 32 officers per 10,000 in England and Wales. That is 21 officers per 10,000 in England and Wales. Perhaps a little bit of self-awareness is necessary when asking those questions. Perhaps as we get into burn season, he may want to be reminded of those famous verses, all would sound power, the gifty gears, to see ourselves as others see us. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I will resist the temptation of quoting burns in my question. But Edinburgh Council is currently planning to cut the £2.6 million that it provides at the police directly, which fund 54 additional community-based officers in the capital. Does the minister know the total number of officers that are funded directly by local authorities and what impact does he think that the reductions in local authority spending over the last few years will have on the level of community-based officers in Scotland? Can I say a couple of things to the member? He and I discussed this at the previous session of the Justice Committee. It would be for the local authority to decide how to spend its resource. He is free to argue otherwise that local authorities in the upcoming budget have a very fair settlement. Indeed, now, if he thinks that that is not the case, it is incumbent on his party to come forward with proposals on where we would have to remove money from the budget to increase local government budget. I understand that he will, no doubt in his party, engage in that process. However, we are treating police in our investment very fairly—not just fairly, but I would say very well—with a revenue protection, plus a 52 per cent increase in their capital budgets. We will continue to invest in the police, invest in local government if he thinks that there should be a change to that in terms of the budget. I would say to him and his colleagues to engage positively in the budget process. To ask the Scottish Government what the load advocate's position is on its competency to authorise another referendum on Scottish independence without another section 30 order. Presiding Officer, by long-standing convention, the content of any legal advice received by the Government is, of course, confidential. Mike Rumbles What a poor response that was, Presiding Officer. In the spirit of openness and transparency, which the Parliament prides itself on, does the minister not agree with me? Just as Scottish ministers demanded the UK Government publish its legal advice on Brexit and it was published, the load advocate's advice on an independence referendum should indeed be published by Scottish ministers. I see that the load advocate is present. It would have been helpful if perhaps the load advocate had given us the benefit of his advice. Presiding Officer, in the spirit of your oft-repeated plea that ministers and members should avoid extending those exchanges unnecessarily, I refer the member to my previous answer. However, in so doing, I point out that the convention that I refer to is so long-standing, it goes, I believe, all the way back to when the Lib Dems were part of the then coalition executive. Quite some time ago, of course, which is why perhaps the existence of the convention has slipped Mr Rumbles' memory. Adam Tomkins Thank you, Presiding Officer. Is it the Scottish Government's view that this Parliament could pass, could lawfully pass legislation authorising an independence referendum without a section 30 order or not? Yes or no? Presiding Officer, I have to refer the member to my earlier answer. Question 4, Ross Greer. Thank you to ask the Scottish Government what action it is taking to improve relations between the Kurdish community and the police. Police Scotland is committed to building positive relationships with all those Scotland's communities. The responsibility for that lies with the chief constable. However, the Scottish Government understands that Police Scotland has engaged recently with representatives of the Kurdish community to address concerns that have been raised by some members of that community. I also understand that Police Scotland has directly engaged with the member in his capacity as co-convener of this Parliament's cross-party group on Kurdistan. Ross Greer I thank the cabinet secretary for that answer. He might be aware that police operations over recent years have resulted in a situation where members of the Kurdish community are now afraid to attend their own community centre and will no longer send their children to language and dancing classes for fear of being monitored. That is obviously an unacceptable and unsustainable situation. Will the cabinet secretary agree to a meeting with representatives of the Kurdish community and the cross-party group on Kurdistan to discuss how we can improve relations and trust between this community and the police? Cabinet secretary. I am more than happy to engage with him and members of the Kurdish community. I could not do that on the basis of many life police investigations. You would understand that, of course, but on the wider issue. To hear their anxieties and their concerns, of course, I would be more than happy to meet him and his role as the co-convener of that cross-party group. I would also say that having engaged with Police Scotland over a number of years and the concerns that I had as a member of the Muslim community as a young Asian male growing up, having been stopped and searched on numerous occasions in my younger days for no apparent reason, I know that it is taking time for Police Scotland to build up that level of trust back with the Muslim community. That takes hard work, that takes effort, but certainly with the chief constable that we have, I know that he is utterly and absolutely committed to making sure that we have those positive community relations. Of course, he can continue to engage directly with Police Scotland where I can assist in that, or certainly where I can listen to those concerns. I would be more than happy to do so. Question 5, Gil Paterson. Many thanks, Presiding Officer. To ask the Scottish Government how much Police Scotland expects to receive from the proposals in the draft budget and how it will allocate this. The Scottish budget in 1920, published on 12 December last year, contains funding of £1.2 billion for the Scottish Police Authority. That is a 3.7 per cent increase on the 18-19 budget. That includes real terms protection for the revenue budget and, as I mentioned earlier, a 52 per cent uplift in the capital budget for investment in modern ICT. It is, of course, for the Scottish Police Authority to now set its budget for 1920, which includes setting the budget for Police Scotland. Gil Paterson. I thank the cabinet secretary for that answer. I am sure that the cabinet secretary will welcome the fact that the police and fire service will no longer be punished by the UK Treasury, now allowing them to claim back VAT. Has the police and fire service been paid back the VAT that had been well withheld? If so, how much has that been? Cabinet secretary? Members will know that we welcome the VAT policy change that came into effect in March 2018. However, that has not addressed the issue of that that has already been paid to Her Majesty's Treasury between 2013 and 2018. Having conceded the principle of saying that it is unfair to charge our service and only our service VAT, it has refused, of course, to pay back that £125 million for the Scottish Police Authority and around £50 million for the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service. If we could always, including the Parliament, look specifically at the Conservative benches, agree to lobby the UK Government to give back that money that they have taken unfairly from Scotland, then, of course, we could continue to invest in the police service, continue to invest in the ICT system and continue to keep investing and keeping our communities safe. The Police Scotland has been plagued by financial trouble since the SNP created it, despite the Scottish Conservatives getting back the VAT and bailing out the SNP. The Auditor General was clear last December that, if the ICT system is not sorted out, the force will remain in deficit. Does the cabinet secretary think that the Auditor General is wrong? I always listen to what the Auditor General has to say. I also happen to listen to what those south of the borderers are saying about the UK Government's lack of investment in the police service, just to quote the English and Wales Police Federation. They say that the UK Government's austerity policies, which have seen police budgets—oh, they do not like that at all, but I will continue to read this quote—are the UK Government's austerity policies, which have seen police budgets slashed by 19 per cent in real terms. That is why policing in England and Wales is in crisis and our members are on our knees trying to keep up with the rising tide of crime with nearly 22,000 fuel officers. Compare that to Scotland, where we have revenue protection and uplift of 52 per cent in the capital budget. More police officers than we inherited and lower crime rates. That puts us in a relatively good position in comparison to police services south of the border. To ask the Scottish Government whether HMP in Vanessa exceeded prisoner capacity in 2018. It did. The average population during 2018 was 113 people. That is an average occupancy level of just over 120 per cent. HMP in Vanessa, as the member will know, is a small local prison that manages the requirements of the courts across a vast geographical area. The Scottish Prison Service supports positive relationships by wherever possible accommodating people in the prison closest to the home, which has contributed to that level of occupancy. Edward Mountain. I thank the cabinet secretary for that answer. When prisons exceed capacity, one of the areas that suffers is rehabilitation and the other is safety, can you confirm that enough resources are being directed at providing sufficient orders and rehabilitation support to prisoners in Vanessa and when the new prison in Vanessa will be ready for use? I say that Edward Mountain raises a very important point. Indeed, none of us want to see over-occupancy in any of our prisons. I addressed the question on this last week, I think, from Liam McArthur. The fact that we have one of the highest, if not by some measures, the highest prison population in Western Europe is to great shame and is not a statistic to be proud of at all. He is absolutely right that that does have a detrimental effect, potentially, on rehabilitation. I know that SPS is very aware of that and will work hard to continue to fund rehabilitation programmes and also look at alternatives to custody. I know that his UK Government colleagues recognise that short sentences do not have the impact on rehabilitating those who commit crimes. Certainly, we are better at looking at community disposals and rehabilitating those offenders. When we come forward with plans to introduce a presumption against short sentences of 12 months, I would appreciate him and his party looking at that with genuine open-mindedness. In terms of the replacement for HNP in Vanessa, I will send him some of the details on that. It is within our infrastructure planning in the Government, but it would be fair to say that the priority at the moment is the female custodial estate, then a replacement for our Barlinnie and then a replacement for HNP in Vanessa. To ask the Scottish Government how its policy on dealing with hate crimes is informed by the expertise of women's organisations. For the question, there is a clear need for action to be taken to tackle gender-based prejudice and misogyny. We are currently seeking views on how best to tackle that in Scotland as part of our consultation on hate crime legislation. As we work to develop the proposals within our consultation, we engage with a number of women's organisations, including but not exclusive to gender rape crisis Scotland's zero-tolerance and Scottish women's aid. The consultation was launched, as the member no doubt knows, on 14 November and will run until 24 February this year, which provides a range of organisations and groups, as well as members of the public, with an opportunity to share their views and inform what is included in the new hate crime legislation. I encourage everybody with an interest to provide a response. Claudia Beamish I thank the cabinet secretary for that answer and I certainly welcome the consultation. I wonder if the cabinet secretary can give detail of how his Government is engaging with women's groups, especially in rural parts of the country, where women might be quite isolated and not necessarily members of a particular grouping. That is a hugely important point. As part of the hate crime consultation, we are holding a host of events right across the country, including in some remote and rural areas. I will be meeting alongside the Minister for Equalities and Gender, along with a number of other women's organisations in March of this year. I will certainly speak to them if they feel there is a deficiency in terms of the engagement with women in remote and rural areas. I would be more than happy to see how we can address that deficiency if it exists. She is absolutely right on the premise of her question that there are undoubtedly specific issues that affect women in rural and rural areas. Anything more we can do on that and I can do as the cabinet secretary, certainly I will look to do. Mark McDonald To ask the Scottish Government what steps are in place to prevent the disclosure of an accused identity from compromising the safety of innocent parties. In addition to the provisions of the contempt of court act 1981, the courts have a common law power to restrict the reporting of proceedings where it is in the interests of justice to do so. It is for the court to decide whether to make such an order in an individual case and appropriate cases and interdict may also be available. The cabinet secretary is aware that I wrote to himself the Lord Advocate and Solicitor General about a case in my constituency where a young victim could potentially have been identified inadvertently as a result of the accused identity being disclosed. I am grateful for the support that was provided to prevent that from happening, but there are other cases where that occurs. For example, in cases where the individual's identity and address being disclosed opens up the potential for innocent family members to face potential retribution and repercussion as a result of their actions, despite the fact that those individuals themselves are innocent. Will the cabinet secretary look at the issues around identification and particular disclosure of address details that can often lead to repercussions and retribution being brought to the door of family members who have played no role in any criminal proceedings? It is an important issue that Mark McDonald raises. I will look at that. I say once again that it is of course for the courts to make that decision when it comes to potential, when it comes to particular orders, imposing orders and banning publications of matters mentioned in court. On the wider issue, he is not the only MSP that is written to me about a similar case. There are protections in place, but if we can strengthen them, I would look to my colleagues, such as Lord Advocate and others, if we can look at seeing what else can be done. Of course, we will keep an open mind to that, with whatever is in the power of the Government, but I reiterate that much of that is in the power of the courts, and rightly so. Thank you very much. That concludes portfolio questions. Just to let me finish, I will take you. I apologise to Liam Kerr and Joan McAlpine for failing to reach them. Mr Rumbles. I rise to make a point of order. It is a focus on the role and of the Scotland Act of the law officers—the Lord Advocate present with us today and the solicitor general. The law officers are privileged to be the only two unelected people allowed to sit in this chamber. That was written into the Scotland Act so that they are here, specifically, to give their opinions and views directly to MSPs. In my question, I ask what the Lord Advocate's position is on the Scottish Government's competency to authorise another referendum on Scottish independence without another section 30 order. I did not ask what his advice was to the Scottish Government. I specifically asked for his advice to MSPs here in this chamber. Under the Scotland Act, they are here for that purpose. What I find particularly annoying is that the Lord Advocate is present and has not taken the decision to answer my question. Is it appropriate—I would like to know from the chair—for the Lord Advocate to sit in this Parliament in the privileged position he is in the Scotland Act and not address MSPs directly as was the purpose of the Scotland Act in the first place? I thank you for making it. However, I set out in rule 13.7 of the standing orders with a few exceptions that do not apply in this instance. Oral questions may be answered by any member of the Scottish Government or a junior Scottish minister. As the member is aware, oral questions are addressed to the Scottish Government as your one was and it is for the Scottish Government to decide who attends to answer each question. Sorry, you do not have a microphone. You have now. I understand all of that and I accept entirely the position that you have just outlined. However, my question goes further than my question today. I understand that the Scottish Government can choose understanding orders to do this. My question makes more a fundamental point and is very important for the Parliament. Why is the Lord Advocate under the Scotland Act here in his privileged position and yet has chosen not to answer the questions directly that he is here for under the Scotland Act? I am afraid that I did answer your point of order. The point of order was answered clearly in the standing orders. That is the position, Mr Rumbles. You may be dissatisfied, but that is the rules of the Parliament. I have to now move on to the next item of business, which is a statement, and I will give the front bench a moment to take up their places.