 The next item of business is topical questions. At question number one, I call Kenneth Gibson. Thank you, Presiding Officer. To ask the Scottish Government what action it will take to ensure optimum ferry capacity to and from Arran, and, in light of reports that repairs to the MV Caledonian Isles are not expected to conclude before mid-June. The delay regarding the MV Caledonian Isles is regrettable, and I recognise the frustration felt by communities as a result. The responsibility for operational decisions regarding ferry services lies with CalMac as the operator. We expect them to be working along with advisers to ensure repair work is progressed at pace. The Cabinet Secretary for Transport spoke with CalMac's chief executive yesterday to convey her concern and making clear that everything must be done to address capacity and provide assurances for the Arran community and others across the network, particularly as we look towards the Easter break and beyond. The MV Isle of Arran is operating out of Ardrossan, and there continues to be additional sailings via the island's secondary route, Clonig to Llanza, and no capacity issues are being reported at this time. Kenneth Gibson. I thank the minister for that response. I know that he is fully aware of the impact that numerous cancellations due to weather, mechanical breakdown and fender repairs have had on Arran and Ardrossan, together with Peelport's permanent closure of Ardrossan's Irish berth and subsequent removal of the MV Alfred by CalMac. Ardrossan to Berodic is CalMac's busiest route, yet it is being serviced by the 40-year-old MV Isle of Arran alone. With the Easter run horizon, the loss of the Caledonian Isles couldn't have come at a worse time for Arran's economy. Right now, islanders need certainty, so what reassurance can the minister provide both Arranachs and prospective visitors that the capacity that she said is not a problem at the moment won't be a problem during Easter holidays? The Cabinet Secretary for Transport has committed to engaging directly with the impacted communities. She met Arran Ferry committee last week and she thanks Mr Gibson for his part in organising this event. At this meeting, she agreed to impress on CalMac the need for capacity to be in place for the Easter holidays, which she has done so this week and is something that she will continue to do. We are pushing CalMac to ensure that it has a robust contingency plan in place to ensure that it maximise the capacity with available vessels and can clearly communicate that the island remains open for business across that period. The cabinet secretary is also travelling back from a visit to the Western Isles where she has met local communities, port and ferry staff. People can't book until at least 4 March new timings to travel because of the Caledonian Isles and the late decision on going down south, and the work has to be done on it. The coming disruption in fleet reshuffling is likely to be the first major test of CalMac's route prioritisation framework since it was overhauled last October. Can the minister confirm that the appalling service that Arranachs has endured in recent months will be considered? Also, whether the increased risk of cancellations and diversions as a result of the issues at Addross and Harbour will be factored into vessel deployment decisions with ways found to expedite the Enveigl and Sanix entering service on the ferry network at the earliest possible opportunity. As requested by ministers following service disruption last year, CalMac have reviewed the route prioritisation matrix for the major vessel fleet. They have done this with the support of the ferry community board. Following public consultation, CalMac have made a number of changes to their prioritisation approach, including more emphasis on the level of use by island residents and commercial vehicles, along with higher prioritisation for routes with limited capacity on alternative services. I fully expect that to be applied by CalMac when they consider their deployment options. Those plans and timing for introducing the Enveigl and Sanix into service will be kept under review as we progress through the build completion, handover and operation trials process. Those are required to meet the MCA and other requirements and ultimately provide safe and efficient services for our island communities. The minister said that the situation was regrettable. That surely is an understatement. It is catastrophic. The island is now being serviced by one vessel, which is over four decades old. If that breaks down, then what else is there? The problem is that it will need to take another ferry off another island route pitting one island against another. This is shambolic, minister. Let me ask directly. Is the Scottish Government willing to put up its purse and give compensation to those businesses that are losing money, hand over fist day in day out right now? We will also stand up and apologise to the people of our island for the absolute shambolic handling of the entire ferry fiasco that his party and his Government is presiding over. The issues around compensation have understandably and rightly been raised many a time with this Government. I have looked into the penalty deductions that are made in relation to failures on the network. It is the view that we should continue to use that money to reinvest in the ferry network. There is a legitimate goal around the use of those deductions, but I think that the best use of that money is to reinvest back into the network. I have previously noted the calls for business support. By any such scheme, we would need to be carefully considered and would require stark choices to be made about funding priorities set against efforts to provide resilience in the network. The cabinet secretary and ministers are due to meet to discuss the wider issues to island business resilience. The minister will be aware of the appalling implications on Arran as a result of the continuing failure to provide a regular Roddick address and service. The Caledonia Nile has been out of service since early January, as has been said. The Alfred can no longer be used on the route, so we are reliant on 40-year-old Arran. Does he not accept that this is an inevitable problem of ageing fleet due to past failure to invest and indeed the failure to make progress at Addrossan harbour is coming home to roost? We need far more robust resilience strategies provided and that the Scottish Government needs to be centrally involved in that. I do not think that there is any doubt that the Arran community have been impacted. I spoke to businesses this morning and I am quite sure that the cabinet secretary is working with them on a regular basis. She is engaging with them fully. Of what I am hearing from those businesses in that community, is that they are very pleased with the response that they are getting from the cabinet secretary and I am convinced that she will find the solutions that we need to go forward. The withdrawal of MV Caledonia Nile, unfortunately, comes at a critical time as we approach the busier summer timetable period. Communities across the whole network are, of course, anxiously awaiting an update on deployment proposals of all CalMac's other major vessels while the Cali isles is out of action. Can the minister assure my constituents that no island community will be forced to bear the brunt of this disruption in the weeks to come? As I have already said, the cabinet secretary met CalMac yesterday to convey her concern and to ensure that they have a robust contingency plan in place to maximise capacity with available vessels to ensure the continued delivery of lifeline services across the network. CalMac, at the request of ministers, has made a number of changes to its prioritisation approach, including more emphasis on the level of use by island residents and commercial vehicles, along with higher prioritisation for routes with limited capacity on alternative services. I fully expect that to be applied by CalMac when considering deployment options. To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to reports that Police Scotland's proportionate response to crime pilot, in which not all reported crimes were investigated, is to be extended across Scotland. At a meeting of the Scottish Police Authority last week, the chief constable stated that the north-east pilot was about ensuring a proportionate approach to policing. Deputy Chief Constable Malcolm Graham also outlined some preliminary findings with a full evaluation to be presented to the SPA in the near future. Any decision on whether the pilot will be extended more widely are for Police Scotland, with oversight and scrutiny provided by the SPA, public confidence will be key to the process. Officers in the north-east will continue to investigate all crimes reported. That means that all reports are recorded using the Thrive model, with an assessment of threat, harm, risk and investigative opportunities, vulnerability and engagement. Police Scotland remains focused on keeping communities safe from harm. The SNP Government might not want to listen to opposition MSPs, but it should listen to Scotland's police officers. The Scottish Police Federation could not be clearer about this surrender to criminals. Its chair says that this is being driven, and I quote, purely by finance and not by basic policing principles. The general secretary reveals that they were not even consulted on this policy being extended across Scotland. He says that the public have been let down. He is absolutely right. Will the cabinet secretary disclose how many crimes were not investigated in the pilot, and how many more she expects will not be investigated across Scotland? I do all members and all stakeholders the courtesy of listening to their viewpoints. It is a shame that that is not always replicated, because despite a narrative by some of misconstruing the pilot, which I think is regrettable, I have to once again emphasise what the chief constable has said to the board and also to observers that this is not a policy about non-investigation. Police Scotland has been clear that they will continue to investigate all crimes reported. Every crime is subject to an individual assessment. If there are no proportionate lines of inquiry and no risk and no threat, there will of course be a report filed and a crime reference number issued. Unless there is any further evidence or information, there would be no further action. However, it is important to remember that the public at the end of the day want quick and proportionate responses, bearing in mind that the change and demands on societies change in crime and the change in demands on our police force necessitates that. I really do not think that the Scottish Police Federation is misconstruing the terms of this policy. I am surprised to hear the cabinet secretary suggesting that. The police officers and the public have absolutely no idea what crimes will not be investigated, and that is exactly what is happening, no matter how it is spun. The pilot scheme's evaluation report is also being kept secret. Will the cabinet secretary explain what crimes she considers minor enough to be effectively decriminalised? It is Mr Findlay who misconstrues the pilots and deliberately misconstrues my words to this Parliament. I have to be clear with him that public confidence in the pilot and the decision making around it, which is still to take place, is absolutely crucial. That is why there is a robust evaluation process. It is anticipated if he had perhaps listened to the commentary and the contribution of the Deputy Chief Constable at the SPA board that this is about a proportionate response to each and every crime. We surely do not expect police officers to pursue a line of inquiry if there is, indeed, no line of inquiry to pursue. It is a shame that Mr Findlay will continue to blister the importance of this matter, because it is about ensuring that we have public confidence, that we respond proportionately to each and every crime, and that we work together to keep Scotland safe. Does the cabinet secretary agree that this approach seeks to ensure a proportionate and appropriate response so that, where there are no lines of inquiry, information is recorded but no further action is taken, therefore enabling officers to concentrate on more serious crimes where there are opportunities for detection? Does the cabinet secretary agree that it is important that the public is reassured that, where evidence subsequently comes to light, the matter will indeed be investigated? To be clear, there are occasions where reported crimes have no associated threat risk, harm or vulnerability and, as I have said, no proportionate lines of inquiry for police officers to investigate. Police Scotland, I repeat, has been very clear that when reported crimes do have proportionate lines of inquiry, including after crime has been reported, they will be investigated as has always been the case. If I quote the Deputy Chief Constable Malcolm Graham when he said, if there are no lines of inquiry that can be pursued, then we shouldn't be, in some ways, setting up an expectation that there are things that police can do when we can't. I note that the preliminary findings outlined by the Deputy Chief Constable Graham at the same meeting included that around 5 per cent of calls taken by Police Scotland fell into this category. Pauline McNeill It will be interesting to see if this pilot does have public confidence and a central question is who arbitrates whether or not it is proportionate or not. How can the cabinet secretary ignore the police federation who also said that this policy is a dangerous precedent and we should be very, very careful? Is this the slippery slope? If you do not investigate these crimes, how do we know that other crimes will not continue to be investigated? How can the cabinet secretary be so sure that this has public confidence? Felly, that is a very important part of the evaluation process. It will be scrutinised robustly and thoroughly by the oversight group that the Scottish Police Authority has set up. The chair of the Scottish Police Authority will chair that oversight group. It will, of course, be looking at many factors, but at its core will indeed be public confidence. I have to repeat, Presiding Officer, that surely we cannot expect police officers to be pursuing lines of inquiry where no lines of inquiry exist. As I reply to Orgyn Nicol in terms of the preliminary findings, we will all want to see the full report along with the full evaluation, but the preliminary findings say that around less than 5 per cent of calls taken by Police Scotland fall into this category. Former superintendent Martin Gallacher has described Police Scotland's decision not to tackle minor crime as disastrous. That could include crimes such as vandalism, break-ins or antisocial behaviour in our communities. We often hear that crime is falling, but it is estimated that 60 per cent of crime is unreported. Can I ask the cabinet secretary how the Scottish Government ensures that they are being tough on criminals when they are letting some away without investigation? I think that that is a very serious slur against policing in this Scotland that they do not pursue lines of inquiry when they exist. We all have a shared endeavour. I accept the scrutiny and the challenge and I accept that everybody in this chamber has an interest in ensuring that our communities are safe. Police Scotland investigates a massive range of crimes from those that some of us may consider less serious to those crimes of the utmost seriousness. We really have to be looking carefully at this pilot, but we should be looking first and foremost at the facts and evidence, Presiding Officer. I thank the cabinet secretary for confirming that Police Scotland has always stated, and now the chief constable has confirmed officers, in the north east, continue to investigate all crimes reported and the service remains focused on keeping communities safe from harm. Can the cabinet secretary provide an explanation of the Thrive initiative? Threat, harm, risk, investigative, opportunity assessments carried out on crime reports? The Thrive model is not new. It was rolled out as part of the contact assessment model in 2021 to ensure that all callers receive an appropriate response and that incidents can be properly prioritised. The handlers consider the six key factors of threat, harm, risk, investigative opportunity, vulnerability and engagement on each call received. If an immediate or prompt police response is required, the call is passed to the area control room. The most suitably located, skilled and equipped police officers will be dispatched. If the call does not require an immediate response, it will be passed to a specialist team of officers and staff for further assessment. It is the 2022 assurance review of the contact assessment model that HMICS noted that Thrive was helping to determine the most appropriate response to incidents being reported to Police Scotland. The cabinet secretary has referred on many occasions to the importance of public confidence. It is not clear, though, from our responses to date how that public confidence will be assessed. I wonder whether she could provide more detail on that. Indeed, the engagement that has been with victims groups will clearly have a very clear view on the effectiveness of this approach. It is an important point, and the evaluation and the full report would be my expectation that that will address the issue very clearly of public confidence and, indeed, feedback from the communities that we all seek to represent.