 That concludes general questions. We will now move on to the next item of business, which is First Minister's Questions. At question number 1, I call Douglas Ross. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. An email revealed yesterday at the UK Covid Inquiry included... Really, SNP members are groaning because we're asking about the Covid Inquiry. So let me start again. Thank you, Presiding Officer. An email revealed yesterday by the UK Covid Inquiry. third party, y gwmddiad yw'r FFWF aethwr i'rói ffordd aethwr diwrnodol iddyn nhw'n rôl, ond pan oedd yn ymddangos i Siw Llywodraeth, dan y ffordd i'r FFWF. Mae'r e-mail yma wrthens, rwy'n bryd yn oed yn fynd i chi'n gweithio ymdarnol. Fel fau'r gwirionedd maen nhw'n gwaith ymddangos maen nhw oheithio maen nhw ymddangos, mae'r gwrthion gyngor yn cymaint i'n cael eu fod yn mynd i'r ffordd i'r lleol. diogelio. Felly mae'n llywodraeth, ac mae hynny'n gwneud eu mewn ystodau ar gyfer unrhyw o unrhyw Scotland yw y rheswm. Rwy'n mwy fydd yw'r cyfrifio o'r gwneud yw'r cyfrifio. Mae'r nid yw'r pethau yn y gallu'r ffrifio yn ni'n nrhyw. John Swinney yn ni'n ni'n ni'n ni'n ni'n ni'n ni'n ni'n ni'n ni'n ni'n ni'n ni'n ni'n ni'n ni'n ni'n ni'n ni'n ni'n ni'n ni'n ni'n ni'n ni'n ni'n yw yw yw yw unig o'r byw sydd yn ddigidio ar gyfer y cyfnodol? Mae'n ddigidio, wrth gwrs, yw yw yw yw yw yw yw yw yw yw, ac Douglas Ross, yw'r e-mail yw'r SNP yw eisiau, yw yw yw yw yw yw yw yw'r Gwfffinol cyfnodol, yw yw John Swinney, yw Nicola Sturgeon, yw yw yw yw yw yw yw yw yw yw yw Yw Jeane Freeman, I can suggest that the decision around Spain was made for any other reason than epidemiology. I'm afraid it is an absolute fantasy. Even if we accepted Douglas Ross's example, or Douglas Ross's framing, that we were looking at this through a constitutional lens and attempting to curry favour with Spain, surely then we would have put them on the exempt list. We didn't put them on the exempt list—the exact point— Why did we not do that? Because let's look at the epidemiology at that point, that Scotland did not include Spain on the exemplars, like England and Wales did. Why? Because their point of prevalence at that time was 0.33. That was four times higher than the point of prevalence in Scotland. In fact, Spain was the only country at that point proposed for the exemplar list that had significantly higher prevalence than Scotland did at the time. When I look at the evidence and the advice from the chief medical officer at the time, he expressed concern about the importation risks. Ministers concluded that they should not add Spain to the list of exempted countries due to our lower prevalence and the fact that Spain had four times higher prevalence. Douglas Ross can do his best to spin. He can do his best to throw insults. He can do his best to try to malign and misrepresent facts and malign not just ministers but civil servants. I believe that the people of Scotland know, for all of the challenges that we had during the pandemic, that the Scottish Government always prioritised protecting the public from the harms of Covid. I don't think that Douglas Ross has to say the same of his party in the UK Government. Amid pretty stiff competition, that might be the most bizarre answer I've ever heard from Humza Yousif. He's saying it's fact, so here is a fact. The day after, Humza Yousif received that email speaking about political concerns that there might be with the Spanish Government allowing an independent Scotland into the EU, he stood up and announced that they were introducing a corridor, travel corridor, with Spain. The very next day they opened up travel to Spain and five days later they had to close it down again because Covid cases were rocketing. That's the fact and we know it because Humza Yousif told us and it's black and white in evidence to the inquiry that they were thinking about independence instead of focusing purely on public health. Now what we've not seen is any evidence of Humza Yousif's response to that email and Nicola Sturgeon's messages have all gone from that time because she deleted them. The former SNP leader destroyed all of her WhatsApp messages despite knowing that he do not destroy order was in place. Despite promising grieving families, she would be transparent. Despite assuring journalists that all her messages would be handed to the inquiry, she told the press unequivocally yes, her messages would be provided. So why did Nicola Sturgeon say yes when she actually meant no? First of all, once again, effective from 10 July 2020, Spain was not included on the first exempt countries list due to the higher prevalence. It had four times higher than it had in relation to Scotland. Let me just say in relation to WhatsApp messages. Douglas Ross has thrown all sorts of incendatory accusations the way particularly of Nicola Sturgeon for not retaining WhatsApp messages. He's demanded investigations and reviews. Not only did his boss, the Prime Minister, not retain his messages, he actually took the inquiry to court and lost. Just over the last hour, we've heard from Alistair Jack, again, Douglas Ross's boss when he was in the Scotland office. What did Alistair Jack say about his WhatsApp messages? He was asked, did he delete his WhatsApp messages? Here's what Alistair Jack said. He said, I did delete them because he wanted to free up storage capacity on his phone. When he was asked if there was any government business on these WhatsApps, he said and I will quote him directly, I didn't think anything of it. When he was asked if he considered the needs of the public inquiry, here's what he said and I will quote directly. No, I didn't. I was quite keen for my phone to start working again, is what he said. Is astonishing that Douglas Ross demands investigations and reviews in relation to Nicola Sturgeon for not retaining her WhatsApps. Not his boss, his colleague, who deletes his WhatsApps, didn't even think about the inquiry, well that's perfectly fine. Well there's one word for that, Presiding Officer, and his hypocrisy and the people of Scotland can see right through Douglas Ross. It is not perfectly fine. Alistair Jack was wrong to delete his WhatsApp messages. He has apologised and he regrets it. Hamza Yousif can't step out the shadow of his disgraced predecessor and say the same. Of course, Nicola Sturgeon has not apologised. She has not apologised for doing it. She has said she was right because she was following government policy. That's a massive difference, First Minister. I can't let the First Minister's confusion over this travel ban with Spain pass. He's just saying that they kept in place the restrictions with Spain. On 20 July, the day after that email was sent, Hamza Yousif said and I quote, we are able to lift the requirement for those travelling from Spain. Five days later, he says, the decision to exempt Spain earlier this week was taken when the data showed there was an improvement. The latest data has given us cause for concern to overturn that decision. So he definitely made a decision on the back of that email. Mr Ross, Mr Ross, can I just ask the front bench to please resist any temptation to contribute, Mr Ross? Well, I think they're trying to come up with a story here because what the First Minister has said so far does not match what he did in practice in 2020. But we know that the deleted WhatsApp messages were covering up major decisions from this SNP government. We know that because of the messages that we have been able to see. Hamza Yousif, when he was then health secretary in charge of the NHS, joked with the national clinical director, Jason Leitch. He laughed about false claims that children were hospitalised because of Covid. In one revealing exchange, Hamza Yousif said this, I'm winging it and we'll get found out sooner or later. First Minister, at what point do you think you were finally found out? First Minister, let's look at the facts. Where Douglas Ross is right, of course, there was Spain initially exempt, not exempt from a travel corridor and then put on a travel corridor. Why? Were they? Because we have the data that the UK Government presented by the London School of Hygiene. First Minister, we have so many members who want to put questions to the First Minister. That would be more likely if we could get on with our session and if I don't have to keep asking front benches to resist the temptation to contribute when they shouldn't be. They don't want to listen to the facts and the facts are this. Douglas Ross said in his own response that the situation improved in Spain and that is correct. The London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine showed a marked improvement in the position in Spain with point prevalence going down to 0.015 per cent. That is the reason why they were put on the exempt list. When the situation worsened, just a matter of days later, worse than considerably, all the UK nations decided to take them off that exempt list. Again, we made the decisions for purely epidemiological reasons. When it comes to the UK Government and the messages that we have seen, I remind Douglas Ross of what we have seen from the UK Government and the messages that have been revealed. He had a Prime Minister, Boris Johnson, that Douglas Ross not only backed to the very end but invited to his party conference. Boris Johnson, who allegedly, according to the evidence that we have heard, said, let the bodies pile up high. When discussing long Covid, he called it, and forgive me for the language, bollocks. We had a Prime Minister, Boris Johnson, who partied in number 10 while loved ones missed the funerals of their relatives. So, yes, we could have done better when it came to the retention of informal messages, but when it comes to steering this country through some of its darkest days, I am very pleased that we had Nicola Sturgeon in charge here in the Scottish Government as opposed to Boris Johnson. I would remind all members of the need for courtesy. Members, I would be grateful if you could desist for a moment. Just let's remind one another of the need for courtesy and respect in this chamber, and that applies to using quotations to use words that might otherwise be regarded as unparlumentary. I'm also very conscious, as I've said, of the numbers who wish to put questions today, and I would be grateful for more concise questions and responses. I call Douglas Ross. Even after yesterday's evidence from the former First Minister, the words we've heard from the Covid-19 bereaved, Humza Yousaf, still backs her to the hill, and that tells you everything you need to know about this First Minister, who is simply the continuity candidate for Team Sturgeon. As health secretary during the pandemic, he joked about not knowing what he was doing. When he sent that message by that stage, 10,000 people in Scotland had already lost their lives from Covid. But he wasn't the only one that's been found out. Nicola Sturgeon destroyed evidence on an industrial scale. The SNP Government considered independence for key decisions. They did things for purely political reasons. They broke promises to grieving families and the public who sacrificed so much. Humza Yousaf was winging it but hasn't the whole SNP Government being found out. First Minister, I go back to the point that I've made several times in these exchanges over the weeks that I absolutely accept, wholeheartedly, that retention policy and informal communications clearly could have and should have been better. That's why, of course, I've commissioned that externally led review. On the big calls, many of the decisions that we made helped to save lives. If we look at some of the evidence that has been presented to the Covid inquiry, if we look at the evidence from Professor Sir Ian Diamond and Jackie Baillie shouting, she may want to listen to the evidence by Professor Sir Ian Diamond. He's a chief executive of the UK Stats Authority and UK national statistician. He gave details of age standardised mortality rates per 100,000 right across the four nations. This is his data, not my data. That analysis shows that in Scotland, of course, we had the lowest level of deaths per 100,000 according to the ASMR data. Every single one of those lives lost is undoubtedly a tragedy. In fact, many of my colleagues on these benches lost a loved one to Covid. On those calls, the decisions that we made have helped to save lives. Let's look at what the World Health Organization said—again, not my data, but the World Health Organization's data—that it estimated that 22,138,000 lives in Scotland were saved as a direct result of the Covid-19 vaccination programme. I accept fully that, when it comes to informal communications, we could have and should have done better. There are also other decisions that, of course, we look at and we think that we could have perhaps moved quicker or moved earlier or done things differently. While political opponents may well try to rewrite history and engage in, frankly, smears insults towards Government ministers and civil servants, I can stand up here and say that I know that every single day of that pandemic, Nicholas Sturgeon, the rest of us in the Scottish Government, civil servants included, worked for one reason and one reason only to protect the people of Scotland from the harms of Covid. 2. Anna Sarwar That is what we have learned after three weeks of the Covid inquiry in Scotland. The most senior ministers and officials knowingly deleted evidence to how they operated during the pandemic. They subverted the Covid inquiry and broke freedom of information laws. They plotted how to maximise their own political advantage while thousands of Scots fought for their lives. It is a betrayal of the trust that the people of Scotland put into this SNP Government. Nicholas Sturgeon did not tell the truth to the public and Humza Yousaf seems to have misled this Parliament in an attempt to defend her. Now the SNP deputy leader is supporting attacks on the inquiry itself. Why is protecting the SNP more important to Humza Yousaf than getting to the truth? 1. Anna Sarwar I go back to the point that I just made to Douglas Ross. I repeat it again to Anna Sarwar. Yes, we should have done better on retention policy of informal communications. On the course of the pandemic, when it came to the important decisions that helped to save lives, I believe that we took first of all the decisions for the right reason. We can evidence that very clearly. Protecting people from harm and the people of Scotland from harm was the number 1 overriding priority. Through the actions that we took. When it came to one measure, the age standardised mortality rates per 100,000 across the four UK nations, Scotland had 124.9 per 100,000. That was different to England—145 per 100,000 and Wales—144 per 100,000. 144 per 100,000, the UK average 143 per 100,000. That is not to diminish the number of lives that continue to be lost to Covid to this very day. The decisions that we took also ensured that when it came to the booster vaccination, it was one of the fastest booster vaccination programmes in the world at one point, certainly the fastest in the UK by quite some distance too. Yes, we could have and should have done better, except fully on message retention. I, of course, handed over the messages that I had in question about them for almost three hours, but on the big calls that helped to save lives, I believe that we can evidence and we've seen the evidence, and not only did we do it for the right reason, but our interventions helped to save lives here in Scotland. Annas Sarwar. Minister and officials knowingly deleted evidence for the Covid inquiry, and the answer to this betrayal of the Scottish people are review into how the Scottish Government records information. In 2020, when we had the salmon inquiry and there were accusations of a cover-up, what did they do? Promise a review. In 2022, when we had investigations into the ferry scandal and there were accusations of a cover-up, what did they do? Promise a review. Now we have the industrial-scale deletion of evidence for the Covid inquiry, and what's this First Minister's answer? A review. They simply don't get it. Pamela Thomas, who lost her brother during the pandemic, said this yesterday. I don't think they're capable of actually telling the truth or being transparent. Pamela is right, isn't she? First Minister. I want to, of course, express my condolence to every single member of the country who lost a loved one through Covid. Pamela, of course, included. I make this point again to all of us, including members of this Government, who lost loved ones through Covid. Ministerial colleagues who have relatives who continue to suffer the long-term effects of Covid. I have colleagues who had to restrict the numbers, who could attend the funeral of a loved one. Many of us included children who were impacted because of the closure of schools because of Covid. I say that not because I'm trying to counter any sympathy from Anasawa or anybody else. I say that because we were all in this together. We were not detached somehow from the impacts or the effects of the pandemic. That's why every decision that we made was made with one overarching priority in mind—how to protect as many people as we could from the harm of Covid. Do I think that we've got every decision right? No, I don't. I don't think that any Government in the world—any Government leader in the world—could put their hand in their heart and say that they've got every single decision right. What I can say is that we did it for the right reasons. On the big decisions that were crucial to saving lives, I believe on many of them. We've got them right. Some, of course, will not have got right. I promise those who have been bereaved by Covid and the families of those who have been bereaved by Covid that not only will we continue to co-operate with both inquiries, but we promise to learn the lessons of those inquiries, too. Anasawa. The Covid-19 believes that families don't believe the First Minister when he gives those reassurances. The Covid inquiry is about learning the lessons so that this can never happen again, but they have been obstructed by this Government with evidence supplied late or not at all. The decisions that the inquiry is investigating still weigh on the people across this country. Why were Covid-positive patients sent into care homes? Why was inadequate PPE being supplied to care workers and leaving people exposed? What impact did lockdowns have on our young people who missed out on years of education? Three years ago, in an election during the pandemic, many people in Scotland voted for his party because they thought that Nicola Sturgeon did the best that she could. They trusted her when she said that this Parliament would be about Covid recovery. Now those same people have had their trust broken by this Government and they are appalled at the cover-up. First Minister, is it not true that it is not just the messages that have disappeared? So has the trust in this SNP Government. I intend to leave the verdict of trust to the people of Scotland. Anasawa is right. One of the major factors of why the SNP is back into power is because of her handling over the course of the pandemic. That was not judged. I am saying to Anasawa that he is absolutely correct and one of the reasons why we are standing here. What I do not think was an issue during the 2021 election was our retention policy, our record management policy. It was about whether or not we got the calls right in relation to the vaccination programme and whether we did the right thing in introducing non-pharmaceutical interventions. Anasawa talks about, in his words, an industrial scale deletion. We handed over 28,000 WhatsApp messages and 19,000 documents. Anasawa is right to ask questions about care homes, about PPE, about lockdown and its impacts. Those are exactly the questions that the inquiry is examining. The suggestion from Anasawa that somehow we are not being transparent. Can I remind Anasawa that not only are we cooperating with a UK inquiry, we are the only nation in the UK to specifically establish an inquiry in our country. We will also be cooperating with that Scottish inquiry too. Nicola Sturgeon, more than 250 media briefings ministers in this Government, attended this Parliament not on dozens of occasions but hundreds of occasions explaining the reason why we took decisions. I go back to the very central point here. We did not get everything right and certainly not in relation to retention of messages. What we did get right and what we did do is the intention behind our decisions was to protect people from harm. According to the world health organisations, through the interventions that we took, we helped to save over 23,000 people's lives. Those are 23,000 people who would not be here if it was not for vaccinations, if it was not for the non-pharmaceutical interventions and the decisions that this Government took. I make no apologies for that. Question 3, Alex Cole-Hamilton. Thank you, Presiding Officer. Do you ask the First Minister when the Cabinet will next meet? First Minister? Tuesday. Alex Cole-Hamilton. Presiding Officer, we did hear the striking testimony from the former First Minister at the inquiry yesterday about her personal phone on which she retained what that message is for the salmon inquiry but deleted them for every aspect of the pandemic. Forever denying the bereaved families an insight into the mind of the person who held all of the power, about hospitality rules seemingly made up at random, sending some businesses to the wall, unanswered questions about care homes, about school closures and a secret central committee in charge, it seems, of everything about which the finance secretary knew nothing and of which there are no minutes, a Government within a Government. Humzaeus have sought all of this and yet did nothing. So why is he now standing in the way of a ministerial code investigation into gold command record keeping, something only he can instruct, and does he agree that Nicola Sturgeon now has a duty to come back to this chamber? This chamber, he says, she addressed hundreds of times and wants more. Finally, explain herself. First Minister. Can I say, of course, that Nicola Sturgeon gave hours of testimony and evidence and under oath, of course, and was questioned extensively. It will be for now the inquiry to make its judgment and we respect the inquiry and, of course, hope that others will respect the inquiry and give it the time and space that it needs to make its judgment. I'm not sure what Anasau and others are shouting at, I'm simply saying that the inquiry should be respected. Can I say that Nicola Sturgeon or this Government got every decision right? First Minister, sorry, I'm actually being distracted by a conversation that is going across the aisles. Can I ask members to refrain from such contributions while we're trying to hear the First Minister? I think that the opposition should try to respect the inquiry and that is the point that I am making. I can say without a shadow of a doubt, as I've already said before, that overarching, overriding priority was always to protect the people of Scotland from Covid harm. Nicola Sturgeon's leadership was, in stark contrast, the leadership that we saw in other parts of the United Kingdom. She may not have got every decision right, but this Government may not have got every decision right. I accept that fully, but it's for the inquiry to examine and to explore that issue. On gold command meeting minutes that Alex Cole-Hamilton has asked me about, yes, the Government is urgently examining, exploring and will hand over to the inquiry any notes that we have on gold command minutes and meetings. To ask the First Minister what steps the Scottish Government is taking to prevent a resurgence of measles in Scotland. Cases of measles in Europe and England continue to rise due to under vaccination, while we have only seen two laboratory-confirmed cases of measles to date in Scotland since October. However, we are acting now to prevent the spread and to protect people. Public Health Scotland has alerted NHS Scotland, which has also met local health protection teams and immunisation co-ordinators to set out measures that need to be taken. Those include early detection and notification, infection control, contact tracing, post-exposure profile access for vulnerable contacts, to try to ensure that cases are contained and don't spread any further. Immunisation, of course, remains the most effective way of preventing illness from infectious disease, and the MMR vaccine is extremely effective at preventing measles. Anyone who hasn't had both doses of the free MMR vaccine should visit the NHS informed website and find a how-to-arranging appointment. I thank the First Minister for that answer. While Scotland's uptake of childhood immunisations has continued to perform really well across the four UK nations, there is recent data from Public Health Scotland that highlights the gradual decline. However, overall uptake of both doses has fallen below the World Health Organization's target of 90 per cent, a critical level that protects against the return of larger outbreaks. What steps the Scottish Government has taken to highlight the importance of receiving both doses of MMR vaccine and can outline what strategies are in place to ensure easy access to follow-up appointments for children and cases for vaccinations when both doses have been missed? Given the very serious nature of measles and the current risk of importation and onward transmission, we are working with Public Health Scotland and NHS boards on a whole range of measures promoting vaccination uptake. NHS informed has been updated on ensuring that information is available for the public on how they can receive the measles vaccination. Letters were issued to parents of pupils for nursery schools, P1 primary schools and S1 secondary schools to highlight the importance of ensuring that young people are up-to-date with their vaccinations. Boards have also been requested to undertake an MMR status check of all pupils. In S1, that check was previously performed in S3, but bringing forward those checks to S1 provides more opportunities for those unvaccinated or indeed under-vaccinated to obtain the vaccination that they require. I am very grateful for the previous answer from the First Minister, because work has undergone in our universities to make sure that the measles vaccinations have been up-to-date. He has talked about the work at S1. Can he give any specific initiatives that aimed at increasing the awareness specifically to parents, guardians and teachers about the importance of maintaining the up-to-date measles vaccination by having the two doses? I thank Martin Mittfield for a very important question indeed. He is right to reference higher education as well. I will ask the Cabinet Secretary for Health to write to Martin Mittfield with full detail of what we have done, including that we have issued letters to parents, for example, in the 23-24 intake of pupils for nursery schools, as well as other pupils. We have also sent a variety of letters from the CMO, from the chief medical officer, to health professionals to make sure that their interactions, often in primary care, with parents and families around the importance of the vaccination. I will ensure that the Cabinet Secretary for Health writes to Martin Mittfield with more details about the actions that we have taken in that regard. The worryingly low uptake of both the MMR and the flu vaccine in the Highlands increases the risk of public health and an outbreak of measles. Therefore, will the First Minister and his Cabinet Secretary for Health ask the NHS Highland to work with GP practices such as that in Nairn, who are very keen to resume local provision from GP practices of this service in order to bring up the vaccination levels to safe amounts? And, First Minister, an approach that I believe is favoured by the British Medical Association? The First Minister is right to raise this issue around the particularly lower levels of vaccination in Highlands that are concerning. I want to give him some reassurance that that engagement with the health board is already happening. I know that the First Minister has raised this issue before he has raised it with me in relation to Covid vaccinations as well, but I am worried about the levels of vaccination in Highlands. We are taking up that engagement with the NHS board and we will ask the direct question for those GP practices that do want to resume what the barrier is. We will examine whether or not the lower uptake and vaccination in Highlands is a result of the model. That is in place. I will ensure that the Fergus Ewing is kept up-to-date in relation to those discussions. To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government's response is to reports that Scottish Water plans to increase charges by 29 per cent over three years. Let me start by clarifying the arrangements for setting water charges. They are set out in the Water Industry Scotland Act 2022. Decisions on charges are rightly a matter for the board of Scottish Water. They will announce their charges for 24.25 shortly. Charges for future years have not yet been agreed. They will be set annually by Scottish Water's board with approval from the independent economic regulator in line with the price cap across the 21 to 27 period. In 23.24, the average charge in England and Wales is 10 per cent higher than in Scotland, at £448, compared to a charge in Scotland of £408. I am not interested in what is going on in England and Wales. Let's hear Mr Simpson. Scottish Water is reported to want to increase bills by 8.8 per cent in 24.25 and then do the same every year until 26.27. That might be all right for the new chief exec, Alex Plant, who can well afford it on his £295,000 a year salary, but that's not okay for normal people struggling to pay their bills. Water bills are paid through our council tax. Given that the First Minister is committed to freeze council tax, is he not prepared to do the same with water? The brass neck of a Conservative talking about the impact on people's household bills is quite something to witness. Let me talk about Scotland and Scottish Water. I have already said that the charges haven't been announced, will be announced shortly, and they will be reviewed and announced annually. However, with Scottish Water, what we end up getting in comparison to England and Wales is better levels of service. We get lower water charges here in Scotland in comparison to England. We get a publicly-owned water company with every single penny of profit reinvested back into the public service. Unlike in England, where his party is in charge, where shareholders get millions in dividends, we get water quality as 87 per cent good or at a high level, as assessed by SIPA. As in so many issues, the Conservative UK Government is far better at looking at how we run Scottish Water and their public services for the good of the people of Scotland. It seems that, while the UK Government runs its services into the ground, it does so for the profit of shareholders, unlike Scottish Water, which is publicly owned. To ask the First Minister when the Scottish Government expects the remainder of the national treatment centres to be opened in light of reports that NHS capital infrastructure projects have been paused. The next two national treatment centres, NTC, Fauth Valley and also Phase 2 of the Golden Jubilee, are due to open in the coming months, providing additional orthopedic endoscopy and general surgery capacity. Our ability to fund capital projects has, of course, been detrimentally impacted and affected. By twin challenges of unprecedented levels of inflation, in some part caused by Brexit and disastrous UK Government decisions, but also one of those disastrous UK Government decisions being the cut in our capital budget. Our infrastructure investment plan identifies priority health capital projects, including national treatment centres for funding in that period. As a result of the almost 10 per cent cut in our capital budget from the UK Government, a revised pipeline of infrastructure investment will be published in the spring of this year. All due consideration will be given to what projects can be included and on what timescales. Of course, that would include national treatment centres, too. Jackie Baillie I thank the First Minister for his response, but he knows that national treatment centres are key to the SNP's NHS recovery plan. We now learn that those promises to patients and staff are in tatters, treatment centres in Esher and Arran, Lanarkshire, Lothian, Grampian and Tayside are all delayed and at risk of cancellation, but those treatment centres are not the only NHS capital infrastructure projects put at risk. Aberdeen Baird family, hospital and anchor centre, delayed. Institute of Neurosciences in Glasgow, delayed. Monkland's replacement project in Lanarkshire, delayed. Edinburgh Cancer Centre, the Hypervillian, delayed. Caithness, Rhaigmoor, The Belford, delayed. Health centres in Cincardin, Loggelly and East Calder, cancelled. Barra community campus, cancelled. Presiding Officer, I could go on, but can I ask the First Minister, with almost one in six Scots on waiting lists, how is he going to end their suffering when these developments were so central to his plan? First Minister, as always, Jackie Baillie will come to this chamber ignoring the fiscal reality and effectively act as a human shield for the Conservatives who are cutting our capital budget by 10 per cent. The fact that Jackie Baillie thinks that a 10 per cent cut can be imposed upon us with no consequences shatters any credibility that she has on this issue, Presiding Officer. We have, of course, made a dent into waiting times in terms of improvements that we are looking to make. When it comes to activity in the NHS, new out-pace activity was up on the last quarter and up 2.3 per cent on Q3 last year. Over the last 12 months to September 23, activity was up almost £1.24 million. That is 2.5 per cent more than the previous 12 months. I mean, I look at inpatient day case activity for Q3. That was at its highest since the start of the pandemic, so we are doing what we can, notwithstanding the financial constraints and the cuts that we are receiving from the UK Government. We will continue to invest in that capacity. I should say to Jackie Baillie that it would be very helpful if Jackie Baillie could use any influence that she has with her UK Labour colleagues who have this far refused to confirm that they will reverse that capital cut. Miles Briggs. Last year, 59,240 patients attended the Princess Alexander Eye Pavilion. For a patient in Edinburgh or the borders with a detached retina, the need for urgent emergency surgery is critical. The health secretary has suggested that if the Edinburgh Eye Pavilion is not replaced, then more surgery will be centralised to the Golden Jubilee national hospital in Glasgow. Can I ask the First Minister if he thinks that it would be acceptable for eye surgery to be centralised to Glasgow? Will he agree to meet with Lothian MSPs urgently to discuss those concerns and look towards where ministers can change their mind and commit to a new replacement eye hospital? First Minister, to Miles Briggs, the clue is in the name. There are national treatment centres that we are building, so where they can offer assistance right across the country, they should be utilised in that way. We know that patients are, if necessary, willing to travel, but our commitment to the Eye Pavilion remains. That is why we will bring forward detail on what we can take forward in regard to our investment plans. I am more than happy to assure that the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Sport meets Miles Briggs. What will be more helpful for Miles Briggs to do is demand that his UK Government Conservative colleagues reverse their 10 per cent cut to our capital budget. They could do that in the spring budget next month. Let's see if Miles Briggs and the Scottish Conservatives who come to this chamber demanding money that will be spent in capital projects have any influence, somehow, Presiding Officer? I think not. Thank you, Presiding Officer. Plans for a new Belford hospital have made great progress in recent years with Scottish Government support, and it is deeply unfortunate that the 10 per cent UK Government cut to capital has postponed the actual build. Can the First Minister commit to enabling the design process to progress so that it is shovel ready when capital does become available to allow the start of the actual build? We are absolutely engaged on that very issue at the moment. I think that the suggestion from Kate Forbes is a sensible approach forward and will certainly seek to do that. I think that it is essential that NHS boards continue to plan on how they will improve and reform services, and we remain committed to absolutely supporting boards in that process. That, of course, goes back to the point that there are many capital projects right across the country that are under threat not because of anything that this Government has done, but because of the disastrous mismanagement of the economy from the UK Government and a 10 per cent capital cut, which is not just going to impact on health projects but on capital projects right across the country. We appeal once again to the UK Government to use the spring budget next month to reverse that devastating cut to allow these important health capital projects to go ahead, Presiding Officer. Move to constituency general supplementaries, and I call Finlay Carson. To ask the First Minister if he will join with me in welcoming the very positive progress that has been made in negotiations which are likely to see the restoration of the Northern Ireland assembly at Stormont, and also welcome the huge job and investment boost which could be delivered as part of the proposed investment zone extending to Starrar and Cairnryne in my constituency, which is the main point of entry for Northern Ireland goods going to Great Britain along the A75 and the A77. I absolutely welcome the restoration, I hope the restoration of power sharing in Northern Ireland. The people of Northern Ireland have had for too long to have to put up without an elected Government in place, so this is good news for the people of Northern Ireland, and we welcome it absolutely wholeheartedly. I've been to a number of British Irish councils over the years in my time as First Minister, and in the last couple that I've been as First Minister, the absence of any elected members from Northern Ireland has been noted and their presence has been missed, so I think that it's incredibly important as part of the Good Friday agreement that we have power sharing restored. It would be fair to say that we weren't given any advanced sight of the command paper that was published by the UK Government yesterday. There was no meaningful engagement by the Westminster Government. The UK Government appears to unilaterally have decided that there will be no border control post at Cairnryan. It's not a decision that they have consulted us on. I also note that there was a £3.3 billion package offered by the Secretary of State to address public spending and for pay pressures in Northern Ireland, which I have to say again is welcome. Those pressures do exist in Scotland and I suspect that they exist in Wales too, so I know that the Deputy First Minister has raised with the chief secretary to the Treasury, as did her Welsh counterpart, that the devolved Government should be treated fairly in line with the Barnett formula. Mark Scott was murdered in 1995 as he walked through Brigton on his way back from a Celtic game. The murder was a brutal, unprovoked, sectarian attack, but from this tragic murder came hope in the form of the Mark Scott leadership for life award, which is now delivered by the outward bound trust and brings young people together to share experiences and reduce racism, sectarianism and intolerance. The Scottish Government has provided core funding since 2012, which has allowed the awards to leverage other funding in from alternative sources. That amount stands at £75,000, and the trust has been told that it will be removed from next year. Surely the First Minister agrees with me that this life changing award for young people that tackles sectarianism in the best way that I can think of cannot be allowed to fail due to Government cuts? Given that I am meeting with the trust today, will he engage with me to find a solution to reinstate the funding? I say to Paul Cain that he raises an important point. Indeed, I know that the work that Mark Scott Foundation has done over the years alongside the outward bound trust. I have met some of those who have taken part in the project. They have done incredibly well as an organisation. I think that they have had a really positive impact on young people as well. It is an organisation that I have engaged with over many, many years indeed, and I can confirm to Paul Cain to this chamber that the Mark Scott Foundation will receive £75,000. We will ensure that they are funded fully in order to carry on the excellent work that the leadership award has done over many, many years. That work, of course, is a lasting legacy and a testimony to Mark Scott and his family, too. This week, Liz Smith endorsed the reintroduction of backdoor tuition fees, which would deny disadvantage students from going to university. It follows Labour leader Keir Starmer ruling out free tuition fees under a UK Labour Government. Can the First Minister outline what progress the Scottish Government has made in widening access, and will he reaffirm his commitment to keeping tuition fees free? Hardly I am surprised to hear the Conservatives heckling when we mention free education. I have to say, Presiding Officer, I was absolutely delighted to see the progress that we have made in this regard. Highlighted by the commissioner of fair access this week, a 45 per cent increase in students from our most deprived communities entering university since 2013-14. No wonder that the Conservatives were groaning. They do not like it, Presiding Officer, one single bit. The commissioner also points out that that increase has not been at the expense of other cohorts of Scottish students with increases in home students right across the board. Unlike Labour and the Conservatives, we are absolutely committed to the principle that access to education should be based on the ability to learn, never on the ability to pay. Mums and babies across Scotland are missing out on vital health visitor appointments. I know that because it happened to me as my daughter was not seen for over 10 months. Parents in Angus have been told that their babies could be without a visit for up to a year. Health visitors are important because they check on a child's wellbeing but can also identify if mums are experiencing post-natal depression. The First Minister and the Health Secretary cannot bury their heads in the sand over this issue. Will the First Minister intervene urgently to ensure that mums and babies are not denied these crucial visits because of staff shortages? The First Minister is absolutely right about the importance of health visitors for a range of reasons. I think that she has articulated very well. Indeed, health visiting remains a universal service. Teams across Scotland work hard to deliver that entitlement, and the latest published data that we have shows that the overwhelming vast majority of eligible children are receiving their key health visitor contacts between 10 days and five years of age. That is not to say that there are not challenges. I am more than happy for the health secretary to write to Meghan Gallacher to give her the details of what we are doing to invest in the service, but also what we are doing, particularly in those areas where we are seeing disparities at what we are doing to further support health visiting services. I want to put on record my thanks to every single health visitor for the incredible work that they do. That concludes the First Minister's questions. The next item of business is a member's business debate in the name of Kenneth Gibson, and there will now be a short suspension to allow those leaving the chamber and public gallery to do so.