 Good morning. The first item of business is general questions. At question number 1 I call Sandesh Gulh��. To ask the Scottish Government whether it will confirm whether what was at messaging by the health secretary and his ministers are covered by freedom of information legislation and the processes that are in place to archive these to prevent them from being inadvertently lost or otherwise deleted. Minister, George Adam? Thank you. Gollani i ddaeth ei ffraeg. D tearsigau o gwaith i ddaethau o ddaethau ach에isio ar gyfer y materio y gallu ei g Lord Gwyrddon yn dod o rhan oedd yn eithaf o ddwyll Méadau. Aelododd o fffoormaeth, o'r holl ffaithau i ddaethau o gwaith, mae'r gwnaeth y materio a'r holl i ddaethau i ddaethau yn ei gyflogau i gredigio ar gyfer y gwaeth ar gyfer y materio a'r holl i ddaethau i ddaethau, dyna'r cair o ynglyn â'n cydwellog yn gwybodol, ac yr unrhyw ffordd maen nhw sefydigion o gydbwysigol ar y gyfer o'r mônwrs. Na'r cair o arlwydd o gyfer o ddim i gael o'r cydwellog, iddyn nhon o gydbwysigol, o'r ddim yn iddyn nhon o'r cydwellog sydd o'r platform yw'r rhai yn datblygu y record cydwellog. Gwyn i'r traitor? Gwyn i'r first minister i nhw, nid ar y hoffa, oherwydd fferi hefyd? y sefydliadau ish oedda wedi'i gweithio cymrydol i'r Fffordd Fffordd Cymru yn ei braw i adeilad i gael ei wneud yn ei ddechrau a pethau i gryfach, ac wedi'i gweithio i'r ddweud, a zyu wneud y bydd o gofyn i'r bellach o gwyddoedd cymryd o gweithio e-mail neu ddechrau o'r ffordd oedd yn cymwyng, ac mae weithio i'n ddweud i unrhyw hanfodol i'r SMP naergyrchu. Will the Scottish Government commit to releasing all that messaging where any personal messages are redacted by an independent party? Perhaps it will be helpful for Dr Gulhane if I explain the process again, because I feel that I probably didn't, from his supplementary question, articulate the situation, because substantive government business and communication between ministers and officials is normally conducted using email and the Scots IT platform. The Scottish Government policy is clear that staff and ministers using any digital platform have responsibility to consider issues such as security and GDPR compliance. Mobile messaging apps can be a useful tool, but there is a clear expectation that any information that relates to the substance of government decision making should be transposed to the official record and retained. What assessment is made of the financial health of businesses and the viability of projects prior to the award of a grant of public funds? The Scottish Government has extensive guidance and process established and available to Scottish Government staff to ensure adequate due diligence is conducted around all organisations that receive public funds via public sector grants. The guidance also requires all projects to be assessed for viability via business cases to ensure that the regular proprietary and value for money principles of the Scottish Government are adhered to. Public bodies are also expected to observe the guidance within the Scottish Public Finance Manual in relation to grants and adhere to the principles of value for money, regularity and proprietary. In September, the company recycling technologies went into administration with £22.8 million in liabilities and just £1 million in assets. The company was given a grant of £1.7 million of taxpayer funds by Zero Waste Scotland in 2018, but, according to the company's house, accounts for the company lodged on 11 October 2017, raised concerns about the ability of the company at that point to continue as a going concern. Why was the grant of £1.7 million of taxpayers' money paid to a company where there were concerns about its on-going viability? Will any of the money now be recovered to the taxpayer? What lessons have been learned from the sorry episode? As I already indicated, there are processes and procedures in place within the Scottish Public Finance Manual in relation to grants and those that adhere to the principles of value for money, regularity and proprietary. If the member has been serious about getting an answer to that specific question, he will let me know in advance so that I can come prepared with the answer to it. Of course, he does not expect me to know the ins and outs of every single company that has been awarded a grant. If he seriously wants an answer to that, I will take that on board and go find out the information and reply back to him on the specifics in relation to that particular business and the situation that applied and why the grant was made in the background work that was done to check the business case within the principles that I have just outlined. The recent Audit Scotland report on the consolidated accounts was quite revealing that the Scottish Government wasted £50 million of public funds in return for zero jobs at BiFab. If the Government had its time again, would it make the same decision about BiFab? Of course, when you go into any situation, you are not sure what the outcome is going to be. That is the whole point. That is why the public sector steps in, because if it was that easy and that clear cut will win, then obviously the private sector would be investing in their bonus need for public sector involvement. The public sector gets involved, so we think that there is a case where we think that public money can be used adequately to support an economic outcome, whereas there is a strategic intent that is important to Scotland's economy to be pursued and, of course, to do so within the bounds of the public sector finance manual and the other regulations and business case requirements that are in place. We are not going to go through all those scenarios and come out the other end with them being financially successful. That is absolutely and obviously the case, but it is not that this Government is not going to be in a position where we are not going to intervene for fear of failure but we will win some and we will lose some. That is what it is all about. It is important that we intervene where we think that the numbers make sense, but, of course, the outcome is not guaranteed in any scenario. To ask the Scottish Government whether it will give an update on the next steps for the national convention conversation to inform a new dementia strategy which closed through responses on 5 December. I am grateful to all those organisations and individuals who have taken the time to input into our national conversation. We have heard the priorities of people living with dementia, their families and carers and individuals and organisations interested in dementia policy. Final engagement events are continuing throughout this week. We will take those responses and working with our national dementia lived experience panel, strategic advisory group and other key stakeholders develop an outcomes-focused strategy with publication planned for spring of 2023. The discovery of the breakthrough drug Le Can Imab is exceptionally welcome news and offers real hope for Alzheimer's sufferers and their families. Professor Tara Spires Jones and the research team at Edinburgh University are to be congratulated on this development. However, this morning I would like to ask if you are familiar with childhood dementia, a condition caused by more than 70 individual genetic disorders that together account for almost as many deaths as in children as cancer. There is no cure and there are very few treatments that can even slow it down. Will Kevin Stewart commit to taking cognisance of this devastating but little-known condition when developing the new dementia strategy? I thank Cocab Stewart for raising this very important issue. Childhood dementia is a term that is sometimes used to describe a very rare group of neurodegenerative disorders that require referral for specialist pediatric assessment and then care within specialist neurodegenerative disorder services. The NHS will always continue to use the best international clinical evidence and research to inform best practice. I am grateful to the member for raising awareness of this very important issue in the chamber today. To ask the Scottish Government what progress it is making on addressing the reported care staff retention and recruitment challenge within social care. The Scottish Government acknowledged the pressures that are faced by the social care sector at present. To address those, we plan to launch an adult social care recruitment campaign in January of next year. We have approved funding for my Job Scotland recruitment website to enable all organisations to advertise vacancies free of charge. We continue to push the UK Government for improved mitigation system and working with stakeholders to develop resources and support to recruit international workers. We also plan to host further job fairs with DWP across Scotland, and we continue to work with employability partners and the SSC to deliver career events targeting young people. The fundamental issue at the heart of the retention and recruitment issues that we have is the gap between what care workers are paid in the private sector and care workers are paid in the public sector. In the private sector, it is low-pay, poor terms and poor conditions that have workers walking out of that sector and making it more difficult. All care is paid for by this Government. Does he agree that that is the fundamental issue? If he does, why is he not addressing it? Unless we address the poor pay, poor terms and poor conditions of care workers, working in the private sector and paid for by the public sector, we will not address this problem. The Government recognises the pay and conditions issues in the care sector. That is why the Government has given not one but two pay rises to ad-ox social carers here in Scotland in the past year. We are looking to see what more we can do on that front. I would highlight to Mr Rowley and to the chamber that ad-ox social care workers here in Scotland are paid much more than those in Labour-controlled Wales or Tory-controlled England. Christine Grahame, I refer to the Scottish Government commission research entitled quotes, contribution of EU workers to social care 2022, published in August. Further to the findings, does the minister agree with me that, while accepting Covid has had its impact, Brexit has made recruitment and retention of EU workers worse? I completely agree with Christine Grahame. The sector is deeply concerned about the impact that the post-EU exit loss of freedom of movement is having on recruitment or to critical front-line social care roles. UK Government immigration policy fails to address Scotland's distinct demographic and economic needs and completely disregards key sectors that we have relied upon during the health pandemic, including social care. We believe that Scotland's social care services benefit greatly from the staff who joined the workforce through international recruitment. I wish that we had control over immigration policy here so that we did not have the situation where some services have lost loads and loads of staff with one service that I talked to losing 40 per cent of their workforce because of Brexit. That is not good enough. Question 5, Jenny Minto. To ask the Scottish Government what its latest assessment is of the potential impacts of the United Kingdom Internal Market Act 2020 and the Substitute Control Act 2022 on future agricultural support schemes in areas such as Argyll and Bute. Are farmers and crofters faced challenges that are not found elsewhere in the UK, so we have tailored our current agricultural support to help address this? For example, through schemes such as less favoured area support. The deeply damaging UK Internal Market Act, which was imposed on Scotland without our consent, allowed UK Ministers to introduce the Substitute Control Act. We have serious concerns about that, not least because the principles that are set out in schedule 1 of that act risk constraining our ability to tailor support to the specific needs of Scottish farmers and crofters in the future. Jenny Minto. I thank the cabinet secretary for that answer. In Argyll and Bute in 2021, 739 businesses received elfast payments. Those provide vital investment to hill farmers and crofters who are a crucial part of our agricultural sector. The NFUS has noted that 97% of the Scottish Government's budget for agricultural schemes are derived from Westminster. The legislation that I mentioned has left the door open to future policy decisions that threaten the ability of the Scottish Government to offer the focused support of this nature. Will the cabinet secretary say to hill farmers and crofters that I represent who are concerned that the Tory Government and Westminster would be prepared to sacrifice necessary support, like elfast, in pursuit of their mission of undermining devolution? I absolutely agree that the UK legislation could threaten our ability to support farmers and crofters in constituencies such as the members through vital schemes such as elfasts. We are committed to maintaining that support for those farming and stewarding the land in our most challenging areas. However, that will depend on getting the certainty of UK Government funding and the guarantees being honoured going forward. EU exit means that we no longer have the long-term certainty of funding and the unilateral choices that are being imposed by the Treasury provide insufficient replacement EU budget. We have been really clear and consistent in our position that we expect full replacement of EU funds to ensure that we do not see any detriment to our finances and we expect the UK Government to fully respect the devolution settlement in any future arrangement. However, as it stands at the moment, I have no clarity in terms of future budget and we know that we are already facing a shortfall of £93 million because those guarantees have not been honoured. Let's have more succinct questions and responses please. Question number six, Michael Marra. To ask the Scottish Government what its position is on the reported delays to the development of the Swallow Roundabout in Dundee. Minister, Jenny Gilruth. Transport Scotland is working with representatives of the developer on a minute of agreement, which will provide the Scottish ministers consent to make changes to the A90 trunk road in the vicinity of the Swallow Roundabout in Dundee. This work is not straightforward, but every effort is being made to bring matters to a conclusion. Residents in the western gateway of Dundee have been waiting for more than seven years for those vital upgrade works on the Swallow Roundabout. At long last, that minute of agreement the minister refers to is sitting on a desk at Transport Scotland. Can the minister say when the agreement will be signed and what more can the minister do to lock down a timetable for those vital safety measures? I know that Mr Marra takes a very keen interest in this issue, and I know that he has been in correspondence previously with Transport Scotland on this matter. Of course, delivery of the improvements needed is a requirement of planning, and the developer is obligated to deliver junction improvements at the Swallow Roundabout. That is going to address the impact of the development on the trunk road network, of course, for which Scottish ministers have responsibility. I have discussed this matter with my officials in Transport Scotland. They advise that they are in regular contact with the developer on this matter, and they will continue to work constructively with Springfield properties to progress the outstanding issues. That includes, of course, the completion of the minute of agreement as soon as possible. In the interim, I am happy to have my officials meet with Mr Marra and interested parties to ensure progress on this issue. I recognise that, as he has mentioned, that this has been going on for a number of years, and there is a need for the local community to have that timetable. To ask the Scottish Government with regard to flooding what engagement it has had with the UK Government to explore the great risk transfer, as described in the recent David Hume Institute report. The DHI report explores risk and where it falls between the individual and institutions. The report highlights flood re-insurance scheme to help people to access affordable flood insurance, and it highlights it as a best practice example of how institutions can underwrite risks that are not realistically within individuals control. That is currently benefiting 16,500 people properties in Scotland. Flood re also supports the build-back better approach whereby homeowners install property flood resilience measures when repairing their properties after a flood, ensuring that they are better prepared, and the Scottish Government is working with Governments across the UK to ensure that flood insurance remains widely available and affordable. I thank the minister for her response. With several areas of Scotland, including my constituency of Aberdeen South and North Concardin, now at increased risk. As the minister referenced, the flood re-scream offers some hope to householders. However, too few people are aware of the scheme and it excludes properties built since 2009. Can I ask what steps the Scottish Government is taking to publicise the scheme and ensure homeowners are aware of the possibility of affordable insurance through the flood re-scream? We will continue to work with flood re, the insurance industry and others to promote flood insurance. We have funded the Scottish Flood Forum since 2009, and they work with communities and advise about property flood resilience and insurance issues like flood re. I am always happy to work with the member. I am happy for her to speak to me about any ways that we can ensure her constituents know that they have access to the support. The majority of homes in high flood risk areas will be eligible for flood re. Properties built since 1 January 2009 are not covered, but that is because it is important not to incentivise home building in flood risk areas. Scottish planning policy takes a precautionary approach to ensure that new properties are built outwith areas of significant flood risk. Of course, it is updated policy on flood risk, which aims to strengthen resilience to flood risk and reduce the vulnerability of existing and future development.