 Felly dy'r unig bwysig wedi bod ynораeth am flynyddoedd i'r gwiaith dechrau, yw y bydddoedd erbyn i ddweud i'r gael'r gael, i b Poesibol fo count, gyda fwy o gennym o chwmau i ddweud i ddweud o'r ddweud i fo cydwyr i ddweud i'r gael. yardas, ddwy'r llawol, Llynddo Fabiani. Rwyf mor bach, maen nhw i chi i gafodd arwдеichu eich gynhyrchu'r clip o'r ysglwll fawr Ap Start. I wrote to James Wharton MP, the parliamentary under Secretary of State, at the UK Government's Department for International Development and Rory Stewart, Minister of State for International Development in August. It was to congratulate each of them on their recent appointments into post and to express the desire to meet to discuss areas of mutual interest. A meeting date has not yet been confirmed but it has subsequently been discussed and it is intended to be arranged by Difford when Mr Wharton or Mr Stewart visit East Kilbride. Scottish Government officials and Difford officials are in touch on a regular basis, but at present no meeting has been diarised to take place in East Kilbride. Ms Fabiani, thank you for that answer. Can I ask the minister that when he does meet at Difford in East Kilbride with those Westminster ministers that he will emphasise the contribution of Scotland's sizeable amount to the UK international aid budget, much of it administered from East Kilbride, and will he also emphasise to them our concern, Scotland's concern, at the UK international development secretary's contention that aid funding could be cut unless it proves in the UK's national interest? Will he further emphasise that the Scottish Government and those who work in international aid in this country do not consider international aid as a bargaining chip? I was tempted to say that that is not a short supplementary, Ms Fabiani. I will be very naughty of the minister. I can certainly confirm that in our contact with the UK Government we will emphasise the good work that both Governments do on the ground, but certainly one thing I would comment on since the member raises it is the remarks that were made about aid and international development being in the national interest. The Scottish Government sees international development as being part of being a good global citizen. I hope, therefore, that aid spent by the UK Government, whether by Difford or via other UK departments, will clearly be designed to promote the economic development and welfare of developing countries and is not tied to the UK's national interest in any selfish way. To ask the Scottish Government when it will next meet the UK Government regarding the result of the EU referendum. The Scottish Government has a distinct role in protecting Scotland's economic and social interests and reflecting the outcome of the EU referendum in Scotland. As such, we continue to engage regularly at both the official and ministerial level with the UK Government. The next meeting of the joint ministerial committee European negotiations will be next month. Ms Vee. Can I thank the minister for that answer? As the minister is aware, the result of the EU referendum almost certainly guarantees the end of the human rights act, with the Tory Government set to repeal it and replace it with a British Bill of Rights. Can I ask the minister what discussions have taken place to ensure protection of all rights guaranteed through the European convention on human rights and the human rights act? The standing council among other bodies has discussed the issue of human rights and the protection of rights. Of course, in the First Minister's five tests for options going forward, the issue of social protection is very heavily within that. I am very much of the view that Professor Alan Miller has taken former head of the Scottish Human Rights Commission, where he talks about the need to ensure that there is no regression on such matters, that there is continued progress and that there is the opportunity to be different and to do better. I think that we will keep that very much in mind going forward, and I look forward to the support of the Labour benches in ensuring that that happens. The minister will be aware of the leaked memo, suggesting that there is no UK Government plan for Brexit and that it will take another six months before the UK Government agrees on its priorities. That is obviously in stark contrast to the Scottish Government. Could the minister outline his views on that? I am aware of the leaked memo and, of course, the UK Government or the Scottish Government comments on leaked memos, but I would simply say that the six months' expectation appears to be a little hopeful from what I have seen up to date. Thank you, Presiding Officer. To ask the Scottish Government how important tourism is to the economy. As one of our key growth sectors, tourism is vital to Scotland's economy. In 2015, spending by tourists in Scotland generated around £11 billion of economic activity in the wider Scottish supply chain, and there were 217,000 tourism-related jobs in Scotland in 2015, around 8.5 per cent of our employment. Thank you, cabinet secretary, for that reply. As a result of the UK and potentially Scotland exiting the European Union and the projected significant impact on the Scottish economy, does the cabinet secretary agree that the role of the tourism industry in Scotland becomes even more important? Given that, in future, around £11 billion of Scottish Government expenditure will come from taxes raised in Scotland, does she agree that continuing to grow Scottish tourism through the efforts of Visit Scotland will be a vital component to future economic success? A very important point has been made by the member. Tourist spend recently voted through the £5 billion barrier. The economic activity generated by tourism will become increasingly important to the economy. Economic analysis by Deloitte shows that, for every pound invested in Visit Scotland, it generates £39 in gross economic activity, £7 in new money or £3.61 in gross value added. Clearly, it is a growing sector, and it is a key sector to our economy. The Government needs to recognise the income generation that will come from tourism from this day forward. Rachael Hamilton As the cabinet secretary rightly said, eight per cent of Scotland's workforce are employed in the Scottish hospitality industry and tourism sector, which is vitally important to Scotland's economy. I would like to ask the Scottish Government what it is doing to meet the needs of the industry for a fully skilled workforce and quality employment opportunities to raise the attractiveness in this sector. Cabinet Secretary? Rachael Hamilton I was delighted this morning to launch the Scottish Bed and Breakfast Association, a new network to support that small sector, small accommodation sector of the industry. Also, just some weeks ago, I, together with the Scottish Tourism Alliance and other partners, helped to launch the tourism skills investment plan, which has been put together with the industry and Skills Development Scotland. Other players are very important to make sure that we have a pipeline and that we see people recognising it as a career choice and the opportunities that are in that sector are extensive. We want to make sure that it is an attractive place to do business, but we also want to encourage the skills that will make sure that the quality of our offer is maintained and developed. Stuart McMillan I thank the cabinet secretary for agreeing to attend the next meeting of the cross-party group records reporting on 29 November. However, she agreed with me that marine tourism which incorporates cruise tourism is a vital sector in terms of future growth and employment opportunities across the country. Cabinet secretary? I do indeed. The member is a great advocate of the marine tourism sector. It needs to develop and grow. There are challenges as to how we can do that, but I am delighted that I can attend the cross-party group on 29 November. I am keen as the new cabinet secretary in this area to ensure that marine tourism with our wonderful coasts can make sure that we can maximise that opportunity and to bring new income in. I was delighted to open the new pontoon at Fort William recently, which again will provide new opportunities for cruise liners coming into that town. David Stewart Presiding Officer, to ask the Scottish Government what support it is providing to visit Scotland and the Highland Council to encourage tourists to the Highlands and Islands, including by ensuring that the north coast 500 route is fully maintained. Cabinet secretary? The Scottish Government is supporting the north coast 500 by ensuring that the economic benefits are realised through the establishment of a strategic group by Highlands and Islands Enterprise, which also includes visiting Scotland and the Highland Council. Transport Scotland also has direct responsibility for the 111 miles of trunk roads that form 20 per cent of the route, and we will do all we can to ensure that they are well maintained. Local roads are the responsibilities of local authorities, and the Scottish Government has delivered a fair funding settlement to Highland Council of nearly £465 million in 2016-17. The group is, in fact, meeting today, and due to your close interest, I will ask the High to provide the member with an update on the progress that is being made. Thank you, Presiding Officer. Does the cabinet secretary share my view that NC 500 is an iconic route that has provided a welcome stimulus to tourism in the Highlands? Would the cabinet secretary agree to meet with me to discuss some concerns raised by constituents such as congestion of the route, speeding, provision of signage of road facilities and road maintenance? I am very interested in finding out more about the route clearly, and I know a number of the constituency MSPs have contacted me, so perhaps we could do something collectively. Interestingly, a survey undertaken by NHI indicated that over 85 per cent of drivers on the coast route experienced no congestion during their time on the route, but, clearly, we need to get more information about what is required. However, it is very interesting and important that, at the meeting that is taking place today, the Scottish Government had asked that Transport Scotland be included, and it will be participating in the strategic group that is meeting today. If I can find out more about what has been resulting from those discussions, I will certainly be happy to meet at the appropriate time. I share the view of David Stewart that the North Coast 500 is an iconic route. It has been an excellent vehicle to encourage people to visit the Highlands. Can I ask if the Scottish Government will join with me in asking Visit Scotland to specifically promote the route during its advertising campaign in 2017 to make sure that as many people come to the Highlands as possible? I will indeed, and the member might be interested that the North Coast 500 has already featured in most domestic and international marketing promotions, not just limited to the following, but seven regional ad features, six direct mail pack features, one Canadian ad campaign feature 15 PR pieces and five press trips financed by Visit Scotland. The total reach so far of the North Coast 500 promotion is over 900 million, so in terms of the promotion that is already taking place, but with that opportunity, I am sure that Visit Scotland will want to take that forward as well. I would ask the Scottish Government whether it can provide an update on recent discussions with the UK Government regarding Brexit. Last week, I attended the first joint ministerial committee, EU negotiations meeting in London. I made it clear that membership of the single market and the benefits flow from it including free movement of labour is essential for the economic prosperity of Scotland. The point that I have made several times previously in my discussions with David Davis, the UK Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union. Although I am pleased at the process of involving the Scottish Government and the other devolved Administrations under way, the UK Government has still not made its strategic intentions clear, but whether the UK Government wishes the UK to remain inside the single market or part of the customs union. The Scottish Government will continue to focus on protecting Scotland's economic and social interests. We will table proposals in the coming weeks to keep Scotland in the single market. I thank the minister for the update. I am sure that the Scottish Government will be aware of the number of reports that have been released recently. We had a few weeks ago a study from the Institute of Fiscal Studies report predicting a £25 billion black hole in public finances, but most recently there was a report from Hitachi capital that found that one-third of businesses across the UK chose not to invest following the Brexit vote, resulting in investments worth £65.5 billion being lost to the economy. I would just really like a response from the Government to that. Reports illustrate what many people have been saying, including ourselves. Brexit will have a hugely damaging impact on the Scottish economy. The Scottish Government is working closely with the enterprise agencies and other partners to ensure that there is a strong package of support for Scottish businesses to maintain and stimulate investment. We anticipate that, through direct action by the Scottish Government under the SME holding fund, there will be a minimum of £250 million released to SMEs over the next 18 months that will stimulate investment. However, the Hitachi capital report says something else. It highlights that 70 per cent of businesses would be likely to resume investment if uncertainty of the UK's membership of the single market is resolved. That is why the Scottish Government has raised that issue in its chamber and why it will continue to work to ensure that Scotland continues to be able to benefit from the opportunities of the single market. Our priority is to protect Scotland's interests and we will consider and take all possible steps to do so. The minister has previously acknowledged that the customs union brings benefits in addition or separate from those that are conferred by the single market. Can he confirm whether there have been discussions and substance around the customs union with UK ministers? If so, what approach is being taken to this issue? I very much agree with Lewis MacDonald that the customs union is of very strong importance. There have been no discussions of substance only because there have been no discussions of substance on a whole range of matters. However, I noticed yesterday that the Dutch foreign minister indicated that Boris Johnson's view of the customs union was intellectually incoherent, and that is correct. You cannot argue for certain things that are being argued for at the moment and still believe that the customs union will be in place. That is another area in which we need clarity because a lack of customs union would create enormous difficulties. To ask the Scottish Government what analysis it has carried out regarding what representation an independent Scotland could have in the European Parliament and on the European Council. The Scottish Government published in 2013 an analysis of the representation on independent Scotland as an equal member of the EU would be likely to have in the institutions of the European Union. That made clear that, as an independent member state, Scotland would have 12 or 13 MEPs, which is 12 or 13 more than a non-independent Scotland when the UK leaves the EU. An independent Scotland as a member of the EU would also be able to exercise influence through the European Council. The UK Government's Brexit means no membership, no representation and no influence in the European Council. I thank the minister for that response, but wouldn't she agree with me that the response to leaving one 40-year-old relatively loose economic union cannot be to leave a solid 300-year-old long-established economic, social and political union? Cabinet Secretary. I know that the member is obsessed, but in the politics of the here and now, our constituents and the people of Scotland want to see this Government and this Parliament standing up for the interests of the people of Scotland. We have an opportunity to make sure that, collectively, we can do that by making sure that they will protect Scotland's interests, that we pursue the best options that we can to ensure that we can have a continuing relationship for the benefit of the people of Scotland. I think that they would like to see the Conservative Party standing up for Scotland than kneeling down to Westminster. Is the cabinet secretary any clearer about how the UK Government intends to ensure that the wishes of the overwhelming majority of the people of Scotland who voted to remain in the EU are respected? No. The clarity that we desperately need and our constituents need and the people of Scotland need is singularly absent. We are now five months since the vote on the European referendum. Five months only until article 50 is due to be triggered. For us to meaningfully take forward the interests, whether it is on the tourism sector, whether it is on creative industries, whether it is on all the different sectors that we have already debated in this Parliament, we need clarity from the UK Government at least some sense of direction of where they might want to go. We are prepared and have been for some time to engage constructively with the UK Government and we have met them on a number of occasions. We are desperate to move this forward. The lack of clarity that we see from the UK Government is very worrying indeed. When we have a foreign secretary who will tell more to check newspapers than to either the Westminster Parliament or this Government, we have a great deal to worry about indeed. Richard Lyle Thank you, Presiding Officer, to ask the Scottish Government how it supports the Greater Glasgow and Clyde Valley Tourist Board and similar bodies in promoting the country's public spaces. VisitScotland actively promotes Scotland's huge wealth of public spaces through its consumer website visitscotland.com. VisitScotland has a specific Greater Glasgow and Clyde Valley destination page, which promotes key attractions in the area, such as Strath Clyde Country Park and Bothwell Castle. It is also linked to local marketing groups to visit Lanarkshire, with whom it works closely in promoting the area. Mr Lyle I thank the cabinet secretary for that answer, and I welcome the work that has been done to promote our excellent public spaces, especially in my constituency. Given the cabinet secretary's answer, can I ask what other specific projects and initiatives that have been delivered to encourage people to visit spaces such as the historic Bothwell Castle in my constituency, as an example of the many fantastic places of interest that we have, lucky to have in this country? Well, clearly, Historic Environment Scotland has marketed Bothwell Castle in its 77 sites guide. There has been a major archaeological work that carried out during June 2015. To mark the end of that archaeological programme, there was 2015 Bothwell under siege, delivered to coincide with the last weekend of the excavation. In 2016, there was a folksy theatre company. They did as you like it, and they were turned in 2017 with 12th night. All of those are to tie in with the year of history heritage and archaeology taking place next year. Margaret Mitchell Briefing, please. Thank you. Country parks such as Shattlerown, Hamilton, Drampellair park in Goatbridge and the Bothwell Castle walkways are often the target of anti-social behaviour and vandalism. Beyond the police response and investigation, what support can the Scottish Government offer to the tourist board like Glasgow and Clyde valley to raise awareness of the issue? That is fine. Thank you for the message. Cabinet Secretary, please. Very briefly, celebrating the sense of place and common ownership will also help to tackle public disorder. I think that there is a good point that people need to be proud of their local area in order not to disrupt it. I would encourage the visit to Lanarkshire and all those involved to make sure that that is the case. Thank you very much. We are now turning to the questions and justice and the law officers, please. A moment for ministers to change places. Question 1, Kenneth Gibson. Presiding Officer, to ask the Scottish Government what the impact is on Police Scotland and the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service of having to make VAT payments. Cabinet Secretary, please. Vatancurd by the police is currently between £23 million and £25 million per annum for fire. It is around £10 million per annum. The UK Government has rejected a repeated request that the Police and Fire and Rescue Service in Scotland should be able to recover VAT. The opposition creates a glaring disparity of treatment compared to the police and fire services in all the parts of the UK. This unequal and unfair treatment completely contradicts the repeated assurances of fairer treatment for Scotland that is made by the UK Government. I thank the cabinet secretary for that reply. Given that, in the 2011 manifesto, the Tories and the Deed Labour supported the information of Police Scotland and Scottish Fire and Rescue, yet are the first to moan about the resources that are available to those services, does the cabinet secretary agree that, if the Tories genuinely want to represent Scotland's interests, they should join with us in demanding that their Westminster colleagues restore to Scotland the £76.5 million taken by the Treasury and ensure that those services are zero-rated for VAT? Cabinet secretary? Yes, I agree with the member. This is money that could be better directed towards keeping the people of Scotland safe. I want to reinforce the point that the chief constable made when he gave a submission of evidence to the Commons Home Affairs Committee when he stated, Since Police Scotland was formed in April 2013, we have paid £76.5 million in VAT, and we remain the only police organisation in the United Kingdom to pay VAT. The chief constable is very clear on this, and the chair of the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service, Pat Waters, has raised concerns and asked MPs on a cross-party basis at Westminster to support the inequity of the position that we find ourselves in with only our fire and police service here in Scotland, having been unable to recover VAT. Members may also be interested that, since Police Scotland and the Fire and Rescue Service were turned into single services here in Scotland, the UK Government has found in their ability to provide other organisations with that exemption over the last couple of years. Health Education England, the Health Research Authority, the Strategic Highways Companies, otherwise known as Highways England, the London Legacy Development Corporation and Academy Schools have all been given the ability to reclaim VAT, but no Police Scotland or Scottish Fire and Rescue Service. I would hope that, for once, the Tories in this Parliament would stand up for Scotland's interests, stand up for our police service and stand up for our firefighters and call for VAT to be reclaimed for those services. Douglas Ross. I would hope that the cabinet secretary provides Parliament with all the information committees making those claims. He has cited Highways England and he will be aware that they are eligible for VAT refunds on certain services under section 41 of the 1994 act, yet what he is asking for is for exemptions under section 33 of that act for Police Scotland, therefore he is not comparing apples with apples. Cabinet Secretary? As ever, with the Tories, they find a way of wiggling out, standing up for Scotland's interests here. We are not asking for anything special, we are asking for parity of treatment for our police and fire service. As ever, we find with the Tories that they are happy to do down Scotland, but they are never prepared to stand up for it. This is a Tory tax on our fire and our police service here in Scotland. It is unacceptable and, as ever, the Tories are never prepared to stand up for Scotland's interests. Kate Forbes. To ask the Scottish Government what support it can provide to people from Scotland who are engaged in legal proceedings in jurisdictions outside Scotland. It is, in fact, for individuals themselves to raise and to defend legal proceedings in other jurisdictions. In international parental child abduction and child maintenance cases, support is available from the Scottish Government's central authority team. I thank the minister for that answer. Engaging in legal proceedings around issues of divorce and custody in another jurisdiction within the United Kingdom can be especially emotionally and financially challenging, causing significant damage on relationships between children and both parents. How can the Scottish Government better assist parents who are dealing with child contact and residence orders between and across jurisdictions? I recognise, of course, the considerable degree of stress that is caused in cross-border cases, including cases across the UK jurisdictions. However, the Scottish Government cannot provide direct assistance to parents who are dealing with child contact and residence cases in other jurisdictions in the UK. We provide financial support to a number of family support organisations, including families' need for fathers. In addition, we intend to produce a guidance circular for legal practitioners and others in Scotland on the existing provisions that govern this area, which is the Family Law Act 1986. That applies across the UK and applies to jurisdiction family actions. We will also continue discussions with our opposite numbers in the UK Ministry of Justice and the Northern Ireland Executive. We have, for example, suggested that the relevant form used in family cases south of the border could, in fact, be amended to ask the applicant if there is a potential Scottish or Northern Irish dimension to the case, and I understand that the Ministry of Justice is amenable to that proposal. Yes. Again, can I ask for short questions and, if possible, shorter answers, valuable though they all are? Gordon Lindhurst, please. Yes. May I ask the minister why there is insufficient provision for people following legal proceedings in Scotland? Why have you closed courts and wasted money on the nationalisation of the police service, which is now costing more than it did before? Minister? I thank the member for his question. I seem to see if I can find a way through to the direct relationship to the question asked by Kate Forbes on the issue of what we can do to help people engaged in legal proceedings in jurisdictions outside Scotland, but, of course, we see that we are ensuring through our modernisation of our court service that it is fit for the 21st century and, indeed, the member will be well aware that the operation of the court service is a matter for the Scottish courts and tribunal service. I ask the Scottish Government what action it is taking to reduce the number of women being given custodial sentences and how it supports those who have been involved in offending. I am committed to reducing the high rate of imprisonment for both women and men in Scotland. That commitment includes an emphasis on improving support for women offenders. Since 2012, we have invested £15.5 million in community justice services for women, supporting the establishment of services that provide holistic multi-agency and gender-focused support to address the underlying causes of women's offending. Those services are intended to reduce both further offending and, ultimately, the number of women receiving custodial sentences. For those women who do not receive a custodial sentence, the new model for the female custodial estate will deliver a bold new approach to how women in custody are looked after. It will be underpinned by the ethos that security is proportionate to the risk that custodial facilities support recovery and that women are located as close as possible to their communities. I thank the minister for his response. Studies show that the impact of prison sentences on women is far greater in terms of family life and mental health, especially when in prison far from home, causing severe disruption to outside family support. The Scottish Government's plan for local detention centres for women, as the minister mentioned— Can I have a question, please? Would the minister agree that there should be a presumption if non-custodial measures must be in place, such as community payback orders and home detention curfew? Yes, I do agree with the member. Short-term custodial sentences remove people from their communities, their jobs, their families and their housing—the very things that we know that show and support assistance. We need to make sure that the approach that we take is focused on reducing the risk of re-offending and that we know that community disposals are much more effective in reducing the risk of an individual committing offences again in the future. That is why, as a Government, we are supporting a greater range of non-custodial sentences for both men and women. That is backed up by the additional £4 million of investment in community sensing provision in 2016-17. On top of the £95 million that we invest each year in community justice services, that is why we will expand the use of electronic monitoring, both as a way of ensuring that individuals are held to account during their sentence and to support rehabilitation and reintegration into the community. Mary Fee, please. It will soon be two years since the cabinet secretary announced that the plans for a new women's prison in Inverclyde would rightly not go ahead. Over four and a half years since day, Manjolini reported to the Scottish Government on female offending. Does the cabinet secretary not agree that those lengthy delays in taking further action to reform the way we deal with female offenders is unacceptable, while female offenders and their families struggle to deal with the many impacts of imprisonment? Cabinet secretary. I am afraid that the member has misinformed that there are no lengthy delays. There is a significant amount of work being taken forward in relation to the five custodial facilities at the present moment in partnership with local authorities that have been identified, and some of the planning work for the new national facility, Compton Vale, is already at an advanced stage with the team that has been established under the SPS and taken forward by the governor of Compton Vale to develop those plans in greater detail. That is a significant change in our approach to custodial policy and it requires careful planning. I recognise a member who may wish to see those things happening sooner rather than later. However, the very significant change that we are taking forward will result in the need to consider carefully the approach that we take. However, I want to assure the member that there is a significant amount of work that has already been undertaken and is continuing to be undertaken in the planning of those new facilities in order to make sure that they start to come on stream from 2018 to 2020-21, which was the timetable that was set out when the announcement was made. To ask the Scottish Government what action it is taking to resolve the reported backlog of cases in the Scottish courts. In April 2014, the percentage of sheriff courts offering summary at criminal trials at the optimum 16 weeks was 50 per cent. The Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service have recently reported that, as at August 2016, that has improved, with 97 per cent of sheriff courts offering trials within 16 weeks or a faster period. Although the administration of the courts business and performance is, as I have said already, during this question time the responsibility of the independent Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service, the Scottish Government and justice organisations such as the Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service continue to monitor the volume of cases and to act on court performance through the national justice board and the judicially led local criminal justice boards. The Justice Committee recently took evidence from Steven Manifield from the Edinburgh Bar Association. Mr Manifield said that the closure of Haddington Sheriff Court in the EBS jurisdiction has had a massive effect. Edinburgh is now dealing with not only all of the sheriff and jury and more serious cases for Edinburgh area, but with all the more serious cases from East Lothian. That is contrary to the view of Scottish ministers who have said that there is capacity within courts to deal with current anticipated cases. Can the Scottish Government explain whether Haddington Sheriff Court will be opened to help to resolve the reported backlog? I would say to the member that, in fact, the evidence does not bear out what she has just said. The Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service has confirmed that the closure of Haddington Sheriff Court has not had a negative impact on the timescale for completing cases in Edinburgh Sheriff and JP courts. Analysis published by the Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service earlier this year confirmed that the timescales for both summary, criminal and civil proofs in Edinburgh Sheriff Court and the JP Court are progressing within the Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service's target timescales—that is, 16 weeks for summary crime and 12 weeks for civil proof. I would add that, following the closure of certain courts, the Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service has been able to target funding more productively on the maintenance and development of its estate. Consolidation of court business in fewer locations does offer greater opportunity to manage business more efficiently and to call cases in courthouses that are actually fit for the 21st century and provide proper security and segregation for those using the courts. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. We heard in the Justice Committee yesterday from Callum Steele, the Scottish Police Federation, of problems arising from cases proceeding to court with an insufficiency of evidence. Does she accept that this is a problem that it is causing undue pressure on the court system, and if so, what action does the Government propose to take about it? I hear what the member says. If the member can bring forward some actual evidence, I understand that that was a statement made yesterday in committee, but if the person who made that statement could bring forward some evidence, of course we will look closely at that, but to date we do not seem to have any evidence to support that statement. Questions 5, Emma Harper. To ask the Scottish Government when the Cabinet Secretary for Justice last met the chief executive of the Scottish Prison Service and what issues were discussed. I have monthly meetings with the chief executive of the Scottish Prison Service at those meetings. We discussed a range of operational issues. My last meeting with the chief executive took place on 3 November 2016. I thank the cabinet secretary for that answer. As I am sure he is aware, there is good work being done at HMP Dumfries. Will it be possible to tell me when he expects to appoint a new governor? I am aware of the tragic death of Phil Kennedy in September this year, who was a governor at HMP Dumfries. I personally wrote at that time to Mr Kennedy's family at the time of his passing. As I have heard a lot of wonderful things of the work that he has been undertaking, I had undertook during his time as governor at HMP Dumfries. Following his sudden death, the Deputy Governor, Mr Hunston, has been acting as governor in charge to provide familiarity and stability for the staff during what I know has been a difficult time early in the new year. The Scottish Prison Service will identify a new governor for HMP Dumfries within the existing H band pool of staff. It is a piece of work that the Scottish Prison Service is currently taking forward and expect to have an appointment made early in the new year. To ask the Scottish Government what the implications on the justice system are of leaving the EU. During the parliamentary debate on 1 November, Scotland's independent justice system has benefited from EU membership over the past 40 years across criminal, civil and family law. Our justice agencies and legal professionals engage directly and extensively with their EU counterparts, for example through EuroPoll and EuroJust. I entirely agree with the views expressed by the Lord Advocate during his visit to Brussels earlier this month. It is not in the interests of Scotland, the United Kingdom or Europe to turn our back on these measures for effective cross-border co-operation. I plan to meet with leaders of key justice bodies, legal professionals and other key stakeholders later this month to discuss how best we can protect the benefits of EU membership for our independent justice system. I thank the cabinet secretary for his answer. I have been contacted by constituents concerned about the implications on the Human Rights Act. Can the cabinet secretary explain how leaving the EU will affect citizens in Scotland? I recognise the concerns that have been raised by many people and how they feel about the implications of the EU referendum and the uncertainty that has been caused by the approach that has been taken by the UK Government. The implications of Brexit will depend on the terms of the future relationship that we have with the European Union. However, justice and security matters operate within the context of human rights treaties, and EU law is an important source of human rights law. Membership of the EU also brings positive social and economic benefits, for example, in relation to the court of rights and social protections. The Scottish Government has consistently opposed the UK Government's proposals for a British Bill of Rights, and we will continue to argue in support of human rights and enabling people in Scotland to have their rights protected. Peter Chapman, please. To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on Police Scotland's standard operating procedures for unauthorised sites used by gypsy travellers. Police Scotland's standard operating procedures are an operational matter for Police Scotland and fall within the responsibilities of the chief constable. Briefly, Mr Chapman. In order to move gypsy traveller camps on from unauthorised sites, police have resorted to using the 1865 trespacked act, which the Lord Advocate has issued guidance against using. The main issue for Police Scotland seems to be that neither authorised halting sites nor the existing legislation are a solution to this issue. Why is this SNP Government pressurising local authorities to waste time and money creating authorised halting sites that fail to solve these problems? Cabinet Secretary for Health and Sport, I highly think that providing halting sites for travellers in gypsy communities is a waste of public resources. I am appalled at the members' views in this matter. Gypsy and traveller communities have their rights as well, and we as a society should respect that, and we should try to help to manage those issues as effectively as we can. Lead responsibility in dealing with those issues at a local level lies with the local authority, and the police can provide assistance with them as and when is necessary. However, I do not think that we should get into a battle over trading individual rights against one group of parties against another. That is divisive, and I hope that the member would reflect on his comments on halting sites. Thank you. That concludes Portfolio Questions before we move on to the next side of our business. Allow the front benches to sort themselves out.