 Felly, dweud hwnnw i gwylliant. Rwy'n meddwl i ddim yn gweithio i gyllteigiau Ier ddevwyr Ier y gallu eu cinagles, ond nid oedd sailowu Ier y Ellin trustsau. Rwy'n meddwl i ddevwyr Ier y llwyddon, rydyn ni'n gweithio i'i gael i'r cinudentau sioedd. Rym ni'n gweithio i'r cilidau i'r cinLAUSEau, gan ddweud i gyllteigiau i'r clyweddau Cymru, gan gyllteigiau i'r clyweddau, gan gyllteigiau i'r clyweddau i'r clyweddau, Shot, 1 eich gwasanaeth yn sonsaniaeth i'r lleiw iawn ganod. Can't the First Minister confirm that, under the SNP's new rules, a pupil is deemed to have met those required standards of attainment even if they fail English'or Mathes? First Minister? The statistics that were published this week where round the sqf level 5 literacy and the similar standard for numeracy they showed that more than 80 per cent of school leavers in 2016-17 had yn 68.8 per cent yw niferisiad. That's welcome progress, but we are determined to go further. I should say of course that that is not the main indicator that the Scottish Government is using as a result of the introduction of standardised assessment and also the new way in which we are monitoring performance instead of the previous SSLN survey data. We now will have data on every pupil across the country, which will allow us to determine yn gweithio'r gafodd y gafodd. Ruth Davidson? That wasn't an answer to the question that I asked. The question that I asked was, are Scottish pupils deemed to have reached the required standard of literacy and numeracy even if they fail? The simple answer to that question is yes, because it used to be the case that we could measure literacy and numeracy standards fairly with accurate surveys. When it turned out the rates were going down, the SNP cancelled them and we now have a new system in place. Under that system, people can fail their national four or their higher English and maths, but still be counted as having achieved the right standards in literacy and numeracy. In other words, you are deemed to have passed even when you failed. The First Minister keeps saying that she wants to boost standards, so how does cancelling surveys, how does rigging the stats, how does lowering the bar for literacy and numeracy help achieve those higher standards? I think that Ruth Davidson is, perhaps deliberately there, mixing up different stages in education. The figures that were published this year, this week rather, were around attainment against level 5 of SCQF, both for literacy and for numeracy. What those figures show is that, for literacy, the performance increased from 70.1 per cent in 2013-14 to 80.8 per cent in 2016-17, and for numeracy it went from 59.5 per cent in 2013-14 to 68.8 in 2016-17. Ruth Davidson talks about hires and level 4. Those statistics are specifically about level 5, and therefore you would not compare them to performance against hires or level 4. That is the first point. Secondly, in terms of SSLN—this is an issue that has been discussed in this chamber on many occasions previously—SSLN was a sample survey. I have cited in the chamber before that, in some schools, that survey could be based on simply the performance of a dozen pupils. What we have done now is ensure that we have data on all pupils across our schools. That is based on teacher judgment, but that teacher judgment is now assessed against and informed by pupils' performance on the standardised assessments. We are deepening and making much more robust the measures by which we measure pupil performance. That is progress. All the statistics that were published this week show that we are making progress. I would have thought that people right across the chamber would have welcomed that. Yes, there is more to be done, but progress is very much going in the right direction. The First Minister disputes the changes, but let me read from her own document published on the 20th. Standard grade courses were not unit-based, so people would have to pass the course in order to achieve literacy or numeracy at their level, and now they do not. That is not a system that parents can trust. It is a complete lack of rigor, and it does nothing to help Scotland's children. However, if we are talking about rigor, let us look at another area of school inspections. Under this Government, inspections crash to the lowest level since devolution. I have asked the First Minister about this repeatedly in this chamber, and she said that it would all get better. However, this week we learned that some of Scotland's schools are going 16 years without being inspected, and a fifth has not been seen for at least a decade, including one in the First Minister's constituency and two in the education secretary's patch. How can the First Minister defend schools going over a decade uninspected? Ruth Davidson probably managed to confuse herself in the first part of that last question. I was specifically talking about performance against level 5 literacy and numeracy. Those were the statistics that were published this week. I think that we should welcome the fact that performance is improving. In terms of school inspections—I know that Ruth Davidson will want to hear the answer—Education Scotland has taken action to increase the overall number of school inspections. School inspections will increase to 250 schools a year in the academic year 2018-19. That amounts to an increase of more than 30 per cent on the number of inspections that are taking place in this academic year. Education Scotland, as I think most members will be aware, has gathered a range of views and comments on behaviours and performance as part of the pre-inspection questionnaires that are sent out. They are in fact right now in the process of recruiting additional inspectors to support that commitment to enhanced inspection activity. All those things that I would have thought, Presiding Officer, were moves that Ruth Davidson and others across the chamber would welcome. We are seeing progress in education. We are seeing progress in the right direction. We are seeing performance increasing. We are seeing the attainment gap start to narrow. There is more work to be done, but I would have hoped that everybody across the chamber—and I am sure that parents across the entire country—will welcome that progress. I think that we have just seen the utter complacency that we have come to expect for this Government when it comes to education reform. This is a Government that deals with slipping standards by cancelling the tests that exposes them, vows to increase inspections and has done again today, but which dropped them to the lowest historic levels and which cooks up a new measure of attainment and literacy and numeracy to try and compare it into believing that things are getting better. That will not restore Scottish education to global excellence and you will not do it by massaging the stats and then slapping yourselves on the back. When will this Government face up to the challenges in Scottish education and not duck them? It is this Government that is facing up to the challenges. That is why we are seeing the improvement and the progress that I have outlined. Of course, other statistics published this week show record numbers of higher passes, more than 150,000 higher passes, even though the cohort has reduced for a couple of years in a row. Ruth Davidson is just wrong in much of what she said there. Nobody is cancelling tests. What we have done is replace a sample survey with comprehensive data on the performance of pupils right across the country. We have taken a survey that looks at a handful of pupils and replaced that with data on every pupil across Scotland. I would have thought that Ruth Davidson would welcome that. In terms of the statistics that she has sounded very confused on today, they are statistics measuring against the standards of our curriculum. As I have said, we are increasing the number of inspections in our schools. Of course, this is the Government that is investing £750 million to improve attainment. We have the pupil equity fund going direct to headteachers and headteachers and teachers. I speak to across the country saying that that is transformational in improving standards. Ruth Davidson is saying that it is about standards. Yes, it is about standards and that money is helping us to improve standards. We will continue to take the action that is about improving performance in our schools. Even if Ruth Davidson and others across the chamber do not want to welcome the progress that has been made, I think that parents across the country will welcome it. In January this year, I raised the serious concerns of relatives who had family members in beeld, sheltered housing and care homes. On 18 January, the First Minister said that there would be no compromise in the continuity and quality of care and that the interests of residents would be protected. Can the First Minister provide us with an update? As Richard Leonard knows, Beeld announced closure of eight of its 12 care homes in October last year and said that that would happen in two phases. The remaining four homes have been transferred to new owners, and the choopy process applies. All the residents from the other homes have been reaccommodated since early May. I understand that that was ahead of schedule, and the cabinet secretary met the Save Our Beeld campaigners on 6 February. I understand that Neil Findlay, Johann Lamont and Unison were present at that meeting. As I have said before, know how difficult this is for any residents affected and for their families, but it is important when these things happen that are deeply regrettable. The Government works with partners to ensure that residents can be reaccommodated quickly. I am very happy to ask the health secretary to send further information to Richard Leonard if there are particular issues that he still wants more information on. One Beeld resident who was forced to move was 87-year-old Christina Wilson. She had led an active life and worked in Tesco until she was 74, but at the age of 84, she was diagnosed with Alzheimer's and moved into what is termed as a very sheltered flat provided by Beeld in Bonnybridge. Following Beeld's decision to walk away from the market, she was forced to move out into nearby Bankview nursing home. Sadly, Christina Wilson passed away last week. Her granddaughter, Laura Owens, told me what Christina's final weeks were like. She said, within weeks of my grand moving, despite best efforts by the new care home staff, she had stopped eating, broke her shoulder. There was a significant deterioration in her dementia. She became unable to walk, became more confused and agitated. She forgot who people were. She was tearful a lot of the time and made claims of no longer wanting to live fundamentally giving up on life. First Minister, what does that say about what is happening in our care system? We have a good care system in this country and our job as Government is to work with all partners and providers to ensure not only that it continues to be good but that it improves in any way that it requires to improve. Unfortunately, the Scottish Government was not in control of the decisions that Beeld took. However, we worked with Beeld to ensure that residents could be re-accommodated and have been re-accommodated. Where any former resident such as Christina, whose case has been outlined by Richard Leonard today, has sadly died, I would want to convey my deep condolences to their loved ones. I think that it was Christina's granddaughter that Richard Leonard was quoting there. I would be very happy to ask the health secretary to meet her granddaughter to discuss those concerns in greater depth. These are situations that none of us want to see happen, but organisations that are independent of the Scottish Government on occasion will take decisions such as those that we are talking about just now. Our responsibility is to work as hard as we can to ensure that the impact on individuals is minimised as much as possible. That is what we did in this case and that is what we will continue to do if there are any future instances such as this one. The dignity with which we treat our older citizens is a measure of the kind of society that we are. We need to get this right. It is why Labour introduced free personal care for the elderly. For Christina Wilson, it was not necessarily that there was a compromise in the quality of care that she received but that there was a huge breach in the continuity of care that she received and all because her care home provider walked away from the market. As a result, this woman in her late 80s, with dementia, was forced to move home. I am not sure that any of us here can really begin to feel the distress and the trauma that has been caused, but we have a duty to understand it. Christina's family demands a review of the human impact of what they describe in their own words as those forced transitions. They are right. Will you establish a review into what happened at Beald so that all of the wider lessons can be learned? We will continue to look very carefully at all those issues. As I said in my previous answer, I will ask the health secretary to look specifically at the circumstances of the very sad case that Richard Leonard is outlining today and the offer to meet with family members stands. Richard Leonard talks about a decision that a provider took to walk away from the market and he is right about that. That was not a decision of the Scottish Government and it was not a decision that the Scottish Government was able to stop Beald taking. The responsibility of the Scottish Government was to ensure that we worked with all partners to ensure that residents were reaccommodated and the disruption to individuals was minimised as much as possible. That is exactly what we did and that is what we will do in any future instances in the regrettable circumstances where they arise. We take very seriously our obligations to continuity of care and quality of care of our older residents. Richard Leonard mentioned free personal care. This Government has protected free personal care each and every year that we have been in office. Of course, we are now taking steps to extend free personal care to those under the age of 65 in certain circumstances. Those are important issues and they are often very difficult issues, but we will continue to discharge our responsibilities with the circumstances, the dignity and the respect that we owe to our older residents at the top of our minds. We have some constituency supplementaries. The first is from Gordon MacDonald. In my constituency of Edinburgh Pentlands, private rented property is being offered at up to £800 for a two bedroom flat and £1,900 for a three bed house. What is the First Minister's reaction to recent news that Edinburgh's private rent levels, including the site hill area of my constituency, has some of the highest percentage yields in Scotland and what is being done to assist tenants struggling to meet ever-increasing rent demands? I am aware of a recent report by Totally Money on rental yields in Edinburgh. The new private residential tenancy that the Scottish Government introduced last year protects tenants against sudden or excessive rent increases. Under the new tenancy, private sector landlords can only increase rents once every 12 months and are required to give tenants three months notice of an increase of that. Tenants can also challenge any increase that they consider unfair by referring it for adjudication by a rent officer. In addition, all local authorities can now apply to ministers to cap rent increases under the tenancy by designating areas of particularly high rent increases as rent pressure zones. The Scottish Government has recently discussed with the City of Edinburgh Council the evidence that the council would need to provide in seeking such a designation. I know that the housing minister would be happy to speak to Gordon MacDonald to share that information with him in order that he can further assist his constituents. On the eve of the Easter recess, I asked the First Minister when people in Orkney and Shetland could expect to see the benefits of road equivalent tariff on Northern Isles ferry routes. She was not able to answer that question, although she did with remarkable foresight and predicted that I would bring it back to Parliament if not satisfied. As we approach the summer recess and still no confirmation of a start date, can the First Minister assure my constituents that RET will be introduced on our lifeline routes as promised before the end of the first half of 2018? I know that the transport minister is considering the issues that arise here, the legal state aid issues and will make a further announcement in due course. I hope that that will be an announcement that is made sooner rather than later. However, as the member will be aware, there are a number of issues that the transport minister and the Government have to satisfy ourselves of before we can outline the detail of that announcement. However, I know that Humza Yousaf will keep Liam McArthur updated on progress. Mary Gougeon Last week, a story was published that claimed that Strachathrow hospital in my constituency was set to be closed and then sold off by NHS Tayside. This has understandably caused a great deal of concern and distress to the staff who work there, but also to the wider community who are now in fear that this vital facility is to close. Since then, I have been inundated with correspondence about it. It was raised at a meeting with NHS Tayside last week where they gave their assurances that this was simply not the case. However, can the First Minister clarify the situation in relation to Strachathrow hospital and offer her categorical assurances that this hospital will not close? The First Minister The hospital will not close and the claims that it is facing closure are simply not true. I think that anybody who is claiming that is doing a real disservice to the public. The chair of NHS Tayside recently met local representatives as a result of the false claims about the future of the hospital and gave MSPs and MMPs an unequivocal assurance that Strachathrow hospital is not closing. He has been explicit that NHS Tayside sees the hospital as being key to the future delivery of local healthcare services and any suggestion to the contrary is wholly unfounded. I will take this opportunity to remind the chamber that was this Government that brought Strachathrow hospital back into the NHS after it had been privatised by previous administration. John Finnie Thank you, First Minister. I wrote yesterday to the local Government Minister asking that he call in a Highland Council decision to grant approval for a development and a triple SI, a special protected area in a Ramsar site at Coal Links. Will the First Minister confirm that, in or out of the EU, the Scottish Government will respect all international treaty obligations, including the Ramsar convention? The First Minister Yes, it is our intention to honour obligations that arise from EU membership. We have been very clear in our resolve not to see environmental protections or any other protections downgraded as a result of Brexit, so I hope that that makes the position of the Scottish Government extremely clear. Willie Rennie The First Minister said earlier that she was making progress in education, but how can we be making progress in education with national testing for five-year-olds? Is it progress when children in Scotland say that it is a detrimental waste of time? Is it progress when teachers say that time has been swallowed up and is actively harmful? Is it progress when the teaching union EISA is opposed to national testing for five-year-olds? Even our own special adviser, Sir Harry Burns, says that the Government should move away from nationwide national testing. Why does she think that all those people are wrong and only she is right? The assessments are not high-stakes assessment. There is no pass or fail associated with those assessments. The results are there to help teachers to plan for children's progress and to inform the teacher judgment about achievement against curriculum for excellence levels. Children and young people's interests are very much at the heart of those assessments. We look at primary 1 assessments in particular. They are designed around the early level of curriculum for excellence and are compatible with play-based learning approaches in primary 1. In the best practice, the assessments that are experienced by children are part of on-going learning and teaching activities in the classroom. They are appropriate to the age of the child, but they are also important in making sure—to go back to the question that I answered from Ruth Davidson earlier on—that we are replacing survey data on the performance of children with comprehensive data on the performance of children, which allows us to know the progress that we are making in closing the attainment gap. In the pupils' interests, she will stop those national tests right now. Older pupils are being brought in because P1s cannot operate the computer, because they are only five. Parents are concerned about the impact on their children, because they are only five. The teachers have said very clearly that they have listed earlier on the list of concerns that they have got because the children are only five, but the First Minister ignores all those concerns. All that she is interested in is her computer machine, with all her assessments and all her data to try to drive her forward, her claim that she is going to improve the education system. Why won't she listen to all those people who have expressed concerns? Why won't she change it and scrap the test now? What drives me is the determination to improve standards in our schools in the interests of young people and to close the unacceptable attainment gap in our schools. We need good data to assure not just ourselves but parents that we are doing exactly that. Willie Rennie says that primary 1 pupils cannot use computers. I do not know about him, but I have met many primary 1 pupils who are better at using computers than I am. I mentioned being in a school in Largs last week, where young primary school children were showing me how to computer code. All of the primary 1 assessment questions have been designed with Education Scotland and with other educational professionals. They are aligned to the curriculum for excellence benchmarks for primary 1, which is the early level. Willie Rennie might be interested to know that, if he is not aware of that already, we are conducting a user review of the first year of assessments. Part of that will be listening to the experience of teachers. We will publish the user review report in August at the time of the start of the new school year, setting out any changes and enhancements that we will make to the system for next year. We will very much listen to the views of teachers, but we will also very much continue to take the action that we consider necessary to improve standards in our schools and close the attainment gap. My constituent, Sam Ross, who is Down syndrome, was spat at on her face by a stranger as she got the train home from her work in Glasgow. Sam has a job and she was getting the train at Queen Street just like thousands of other people. She should not have to face being spat at just to travel independently. Sam will be representing Scotland when the World Down Syndrome Congress comes to Glasgow next month, an event that will see hundreds of people with Down syndrome around the world travel to the city. Will the First Minister join me in condemning this hate crime? Will she set out what she will do to make Scotland a safe place for everyone? The First Minister Sam should not have had to face that treatment. It is despicable and unacceptable. All of us should be very clear that behaviour of that kind will never be acceptable in Scotland. I thank James Kelly for raising Sam's experience in the chamber today to allow me to say that unequivocally. We are looking forward to welcoming the Down syndrome Congress to Glasgow next month. I have recorded a message that the Deputy First Minister may be speaking at the Congress, and that will be an opportunity for us to celebrate the amazing contribution that individuals with Down syndrome make to our society. We should and we do value them, and this is an opportunity to say that loudly and clearly. The police will take instances like this very seriously, and all of us must make sure that, in our actions as well as in our rhetoric, we are supporting that zero tolerance to any abuse or discrimination. What I would say to Sam is that she should continue to work to go about her daily life and know that, as she does so, as does anybody with Down syndrome, she has not just the full support, but I am sure that the admiration of everybody across the chamber. Ruth Maguire Does the First Minister think that it is appropriate for the UK Government to roll out the red carpet for Donald Trump, given the shocking reports of families being split up and the heartbreaking scenes of children detained and caged at the US border? Will she relay the serious concerns of the people of Scotland to the UK Government? I do not think that it is appropriate at this time for the red carpet to be rolled out, meetings are perhaps one thing, but red carpet treatment is another. I do not think that there can be anybody, perhaps with the exception of Nigel Farage and his ilk, but I do not think that there can be any decent person across the UK, across Europe or even across the world, and the vast majority of people in America, for that matter, who have not been appalled at the images and stories of young children being separated from their parents and incarcerated and what look to all intents and purposes to be cages in America. I am glad that the president appeared to U-turn on that position yesterday when he signed an executive order, although I think that we have all got to be careful not to just assume that the situation now is okay, because it appears to be that instead of children being detained without their parents, we will see children detained with their parents. I will continue to raise my voice against instances like this, and of course it is not just in America this week that we have seen reasons to be concerned. In Italy, the conduct around the Roma community reports today of Hungary deciding to criminalise lawyers and activists who help asylum seekers should make us all pause for thought. We should be standing up for the rights and values that all of us hold dear as human beings. The world has a collective responsibility to deal with those seeking refuge and asylum, and I think that it is important that we do that collectively, but that we also do that with human dignity at the very forefront of our minds. That is my view, and I hope it is the view of everybody across the chamber. Alison Johnstone In 2015, the Scottish Government asked Lord Bonomy to review the Protection of Wild Mammals Act. He did so in 2016. The Government consulted on the review in 2017 and the consultation closed in January this year, 2018. Five months on, the Scottish Government has yet to respond. Just over a year ago, the First Minister told the chamber, I have always been an opponent of fox hunting and I remain so. Is that still the case? If so, will the First Minister commit to legislation to introduce a real ban on fox hunting in Scotland? I do oppose fox hunting and that remains my position. As Alison Johnstone rightly says, Lord Bonomy looked at this in detail for us. It is important to say that he did not find evidence of widespread flouting of the law, but he did have comments to make about the need for more clarity in the law, better enforcement and monitoring to deal with any illegal practices. The Environment Secretary will make a further announcement on that in due course, which will set out any further steps that the Scottish Government intends to take. Emma Harper To ask the First Minister whether the Scottish Government has received details of the financial implications for Scotland of the UK Government's investment in the NHS. The information that we have managed to extract from the UK Government on this potential funding and its sources has been incomplete at best. On Tuesday, two days after the announcement that the UK Government provided a nominal profile of Barnett consequentials, but I have so far refused to confirm that this will be a net benefit to Scotland. In fact, a paper placed by the UK Government in the House of Commons library states that, I quote, the final Barnett consequentials for all three devolved administrations will be confirmed at upcoming fiscal events and at the next spending review. The finance secretary has requested details as a matter of urgency from the UK Government to ensure that Scotland is not shortchanged. Emma Harper Thank the First Minister for that response. Has the First Minister had any guarantees at all from the Treasury that the £2 billion increase associated with the UK Government's announcement will be a net increase in funding to Scotland's budget, or could the money result in cuts elsewhere? The First Minister Can I make a couple of quick points? First, I welcome the fact that the UK Government is now talking about tax rises to fund the national health service. It is just a pity that, when the Scottish Government did increase taxes for those who can afford to pay to fund increases for our health service, the Scottish Conservatives opposed that tooth and nail. I will put forward tax proposals that would have taken £550 million out of the Scottish budget, equivalent to 12,000 nurses. Secondly, we do not yet know that any consequentials will represent a net increase. We have some experience here. For example, when there was the promise of consequentials last year of £33 million from winter funding, we ended up receiving just £8.4 million of that because of the way that commitment was funded. The fact of the matter is, until we know from the UK Government how they intend to fund this commitment, we do not know how much there will be for the Scottish Government in consequentials. We do know, for example, that none of this money will come from a Brexit dividend, because there is no such thing as a Brexit dividend, but until we know where it will come from and that it does not involve cuts in other devolved areas, then we will not know the final amount. The sooner we get that information, the better, Presiding Officer, and we will continue to press the UK Government for it. The First Minister is known for never wanting to seek grievance and division between England and Scotland, but a key aspect of what the First Minister has not mentioned today is the fact that, under the Conservatives in England, health spending has grown twice of that of Scotland. Does the First Minister not accept that, since 2010, her Government has received £2.46 billion in additional Barnett consequential funding for our health service? As we celebrate the NHS turning 70, can she not find it in her heart to welcome that additional funding? When we know what the additional funding is, and if it does amount to the kind of sums that have been talked about, then, of course, we will welcome it, but we do not know that right now. I will repeat again. When we were previously promised £33 million, when we saw the detail of that, it turned into £8.4 million, so forgive me. I think that I will wait to see the colour of the money first. In terms of comparisons between Scotland and England, I am not sure if Miles Briggs is aware of that, but health spending in Scotland is £163 per person higher than it is in England. That is 8 per cent higher per head. In fact, Miles Briggs wants us to match the English levels of health spending. If we were to match the levels of health spending in England, we would have to take £880 million out of the NHS budget. That would be the price of matching spending in England. If Miles Briggs does not mind, we will continue to fund the health service fairly in Scotland, and we will continue to do it by being honest with people about the modest tax rises, instead of pretending, like the Tories do, that there is some mythical unicorn of a Brexit dividend. Let's hope that this will go better then. To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government's response is to the recent report by ISD Scotland, which suggests that antidepressants are detected in nearly half of postmortems involving accidental drug deaths. The recent report was extremely helpful in allowing us to deepen our understanding of the issue. It is important that our action is not only driven by what drugs are detected in those who die from drug misuse, but that our actions are also informed by where a drug is assessed as being implicated in a death. This week, ISD analysis showed that antidepressants were implicated in combination with other substances in 10 per cent of accidental drug-related deaths. However, they were implicated in combination with other substances in 43 per cent of intentional drug-related deaths. That analysis of already published data reinforces that large numbers of those who are most at risk often suffer from poor mental health. We are working already to develop better dual diagnosis service arrangements for those suffering from substance misuse and mental health problems, because we know that the use of antidepressants alongside the use of opioids can bring additional risks. I thank the First Minister for that answer, but isn't it the right place to consider the difficult and nuanced question of how prescription drugs and illegal drugs are linked? Is the Scottish Government's overall strategic approach to drugs? However, it is now almost a year since the Scottish Government promised a refresh of its drug strategy, and I cannot find any sign of when it is coming. Can the First Minister give us a guarantee that the refresh strategy will be published before we come back from summer recess? The forthcoming substance use strategy will be published shortly. I will ask the health secretary to write to the member when the date for that is known. That strategy will look at how services can adapt to find people most in need and then deliver services that address their specific circumstances. We have been very clear that behaviours and culture around substance misuse have changed and that services that we think are not currently meeting the wide range of very complex health and social care needs of those most at risk. That is why it has been right to take time to develop that strategy, but I hope that, when it is published, the member will engage with it and, indeed, hopefully be able to welcome it. To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government's response is to the national audit office report rolling out universal credit. The national audit office report provides further evidence that the UK Government's shambolic universal credit is failing people causing debt, rent, arrears and hardship across Scotland and the UK as a whole. The report states that there is no evidence that universal credit will provide value for money to the taxpayer or achieve its targets in relation to getting people back into work. Of particular concern is the finding that the DWP is showing a lack of regard in failing to understand the hardship that is faced by some claimants. That, in my view, is damming and even further evidence of what the Scottish Government, alongside many others, has long and repeatedly called for, a halt to the roll-out of universal credit so that fundamental flaws with the system can be fixed. The Cabinet Secretary for Communities has written yet again to Esther McVeigh urging the UK Government to do just that. I am grateful for the First Minister's response because we agree that universal credit must be halted and must be fixed. Nine and a half thousand families with children in my region are suffering the misery and destitution that universal credit, that the Tories are willfully forcing on communities. The Scottish Government has announced plans for an income supplement through the social security system and we have proposed a child benefit top-up because it is future-proofed against means testing, conditionality, sanctions and the destitution of universal credit. The First Minister, you cannot deliver dignity and respect using universal credit. Will you today rule out using universal credit for your planned income supplement? We are considering all options for the income supplement. We want to do that in the way that is best for those who would be in receipt of that. Angela Constance set out our current thinking around that when the child poverty strategy was published and we will continue to inform Parliament as our thinking on that develops. We see that as a very important part of our efforts to reduce child poverty in particular. Of course, we are also taking other action mitigating some of the welfare cuts that we are seeing coming from Westminster and, of course, from next summer we will see the introduction of the best start grant, which will give additional financial help to new parents in low-income families when a child is born. We will continue to take action across a range of areas to make sure that we are helping those who most need our help. I hope that all of us in Mark Griffin's party and in the Government will join together to call for a halt to universal credit. Even using our devolved powers, 85 per cent of the welfare budget and powers still lie with Westminster. I hope that one day soon we will see all those powers lying with this Parliament, but until that day comes, I think that it is incumbent on all of us to call in the UK Government to stop policies that we know are doing so much harm to so many people across the country. Thank you, Presiding Officer. The Social Security Committee regularly hears evidence of the devastation that the roll-out of universal credit causes, pushing people into debt and rent arrears. Considering the strikingly different approach that Scotland is taking to social security from that of the UK Government, does the First Minister believe with me that the only way to ensure fairness, respect and dignity is for all social security powers to be involved to this Parliament? Yes, I believe that the sooner that happens, the better. I hope that we can get Labour's support for that now in a way that we did not have previously. I think that we have the opportunity to show that. We are already showing where we have powers that we can do things differently and better and do things in a way that makes sure that fairness, respect and dignity are very much at the heart of all of our policies. The more we demonstrate that through the use of our limited powers of social security, the more I think the argument for having total devolution of social security simply becomes completely overwhelming. I hope that we see that happen very soon. Monica Lennon To ask the First Minister what action the Scottish Government is taking to support the Joe Cox Foundation initiative, The Great Get Together. I am delighted to say that the Government is supporting this year's Great Get Together, which follows the success of last year's events. I was able to offer both my support and encouragement to Joe Cox's sister, Kim Ledbetter, when I had the opportunity to meet her in May. This year's events will take place this weekend, which would, of course, have been Joe's birthday. I am pleased to see that a number of events will take place the length and breadth of Scotland. Monica Lennon I thank the First Minister for her response and for her continued support for the Joe Cox Foundation. When Kim Ledbetter, Joe's sister, was in Parliament recently, she said that Joe would want to be remembered for how she lived and not for how she died. Joe's legacy has taught us that being kind and compassionate does not make politicians or communities weak. That is what made her strong. This weekend, in tribute to Joe and what would have been her birthday, people right across the UK will come together to celebrate our diverse communities and to demonstrate that, just as Joe once said, we are far more united and far more in common than that which divides us. Will the First Minister join me in encouraging people to take part in those great get-together events happening across Scotland, where they will be warmly welcomed, including at the coffee morning that I am hosting in Hamilton on Saturday? Does she agree with me that our communities will be strengthened if we all endeavour to love like Joe? The First Minister Yes, I agree with that. I encourage people to take part in events in their own communities over the weekend. I think that they help to bring people together and for all our divides, for all our disagreements, and that is natural and necessary in any vibrant democracy. I would like to think that all of us work hard—we might not always succeed, but all of us work hard to ensure that kindness and compassion is very much the hallmark of how we do and approach politics. I did not know Joe Colt personally. I wish I had had the opportunity to know her, but everything that I have read and heard about her says that she was a passionate, vibrant, energetic individual who put those principles and values into practice. I have to say that those values were very much evident in her sister when I met her a few weeks ago, so that is an opportunity. There are many issues, perhaps more so now than has been the case in recent times in our politics, that cause deep disagreement. We have talked about some of them today and no doubt will continue to do so, but, at the end of the day, it is useful always to remind ourselves—I think that Joe's memory helps us to do that—that there is always more that unites us as human beings than will ever divide us as politicians. That is a good opportunity this weekend just to remember that and encourage everybody to take part in those events very much in that spirit. Thank you very much, and that concludes First Minister's questions. We will move on to members' business shortly. In the name of Christina McKelvie, there will be an MND awareness week 2018. We will just take a short suspension before then to allow the public gallery to clear and for our new guests to arrive. So, a short suspension.