 That concludes General Questions. We turn now to First Minister's Questions and we start with question number 1 from Jackson Carlaw. We have learnt over the last two years that the First Minister has become a great fan of unions. So can the First Minister explain why would it be in Scotland's interests to fracture the one union that matters most to us are on with the rest of the United Kingdom? First minister. Well of course, The The European Union is a union of independent countries and look out it and stood up for Ireland over the past two years. By contrast, as I said to the Prime Minister on the telephone just last night, the United Kingdom Government has ignored Scotland, sidelined Scotland, cast aside Scotland's interests, now stands on the brink, not just of taking us out of the European Union against our will, or taking us out of the single market against our interests. They now stand on the brink of placing Scotland at a real competitive disadvantage with Northern Ireland. That is not an academic or an abstract argument. That will have real implications for jobs and living standards and investment in Scotland. I do not think that the Tories care a jot about that. Of course, it is not so long ago that the Secretary of State for Scotland, the leader of the Scottish Conservatives, was saying that if there was a separate relationship with the UK for Northern Ireland, they would resign. Wait, it is David Mundell today. Jackson Carlaw. Order, please. Jackson Carlaw. Let me be absolutely crystal clear. Others may be abandoning their post, but none of us in those benches are going anywhere. We will be staying right here every day, every week holding this First Minister and this Scottish Government to account. Let me be also clear that Ruth Davidson and David Mundell have spent the last year fighting for the United Kingdom. They are not going to take any lessons from anyone else, not any carpetbagger who has come late to the defence of the United Kingdom, and certainly not from this First Minister. First Minister. Can I just try to strike one note of consensus here? I agree with Jackson Carlaw when he says that the Tories are staying exactly where they are. It is called opposition, and they do not deserve to be anywhere else. I always thought that it was a really odd position for Ruth Davidson and David Mundell to argue against Northern Ireland getting a deal that protects their vital interests. Instead of arguing for Scotland to get a similar deal, it was standing up for the DUP rather than standing up for Scotland. Having chosen that red line is really hard to see how they stay in office after today with a shred of credibility. Let me quote the letter from David Mundell and Ruth Davidson just a few weeks ago. Any deal that undermines the integrity of the UK internal market or of the United Kingdom was a red line. They were briefing. That was a resignation issue. Dominic Rabb, the Brexit Secretary, who has been involved in those negotiations, has been very clear that the deal presents a very real threat to the integrity of the United Kingdom. Esther McVeigh is saying exactly the same. If I was as cynical and as completely self-serving as the Tories, that might take me to vote for the deal, but I am not. What is absolutely unclear to me is how David Mundell or Ruth Davidson can have any other option but to follow through on the principled commitment that they made. Let's see over the course of today whether they have any principle, whether they have a backbone between them. I suspect that that answer is going to be a resounding no. Jackson Carlaw. First Minister, let's be candid with the chamber. You and I have one very particular thing in common. Neither of us is going to be First Minister after the next Scottish election. But I know a woman who will be and I'm just keeping her seat warm. Fracturing the UK internal market is exactly what the First Minister continually proposes. How if Scotland were to have a different trading arrangement from England, then as night follows day, we would create a problem where none currently exists. A border at Berwick. Scotland facing restrictions on a trading market four times as important to us as the EU. How is that standing up for Scotland? How can this possibly help our country prosper? Jackson Carlaw used to have a reputation for half decent jokes. I think that reputation has been completely shattered over the course of this session, but Jackson Carlaw has just stood here and uttered the phrase, no problem currently exists. Is he watching what is happening in the House of Commons right now? The Tory Government is imploding as we speak. People, the length and breadth of the UK are seriously worried about their jobs, about their living standards, all of which are on the line because of the ideology of the Tory Government and the complete shambles that they have made of the negotiation. How dare Jackson Carlaw stand in this chamber and say that there is no problem? Scotland. Let me spell it out to Jackson Carlaw. Scotland faces being taken out of the European Union against our democratic wishes. Scotland faces being taken out of the single market against our economic interests. Now we face being put at a competitive disadvantage to Northern Ireland. That is what the Tories are presiding over. Jackson Carlaw and every single member of the Tory benches should be completely and utterly ashamed of themselves. Jackson Carlaw is the same tired old lines from the same tired old First Minister. You know, this First Minister made her priorities clear the morning after the 2016 referendum result before even the votes have been counted. Her first actions were to get on to her civil servants demanding that they start drafting a bill for an independence referendum. It has been that grudge and grievance agenda that has seen her act in a way that is nothing other than destructive to the negotiations that have been taking place over the last two years. Everything that she has said and done since has been pursued relentlessly with that goal in mind, even now using the history of Northern Ireland with all the desperate turmoil that is involved for her singular political advantage. That is the disgrace today. To turn the First Minister's cliche in its own head, she should be thoroughly ashamed of herself. The First Minister exploiting the coming days to pursue her own goals as she has done over recent months, over and over again, is fundamentally against the country's interests. We need a First Minister acting for all of Scotland. Is it at time that she acted in the national interest, not the nationalist interest? With everything that is going on and acknowledging that, will she now take her threat of a second independence referendum and all the additional disruption that would cause off the table? Will she, yes or no? Talk about tired old rhetoric. There is only one person in this chamber indulging in that today. What an air for Jackson Carlaw to come to this chamber and to talk about the importance of finding solutions for Northern Ireland? It was David Mundell and Ruth Davidson who wrote to the Prime Minister opposing a separate deal for Northern Ireland. All I am asking for is if the Northern Ireland is to get a separate deal for very good reasons—I support that—then Scotland should not be placed at a disadvantage as a result of that. As for Jackson Carlaw's statement that the Scottish Government has been, what was it, destructive to the negotiations? Scotland hasn't been allowed into those negotiations. We haven't had the opportunity to be destructive to the negotiations. I do support remaining in the European Union. I have been consistent about that, but, from day 1, I have put forward compromises. I have put forward the compromise of the UK, staying in the single market and the customs union. I have lost count of the number of times I have asked the Prime Minister to consider that sensible option, but she has been too busy pandering to the likes of Jacob Rees-Mogg. I think that the chickens are going to come home to rust on that today, as Jacob Rees-Mogg and his colleagues will probably bring her down. I am pretty confident, because I will put my case to the Scottish people that I will be First Minister after the next Scottish election. I am not confident that the Prime Minister will be in office by the end of today, such as the shambles that she has created of those negotiations. As I said earlier on, she should be ashamed of that. Jackson Carlaw should be ashamed of that, and every single Tory in the country should be ashamed of the mess that they are creating for people, the length and breadth of the UK. Question 2 Richard Leonard Presiding Officer, Theresa May's Government is falling apart before our very eyes. The Northern Ireland Minister, gone. The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, gone. Even the Secretary of State for Brexit, gone. So can I ask the First Minister, does she agree with me that it is time for the wretched Tory Government to go as well? First Minister. Richard Leonard Presiding Officer, nothing is more emblematic of this Tory Government's bankruptcy than universal credit. The roll-out of the flawed universal credit is not only socially unjust, it is morally wrong. It is pushing people into poverty, into homelessness and into debt. The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions has just resigned, and why? Because of David Cameron's arrogance in calling a referendum and because of Theresa May's desperation in making promises that she knew she could never keep. Will the First Minister instruct her Government this afternoon to urgently contact the DWP to press again for the roll-out of universal credits to be halted? First Minister. Richard Leonard wants me to do that. Yes, I will do that, but I have also lost count of the number of times the Scottish Government has contacted the DWP asking for universal credit to be scrapped for roll-out to be halted. Can I make a better suggestion to Richard Leonard? Can I ask that he joins me? We can do it together. This afternoon I will sign a joint letter with him that we write a letter to the Prime Minister if she is still in office or to her successor or to the DWP, and we ask for power over universal credit to be taken out of the hands of the Tories and put into the hands of this Parliament. That is a better suggestion. I know that it is First Minister's questions, but it indulges me in asking Richard Leonard a question. Will he join me in making that call this afternoon? Richard Leonard. First Minister, I have got a better idea. Let's call for a general election. The First Minister and I do not agree on many things, but I think that we do agree that Theresa Mayle's Brexit deal is a bad deal, and that is why Labour MPs will vote against the deal. As I understand it, SNP MPs will do the same. It is my firm belief that this deal will not be agreed to by the House of Commons, that this shambolic Tory government needs to go, and that the people need, more than anything, a general election as a matter of urgency. So First Minister, will you join with Labour to defeat the deal and will you back an early general election? First Minister, I think that we have just had confirmation yet again that Richard Leonard would rather leave powers over welfare in the hands of a Tory Government than bring them back to this Parliament. Shame on him for that. As people suffer under universal credit and all of those welfare cuts, they will look at Labour and wonder why that is the case. It is reasonable to say, if memory serves me correctly, that the SNP made clear—I may get clear to Willie Rennie in this chamber this afternoon—that the SNP MPs would vote against this deal. I think that we did that before Labour did, so it is perhaps Labour joining the SNP. However, I hope that no party in the House of Commons falls for the Prime Minister's spin that it is a case of accepting a bad deal for fear of no deal. No deal is not inevitable if this bad deal is voted down. However, there is one question that remains to be answered. If that happens, what actually is Labour's position on Brexit? Again, I do not know if he has got another question, but perhaps he can enlighten us today. Do they favour a single market in customs union? Do they favour another vote? What exactly would Labour do on Brexit that is different to what Theresa May is doing? I do not have a clue. Maybe Richard Leonard can tell us. We have a number of constituency supplementaries. The first is from Johann Lamont. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. The First Minister is all too aware of the terrible impact of the contaminated blood scandal on so many Scottish people and their families. Indeed, the First Minister has played an important role in seeking to address the disgraceful injustice that so many have suffered, and is critically confirming that she and her Government accepted the moral responsibility to provide support, including financial support, to all victims. A constituent met me this week to highlight her concerns, and those of the Scottish Infected Blood Forum and Hemophilia Scotland about imminent decisions by her Government on financial support, which are in danger of continuing the inconsistent gap in financial support between the advanced as opposed to chronically infected, a gap that is simply unjustifiable. Would the First Minister reflect on the distress that is being caused by reports that decisions to financial entitlement may be determined not by the clear evidence of need, but by pre-determined budget constraints? Given the important role of Scotland in seeking justice for victims, will the First Minister agree to meet me, my constituent and those who have supported victims to ensure that we in Scotland live up to our moral responsibility to all victims of contaminated blood? I thank Johann Lamont for raising an issue. As she says, I have had a long-standing involvement in the issue. It was an issue that I campaigned on when I was in opposition, and I have retained that interest as health minister and laterally as First Minister. I know many of the people who have been affected. I have one in particular constituent of mine that I understand the issues from very clearly indeed. I want to, and the Scottish Government is determined to see justice delivered. I will ask the health secretary to meet with Johann Lamont, where we can discuss where we are in terms of the progress around amended payments, and we can ensure that we listen to the representations that a constituent has made to her and that my constituents make to me. I will ensure that that meeting can happen as quickly as possible. Would the First Minister agree that the decision by Talgo to choose Longannet as a site for their train manufacturing base, creating 1,000 jobs, could be a wonderful legacy for the communities who serve the power station? Does she also believe that reopening the Allwood Unferm in Rail route to passengers should also be part of that legacy for workers and for their communities? I warmly welcome Talgo's announcement. This week, Michael Matheson was in London for that announcement. I met the senior executives of Talgo some time ago to make the case for Scotland, so I think that all of us are delighted that this announcement has been made. It is good news for Longannet and the surrounding area. Mark Ruskell is right to talk about the legacy benefits of that, and transport links will be a key part of that, so we will absolutely consider all of that as we work with Talgo to make the preparations. Obviously, the decision is, to some extent, dependent on that company winning the contract for HS2 that they are bidding for, but we would hope that, regardless of the outcomes of that, we can persuade Talgo to go ahead with that manufacturing site for all of the benefits that we know that it will bring, including the ones that Mark Ruskell raises. Finlay Carson Given the huge success of the Galloway National Park Association conference, with overwhelming support from young and not so young constituents of Galloway and West Dumfries, will the First Minister recognise the work of the Galloway National Park Association and give a commitment to initiate preliminary investigations into the feasibility of a kingdom of Galloway National Park, which can now clearly be seen to have community and local authority support? The First Minister I thank the member for raising the issue. Of course, this was an issue that our late Presiding Officer took a very close interest in and worked very hard to progress. I understand and appreciate the arguments that are made for a Galloway National Park. It is certainly something that we want to give full consideration to, and I am happy to ask the relevant minister to engage with the member and others in an interest to look at how we take those things forward properly. Mark Griffin I want to raise the case of Sebastian Skelton, a 13-month-old infant whose mother, Siobhan, is struggling to get the treatment that he needs from our national health service. Days after he was born, Sebastian developed food intolerances that have now developed considerably. More than a year later, he still has not been seen by the allergy specialist and is still going without an NHS prescription for the medication that he needs. As Siobhan's mother has been forced to take matters into her own hands and sought help from private, specialist doctors in London and Glasgow, having written to the health secretary seven weeks ago to seek urgent intervention and support, I have still to receive a response. Can I ask the First Minister to look into Sebastian's case and give him and his family the help that they urgently need? The First Minister Yes, I will give the undertaking today beyond what Mark Griffin has narrated in the chamber today. I do not know the full details of Sebastian's case, but clearly we are talking about a young baby. I can understand the distress of his parents, and we would all want to see that baby get the treatment that he needs as quickly as possible. I will ask the health secretary to look into it as a matter of urgency and to come back to the member as soon as we have had the opportunity to do so, but I would also ask him to convey my very best wishes to Sebastian and to his family. Question 3, Patrick Harvie. Thank you, Presiding Officer. It is another day. It is another dose of Brexit chaos. The Prime Minister's deal, so-called, satisfies almost nobody from Brexiteers to Remainers. It is unlikely to pass at Westminster, and the public must ultimately be given the chance to kill off Brexit in a people's vote. However, if the last two years have made anything clear, it is that Scotland's future is best secured as a full, independent EU member state. The First Minister stated in this chamber in summer last year that, at the end of the period of negotiation with the EU, when the terms of Brexit will be clearer, we will come back to Parliament to set out our judgment on the best way forward at that time, including our view on the precise timescale for offering the people a choice over the country's future. Jackson Carlaw might not want to know the answer to that, but I want to know the answer to that, and I do not think that I am alone in wanting to know the answer. Will the First Minister now confirm to us that Scotland will be given that choice and when? I will, as I said, at the time that Patrick Harvie has alluded to. I will come back to the chamber and set out my views on the precise detail of that. When we have clarity, obviously we have now seen the terms of the deal. It remains to be seen whether that makes it a vote in the House of Commons over the next couple of weeks. We will see how that whole sorry saga plays out, and then I will undertake that commitment, as I said, Let me say two things in addition. First, I have no doubt that Scotland will get an opportunity to choose again on the question of independence, and when it does, I am confident that Scotland will choose to be an independent country. The last two years, from the decision that risk taken is out of the EU against our will, to the way in which the Scottish Government is trying to represent the interests of Scotland has been sidelined, to the way in which the powers of this Parliament have been undermined. The case for independence has grown stronger each and every single day. The sooner this Parliament is independent, the sooner this country is independent, no longer at the mercy of Tory Governments who do not have our interests at heart, the better. That time will come, and when it does, I have no doubt that the people of Scotland will choose to be independent. Patrick Harvie Well, the First Minister is right that we have only just seen this deal, and it is conceivable that MPs might vote for it. I think that it is highly unlikely, but there is already, surely, enough clarity to make a judgment, because there is nothing in Theresa May's plan that protects the social, economic and workplace rights that we have, nothing that protects the environmental rights and protections that we have, nothing to guarantee the future rights of EU citizens living here, or our ability to attract more of the people we need for the strength of our economy, the delivery of our public services, or the diversity of our society. There is not a single reference to Scotland either in the withdrawal agreement or in the absurdly simplistic paper on the future relationship. Look, the chaos of Brexit was inevitable, but we also need to face up to the equally inevitable fact that Scotland will only get the strong future relationship that we want with Europe, as the overwhelming majority of people in Scotland voted for. If we get out their campaign for it and persuade people to vote for Scotland to become a full independent EU member country, the Greens are ready to start that campaign, is the First Minister? The First Minister The SNP started a long, long time ago, when I've never stopped campaigning for independence, so my message to Patrick Harvie was what's holding you back. Get out there and make the case for Scotland to be an independent country. Look, I agree with everything Patrick Harvie said there. I think that the case for independence, which I have long thought has been made, has got stronger with every day that has passed over the last two years. In terms of the precise timing of Scotland having that opportunity to choose, I think that people deserve a bit of clarity about what else might unfold over the next period. Are we going to have another general election? Is there going to be a second EU referendum? It is reasonable to wait and allow this to play out over the next few weeks, but there is no doubt in my mind that this country is going to become an independent country and it will be a far more prosperous, fairer and better country when it does. It will be able to choose its own place in the world. It will be able to make its own decisions. Undoubtedly, it will make its own mistakes, but it will not be at the mercy of a Tory Government imposing policies on us that we did not vote for. That will be a far stronger position for this generation and for future generations to be in. We were promised that Northern Ireland would not be affected, but it is. There would be a free trade deal, but there is not. The UK would not be subject to EU laws, but it will be. Our fishing grounds would be protected, but they will not. The biggest lie of all is that there is not £350 million a week for the NHS. The people have been cheated. Can the First Minister think of a single reason why there should not be a people's vote so that we can stop Brexit now? I have made my views on this clear. Willie Rennie and I have had this exchange now many times. If there is a proposal for a people's vote, I think that we should support that. I think that people across the UK should have that opportunity. I guess that the same question that I have posed to Willie Rennie remains. What if the result in a second referendum is the same as it was in 2016? Scotland votes overwhelmingly, probably even more overwhelmingly, to remain in the EU, but the UK is a whole vote to leave. I will posit that again to Willie Rennie. What would he suggest Scotland does in those circumstances? Willie Rennie knows that I think that we can win this people's vote. I want to keep the United Kingdom together and I want to keep us in the European Union as well. The future of this deal could lie in the hands of Scottish Conservative MPs. They have been ignored on fishing, ignored on Northern Ireland, but they still do nothing. They are as useless as a piano in a pigsty, as ministers resign on principle. Where are the principles of the Scottish Conservatives? The Prime Minister said that stopping Brexit is now an option. With the Cabinet divided and the Parliament split, the case for a people's vote grows stronger every day. Now is the best chance. Does the First Minister agree that this Parliament and her Government's first priority should be to secure that people's vote? I have a feeling that there was an insult to pigs somewhere in Willie Rennie's question, but I cannot quite work out where it was, so I probably should not go any further down that road. I would say that if he is right and the future of the deal and the future of the country depends on the 13 Conservative MPs, then we are all doomed. The Conservatives have demonstrated that they do not have a backbone between them and that they will sell Scotland out as quickly as anything. On the issue, I think that if there is an opportunity to stop Brexit in its tracks across the whole of the UK, we should take that. I have no doubt in my mind about that, because the promises that were made in 2016 have been proven to be, in most cases, lies. The negotiation has been shambolic, and we are left in the position that we are in today where there is a bad deal, and the Prime Minister, having spent the last two years saying that no deal is better than a bad deal, is now in the ridiculous pathetic position of saying that a bad deal is better than no deal. If that opportunity to stop in its tracks is there, yes, I think that people across the UK should take that. However, I want to do more than that. I want to make sure that, as well as, hopefully, stopping Brexit in its tracks, we can ensure that, never ever again, is Scotland putting the position of facing something like Brexit against our democratic wishes. A second EU referendum, although it might stop Brexit, does not guarantee that that will be the case. Willie Rennie dodged that question at the first time, but he cannot continue to dodge that question. I will support a people's vote to stop Brexit, but if Scotland yet again finds itself in the position of facing Brexit against it as well, will Willie Rennie support independence so that we can take control of our own future? Thank you. We've got a quite a lot of interest in asking supplementaries. The first is from Stuart McMillan. Thank you, Presiding Officer. Does the First Minister, like me, welcome the U-turn by the UK Government and, at long last, the reduction of the stakes of FOB team machines to £2 will finally be introduced from April 2019? What steps can the Scottish Government also take? Will it help to take to tackle the issue of problem gambling, particularly with young people? Yes, I do welcome the U-turn, although it is long overdue. Let me also take the opportunity to congratulate Stuart McMillan on all of the very good and hard work that he has done on this issue. We've been clear for a long time that action like this is needed earlier this month. The community safety minister wrote to the UK Government expressing concern about the delay in the implementation of the policy. I commend Stuart McMillan and all campaigners on the issue following a sustained and effective campaign for such a move. The Scottish Government encourages any actions that can help to reduce the harmful impact of problem gambling. That is why we are seeking to deliver faster access to psychological therapies for people with mental illnesses, including those who have problems with gambling. Those seeking clinical support will benefit from the work that has been done also through the mental health strategy. The Scottish Government will continue to take action where we can, but we look to the UK Government to take action that is, as I say, long overdue, but I am glad that it is happening now. Today, the first multi-faith remembrance service will be held in Canussy for the soldiers of the British Indian Army whose graves have been discovered there and elsewhere in Scotland. The 13 young men who came to Scotland have been evacuated from Dunkirk during the second world war. They are our forgotten heroes. Ali Bahadur, Barry Share, Dadan Khan, Fuzzal Ali, Khan Muhammad, Khushi Muhammad, Muhammad, Muhammad Sadiq, Mushtaq Ahmad, Mir Zaman, Abdul Rahman, Ghulam Nubi, and Karam Dad. Does the First Minister agree with me that their names should be forgotten no more? There should be a permanent memorial in Scotland to commemorate their lives and that of the 161,000 soldiers of the British Indian Army who lost their lives in defence of our country, so that their contribution is remembered for generations to come. I agree with Anna Sarwar and thank him for raising the issue and for raising it in the way that he did. He is right to say that those were forgotten heroes today. As a result of that question, their names are on the official report of the Scottish Parliament and they will be forgotten no longer, so let me thank Anna Sarwar. I welcome the multi-faith remembrance service that is taking place today. That is very fitting and it is an opportunity to remember and to remember with gratitude the contribution of the British Indian Army to the war effort. Of course, we have just passed arms this day where we commemorated the centenary of the end of the First World War and remembered all those who have lost their lives in conflicts throughout the last century. We must make sure that when we do that, we remember everybody. I certainly would be very happy to take forward discussions about the possibility of a permanent memorial and I will ask the relevant minister to contact Anna Sarwar to kick off those discussions as soon as possible. Bruce Crawford, to be followed by Polly McNeill. Thank you, Presiding Officer. Given that it is now clear that the Prime Minister's Brexit deal is dead in the water and it cannot command a majority in the House of Commons, will the First Minister commit to working with others so that we can replace the current Westminster chaos with a common-sense plan to keep Scotland and the rest of the United Kingdom in the single market and the customs union? The people of this country who are very worried at this very moment about what is going on deserve a pragmatic and sensible solution. How can the First Minister help? Bruce Crawford is right to say that the deal that the Prime Minister has brought forward is dead in the water. She does not need me to tell her that. Her own benchers have been lining up in the House of Commons this morning to tell her that. Let me say a word about the Prime Minister, because she deserves a degree of respect for the resilience that she has shown and is trying to bring forward a deal that she thought was the right thing to do. I will gladly say that about her, but she has to recognise the reality of the position that she faces. The deal is not going to get through the House of Commons and therefore it is wrong for anybody to suggest that that means crashing out with no deal on 29 March next year is an inevitability. It is not an inevitability. There is now a duty on everyone, principally in the House of Commons, because that is where the decisions are taken, to come together to look at sensible alternatives. I have consistently said that single market customs union membership for the whole of the United Kingdom would be the best possible compromise position. It is not my top preference that I would rather stay in the European Union. However, if we are looking at compromises, that is both the best one and it is also the one—I readily say that there is no guarantee of this—but it is the only compromise that I can look at the House of Commons and actually see a path to a majority for. That is the moment for people to put party interests aside and to come together and find a way through this. Simply blundering on with a deal that is destined to fail is not putting the interests of the country first, and I appeal to the Prime Minister not to do that. Pauline McNeill, to be followed by John Finnie. Thank you. The tragic death of 16-year-old William Lindsay in polemant prison, whilst on remand, raises many sharp questions about our criminal justice system and, in particular, the availability of secure accommodation. I am sure that the First Minister will join with me in offering control assistance to William's family. However, is the First Minister aware that, by all accounts, those who worked with William said that he was crying out for help and that prison was not the right place for a young man who spent his life in care? Can the First Minister explain why the 2016-17 figures show a reduction of 11 per cent in the number of secure places and the complete closure of one unit where 29 per cent declined in the use of residents in Scotland? Does the First Minister agree that, for those reasons and many more, there is a need for an urgent review of the availability of secure accommodation? That is a serious issue that, yes, has to be seriously looked at. The cabinet discussed that at some length in the context of this tragic case just on Tuesday. Let me start, of course, by putting on record my sincere condolences to the family of William Lindsay, who I know is also known as William Brown. I would also take the opportunity to put on record my condolences to the family of Katie Allen, who also died in poemant recently. Humza Yousaf met her family earlier this week, and I am grateful to them for taking the time to attend that meeting and to allow us to hear their views about their dreadful experience. I do not think that any of us can imagine the distress that both families are going through. Clearly, we are determined that any lessons that need to be learned will be learned. All appropriate agencies must look closely at what has happened here. There will be mandatory fatal accident inquiries in those cases, of course, and, while those processes are on-going, I think that it would not be appropriate for me to get into the details of the individual cases. However, what I will say, looking in particular right now at the case of William Lindsay, there are a number of things that I know, as First Minister, that I want to address and make sure that we look at properly. Experiencing the care system, for example, we have the independent review of the care system under way right now. The issue of secure care provision is certainly one of those issues. How we do even more to keep young people out of the criminal justice system altogether and, of course, the issues of mental health support within poemant itself. Those are all issues under the active consideration of the Scottish Government. As I said, there will be mandatory FAIs in those cases rightly so, but we will not wait for that before taking action that we consider is necessary to make sure that any issues here are properly addressed. Thank you, Presiding Officer. The First Minister may be aware of two instances of illegal scallop dredging in protected area of Western Ross. I have consistently raised the issue of maritime protection and enforcement, particularly with regard to the expansion of MPAs and Brexit, and I have been assured that it is under review. Does the First Minister agree with Open Seas that there is now a clear case for robust tamper-proof vessel tracking? I have seen some reports of the instances that John Finnie has raised this morning. I have not yet had the opportunity to look into all the details of that. Certainly, the suggestion that John Finnie is made is one that is worthy of our consideration. I will ask the Environment Secretary to look into the issue in more depth and then contact John Finnie to discuss the matter further. To ask the First Minister how the Scottish Government is marking anti-bullying week. Anti-bullying week 2018 provides us with the opportunity to send a clear and positive message that bullying of any kind is totally unacceptable. When it happens, we all have a responsibility to address it. The theme is choose respect, which reinforces the messages of respect, positive relationships and empathy. I encourage everyone to spread that message. I was particularly pleased that, in time for the start of anti-bullying week last Thursday, the Deputy First Minister was able to announce that we have accepted in full the recommendations of the LGBTI inclusive education working group report, including its recommendations on tackling bullying. That is just the latest substantial step forward that we are taking. I am sure that the whole chamber will agree that we must always look to instill the values of tolerance and respect in our children and young people to help them to develop positive relationships. I thank the First Minister for that response. We know that bullying can have an extremely damaging effect on a young person's mental health and, in some tragic cases, can result in suicide or attempted suicide. What can be done to assist schools to better support those who are bullied at school, as well as those who perpetrate bullying, who may also be experiencing difficulties elsewhere? First Minister. Fulton MacGregor is right to raise this issue. We take child and adolescent mental health very seriously. We have discussed in this chamber many times previously the challenges of making sure that services are there in the right places for young people. Our commitment to invest over £60 million in additional school counselling services supporting 350 counsellers will, however, help to ensure that support is in place. Respect for all is our national approach to preventing and responding to bullying incidents. It makes clear that bullying is not just the responsibility of schools, but of all adults involved in the lives of young people, including supporting the child experiencing bullying and the child displaying bullying behaviour. Respect for all includes an expectation that all schools develop and implement an anti-bullying policy, which should be reviewed and updated on a regular basis. Seven weeks ago, First Minister, you would not agree to a full independent inquiry into allegations of bullying at NHS Highland, given that we are now going to have an independent inquiry. Can you confirm that the Scottish Government will encourage all those that they believe that were bullied, including any that have signed non-disclosure agreements, to give evidence? I would not just encourage, but support anybody who has experience of bullying in NHS Tayside or anywhere else to come forward and discuss their experience. I absolutely agree with that. I hope that all of the chamber will welcome the action that the health secretary is taking, which sends a very clear message that we will not tolerate bullying in any organisation. To ask the First Minister what plans the Scottish Government has to evaluate the impact on sales of minimum unit pricing of alcohol. First Minister. Scotland's world-leading minimum pricing measure targets the low-cost, high-strength alcohol, which causes so much damage to our communities. It has been in place now for just six months. A reason for introducing minimum unit pricing is specifically to reduce alcohol-related harms. It will, of course, be at least a couple of years before necessary data is available to analyse impacts robustly. Our extensive monitoring and evaluation programme is led by NHS Health Scotland, and it includes examining implementation and compliance, price and product range, alcohol sales and consumption, alcohol-related harm and the economic impact on industry. I look forward to seeing full and robust data when considering the range of impacts that the policy is having. Jamie Greene I thank the First Minister for the confirmation of that on-going monitoring, but she may be aware that, since the legislation came into effect six months ago, sales of one well-known and quite potent drink has increased by 11 per cent, and what some people regard as a trade-off is drinkers' move from one high-strength product to another. We all hope that this is not an unintended consequence of the policy, and whilst it benefited from cross-party support at the time, it was conditional on a sensible sunset clause. That will ensure that a fact-based approach would form the basis of the success, or otherwise, of the legislation. What public health targets were set in relation to the introduction of minimum unit pricing, and are those targets being met? It was to the credit of the Tories, and Jackson Carlaw in particular, if I may say so, that the Tories supported minimum unit pricing. They did so before—I do not even know if Labour still supports minimum unit pricing—but, really, it has not been in place for more than six months yet, and already Jamie Greene appears to be shaping up to criticise it. For goodness sake, let us give it a chance. The sunset clause was put in place—I think that it was Jackson Carlaw that proposed the amendment for that. The Government accepted it. We put in place robust monitoring and review procedures, and all of the indicators around that will be properly monitored. Of course, the experts here point out that it is far too early to judge the success of the policy. We also have seen some indication of a rise in alcohol sales—a substantial rise in sales in England—more than in Scotland, which, if there are any early indications, might be that minimum unit pricing has helped to peg that back in Scotland. I hope that we continue to have the support of the Scottish Conservatives. That is an important policy. It was a brave move of the Parliament to put it in place. I believe that it will work, but let us give it a chance and let us do the monitoring in the proper and full way. Thank you very much. That concludes First Minister's questions. We will move on shortly to members' business in the name of Ruth Maguire on day of the imprisoned writer. Until then, just to allow the gallery to clear and for members and ministers to change seats, we will have a short suspension.