 Mil has not been lodged. The member has provided an explanation. We are just moving right now to First Minister's questions. Question number one, Kezia Dugdale. To ask the First Minister what engagement she has planned for the rest of the day. Given that yet again today parts of the country are facing severe weather and a renewed risk of flooding, I think it's appropriate at the outset to again thank all of those in our emergency services, not exclusively but particularly police and fire, utility companies, transport operators are local authorities and of course individuals and businesses in local communities who are all working so hard to respond. I and other ministers will be updated on weather impacts throughout the course of the day and we'll be working to ensure that all appropriate actions are being taken. Later today I'll also have engagements to take forward the Government's programme for Scotland. Kezia Dugdale. Can I thank the First Minister for that response and send my best wishes to all those affected by the floods and indeed thank all the emergency services for the tireless work that they're doing to protect people and keep them safe. In her new year message the First Minister said that 2016 would be the year of ambition and I couldn't agree more. It's why I kicked off this election year by setting out a plan to help young people realise their ambitions and aspirations. For many young Scots owning their own home is a key ambition but for thousands of people from my generation it's just a pipe dream. Thousands are stuck in a cycle from which there is little escape. They rent to save a deposit for our first home but rents are so high people simply can't put enough money aside. It means they end up paying those higher rents for years with no realistic prospect of buying. So can the First Minister tell us what proportion of young people in Scotland today live in the private rented sector? First Minister. There's a significant proportion of young people as there now is across all age groups who rely on the private rented sector for their housing needs. That's why one of the focuses of this Government has been through a variety of measures and indeed legislation has been on making sure that we have a high quality and indeed affordable private rented sector. I know the importance of that very well from my own constituency experience where the quality of the private rented sector is just as important as the affordability of it. Kezia Dugdale will be aware of the plans that the Government has to introduce new measures in terms of rent controls in rent pressured areas, which is absolutely vital to ensuring affordability. So I hope that those are issues that we can work together on across the chamber in terms of the wider issue about the aspiration of young people for home ownership. That is one that I, like everybody across the chamber, understand and wants to support. That is why this Government, since the moment we were elected, has focused on two things. Firstly, trying to help people into home ownership—we've helped since we were elected—20,000 people into home ownership through our shared equity schemes and help to buy three quarters of the people that we've helped are under the age of 35. Secondly and arguably most importantly, what this Government is doing is focusing on increasing housing supply. That's why I'm so proud that we've exceeded our target of 30,000 new affordable homes in this Parliament and we're now looking towards our ambition of 50,000 new affordable homes across the next Parliament as well. I welcome the sincerity of much of that response, but it wasn't an answer to the question that I asked. In amongst all of that, the First Minister failed to face up to the reality of life for many people of my generation. In 1999, just 13 per cent of people aged between 16 and 34 lived in private rented accommodation. Today, that figure is 41 per cent. That's a three-fold increase. That's thousands of young people in Scotland paying high rents to private landlords rather than owning their own home. It's generation rent. What the First Minister's generation almost took for granted is now often too out of reach for people of my generation. When Nicholas Sturgeon was first elected to this Parliament, almost half of those aged 16 to 34 owned their own home. Can the First Minister tell us what that figure is now today under the SNP Government? I was trying to respond to Kezia Dugdale's first question by being serious about the scale of the challenge that is faced. There are more people across all age groups who are living in the private rented sector. I am not suggesting for a second that it is everybody or even a majority. Some people make a positive choice to rent rather than to buy houses. That's why we should also focus on making sure that people have quality options. In terms of home ownership, the housing crisis is part of the overall financial and economic crisis that we've all lived through over recent years. We've seen in recent times increases in the number of first-time buyers. I think that we've seen a 4 per cent increase over the last quarter and a higher, more significant increase over the past year. We see that again going in the right direction. However, this Government has made a very deliberate choice to focus on what we consider to be the things that really matter in housing. First, we need to make sure that we've got the right number of houses being provided. That's why the £30,000 target for the next Parliament is so important. I have to say that I haven't heard Labour make any commitment whatsoever to housing supply in the next Parliament. Secondly, we're focusing on making sure that whatever tenure of housing people have, they have access to high-quality houses. That's what my Government will remain focused on. I notice that Iain Gray is sitting next to Kezia Dugdale. It was, of course, Iain Gray who said, in an admirable moment of honesty for the Labour Party, that the problem for the last Labour Administration was that the past world-leading housing legislation, they just forgot to build the houses to make it possible to be implemented. Kezia Dugdale? We moved from consensus to mud slinging and one question there, Presiding Officer. Once again, there was no answer to the question that I asked, so I will give the First Minister the answer. In 1999, 48 per cent of Scots under 35 owned their own home. That stands at just 28 per cent today. Is this the scale of the Government's ambition really for just over a quarter of young Scots to have the security that comes from owning their own home? Today, it takes a young couple, both on an average wage of 10 years, enough for a typical deposit to buy their first home. Labour would help young people to get their first deposit by adding to their savings. We would encourage people to put money away if they can, and in return we would help them to get on that property lander. We know that the First Minister cannot bring herself to back this plan, but we also know that her proposals just do not meet the scale of the challenge, so what will she do to help people in Scotland to buy their first home? I have outlined a number of things and I will come back to the plans of this Government. Kezia Dugdale is right to mention the fact that there has been a challenge in terms of getting people into home ownership. There has been a recession. There has been a financial crisis that has contributed to a housing crisis. That is why the numbers that she cites are as they are, but what she chooses to ignore is the fact that, in the last quarter, we have seen an increase in first-time buyers. Over the last year, we have seen an increase in first-time buyers of 16 per cent. That is what I want to focus on—helping more people into home ownership. That is why we have our open market-shared equity scheme, which, incidentally, gives first-time buyers much, much more help when it comes to buying a house than the proposal that Labour has put forward would do. It gives people up to, I think, 40 per cent of the cost of buying a house and helps them in that way. We will continue to focus on schemes like that to help people with the aspiration to own their own home. I notice that Kezia Dugdale has chosen to dodge around so far in our discussion, so, hopefully, she will address it in her final question to me. Housing supply is at the root of many of the issues. We are talking about a quoted Iain Gray earlier on. Let me give her another view of somebody perhaps more current and topical in the Labour Party than even Iain Gray, the shadow chancellor, John McDonnell. I do not know whether Kezia Dugdale is one of those in Labour who supports him or not, but we will leave that to one side for today. That is what he said. We, as in Labour, inherited a housing crisis from the Tories, which we then exacerbated by not building houses. That is the issue. That is why, in this Parliament, we have already exceeded our target of 30,000 new affordable homes and why we are determined, if re-elected in May, that we will build 50,000 new affordable homes. Labour has made no commitment to supply whatsoever. That is because we know that, in this election, Labour is not aspiring to be the Government. It is fighting to hold on to second place. In all that, the First Minister cannot escape the reality that home ownership among the young is at its lowest level since this place was delivered in 1999. Because young people in Scotland are getting a raw deal from this SNP Government, they are bearing the brunt of an austerity agenda that this First Minister seems content to manage rather than to change. Young Scots are less likely to own their own home. Young Scots are less likely to own their own home. They are more likely to be stuck in private rented accommodation. They are hard-earned cash boosting the profits of private landlords rather than investing in their own future. We want to spend the money helping young people to buy their first home. Nicholas Sturgeon would rather spend the money giving airlines a tax cut. Isn't it the case that the First Minister is on the side of the big airlines while Scottish Labour is on the side of young families just trying to get on in life? Of course, First Minister is not the first, not even the second but the third use of APD money by the Labour Party. Let me remind Kezia Dugdale yet again of her own words from 30 October last year. We would scrap the APD measure, which we would then spend that money on education. Education then became tax credits now its housing, not the behaviour of a credible opposition, let alone a credible alternative Government. Let us get back to the important issue for people out there across the country of housing. I talked about our support for over-the-year shared equity and the help to buy scheme. Let me remind Kezia Dugdale of something else that we have helped to help people, particularly first-time buyers. We have removed staff duty on all property transactions under £145,000, helping people buying starter homes. We will continue to help first-time buyers, but we will do it in a sensible way, not in a way that will not give first-time buyers any help until they have saved for three years but will also help to push up house prices. We will do it in a sensible way. We will also continue to make sure that private rented housing we are seeing rising quality and more affordability. Getting back to the point that Kezia Dugdale still after four questions has not addressed is that we will focus on building more houses, because it is by building more houses that you get the cost of houses down and you let more people get them. That is what we will do. We have been successful over this Parliament, and we will be even more so in the next one. To ask the First Minister when she will next meet the Prime Minister. No current plans. I associate myself with the First Minister's comments regarding emergency and local authority workers, because the flooding that we have seen across Britain in the past few weeks has been devastating for thousands of families. We know that it is continuing to affect people across Scotland. We need to know how they are going to be supported. On 29 December, the UK Government announced an extra £50 million in immediate support for homes and businesses affected by flooding. £5 million of that money was handed to the Scottish Government, and it is entirely up to them how that money is spent. Yet, as my colleague Alex Ferguson said in the chamber on Tuesday, he is still receiving phone calls from people in Newton Stewart, wondering why people in Cumbria are already receiving support while they are not. I know that other members will be receiving similar calls. Ministers have had this new money for nearly a fortnight. Why are they dragging their feet? Ruth Davidson raises an important issue, and I think that she is right to do so, but I think that she is unfair in her characterisation. She will recall, as all members across the chamber will recall, that the Deputy First Minister, when he announced the budget just before we broke for the Christmas recess, announced an allocation of £4 million to those local authority areas most affected by the flooding that had been caused by storm Desmond in early December in order to help those local authorities to support flood-hit local households and businesses. That money is there to provide flat rate grants of £1,500 to individuals, businesses or community groups who have been directly affected by flooding. John Swinney also said last week when he was visiting Ballotir, I was visiting the communities in Newton Stewart, that we will very shortly make an additional announcement about an additional allocation to deal specifically with the impact of Storm Frank and what we have seen in the days after that. John Swinney is taking care to discuss with local authorities what the appropriate amount of that allocation will be. That is the action that we are taking. It is right, it is proper and it is focused on helping people who have been so hard hit. Of course, in addition to that, we have activated the bellwine scheme, which gives local authorities the ability to apply for help dealing with the immediate impact of flooding. We continue to invest, as people expect us to do, to make sure that local authorities are able to put into place the appropriate flood protection and flood defence scheme. We will continue to remain focused, and I hope that, as we do so, we have the support of people across the chamber. Ruth Davidson I thank the Presiding Officer for that answer. However, the £4 million that she talks about is a previous allocation. It has nothing to do with the subsequent £5 million that I asked about. People who are currently affected want to know how this Government is going to spend and how it is going to help them. I wait for further details on that answer. The First Minister says that she is getting on with addressing the issues and she is matching support from across the UK. Just this week, we hear local authorities saying that they are, and I quote, bemused by claims that future flood defences are being fully funded. Farmers and crofters who are bearing the brunt of those floods are still waiting on the support payments that they were promised months ago because of what the NFU calls the SNP Government's lumbered approach. We know that people are beginning to ask why it is that firms and families cannot get the support that they are getting elsewhere in the UK. I will give just one other example if I may. Before Christmas, the UK Government set up an emergency recovery fund in flood affected regions that was designed to help to restore soils, to rebuild tracks and to repair flood channels. Scottish farmers are now asking the Scottish Government to mirror the scheme north of the border. Will the First Minister do so? We will take, as we have done, all appropriate action to help people affected by flooding. Ruth Davidson says that we have not yet announced the additional allocation issue. She is right that we have been very open about that. The reason for that is that it is both a simple one and an understandable one to people. We are still dealing with an on-going situation. I very much hope that it is not the case that we will see communities affected by flooding again today, but it is entirely possible that we will do so. We need to make sure that we take time to assess the full impact so that we know what an appropriate allocation of funding will be. It may be more than £5 million that we need to allocate in order to meet the impact that people are facing, but just as we did in response to storm Desmond, we will take the appropriate action in response to storm Frank and the flooding that hit in the days after that and the flooding that we may well see in parts of the country today. Ruth Davidson's comment about flood protection and flood defences, we funded all eligible schemes that have met the criteria in terms of flood defence systems. There are, as a result of the 14 flood risk management strategies that are in place across Scotland schemes over the remainder of this decade, worth more than £200 million that are planned. We have given a commitment through the commitment that we have given to local government to guarantee them 26 per cent of our capital budget right through to the year 2020, the financial certainty that those schemes can be funded. That is the action that we are taking. It is responsible, it is right and it will be proportionate to the scale of the impact that people are dealing with. I personally and the ministers in my Government who have one or more responsibilities in this remain absolutely focused on doing everything we can and everything we need to do to help individuals, businesses and communities who have been so hard to hit in recent weeks. 3. Patrick Harvie Thank you. To ask the First Minister what impact the introduction of an upper band of the minimum wage for workers over 25 will have on pay inequality and in-work poverty in Scotland. A higher wage level for over 25s will clearly be of benefit to some low-paid workers. However, we have concerns about the UK Government's approach to pay because it is not as this week's Resolution Foundation report makes clear a real living wage. The rise does not support young people under 25, one of the groups most affected by the recession. The introduction of this new rate will not compensate workers for the annual £12 billion in reductions to welfare, given that it will be introduced alongside a withdrawal of support through universal credit and proposed tax credit cuts for families with more than two children. We want to encourage employers to develop fair work policies that can promote equality and tackle poverty. The real living wage, of course, is calculated according to the basic cost of living, and that is what the Scottish Government will continue to focus our efforts on. I agree with much of that assessment. Combined with welfare changes, that measure will not abolish in-work poverty. By leaving younger workers further behind, it risks deepening their exploitation by the most unscrupulous employers. The First Minister knows that the Greens welcome the fair work agenda, and we think that it can be bolder. So far, it emphasises placing support for those employers who are willing rather than a more robust approach for the employers who are less willing. Is not it time now for the First Minister to consider ensuring that taxpayer-funded business support services will only be available to those employers who treat the upper 25-year band of the minimum wage as the minimum for workers of all ages to make sure that we do not just have an all-carat no-stick approach that may work for some employers but not for the worst? Patrick Harvie had in exchange during the debate the other day with John Swinney on this very issue. I absolutely appreciate where Patrick Harvie is coming from in this. I want our fair work agenda to be real and meaningful. We are, I think, the only Government in the whole of the UK that has a Cabinet-level Minister dedicated to promoting fair work. What we have tried to do through both the living wage accreditation scheme and the business pledge, and indeed through the fair work convention, is to say to businesses that they should be employing fair work practices, not as some kind of favour to Government, not as something they feel they have to do, but as something that is beneficial to them and to the prosperity of their businesses, as well as beneficial to their employees. That is the whole ethos that we are trying to encourage. That is bearing success. We are now the part of the UK, outside the south-east of England, with the highest percentage of people paid the real living wage. We have seen numbers of accredited living wage employers rise considerably. We are also seeing a growing number of companies sign up to the business pledge. We will continue to give that focus to all of that work. Of course, we will continue to consider and indeed to discuss with others who have an interest in how we can accelerate progress. I look forward, in the remainder of this and in the next Parliament, to discussing these things and to hearing the ideas and suggestions of Patrick Harvie and his colleagues. The First Minister will be aware that support for industries such as retail, hospitality and the care sector to pay the real living wage will reap significant benefits for those employees, many of those of whom are under 25. What action is the Scottish Government taking to specifically target those sectors to pay the real living wage? Those sectors, and Jackie Baillie is right about that. There are a small number of sectors that employ large numbers of people that we need to make most progress in if we are going to lift the overall numbers paid the living wage. We relatively recently had a fair work living wage summit that was an occurring, and I attended it, which was very focused on retail and leisure and care sectors. We will bring forward, as I said, in the debate on Tuesday over the next few months more proposals of our own about how we extend payment of the living wage further. There is no doubt in my mind that if we get more and more people on to the living wage, we will help to raise the quality of work, which is why it is so much in the interests of businesses and employers, but we will also go a great way to helping to deal with inequality and the poverty challenges that we face. I hope that that is an area that, whatever disagreements that we might have, we can find areas to agree on. This week's research by the Resolution Foundation states that 500,000 low-paid workers in Scotland will benefit from the new national living wage by 2020. The Resolution Foundation has said that the welcome new national living wage will have a huge impact on low pay, so instead of being so carping about this policy, shouldn't the First Minister be more welcoming? If I can repeat to Murdo Fraser the first line of my first answer to Patrick Harvie, a higher wage level for over 25s will clearly be of benefit to some low-paid workers. Nobody quibbles with that, but it does not go far enough. Outside the Government, lots of people have put a lot of work in over a long number of years to calculate what the real living wage should be. The real living wage is calculated very deliberately according to the basic cost of living. That is why I think that the real living wage is the figure that we should be aspiring to getting people paid. That is what I will continue to focus on. Anything that takes us in that direction, of course, is to be welcomed, but I will not limit myself to the positivity of ambition that characterises the Tory party on this issue. I will continue to aim much higher than that. Thank you, Presiding Officer, to ask the First Minister what discussions the Scottish Government has had with the UK Government regarding the proposed referendum on EU membership. The Scottish Government is proactively engaged with the UK Government both at ministerial and official level to influence both the form of the referendum and the UK Government's agenda for EU renegotiation in order to protect Scotland's interests. Prime Minister and I spoke about the issue at our meeting in December. The Scottish Government believes that EU membership is in the best interests of Scotland and we are concerned that the people of Scotland could be taken out of the European Union against our will. We have also sought and will continue to seek engagement on the UK's renegotiation process, but to date the UK Government has not yet provided us with sufficient detail or opportunity to meaningfully influence those proposals, but we will continue to make attempts to do so. I thank the First Minister for her answer. How can we trust the Prime Minister on Europe when he cannot even get members of his cabinet to agree with him? What can the First Minister and her Government do to ensure that Scotland is not hauled out of Europe against its will? I am not surprised that the Prime Minister has been forced to allow a free vote among his cabinet colleagues in the referendum. The Tories have always been split from top to bottom on Europe, and the referendum, far from healing the splits, so far only seems to be making them worse. I am not even sure whether the Scottish Tories have a position on the EU referendum. I think that it is a complete free-for-all in the Scottish Tories. I have no idea how many positions will be represented on those benches, but that is for the Tories to worry about. What I am concerned about is the prospect of Scotland. If it votes—and I take nothing for granted in any vote—but if Scotland was to vote to stay in the EU, but the vote across the UK was to lead to us being taken out, I think that that would be a democratic outrage, and I think that it is a cause of real concern. For my own part, I will be campaigning to seek to persuade people—not just in Scotland, but I hope that people across the UK choose to stay in the EU, because notwithstanding its imperfections, I think that our interests are best served by being within. Minister, will the Scottish Government conduct a review of flood defences in conjunction with local authorities in light of this winter's flooding incidents? As I have already commented on today, the scale of the flooding that we have seen in recent days has been exceptional, and the impact has been devastating for many, many people across the country. The response from our emergency services, volunteers, members of the public, the councils and others working together to keep communities safe, minimise damage and disruption has been heroic, but we all know that there is a long recovery road ahead for some of the people most affected. A review of flood defences was conducted in 2007. Since 2008, the Scottish Government has made available funding of £42 million a year to enable local authorities to invest in flood protection schemes. As I have just said to Ruth Davidson, we have 14 flood risk management strategies in place and a number of schemes that will be funded over the years to come. However, it is absolutely right that, when we have experienced flooding such as that, we have seen in recent weeks that we consider carefully any lessons that can be learned from what has been an exceptional situation and consider what further mitigating actions we can take for the future. The Government will certainly do that. Thank you very much First Minister. If you are now committing to a review in the light of recent flood incidents, I would wholeheartedly welcome that. The response that we have seen in our communities has been inspiring over the past few days, but communities, businesses and local authorities are clearly concerned about the huge costs that they have already incurred in dealing with the public emergency. If I can follow up the First Minister's answers to Ruth Davidson earlier, the Deputy First Minister has encouraged councils to reduce business and council tax bills for those affected. Beyond the potential money from the bellwine scheme and the £4 million that is already promised, can the First Minister clarify that the Scottish Government will fully fund all those local tax reductions? Given that the cost of flooding is estimated by SEPA to be £1.25 billion every year now, can we have a review to have a new look, a fresh look at the resilience for our infrastructure, our homes, our businesses and our farming communities for the future? Given that, with the financial pressures on local authorities, not all communities at risk of flooding will receive flood defences over the next five years? As I said in my initial answer, of course we need to make sure that we learn any lessons that need to be learned, it would be completely wrong to take any other approach. What I do not want us to do, and I do not want us to do this because of the significant work that has been done to get us to the position of the 14 flood risk management strategies that are in place, is involve ourselves in another long-running review when there is work there, planned, detailed work out that we need to get on with. For example, the community of Newton Stewart that I visited last week, there is a scheme planned as part of the flood risk management strategy for the Solway that we need to get on with, not look again at a wide-ranging review. So let's focus on that. In terms of the financial support, as I've said previously during this session, we will take a decision very soon about a further financial allocation to help councils with things like rates relief and direct financial support to individuals and businesses that have been impacted. We will, as I've said repeatedly, take whatever steps we need to take to make sure that we are doing all that it is reasonable for us to do to help with those that have been so badly hit in recent days. To ask the First Minister how many children receive free school meals. Almost exactly a year ago, I went back to my old primary school in Dreghorn to launch the introduction of free school meals for all children in P1 to P3. That policy a year on is proving to be hugely successful. Latest statistics show that more than 129,000 pupils in P1 to P3 are benefiting from a free school meal and more than 192,000 children and young people across primary, secondary and special schools in Scotland took one. Thank you for the promotion, Presiding Officer. I thank the First Minister for her answer. I'm pleased that the policy is proving such a success nationally, but disappointed that the take-up in Renfrewshire is lower than the national average. Can the First Minister advise what funding is providing to local authorities to enable more children to benefit from free school meals and what more can be done by local authorities like Labour-controlled Renfrewshire Council to promote further take-up? I'm sure that your time will come, Mr Adam. I suspect that you have just sparked celebrations and paisley at the news that their boy in Parliament has been promoted to the Office of First Minister today. The Government has fully funded the roll-out of free school meals for P1 to P3, with £95.3 million of revenue in capital allocation for local authorities across 2014-15 and 15-16. We have allocated a further £53 million for 16-17 so that local authorities can continue to provide free school meals for all children in P1 to P3. It is one of the many ways in which we are putting the tackling of inequality at the heart of our agenda, giving children a healthy, nutritious meal at school while saving parents around £380 a year per child. Clearly, we want more children to benefit in every local authority, and we will continue to work with education authorities, schools and teachers to ensure continued promotion of take-up of school meals so that all children can benefit. All members across the chamber have a role to play in making sure that all children who are entitled to take up the option of a free school meal. Thank you. That ends for questions. We are now moving to members' business. Members who are leaving the chamber should do so quickly and quietly.