 The first item of business this afternoon is portfolio questions on finance, constitution and economy. Q1 Willie Coffey To ask the Scottish Government what measures it has introduced to boost the economy in Kilmarma in Irving Valley. Cabinet Secretary John Swinney Scotland's economic strategy reaffirms our commitment to increasing sustainable economic growth for all of Scotland, which is essential to achieving a more productive, cohesive ac mae hyn yn cychwyn eu congratoli ciwyr y gynalydd. Mae genedlaeth ymdeliadau amser i gyfnodau i gyffinol yn Comarnock a Irving valley. Willie Caffee With that answer, as he will be aware that dairy industry is an important part of the local economy. How does the cabinet secretary see the recently launched Dairy Action Plan assisting local milk producers and how might that benefit the local economy in general? Cabinet Secretary for Energy and Connectivity Mr Coffey ddim yn yr yw y clywbeth cyfwyr i'r tiw lleol iawn ar gyfer gyfer cyfwyr gan ésas pan oedonig cymodegau y Chymar break mewn ddod y myraddiadau. Dillewyr Feir's-sawerd blaenau tekddol yn 54 y maes yn gweithio i gweithio'r cyfrifiad i'r ddisgytod ychydig ar gyfer gyfwyr ystag iawn i gwerthu'r tîmân i gydag i'r ddweud i lleol iawn i chi i gydag i'r cyfrifiad i chi i'r ei pwysigau. heb y cyfnodau cofianthau o gwasiwyr yn gyllideb i gaeligio a ffocusing a ffordd o faf o'r cynfantiau o'r randyntau Cyllidebion ystod o'r wgledig, nid oedd y cyfnodau ymddyn yn cymaint. Ieidol i'r gwneud i ddiogel eich cwmwyomes cwmwyomes i gaeligio i gaeligio i cefnodau i gaeligio i gaeligio i gaeligio i gaeligio i gaeligio i gaeligio i gaeligio i The cabinet secretary will be aware how important Kilmarnock College as part of the Ayrshire colleges is to the economy in Kilmarnock and the Irvine Valley. The cabinet secretary will also be aware of the funding shortfall in the Ayrshire college budget for 2015-16, a shortfall that is being met in this financial year by turning the depreciation into hard cash. Will the shortfall in the 2015-16 budget for the Ayrshire college and others be again met by using cash allocated in budget terms for depreciation to meet the cash requirements of student funding at that time, or will other sources of funding be provided? Mr Scott will be familiar with the allocations of resources that have been made as part of the annual budget round, which was concluded in early February, which gave allocations to the Scottish funding council, which of course then in turn distribute the resources to the Ayrshire college. The dialogue about the appropriateness and the utilisation of the resources available to the funding council and then by onward transit on to Ayrshire college is a matter for the funding council to determine the dialogue and discussion with the Ayrshire college, and the Government would expect that dialogue to focus on supporting the achievement of the outcomes that the Government seeks from its investment in the further education sector. To ask the Scottish Government what action it is taking to improve the economy and public services. The Scottish Government is committed to creating a more successful country with opportunities for all of Scotland to flourish through increasing sustainable economic growth. Scotland's economic strategy set out an overarching framework and actions for increasing competitiveness and tackling inequality in Scotland. We also remain focused on delivering a cross-sector programme of public sector reform, and a clear strategic direction for protecting and improving Scotland's public services is now well established. The main fiscal policy of the SNP Government is, of course, full fiscal autonomy, which would lead to £7.6 billion of cuts according to the IFS. The finance secretary tells us when he wants to see full fiscal autonomy come into force. Why does he think that a policy that would lead to £7.6 billion of cuts is a good idea? The first thing that I would say to Mr Bibby is that I believe that full fiscal autonomy would give Scotland the economic levers to strengthen our economic performance and as a consequence to improve the productivity and, as a further consequence, the public finances of the country. I do not really think that that is a particularly surprising ambition given the fact that I thought that we were all here to try to improve economic performance and to deliver stronger public finances as a consequence. If Mr Bibby is the slightest bit concerned about cuts, then he should look at his Labour Party proposition for the forthcoming election, which has signed up to the Charter for Budget Responsibility, which involves £30 billion worth of cuts. Before Mr Bibby comes anywhere near me, he should reconcile the issues of his own party and the slash and burn of the cuts that the Labour Party will impose on public services in Scotland. Question 3, Gavin Brown. Thank you, Presiding Officer, to ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on the implementation of the Revenue Scotland IT system. Cabinet Secretary. The implementation of the Scottish electronic tax system is an operational matter for Revenue Scotland. I discussed this issue with the chief executive of Revenue Scotland this morning. The system opened for sign-up for both the devolved taxes on 16 February and registration open for the Scottish landfill tax on the same day. The online return for land and buildings transaction tax has been available to users since the 24th of March. I am pleased to inform Parliament that the chief executive confirmed to me that, as planned, the system has today started to collect the first national tax introduced by the Scottish Parliament in over 300 years, and it undertook that online. Gavin Brown. I am grateful for that answer, and I am glad that the first one went through. What percentage of transactions today approximately does the Deputy First Minister think will be done through the online portal? I do not know what that proportion will be. It will be for the market to determine, but I can say to Mr Brown that, as of about 145 this afternoon, 83 transactions had been undertaken on the online system. I told Parliament that the online system would be available for operation on 1 April. There were some doubters in Parliament. I would have thought that some of them could have come to Parliament and congratulated Revenue Scotland on the achievement of having an online system available, but perhaps that is too much to ask on a Wednesday afternoon. Can I congratulate Revenue Scotland for operating online? Before we congratulate ourselves, yesterday a firm of solicitors contacted an MSP to complain that the new land and building transaction tax forms were not yet available. I am assuming that is because he was a day early. However, the cabinet secretary will of course be aware that conveyancing transactions cannot be registered at register house without a tax-paid certificate, so can he confirm that there are no problems at all with the implementation of Scotland's new landfill tax and also the land and buildings transaction tax? I am grateful to Jackie Baillie for her warm words towards Revenue Scotland. It is in stark contrast to what she was driffling on about in the Times on Monday, on the issues in the Times newspaper. In relation to the implementation of land and buildings transaction tax and landfill tax, the Government has taken forward the arrangements to put them in place. There has been good co-operation between the Registers of Scotland and CEPR, who will be involved in the administration of both taxes and to put them in place in co-operation with Revenue Scotland. I am satisfied with the arrangements that have been put in place. Cabinet Secretary, I will use this opportunity to remind all members that they should use parliamentary language and be respectful to each other. To ask the Scottish Government what recent discussions it has had with the UK Government on the implementation of the Smith agreement. Since the United Kingdom Government published its draft clauses on 22 January, the Scottish Government has provided a range of detailed comments on the drafting and the scope of the clauses, with the aim of ensuring that it implement the Smith commission recommendations in full. That has been accompanied by discussions at ministerial and official level, including two meetings of the joint ministerial working group on welfare. The Scottish Government has also started work on development of the fiscal framework, which will be a critical element in implementing the Smith commission proposals. I met the Chancellor of the Exchequer on 2 March to discuss the progress on this work. I thank the Deputy First Minister for that answer. He will be aware that the academic analysis by Robert Gordon University shows that the draft new clauses watered down the already minimalist provisions of the Smith agreement. Does he agree that the absence of the power to create new benefits and the restrictions placed on the categories of people to whom benefits can be paid clearly shows that the UK Government is already reneging on the implementation of the Smith agreement and that therefore the only way to deliver significant additional powers to this Parliament is to send a strong team of SNP MPs to Westminster to speak up and stand up for Scotland. There are a number of issues that the Government has raised with the United Kingdom Government in relation to the detailed definition of the clauses that were published on 22 January. We have shared with the devolution of further powers committee the detail of that information that we believe has to be addressed. The Scottish Government has engaged constructively with the UK Government on the specifics of what we believe is deficient about the draft clauses put in place by the UK Government and which are now subject to consultation. I should point out to Mr Eadie that a number of those observations have also been reinforced by the observations of a number of the stakeholders who have been involved in the dialogue around the implementation of those clauses. I hope that those issues are properly addressed by the incoming UK Government. We have made that point in our discussions. Finally, Mr Eadie is absolutely correct that the best approach to safeguard Scotland's interests will be to secure the election of a strong team of SNP MPs at Westminster, who will be able to protect and promote the Scottish interests on all occasions and without reservation. I note that the Scottish Government has stopped preferring to V2s being contained in the new powers. Will the cabinet secretary confirm that the two Governments working together constructively to deliver the new powers will do much more to secure Scotland's interests than trying to undermine the process? I will happily restore the veto word to my answer if it would suit Ms Goldie better, but there is a very serious point at the heart of what Ms Goldie raises. Ms Goldie says that there is no veto in all of this. In the Smith commission proposals, one of the commitments that Ms Goldie and I made was to secure the earliest possible devolution of the work programme. Essentially, last week, the UK Government vetoed the early devolution of the work programme. During the course of the Smith process, Ms Goldie and I argued for the work programme to be devolved earlier and were echoed in that position by the Labour Party. Indeed, a Labour member of Parliament in the Westminster Parliament, Ian Murray, has put forward a private member's bill to seek the earliest possible devolution. I think that this summer, if my memory serves me right, of the work programme, that has been vetoed by the UK Government. It is not just that it has been vetoed, the contracts have been extended against the express will of the Scottish Government. I am all for co-operation on the substance of those issues. I have marsaled to the UK Government a detailed list of areas where we think that the draft clauses are deficient in terms of the objectives of the Smith process, and we have shared that with the devolution for our powers committee. I do hope that we have a willingness to engage constructively and solidly in implementing not just a letter of the Smith commission report, but the spirit of the Smith commission report into the bargain, which, on the example that I have cited to Ms Goldie, was about early action to ensure that the earliest possible devolution was delivered off the work programme. To ask the Scottish Government whether it has filled all the vacancies at Revenue Scotland. The staffing of Revenue Scotland is an operational matter for Revenue Scotland. I spoke to the chief executive this morning. She confirmed that 38 of 40 operational posts have now been filled, providing Revenue Scotland with the breadth and depth of experience that it requires to collect and manage the devolved taxes. Recruitments processes are under way for the two remaining posts, neither of which was identified as critical for the first of April launch. Thank you, Deputy First Minister, for your reply. Have the salaries offered been increased, and if so, what impact will that have on the organisation's cost? Cabinet Secretary? There have been no increases to salaries beyond what we have set out in the public audit committee as part of this process. There are no changes to the financial arrangements that have been shared openly by the Government. We have done that on a number of occasions. We set it out at the stage of the financial memorandum. The chief executive of Revenue Scotland was in front of the audit committee and the France committee in December, if my memory serves me right. Further information on financial provisions has been made at those stages, and there are no changes since those updates were given to the relevant committees. Question 6 has been withdrawn, and a satisfactory explanation has been provided. To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to the House of Lords Constitution Committee report proposals for the devolution of further powers to Scotland. The Scottish Government agrees with the committee that the proposed Scotland bill should receive detailed scrutiny when it is introduced after the UK election. The bill and the accompanying fiscal framework will need to be scrutinised carefully in this Parliament to ensure that it reflects the substance and the spirit of the Smith commission proposals. The Scottish Government has suggested changes to the draft clauses across a range of areas to bring them closer to the intentions of the Smith report. I hope that the new UK Government will work with us to make those improvements and to ensure that the additional powers are transferred to the Scottish Parliament as soon as possible. I thank the Deputy First Minister for the answer, but I wonder whether he would agree with me that it is an outrage for a group of unelected peers to respond, as they have, to the prospect of this Parliament obtaining increased powers. Does he also agree with me that it is high time that the democratic anomaly that is the House of Lords was addressed by abolition? I agree with Mr Day in relation to the abolition of the House of Lords, in relation to the report of the select committee that has come forward. The report expresses a number of different issues, some of which are worthy of being taken further forward and considered. I do not really think that some of them require much attention, but in the course of the parliamentary scrutiny, the Parliament will have the opportunity to consider any relevant remarks that come from this committee and how they may have an effect on the formulation of the legislation involved. To the great disappointment of Mr Day, I am still around, Deputy Presiding Officer, on occupying a place in another House. The Lord's Committee noted that Scotland and the UK have been in a period of constitutional upheaval for 15 years, and that is unprecedented in mature Western democracies. Can the cabinet secretary commit that once the new powers are in effect, the Scottish Government will end constitutional wrangling and give the new powers a chance to work effectively for the people of Scotland? There is a fundamental point among all that we have gone through in the aftermath of the referendum since September. First, where there is a need and an obligation in the political process for the Government to co-operate to implement particular changes that arise, the Government co-operates to the full. For example, in relation to the formulation of the approach on land and buildings transaction tax, and on the landfill tax, and on various other provisions that arose out of the Kalman commission, which, if my memory serves me right, Ms Goldie found it but did not serve on it. The Government has taken forward all those provisions in a spirit of effective co-operation. In fact, we have got to that point in relation to the land and buildings transaction tax, because the Exchequer Secretary and I were able to exchange correspondence just the other day there, which enabled the UK Government to switch off stamp duty land tax in Scotland, and for me to switch on land and buildings transaction tax, perfectly orderly arrangements to make that happen. Wherever that is required, this Government will undertake that activity. However, Ms Goldie must appreciate it, and I would have thought that this is something that she does. Those of us on those benches have a different view of the constitutional arrangements that should be appropriate for Scotland. Those are appropriately held, deeply held, sincerely held views about the arrangements of our country, just as deeply and sincerely held, as I know Ms Goldie's are, about her position. We simply have to leave it to the people of our country to decide what should be our future, and we are happy to enable them to do exactly that. To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to the Committee on Climate Change's expert statement that further actions are required if the 2020 renewable heat target is to be met. We welcome the Committee on Climate Change's consideration of progress and action in regard to the emissions reductions in Scotland. We are making progress on the target for 11 per cent on non-electrical heat demand from renewables by 2020, but there is no doubt that it will be challenging to meet, particularly in the context where we do not have the full range of drivers within our competence. For example, the renewable heat incentive is a UK Government scheme. In order to focus and drive pace of change that we published in 2014, our draft heat generation policy statement has a particular focus on encouraging uptake of renewable heat technology and maximising potential for existing and renewable heat sources, and we expect the final statement to be published soon. I thank the minister for that response. Will the Scottish Government publish an update on progress towards the expert commission's 18 recommendations? Will the specific points raised by the climate change committee's report be actioned urgently? For example, there are many things that can be done in the Scottish Government's competence such as the delivery of a heat networks delivery unit and requiring consideration of district heating in all new developments. If the minister does not feel able to confirm those issues today, would he ask the energy minister if he would be prepared to meet with me to discuss taking these issues forward? I thank the member for the way she has put the question. I could go through some of the issues that she has raised, but I recognise the member's long-standing and in-depth commitment to the area, so it is probably best if we arrange for a meeting with the minister and the member. To ask the Scottish Government what it is doing to grow the economy in Mid Scotland and Fife. The Scottish Government is committed to boosting economic growth and tackling inequality across Scotland. In Mid Scotland and Fife, we continue to support economic growth with substantial investment in infrastructure and business support. For example, 113 businesses across Mid Scotland and Fife have benefited from over £55 million of regional selective assistance awards since 2007, creating or safeguarding 5,603 jobs. I thank the cabinet secretary for that answer. Does he agree that, for the long-term sustainable growth of the Scottish economy, we must shift the balance of investment towards manufacturing? Can he provide me with more detail of the progress being made to bring such investment for strategic employment sites in Fife, including the Rosyth Waterfront area, the Motorola site in Dunferman and the Energy Park in Meadow? On the fundamental point that Jane Baxter raises, I agree entirely that the Government's economic strategy is focused on strengthening innovation, on encouraging inclusive growth of supporting investment in particular companies and the wider infrastructure of the country, and on encouraging companies to be more actively involved in the wider international business activity. On the particular sites that Jane Baxter referred to, additional freight capacity on the fourth was identified as a national development to assist in ensuring that proposals for the development of the Rosyth facility are delivered, and that remains a central part of the national planning framework. The Scottish Enterprise has been heavily involved in investment in the methyl site, and we will continue to encourage and support economic development in that site. There are a number of very focused initiatives that the Government takes to ensure that we have sites available for particular development and to encourage manufacturing companies to either locate or expand and grow in those areas. The final point is that the Scottish Manufacturing Advisory Service, which is available through the work of Scottish Enterprise, is available to companies in the locality, and we would encourage companies in the Fife area to take up those opportunities. Can the cabinet secretary advise what are the potential benefits to the mid-Scotland and Fife economy of the University of St Andrews renewable energy project at Cardbridge? That is one of a number of energy projects that are taken forward. There are a number, Jane Baxter referred to one in relation to the energy park at methyl. We encourage and support the development of renewable energy projects throughout the country. I am sure that the work that is under way at St Andrews will be of great benefit in expanding and developing knowledge and the approach to project development in those areas. One proposal from the Scottish Government that will have an impact on the mid-Scotland and Fife economy is the plan to reintroduce business rates on sporting interests. Can the cabinet secretary tell us if those rates will be charged on all agricultural land to which sporting rights are attached? The Government is still engaged in the detailed consultation around all of those questions. When we set out our further proposals on land reform, the particular issue that Mr Fraser raises will be dealt with in that consultation. The Government believes that the anomaly that is created by the absence of business rates in sporting estates is something that should be closed as part of the land reform process, and we will set out the detail in due course. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer, to ask the Scottish Government what steps it is taking to help to regenerate the economy of Dumfries on Galloway. The Scottish Government is committed to supporting sustainable economic growth and regeneration in Dumfries in Galloway. We support the work of the South of Scotland Alliance, which is driving forward the South of Scotland rural regional economic development programme. Projects in that programme will encourage economic activity, promote growth, increase inward investment and protect and create employment across Dumfries in Galloway. Great for that answer. I can think of no greater stimulus to the economy of my constituency than the regeneration of Stranra Harbour waterfront, a large area of prominent land that has become increasingly derelict since Stenna, the ferry company, moved to its new port facility north of Cairn Rhyon. I am glad that the cabinet secretary mentioned the South of Scotland Alliance. It came and gave us a briefing here just two weeks ago, and it highlighted the importance of this development as one of its top priorities. There are reportedly two bids being considered for the redevelopment of that site, but no outcome has been forthcoming, despite one being promised for some time. So may I ask what steps the cabinet secretary might be able to take to try to move this process forward? Would he consider the creation of a special enterprise zone around Stranra if no bids materialise? I discussed this issue when I last met the South of Scotland Alliance in Dumfries, which was several weeks ago. The local authority, the Fries and Galloway Council, has the lead role in relation to the regeneration of the Stranra Harbour waterfront, so the consideration of the bids to which Mr Ferguson refers is a matter entirely for the local authority. I am certainly not sighted on any of the detail about that bidding process, nor should I be for that matter. What I said to the South of Scotland Alliance is that I could see the strategic significance of the Stranra Harbour waterfront. Therefore, once they were further through their process in relation to considering the bids, I would be happy to discuss further with the local authority and the South of Scotland Alliance how we might bring together different interests and parties and players to try to tackle what I recognise as a significant issue for the Stranra area in Mr Ferguson's constituency. The ball at this stage is in the court of the local authority, but I do not say that to say that the Government has nothing to do with it. The Government will happily engage constructively with the council on this point. I encourage the South of Scotland Alliance to formulate an economic agenda of how it wishes to advance key projects across the whole of the area. It has responded to that constructively. I have committed to meeting the South of Scotland Alliance twice a year to ensure that Government agencies are engaging to my satisfaction with the agenda that the South of Scotland Alliance has created. I welcome the leadership that has been put in place by both local authorities, and I am pledged to ensure that the Government engages constructively in any way that we can to help to deliver the agenda. I attended the meeting with the South of Scotland Alliance, and specifically they mentioned the absence of financial support from central Government. Amongst the issues that the cabinet secretary will consider, we also consider the very helpful use of Scottish Government finance to support the initiative. It really depends on what emerges as a project. There will be a multiplicity of different issues that the Government would have to consider, at least if, for example, a private developer came forward to develop Mr Nall's waterfront, there would undoubtedly be issues of state aid that the Government would have to consider, which are not issues that we can ignore. As I made clear in my answer to Mr Ferguson, the Government is very willing to engage in substantive dialogue with the South of Scotland Alliance on those projects. I asked the Alliance to come up with a substantive agenda that would advance those questions. They have now done that, and we will maintain that discussion with my six-monthly meetings with them to consider what are the most effective ways in which the Government can assist in any way that we can. To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to the post-budget briefing by the Institute for Fiscal Studies, which finds that the poorest have seen the biggest proportionate losses as a result of the UK Government's tax and benefit changes. The Institute for Fiscal Studies has indicated that, looking at the tax and benefit changes implemented by the current UK Government, the poorest has suffered the biggest proportionate losses. Clearly, the United Kingdom Government's austerity agenda and welfare cuts have significantly reduced incomes for some of our poorest households and are undermining our efforts to tackle poverty. We are doing what we can to help those affected. We are investing around £296 million from 2013-14 to 2015-16 to limit the damage of the cuts and changes being introduced. We cannot fully mitigate all the effects of welfare changes, but we will continue to make the argument for a fairer welfare system. It is clear from the IFS analysis that not only is austerity not working but that our alternative of modest real-term spending increases in each year of the next Parliament instead of cuts would see the deficit and debt falls as a share of our national income, freeing up billions of pounds to reinvest in our infrastructure, skills, public services and protecting our people. Does the minister agree with me that that just highlights the need for a vote for the SNP in a couple of weeks to offer the best opportunity to stand up for all the people of Scotland? What is clear from the current debate is that there are alternative approaches that can be taken to austerity. The Scottish Government believes that that is the case. We have long argued for that position. That issue is one on which people can use their votes effectively in the forthcoming general election. Very briefly, Jackie Baillie. We discovered at the start of this week that the SNP had signed up tutorial austerity plans for 2015-16. Given what James Dornan has said, why has the SNP joined with the Tories in continuing austerity? Does he agree with the IFS analysis that there is a £7.6 billion black hole in the Scottish budget with full fiscal autonomy? I really do not know what on earth Jackie Baillie is referring to about the start of the week. The Scottish Government has been absolutely crystal clear that we oppose austerity. Jackie Baillie would do us all a service if she and the Labour Party would take a different tack to the one that they have taken and would support an approach of investment in the economy to deliver the economic growth that I thought Jackie Baillie would be interested in delivering to create new hope and new opportunities for people in our country. However, as usual, Jackie Baillie is continuing her partnership with the Conservatives, which saw her go through the last couple of years hand in hand better together, and it is going through the election campaign into the bargain. To ask the Scottish Government what the impact on the Scottish economy would be of the UK leaving the EU. The Scottish Government firmly believes that exiting the EU would have a deeply damaging impact on Scotland's economy. Membership of the EU provides us to access with the largest single market in the world. Over 500 million potential customers in 2013, the EU was the destination for 46 per cent of Scottish exports, worth almost £13 billion. On top of that, over 300,000 Scottish jobs depend on those EU exports. That is why the Scottish Government will continue to make the case for Scotland's membership of the EU going forward, as set out in our action plan for EU engagement, launched last Friday, along with our booklet on the benefits of EU membership. The minister will be aware that there are many individuals from other parts of the EU who live and work in Scotland and whose status may be affected by a decision for the UK to withdraw from the EU. I would be grateful if the minister could outline what constitutional measures could be put in place to prevent Scotland being taken out of the EU against the wishes of our people. The member highlights a very important point, particularly in the run-up to the general election. We know that anti-EU migration rhetoric has been hyped up, and many parties have got behind that. I think that all of us would recognise that EU migrants in Scotland have played a very positive role. Research from UCL has shown that between 2001 and 2011 they contributed £20 billion to the economy. Of course, Scots, who are on the continent, as the member says, is also making a very positive contribution wherever they are. The UK exit from the EU would have a drastic and catastrophic consequence on an economy. That is why the First Minister herself has made clear that we believe in a double lock on membership, with an exit only possible if a majority of people in all four constituent parts of the UK vote to leave. Question 13, Malcolm Chisholm. To ask the Scottish Government whether it supports more progressive taxation for those on the very highest incomes and those with the most expensive property. Cabinet Secretary. Presiding Officer, the Scottish Government has set out its approach to taxation, which is based on the four principles set out by Adam Smith, certainty, convenience, efficiency of collection and that taxes should be proportionate to the ability to pay. The Government placed fairness, equity and the ability to pay at the very heart of the first decisions that we have taken on national tax rates. We have also set up the commission on local tax reform, whose remit will enable it to show how progressive the alternative tax systems that it identifies can be and the significance of any changes to both taxpayers and the funding of public services. Malcolm Chisholm. I welcome the fact that the cabinet secretary has played catch-up with Labour on the 50p tax rate for those with the highest incomes, contradicting what Alex Salmond said on the Andrew Martial 10 days ago. Will he go further now and also support a mansion tax in order to provide extra money for the NHS, a bankers bonus tax in order to provide a job and training guarantee and changes to the pension tax relief for the richest pensioners in order to provide more opportunities for young people? I think that the point that I would say to Mr Chisholm is that I think that we should be judged on the actions that we take on these questions. The actions that we have taken on these questions is that when we had the opportunity to set particular tax rates, the Scottish Government has used the first available opportunity on land and buildings transaction tax to essentially do exactly what Mr Chisholm is talking about in his question of ensuring that on property transactions those who are living on the highest value properties pay more. Under the system that I have put in place, which Mr Chisholm's party voted for, 90 per cent of taxpayers are paying the same or less under the system and 10 per cent are paying more, and those are the people who are living in the higher value property. I would have thought that that would have been a reasonable reassurance to Mr Chisholm about the direction of travel, but, of course, when it came to deciding on the issue about the 50-pence tax rate in the House of Commons, my colleague Stuart Hosey, the member for Dint, or the member apartment in the last House of Commons for Dint East, moved that the 50p tax rate be restored, but Mr Chisholm's colleagues for some unbelievable reason couldn't find it in themselves to vote in favour of such a proposition. I think the only... I'm told that this is about the Bain principle, that no proposal that comes forward from the Scottish National Party should be supported. That seems to me to be a rather short-sighted action by the Labour Party, but we look forward to utilising the influence that we have in the House of Commons to deliver fairness and prosperity in the aftermath of the United Kingdom general election, and we will bring those values to bear in any situation beyond the UK election. I wonder if the cabinet secretary agrees that Westminster's 2 per cent NIC rate for high earners is regressive rather than progressive. The Scottish Government believes that taxation should, in all circumstances, be related to the ability to pay. Our belief is that important decisions about the management of the tax arrangements can be best served and best undertaken by the decision making that we undertake in this Parliament and where we can take the opportunity, as we have done, on land and buildings transaction tax to deploy the values of fairness and equity, which have been at the heart of our decision making. Question 14 has not been lodged and a satisfactory explanation has been provided. Question 15, Christian Allard. To ask the Scottish Government what it is doing to suppose the oil and gas industry. The Scottish Government is using all of the levers under our control to support the oil and gas industry. At this time, the energy minister, Fergus Ewing, is in the United States undertaking meetings and discussions with various interested parties in the North Sea oil and gas sector. There is an extensive network of support for the oil and gas industry, which is delivered through Scottish Enterprise, Hearnslands Enterprise, Scottish Development and National Skills Development Scotland and the Scottish Funding Council. We have established the energy jobs task force, which is now met three times, and has recently published its action plan, setting out some of the key measures that have been taken forward with the backing and support of key industry leaders. Christian Allard. I thank the Deputy First Minister for his answer. Will he agree with me that the U-turn from the chancellor, George Osborne, on the taxation of the oil and gas industry was an admission, but his policy for the North Sea has been wrong and the post scholarship by the UK Government has had a detrimental impact on our oil and gas sector? Will he agree that he has been in another case of too little, too late and that many job losses could have been avoided? Cabinet Secretary. I want to say first of all that, as the Government has made clear, that we welcome the steps that were taken by the United Kingdom Government in the budget statement on 18 March. The reduction of the supplementary charge, the introduction of the base and wide investment allowance, the reduction of petroleum revenue tax and the modest investment in exploration were all welcome. I think that what they indicate is that the United Kingdom Government has realised that its stewardship of the North Sea oil and gas regime on taxation purposes had to be dramatically revised as a consequence of the results that had been generated from the significant increase in particularly the supplementary charge that had taken place since the UK Government came to office. Add to that the fact that a new oil and gas authority has been put in place, changing the regulatory regime, demonstrates that, in the course of the past 18 months, the UK has changed fundamentally both the fiscal regime and the regulatory regime, which demonstrates to me that there is acknowledgement that the UK has ill-served the North Sea oil and gas sector with the way in which it has taken forward its policy agenda. The changes that have been made in the budget are welcome, and I do hope that they are taken as a signal by the oil and gas industry that there is an opportunity to invest in the North Sea sector, and that is taken up by interested parties. I am afraid that that concludes questions, and I apologise to the members that we have not reached. We turn to the next item of business, which is a debate on motion number 12857, in the name of—