 First item on business is General Questions, pubwysuig 1-5. Thank you. To ask the Scottish Government whether it will reconsider its decision to pause capital funding for NHS Highland in respect of completion of the refurbishment of Granton health centre in light of reports that these works were nearly completed i ddangos i gafodd, a'i gydag i gwaith perilu iawn i gydag llwyddiadau ysgrifell yn ôl i ddifod ei gieith ar Argwm Nidol. Rwm wedi bod yn gweithio'r ffocas bwllfa yn yr agus ym Mgrhaenftegach, rwy'n teimlo i fyfydol graf, os ym 22, 27, 28, unrhyw yn ymolio'n sylwf yn hunu arwyddo'r £1,3 billion. Diwrnod yma yn gweithio'r gwybru i ddigon yw'r cyd, ac yn cael ei gaelio'i gydag development and the grant in health centre phase 2 has been paused at this stage until the necessary capital funding becomes available. The cabinet secretary is aware that there is a cross-party campaign supported by myself, Ed Mountain and Rhoda Grant. It is a non-political campaign. The cost of the project is £2.4 million, but unlike every other project in NHS Highland, the project is nearly completed. £2 million of the £2.4 million have actually been incurred, and the materials are on site, waiting to be installed, but if there is not an overturn of the decision within the next three weeks, abortive costs will be incurred, which together with the running costs of the old Victorian Ian Charles building, which was to be decommissioned, will mean that the overall costs will far exceed the notional savings. Will the cabinet secretary, whom we met yesterday and whom he is willing to listen to, be much appreciated seriously reconsider that a small sum of £400,000 would help to save this vital project that promised the community nearly a decade ago? I thank Fergus Ewing for his question and for both his engagement with Edwin Mountain and Rhoda Grant and the grant in on-spay medical practice in NHS Highland, whom, as he says, met with me yesterday to discuss the situation. I am very grateful for the further information that has been provided across all those participants in that meeting. I gave a commitment yesterday that I would, without prejudice, without any commitment, look to go away and consider the position and the potentially exceptional situation that there is there. I committed to come back to those who were on the meeting as soon as I possibly could. Edward Mountain Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. I, too, am pleased to be working with Rhoda Grant and Fergus Ewing. The 2015 redesign of healthcare in Strath Spay and Badenoc will require the closure of two hospitals and an upgrade of two GP practices, including the grant and practice. The non-completion of the grant and medical practice, which was the last piece in the jigsaw, will leave this Government and NHS Highland without one shred of credibility in space life. I ask Cabinet Secretary to reflect on that when he is making his decision. Edward Mountain Thank you, Presiding Officer. I thank Edward Mountain for reiterating a point that he raised with me yesterday. Of course, that will be part of the consideration in this case, and I look to take a swift decision, the positive or negative, as quickly as possible. Murdo Fraser To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on how it is supporting the museum sector. The Scottish Government provides significant support to the museum sector and will continue to do so. For example, we have given cultural bodies an uplift in 2024-25, which includes the National Museum Scotland. We continue to support the national development body for Scotland's museum sector, the museum's gallery Scotland, and we have committed to providing an uplift of £800,000 to the V&A Dundee, despite the Scottish Government's challenging 2024-25 budget position. I am pleased that our investment continues to support our museums and world-class collections, ensuring that they are cared for and enjoyed by everybody across Scotland. I thank the minister for her response. I am sure that she will want to join with me in welcoming the opening this week of the new Perth Museum, a fantastic new resource created by Perth and Cynros Council, with the assistance of £10 million from the UK Government by way of the Tay cities deal and, of course, home now to Scotland's stone of destiny. How will the Scottish Government help to capitalise on the economic and cultural opportunities offered by the new museum? I thank Marjo Fraser for raising that, and I am very pleased that Perth Museum will reopen on 30 March after a significant redevelopment project. Alongside the stone of destiny, the museum houses the Perth and Cynros recognised collections of national significance, as well as being situated in one of Scotland's heritage buildings. As you know, Perth Museum will be managed in partnership with Perth and Cynros Council and Culture Perth and Cynros and was supported by Tay City regions deal, which received funding from the Scottish Government alongside other partners, including the UK Government and regional partners. As mentioned, the Scottish Government continues to provide funding to the national development body for Scotland's museum sector, MGS, which provides valuable strategic investment, advice, workforce development and advocacy. To ask the Scottish Government how many children aged 16 and under have been prescribed puberty-suppressing hormones by NHS Scotland since 2014. The Sandiford Young People's Gender Service, based in NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde, offers a range of support to young people and their families. Referol to paediatric endocrinology for consideration for endocrine intervention is only one potential option of the overall clinical pathway offered. According to figures provided by NHS Scotland from 2016 to December 2023, just under 100 young people aged 16 or under were referred by the Sandiford Clinic to paediatric endocrinology in NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde and NHS Lothian for further assessment for puberty blockers. Not all of those referred would have been assessed as suitable to progress on to this medication. I understand that NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde are currently reviewing their data systems and I shall write to Ash Ragan with the relevant information for the 2014-2016 period when available. Following medical evidence reviews, Denmark, Finland, Norway, Sweden, France and England now sharply restrict or prohibit the use of puberty blockers for gender dysphoria. There is weak to no proof that they help, but there is much evidence of serious side effects. They prevent bone density developments, they render children infertile, they can cause damage to the heart and cause severe depression. Class action lawsuits in the US courts now involving thousands of patients damaged by puberty blockers. What will it take for this Government to step in and protect Scotland's children from this unethical experiment? We are aware of the new clinical policy that has recently been issued by NHS England on the routine prescription of puberty suppressing hormones for children and young people as a treatment option for gender dysphoria. The details of that are being closely considered by NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde and its relevant clinical team as the provider of the young people's gender service at Sandiford. Any decision on how such healthcare is delivered in Scotland will rightly be made by health boards and their clinicians. It should also be noted that NHS England's announcements follow their interim policy position last year, recommending that puberty blockers are only accessed via a research programme. It is establishing. The Scottish Government and NHS Scotland remain observers to the study development and we are considering what further engagement may be appropriate. The cash review was clear in its recommendations and, given the action taken in Scotland, was on the basis of lack of evidence that the puberty suppressing hormones were safe or effective, many in Scotland will be expecting action from Government. Can I ask the health secretary what actual discussion he has had with NHS Scotland in light of the decision taken in England? If action is to be taken, what time scales for such action and will he set this out to Parliament? We have been consistently clear that the on-going findings of the cash review and the review's final report once published will be and are being considered closely by both the Scottish Government and NHS Scotland in the context of how such healthcare is best delivered here in Scotland. Although the cash review only extends to NHS England's services, Scottish Government officials and NHS Scotland clinicians have met with Dr Cass on multiple occasions to share information on improvement work in Scotland and expected outcomes of that review on-going. We have much to get through, colleagues, concise questions and responses. I appreciate that question number four. To ask the Scottish Government what it is doing to support the mental well-being of asylum seekers accommodated in hotels in Scotland. The Home Office is responsible for the provision of asylum accommodation and support, including the use of contingency hotels. The Scottish Government has consistently made clear to the UK Government that hotels are not appropriate accommodation and we continue to be concerned about the effect prolonged stays in hotels having people's wellbeing. People seeking asylum living in Scotland are entitled to access healthcare, including referral to mental health services. The Scottish Government funds a range of action that supports mental health and well-being, which is available to anyone living in Scotland, regardless of their residence status. She will be aware of the overwhelming evidence of worsening mental health among hotel-accommodated asylum seekers. There have been at least five suicide attempts in the last few months. Asylum seekers do not feel safe. They feel like they are in open prisons. The Ferret and the Scottish Refugee Council identify the rise in far-right hostility and the fact that about 500 asylum seekers have to share bedrooms with strangers as contributing factors. How can the Scottish Government and public agencies, including the NHS, mitigate the impacts of those measures and provide increased safety, reassurance and mental health support to people seeking asylum? We absolutely recognise that the circumstances and the uncertainty that asylum seekers and refugees face, which is often distressing and can lead to an increased risk of suicide. In implementing the Scottish Government and COSLA's suicide prevention strategy creating hope together, we are working hard to tackle the inequalities that can lead to suicide, as well as prioritising communities and groups where there is a heightened risk of suicide, which includes asylum seekers and refugees. To improve the mental health and wellbeing of our asylum seekers and refugee community, we are engaging with public sector partners, including the NHS. We are also connecting with existing projects such as supporting asylum seekers and refugees such as mental health foundations elevate projects. We also continue to fund the Simon Community Scotland, who are doing excellent work in supporting asylum seekers and people with no recourse to public funds. Our partnership this year is delivering peer support for people living in Glasgow, which has been developed to meet specific needs of that community. More widely. To ask the Scottish Government for an update on the cost of living tenant protection Scotland Act 2022. Emergency Act has provided tenants with extra protection and stability at a time when rents have been rising across the UK, but, as Parliament agreed, it must come to an end on 31 March. All rent increase notices issued until 1 April still need to comply with the cap, as well as giving three months notice. From that date on, we know that many landlords will continue to act responsibly. However, without action, there could be cases where tenants face sudden extreme rent increases. I am pleased that Parliament recently approved regulations to temporarily modify the rent adjudication process by which tenants can ask for a review of rent increases. That will protect tenants by preventing a cliff edge as we transition out of the emergency legislation while continuing to support responsible landlords. I thank the Minister for that response. Over the 18 months of the emergency rent cap, the number of privately rented properties on the public landlord register has grown by more than 5,000, despite attempts by landlord groups and some opposition MSPs to claim the opposite. With the Minister publishing a bill yesterday that delivers much of the new deal for tenants in the Butehouse agreement, including new rights for tenants and long-term rent controls, how does he think that proposals should be greeted by responsible landlords who want to provide a good and fair service? The member is right that private renting has always been a very dynamic sector. Some landlords are leaving and others are entering, and the evidence growth of registered properties available for private rent over the last 18 months demonstrates that further. I acknowledge that there are some limitations to that data. There could be a time lag in landlords' deregistering properties, for example, but a fairer, well-regulated private rented sector is in the interests of both tenants and responsible landlords and can be attractive to investors. Therefore, our proposals will help to improve affordability for tenants in the private rented sector while recognising the importance of landlords investing in the quality of property. To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on what action it is taking to support tenants in light of accelerating rents. As I said in the answer to the last question, the cost of living act has provided tenants with much needed stability within tenants at a time when rents have been rising across the UK. In 2023-24, we also invested over £83 million in discretionary housing payments, a vital tool to reduce poverty, safeguard tenancies and prevent homelessness. I am also delighted that the new housing bill has now been introduced, a set-out in the programme for government. The bill will enable the delivery of our commitment for longer-term proposals for private rented sector rent controls, strengthen tenants' rights and other protections, and duties aimed at the prevention of homelessness. Katie Clark I welcome the publication of the Housing Scotland Act and congratulate living rent, tenants' unions and all who have campaigned for rent controls legislation. As the minister knows, we face a housing emergency and the minister has referred to concern about a cliff edge. A dedication system being proposed by the Scottish Government is complicated and there is concern about the burden on councils. Living rent is calling for a rent cap. What consideration has been given to input interim measures to help tenants whilst we wait for the legislation to come into force? I join the member in congratulating all those who have campaigned for progress in this area for a long time. As indeed have I, I first proposed rent controls well over a decade in this Parliament and got very little support at that time from any part of the political spectrum. I am glad that the case has much more support today. The member is also aware that the temporary emergency legislation that this Parliament passed did have that time limit. If it had not had that time limit, if it had not been temporary emergency legislation, it would have failed the legal test of proportionality and necessity that we have to do. The legislation was challenged in court and the large reason that we won that challenge was that we met that proportionality and necessity test by the temporary nature of emergency legislation. The adjudication provisions that we have made are more complicated than a rent cap by necessity, but we have put a great deal of effort into raising awareness of tenants' rights and making sure that they are able to exercise the rights and protections that are available to them. To ask the Scottish Government how many children in Aberdeen have been lifted out of poverty since the inception of the Scottish child payment. It is estimated that the Scottish child payment will keep 60,000 children in Scotland out of poverty in 24-25, but this impact cannot be broken down to local authority area level. However, published statistics show that over 327,000 children in low-income families in Scotland were receiving the Scottish child payment in December 23, with over 10,000 of those children in Aberdeen city. Since the launch of the Scottish child payment, over £570 million in payments have been made to the families who need it most in Scotland, with more than £18 million of those payments being made in Aberdeen city alone. Thank you, Presiding Officer. It is gratifying that the Scottish child payment has contributed to lifting 100,000 children in Scotland out of poverty. Has the Scottish Government had any discussion with the UK Government about whether it will replicate the scheme south of the border? Is it possible that Barnett consequentials for Scotland could help us to do even more to lift people out of poverty here? We have repeatedly called on the UK Government to make key changes to reserve benefits, including to introduce an essential guarantee and to reverse damaging welfare cuts such as the two-child limit steps that would lift 40,000 children out of poverty in Scotland next year. The First Minister also wrote to Keir Stammer in January to find ways of working together to tackle poverty should Labour form the next UK Government. No reply has been received from either Labour or the current UK Government, and neither have indicated any intention to match ambitious anti-poverty measures taken here in Scotland. The minister points to the impact of the child payment rightly, but does he accept that on last week's poverty and inequality statistics and the budgetary decisions of his Government, including slashing the housing and employability budgets, that the IPPR, Save the Children and the Joseph Rowntree Foundation have said that the interim poverty targets are now at risk or are going to be missed? Does he agree with those experts? We will continue to do all within our powers to reduce child poverty but also to mitigate the ingrained austerity of successive UK Governments. I will come back to the point that I just mentioned previously in the previous answer to Kevin Stewart. We have wrote to Keir Stammer in regard of what he has said. We have had no answers back in terms of that. The other point is incredibly important. In contrast, the UK Government has scrapped its child poverty target, for example, in 2016, and has continued its campaign of austerity. We want to talk about comparing records. In January, children's groups, along with the Well Children's Commissioner, criticised the well-run Government for failing to set targets.