 Cyfnog oedd yn y cyfnod y cwestiwyr cwestiwn, ynсеud i gweld yr ysgol yng Nghymru, ond enw i fynd ym Mwneu i'r holl yng Nghymru. Felly, rwyf yn fwy o gŷn amddain fearsol o dnymneu cyfnod, i ffôr, o bobl cyfeirio, o bobl cyfnod, o bobl cyfnod o bobl cyfnod o bobl cyfnod o bobl cyfeirio ar bobl cyfeirio o bobl cyfnod o bobl cyfnod o bobl cyfeirio ar bobl cyfoi'r Cyfnod, o bobl cyfnod o bobl cyfnod sy'n meddwl i gynlluniaethau i gael i sgwyllietadau o ddadod, i ni wedi cael ei ffordd a fyddion leidud o sicr i'ch buddwg hon bobl yn lli'r gwasanaeth ar gyfer gwineillol. To ask the Scottish Government what assessment it is made of the potential impact on workers in Scotland of an independent Scotland rejoining the European Union. Cabinet Secretary. Hanges Robertson. Thank you. The Scottish government believes that the best future for Scotland is as an independent country, which is a member state of the European Union. We set out the multiple benefits that rejoining the EU as an independent country would bring to workers in the third paper of the independence prospectus, including greater mobility to work in any EU country, fairer labour market, better regulation and protection of workers rights. We'll continue to build the case for a socially just independent Scotland within the EU and give the people of Scotland the information that they need to make an informed choice about whether Scotland should become an independent country. The cabinet secretary will be aware of the recent findings by the centre for European reform, which predicts that the average worker will be £1,300 worse off as a result of Brexit. Despite Scotland voting overwhelmingly to remain, being forced out of the EU against our will is hitting workers hard in the pocket. Does the cabinet secretary agree with me that the Tories and Labour for that matter must answer as to why workers in Scotland are being forced to pay such a heavy price for their Brexit obsession? I wholeheartedly agree with Claire Hawke, the UK Government and for that matter, with the support of the UK Labour Party, has imposed an unnecessarily hard Brexit, which is having a damaging impact on businesses and workers in Scotland and making the cost of living crisis so much harder to bear. The Office for Budget Responsibility expects that the UK's GDP will be 4 per cent lower on the long run, which is the equivalent of around £100 billion in lost output, which will damage employment prospects for workers. That further demonstrates why securing independence and getting back into the EU, a market that, by population, is seven times the size of the UK, is essential for the future wellbeing of people in Scotland. Earlier this month, the president of the SNP and former constitution secretary, Mike Russell, told the Herald newspaper, and I quote, I do not think that independence can be secured right now. In light of that statement, why is the SNP Government wasting time contemplating such hypothetical situations instead of focusing on the real and present priorities of the Scottish people? It should not come as a surprise to Sharon Dowie. In fact, it should not come to a surprise to any members on the Conservative benches having lost the last Scottish Parliament election, that the parties that won the election were elected on a manifesto to hold a democratic referendum in Scotland. There is no technical reason why the UK Government cannot transfer the responsibilities to have a referendum. It is, after all, the policy favoured by the majority of MSPs in this Parliament, so it would be entirely incorrect and false for this Government to not make the necessary preparations. We want the people to be as informed as possible. I would hope that Democrats would all agree that if a Government is elected to do something, it should be able to get on with it. I think that I must be getting a bit deaf in my old age, but I did not hear the minister set out what the impact of leaving the UK internal market would be on those very same workers. Why is he embracing the obvious benefits of the European Union, but ignoring the problems caused by the break-up of the United Kingdom? All I can say to Willie Rennie, there is nobody on those benches who is a tectonic separatist. We are in favour of the best possible trading relations across the islands, but we also want to be part of the biggest single market in the world, which is the European Union single market. I am not one of those who is perhaps pleading for Scotland to remain dependent on a single market the size of the United Kingdom. Why not embrace the historical, credible, European support of the liberal Democrats for the European idea and join us on those benches by seeking our place within the European single market? To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to the reported comments by the Edinburgh Festival fringe society chief executive that the festival faces an existential threat. The Edinburgh Festival is a top cultural brand in Scotland, attracting global talent every year. The Scottish Government acknowledges the challenges that the cultural events sector, including the fringe, has faced during the pandemic, Brexit, lower audience numbers and high energy costs. To support the fringe resilience and long-term viability, the Scottish Government has offered a combination of loans and grants, recognising the festival's importance to Scotland's cultural scene. We aim to keep working with the fringe society and the wider cultural events sector to understand how to provide support during these very trying times. Can I thank the minister for that response? I am sure that the grants will be welcome, perhaps the loans less so, but I hope that she will join me in welcoming the £8.6 million pledged by the UK Government for Scotland's festival economy, which I hope will create a permanent headquarters for the fringe in Edinburgh and also create year-round opportunities for artists and local talent. However, we should acknowledge that it is not just Edinburgh that celebrates culture. I would like to hear what the Scottish Government is doing outside of the central belt to support regions such as my own in the west and rural communities to ensure that there is a vibrant cultural scene right throughout Scotland that is not dependent on large tourism numbers such as the capital does. Jamie Greene will also welcome the announcement by the Scottish Government on the financial commitments that we have made over the past few weeks of the cultural sector in the on-going months and years to come. We have been urging the UK Government to recognise the valuable role Scotland's culture sector plays to the Scottish and UK economy. Therefore, any additional funding from the spring budget is welcome. While the funding is welcome, the UK Government needs to engage with us in advance to ensure that support is aligned and its impact is maximised. We understand that £7 million of that award is subject to a business case being agreed by DCMS, and we do not have that yet. It is for capital expenditure to assist the French Society in finding a new home that can offer year-round support to local artists and communities like the one Mr... Mr Greene. Sorry, Jamie Greene. Mr Greene represents. Sorry about that. Question 3, not lodged. Question 4, withdrawn. Question 5, Stephanie Calhann. To ask the Scottish Government how the Scottish Connections Framework will help to address any demographic challenges. The Scottish Connections Framework seeks to expand links and networks with Scottish people and those with an association to Scotland living elsewhere in the world. Scotland has particular challenges with all our future population growth forecasts expected to come from migration, which is one of the reasons the Scottish Government is so concerned at the UK Government's approach to migration. Migration is therefore an issue that is crucial for Scotland's future economic and social wellbeing. Activity under the framework will allow the Scottish Government to project Scotland's attractiveness as a place to work, to live, to study and to do business. That will include promoting the talent attraction and migration service that we aim to launch later in 2023. Stephanie Calhann. I thank the cabinet secretary for that answer. Does he agree that encouraging your talent to immigrate to Scotland will help to address Scotland's demographic challenges and support our economy and public services? Can he outline how the talent attraction and migration service, which I know will be launched this year, plans to encourage immigration and retention of young people in areas that Scotland for tourism is not as prevalent? In 2021, the Ministerial Population Task Force published Scotland's first population strategy, a key building block of which is to ensure that Scotland is an attractive and also a welcoming country. Inward migration supports our community, strengthens our public services and grows our economy. The talent attraction and migration service will encourage more people to come and live in Scotland. It will help employees to navigate the UK Government's complex and, sadly, bureaucratic immigration rules to help to meet their skills' needs. The service will provide good quality information and advice to help people to move here and settle into their communities. There are restrictions on what the Scottish Government can do through the connections framework and other work to address demographic challenges through international immigration due to its reserved nature. There are no restrictions on addressing demographic challenges through attracting people from the rest of the UK to come and live and work in Scotland. Can I ask what the Scottish Government is doing to take forward the work of the industry group on UK talent attraction, which already exists, to address demographic challenges and increase Scotland's tax revenues? Ivan McKee raised some very important issues. The Scottish Government is taking action to attract people with the skills that Scotland needs from the rest of the United Kingdom. Our UK talent attraction programme will continue to be informed and supported by the industry advisory group. As a priority action, we are working with the group to develop an aerospace and space sector talent attraction pilot that includes the implementation of a recruitment toolkit and of marketing activity. However, people moving from the rest of the United Kingdom to Scotland are extremely welcome. To ask the Scottish Government what engagement it and its agencies have had with Leith Theodore. Can I just thank Ben Macpherson for the legacy in which he left in this role that I now take over and many of the stakeholders have been asking after Mr Macpherson. I just wanted to pass that on. In December, the Cabinet Secretary for Constitutional Affairs and Culture, Angus Robertson, chaired a cultural resilience round table that I am very pleased to say that Leith Theodore participated in. During the height of the pandemic, Leith Theodore received £538,000 from our performing arts venue relief fund and recovery fund. Creative Scotland has had engagement with the organisation and artists who have presented work at Leith Theodore on a case-by-case basis. Ben Macpherson. I thank the minister for her kind words and for that expansive answer, highlighting the good work of Leith Theodore. Does the Scottish Government agree with me that Leith Theodore has an important role to play in assisting the Edinburgh festivals in widening their impact throughout the city of Edinburgh and its communities? Would the culture ministers agree to visit Leith Theodore in the period ahead to learn more about its artistic facilities, its community work and its plans for the future? Thank you very much. I do acknowledge the important role that Leith Theodore has played in Edinburgh's festivals, including the successful hosting of numerous contemporary music events at last year's Edinburgh international festival. Leith Theodore is part of Edinburgh's rich theatre landscape, and I am sure that festival organisers hear the great case that the member is making for Leith Theodore as a venue. I would also invite the member to send me some additional information on the exciting work happening at Leith Theodore, and I am glad that we would consider a visit to the theatre with him. To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on the historic environment Scotland sites that remain closed. Historic environment Scotland has recently announced the reopening of more than 20 properties in care as part of its seasonal reopenings. It has also fully reopened or increased access at more than 40 sites as part of its high-level masonry programme of inspections. The first batch of inspections was completed in the summer last year, and the work has progressed very well on the next batch. However, I have asked Historic Environment Scotland to write to the member with a fuller answer to her question. I thank the minister for that response. She will know that, in 2022, Llythgo Palace had to close due to the masonry inspections that Historic Environment Scotland carried out. It is hoped very much that it will reopen this summer but only partially. It has also recently been victim to vandalism with conservation teams working to assess this damage, which will no doubt be costly to repair and choirs experts to carry out the work. Can the minister assure me that the closure and lack of full accessibility will not adversely affect Llythgo's local economy and tourism industry and confirm that the recent vandalism won't hinder its partial reopening date? As I said, I will get Historic Environment Scotland to write on the particular details about timing. I do not have that information to hand, but I condemn the vandalism at Llythgo Palace. We want the programme of assessment to enable all the attractions to be opened fully, but we have to err on the side of caution and be safe about that. As I said in the original answer, we are making great progress on that work. I have hes right to sue whether on that. The Scottish Government should be known to take heritage crime very seriously and, with specific legislation in place to protect nationally significant historic spaces, heritage crime can rob us of our history. Llythgo Palace and other places have had enough to deal with the issues that have been experienced through the pandemic and the cost-celleving crisis, but to then be vandalised is just not acceptable. I would also be interested in seeing that reply. Does the minister agree with me that the vandalism that took place on 30 April 2020 at the historic Llythgo Palace in my constituency is of great concern and highlights the danger of leaving properties closed, attracting anti-social behaviour and, in some cases, a heritage crime? The reopening of properties does not just have a heritage and tourism role. It also needs to be reopened to promote responsibility around those sites. As I said in the previous answer, I will ensure that that advice from Hes goes to both members asking questions today. I think that this act of vandalism in particular, in any vandalism in our historic sites, is completely unacceptable. I know that incident is subject to a police investigation, so I will not say much more on that as we speak right now. As I said, heritage crime can rob us of not just our history, but some of the learning for our children in the future as well. Its impact on communities is absolutely enormous. In my new role, I will discuss closely with Historic Environment Scotland the current safety-related closures at the property and the care and the impacts of the vandalism and report back to members on that issue. I previously asked her predecessor, Neil Gray, about two particular sites in the Highlands and Islands, one being Kismal Castle on Barra and the other, the Bond or Iron Furnace in Argyll, both of which I believe remain temporarily closed. Could she give Parliament an update on those sites? Does she recognise the damage to the local economy, especially the tourist economy, of sites across Scotland remaining closed to the public? I do not have details on those particular sites, but I will get those details and get those to Donald Cameron. Thank you so much for your good wishes. I am looking forward to working on that work. It is important to say that we have substantially increased our resource to historic environment Scotland in recognition of the impact of not just the pandemic, but all the other issues, particularly the impact on its commercial income. The quicker we can get the assessments done, the quicker we can get those places open, and the quicker that has an impact on local economies. I will again get the most up-to-date information that I can for Donald Cameron on the two particular sites that he mentions. I would also like to congratulate the minister on his new role. At the end of last year, the Scottish Government's budget predicted a forecast increase in commercial revenue for historic environment Scotland. However, at the beginning of this year's 60 historic environment Scotland sites remain closed or permanently closed for the public. Can the minister advise how historic environment Scotland's revenue will raise as predicted if so many of those sites remain closed throughout the summer? I emphasise the answers to the other questions and the impact that both the pandemic and the cost of living crisis have had on those particular attractions, but also on the issues around the safety and inspection work that needs to be done. As I said, we have completed one tranche, and we are well on our way in completing the other tranche. Again, that has an impact on the revenue in which those attractions can incur. We have supported historic environment Scotland with £72.7 million to maintain Scotland's heritage and historic environment, which is 82 per cent—point 6 per cent—higher than the £39 million level of support before the impact of the pandemic in 2019-20. I hope that that will reassure the member that we have given that financial commitment, but I have also given the commitment to work very closely with historic environment Scotland to ensure that we can get all of these, if not partially opened, but opened completely as well. To ask the Scottish Government what discussions the constitution secretary has had with ministerial colleagues regarding engagement with the UK Government on the potential return to the Horizon Europe research programme. Scottish ministers have been clear in their communications that association to horizon Europe is a matter of utmost importance to Scotland and is the best option for the Scottish research and innovation sector. Given the cross-cutting nature of horizon Europe, many Scottish ministers have an interest and engage with their UK and devolved counterparts on the issue. I myself attended the UK-EU relations interministerial group meeting on 20 March, when I raised the importance of UK association to horizon Europe ahead of observing the trade and co-operation agreement partnership council meeting between the UK and the EU on 24 March. The Scottish Government will continue to work together to ensure that Scotland's interests and needs are supported as negotiations are taken forward on EU programmes. I thank the cabinet secretary for that answer. He pledged to press for a return to the programme in last week's programme for government document, so he will be aware that this is exactly the outcome that the UK Government seeks, but it must be a good deal for the UK. If that is not possible, then there is the alternative pioneer plan, which is backed, should it be required by the Russell group and others. Will the cabinet secretary commit to working with the UK Government on both the horizon or pioneer for the benefit of research and development across the island? The simple answer to that question is yes. I have been working with UK ministerial counterparts in two recent meetings, the most recent that I attended with Foreign Secretary James cleverly and Marius Sefcovic in relation to a number of normalisations that we would hope after progress in Northern Ireland. I give him and colleagues a commitment that we really want to see a return to the horizon programme. I would make one minor point in relation to all of this, of course, which is that we would not be in any of this difficulty if the UK hadn't left the European Union. If we, as we voted for in Scotland, had been able to remain in the European Union, we wouldn't be in the difficulty that we are now trying to dig ourselves out of. As the cabinet secretary has indicated, the situation with horizon Europe is a product of an unwanted Brexit. Does the cabinet secretary agree that the UK Government should see horizon Europe as part of a process of reopening more doors to our European neighbours? Why, for example, is it also scrapping the disastrous retained EU law bill and remaining aligned with high EU standards? Alasdair Allan is absolutely right. Brexit is an active, unmitigated self-harm by the UK Government. It represents a generational disaster for Scotland. Mitigating its impact is a priority for this Government. Until we are able to rejoin the European Union as an independent nation, we are going to have to deal with issues such as the retained EU law bill, which is reckless and damages legislation that needlessly puts at risk vital protections and standards. It should be withdrawn by the UK Government. Scotland will continue to align as closely as we can with the safeguards and the standards that we benefited from as part of the European Union. As to horizon, Scottish ministers have been clear consistently that association is a matter of significant importance to the research sector in Scotland. I thank the minister for his answer to those questions, and I welcome the conversations that he is having with the Government to rejoin. If Scotland is able to rejoin one European Union programme like horizon, why is it not making progress towards a replacement for others, such as the Erasment programme, as has been done in Labour-run Wales, to allow students to come here to study and to allow our own students the valuable opportunity to study abroad? Frankly, the best way to protect our place in European programmes is to be in the European Union. The last time I looked, the UK Labour Party is supporting the Conservative Party in the UK remaining outside the European Union. This is a statement of fact, and one is going to hear a lot of that in the months and the years to come. Of course, we should be seeking mitigation wherever we can, but we have to aspire to more than mitigation. Let us do everything that we can do in relation to the horizon programme. Yes, we need to do everything that we can in relation to student mobility across the European Union, but please let us not wave a white flag of surrender, keep ourselves outside the European Union and suffer the damage. Labour Party in Scotland, why do not you return to your pro-European roots and support Scotland rejoining the European Union where it should be? That should be an easy fix given the Windsor framework that is now agreed. Has the cabinet secretary established what the barriers are in his discussions with the UK and EU ministers to ensure that the horizon research programme is not that students are not going to miss out on the horizon research programme? To be frank to Beatrice Wishart, I think that the biggest blockage, the biggest impediment to progress related to the state of negotiations around Northern Ireland, the threat by the UK Government to break international law, to break international treaties as part of the appalling relations and gunboat diplomacy that it was pursuing in past months. We have now moved beyond that. Thank goodness for that. As I previously mentioned to a question on the Conservative benches, having sat in on a meeting between James Cleverley and Mara Sefcovic, there is reason to believe that now we have got beyond that stage, progress can be made. We will do everything that we can when we meet with the UK Government colleagues to impress on the importance of making progress. To be honest, the biggest impediment that there has been to date has been the appalling relations between the UK Government and the European Union. Hopefully we are beyond that now. To ask the Scottish Government whether it will consider making proven and not proven the two available verdicts in the criminal courts. Presiding Officer, the Victims, Witnesses and Justice Reform Bill introduced yesterday proposes to abolish the not proven verdict and introduce a two verdict system of guilty and not guilty. This decision was based on significant high quality evidence and extensive stakeholder engagement during the consultation and policy development process. The alternatives of introducing verdicts of proven and not proven was considered and engagement made clear that guilty and not guilty are unambiguous and easier to understand than the alternatives of proven and not proven. They are familiar verdicts that provide greater clarity and have been proven to work well in other jurisdictions. I thank the cabinet secretary for that answer, and I note the point that she feels they are guilty and not guilty and are more easily understood. However, I wonder if she would accept that not proven is a more honest verdict than not guilty. After all, someone might have committed the crime, but there is not enough evidence or they have often a technicality, so not guilty is surely a subset of not proven, but not proven includes other possibilities too. Presiding Officer, it is important that we explain why we support the two verdict system of guilty and not guilty. In many regards, Mr Mason's questioning demonstrates some of the difficulties with the not proven and proven alternative. Our evidence is clear that the not proven verdict is not understood by jurors, can cause stigma for the equited and trauma for complainers. Our consultation demonstrated that 50 per cent of respondents favoured guilty and not guilty compared to 41 per cent for proven and not proven. Support for guilty and not guilty was particularly strong among legal organisations and those third sector organisations, particularly those who support victims and their families. For example, the senators of the College of Justice commented in their response that the two verdicts available ought to be guilty and not guilty. Those are commonly understood concepts that are applied throughout every other English-speaking jurisdiction. The victims bill published today is an excellent name for a bill, I should add. As well as removing the not proven verdict also proposes one other major change, which is the reduction of jury sizes and the numbers required for a majority verdict. This is quite a substantial change to how decisions are made about whether someone is convicted or not. What was the thought process that went behind that proposal? What consultation took place that said that that was the right proposal in direction of travel to take? More importantly, what did the modelling say about the effect that it would have on the outcomes of trials? Ultimately, that is the key to its success or otherwise. Mr Greend, for his question, it is important that I reassure him that extensive consultation has underpinned the bill, particularly in terms of the work that has been undertaken by the victims task force, and there has also been significant research undertaken in and around matters impacting on juries both in Scotland and across the developed world. It is important to stress that matters of verdict, jury size and majority are all very closely related and interlinked. It is important for us to maintain a balanced approach and to consider those matters in the round. While there are other aspects of the bill that are very focused on improving the experience for victims and survivors and a pilot to address some of the long-standing concerns that we have had about conviction rates for the most serious of sexual offences, including rape, issues in and around jury size and are not proven are not designed to influence conviction rates because the not proven and the jury size and the jury majority required have to apply for all offences. I appreciate that it is a somewhat complex area, and I am happy to explore the detail further directly with Mr Greend, but also as the bill progresses. I belatedly welcome the cabinet secretary, her post. I also welcome the publication of the bill and support the general thrust in terms of the removal of not proven, which will be aware of the concerns around the impact that the bill has on juries. The Government has carried out quite a bit of research in terms of mock jury research, but I am aware that Professor Thomas at University College London has carried out research with real juries in different areas. I wonder whether the Government is willing to explore, even at this late stage, engaging with UCL with Professor Thomas to undertake further research with real juries on the potential impacts and the confusion that she referred to. I start by assuring Mr MacArthur that the research that was undertaken that was specific to Scotland was indeed extensive, and there is also extensive research elsewhere in Europe, too. Of course, it is important that, as we progress with this landmark legislation, that we have a debate in and around all aspects of the bill that is on the very highest of standards. Of course, I would expect Parliament and, indeed, committees to be looking at a full range of evidence. Certainly, on behalf of the Government, we are always open to exploring all evidence, because it is imperative that, if we are determined to put victims very much at the heart of our criminal justice system, we have to be focused on what works and what works in the real world. To ask the Scottish Government what recent discussions it has had with the Scottish Law Commission regarding its view on the law on homicide in relation to culpable homicide. Ministers meet regularly with the chair of the Scottish Law Commission to discuss their work programme in general. The last such meeting was held in December 2022. Gareth Robertson, from Cowdenbeath, died in 2019, a result of falling from a platform while working at Longannate Power Station. Following Gareth's death, the demolition firm Brown and Mason were fined just £5,000 in a criminal prosecution. The family received no apology from the company. They were not even allowed to make a statement in court as it was a health and safety prosecution. The £5,000 did not cover the cost of Gareth funeral. Through a civil case, Mr Robertson's family received damages, but families who lose loved ones at work should not have to rely on civil cases that diminish their loss. Gareth's wife, Karen, has said, "...we need to make sure the laws designed to hold people accountable can't be manipulated to let those responsible escape justice." The first thing that Gareth's employers sent to me was not a sympathy card or a phone call, but his P45. As we approach international workers' memorial day, can I ask what the cabinet secretary will do to ensure that families such as Gareth can get justice, given that no cases in Scotland have been prosecuted under the Corporate Manslaughter and Homicide Act 2007? I recognise Mr Baker's long-standing and committed interest in the area. There are existing laws that can be used such as the common law of homicide, the Health and Safety at Work Act and, of course, Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007. It is important for information to say that, since 2009, 13 cases have been reported to the Crown Office in respect of corporate homicide, as well as other charges, of those cases, nine have resulted in convictions in court, three remain under consideration by the Crown Office and one led to no further action. While she is correct to say that there have been no convictions under the 2007 act, those cases that I refer to have resulted in guilty pleas to breaches in other legislation such as the Health and Safety at Work Act, but it is an area that I would be more than happy to continue to engage with Mr Baker on. To ask the Scottish Government what its strategy is for protecting autistic women from sexual violence. We are fully committed to protecting all women from violence as part of our commitment to the equally safe strategy. The autism and learning and intellectual disability transformation plan towards transformation sets out to shape, support, services and attitudes to ensure that human rights of autistic people and people with learning and intellectual disabilities are respected and protected and that they are empowered to live their lives the same as everyone else. A recent report revealed that 90 per cent of autistic women are victims of sex attacks and very few of those are reported to the police. The Scottish Women's Autism Network have teamed up with Police Scotland to raise awareness and create strategies to help. Does the minister believe that an early diagnosis of their condition would help women to cope and may prevent them from becoming victims in the first place? It is essential that perpetrators of sexual violence are held to account and on the owners of a change in action is focused on the perpetrator and not the victim. That is why our equally safe strategy prioritises robust responses to perpetrators and changes to attitudes that allow that behaviour. The member is correct that support for survivors is also vital. A diagnosis can be essential to enabling an autistic person to access relevant information and support and we encourage all victims of sexual violence to report crimes and welcome police Scotland's work to better understand with those with neurological divergence to ensure that victims are treated respectfully. The Scottish Government fully recognises the importance of supporting the families of veterans where they face challenges as a result of service or from events such as transition to civilian life. As such, we seek to incorporate them into our support to veterans wherever possible, for example, the partners and the spouse of veterans are eligible for veterans employability support such as the going forward into employment scheme and we fund the national education officer role to support both service children and the children of veterans and projects supporting veterans families are eligible for funding through the Scottish veterans fund. I thank the minister for the answer and I appreciate that this is not perhaps your portfolio now. Wives and partners of people serving the armed forces such as in my constituency at Glencoast Barracks, they find it very difficult because of regular relocation to sustain employment. Is there a role for women's enterprise Scotland, for example, to assist partners to establish their own businesses, which they can take with them as they move around? I will get back on that specific point, but I want to raise that in spite of the Scottish Government's supported can-do places programme, the Lucas Co-working hub for spouses and partners opened in 2017. It was the first hub in which now became the military co-working network and network of co-working spaces close to military bases throughout the UK and the criteria for women's return to programme, which assists women who have been able to work for six odd months to successfully enter the workforce, was extended to include female veterans and spouses and partners and service personnel. Skills Development Scotland continues to work with service and veteran families to provide careers information, advice and guidance. For example, SDS advisers work once a month at community centres in Helensburgh and are considering how to set up regular opportunities across Scotland, including at the borders. I know that the minister for veterans would be happy to meet Christine Grah to discuss it further. Glasgow's Helping Heroes run by SAFA offer a vital service across greater Glasgow offering holistic support to veterans and their families via their one-stop shop in Govan. For every £1 invested in that service, Glasgow's Helping Heroes delivers £6.63 of social value back into the Scottish economy. Can I ask the minister what assessment the Scottish Government has made of this particular service and whether it will consider allocating funds to scale up the programme to provide support for veterans across Scotland as a model of exemplar quality? I thank the member for that question. I do not have that information at hand, but I am happy to write to you regarding that. I can attest that the Lukares project working hub is a fantastic exercise. The education of children of veterans and armed forces is characterised by constant disruption as the families move from base to base. In England, there is a pupil premium specifically for service children. Should there be a similar one for Scotland in addition to the pupil equity fund to help those very children here? The national education of children and young people of armed forces families, which is funded by the Scottish Government, has been undertaking a national data collection exercise with accompanying analysis to help to put together an accurate picture of the distribution and number of service children in Scotland. The data reports collated from this exercise will be shared more widely with key stakeholders and used to improve educational outcomes for service children and young people. To ask the Scottish Government what progress is being made in the use of diversion from prosecution in Scotland. Decisions relating to prosecution policy, including the decision to offer diversion from prosecution, are matters for the Lord Advocate as independent prosecutor. However, with diversion cases at the highest level in the last decade, noting some caution given to the impact of Covid-19, we welcome the recent joint inspector review report into diversion from prosecution and will work with justice partners to consider the recommendations outlined. We know diversion can allow individuals to address a range of issues or needs which have contributed to their alleged offending behaviour at the earliest opportunity, helping to improve outcomes for individuals and keeping communities safe. I thank the cabinet secretary for that answer. Diversion from prosecution provides an accused person with support to address the underlying causes of their behaviour. As the cabinet secretary's outline, diversion cases commenced rose by 12 per cent between 2019-20 and 2020-21. A joint review of diversion from prosecution found that, while some community justice partnerships express readiness to respond to an anticipated increase in referrals, others were less confident about their capacity to manage an increase on the backdrop of stretched resources. Given future reform of, for example, bail and release from custody is likely to see additional demands on community justice agencies and, while I acknowledge prosecution policies that matter for the Lord Advocate, can the cabinet secretary provide an assurance that the Scottish Government will review funding arrangements to maximise use of diversion at the earliest opportunity, as was recommended in the report? The Scottish Government is committed to supporting community justice services as part of our wider focus on reducing crime and re-offending. We continue to protect the community justice budget and, in 2023-24, we will invest a total of £134 million in community justice. That includes £123 million to local authority justice social work services for the provision of community interventions. The investment contributes to our long-standing aim to encourage a shift in the balance between the use of custody and justice in community, where that is appropriate. Of course, reflecting evidence that community interventions can be more effective at reducing re-offending and assisting with rehabilitation and short-term custodial sentences. However, we do very much recognise the challenge in budgetary situations for our delivery partners, including local authorities. We will continue to work in collaboration to maximise the use of available resources and to understand the issues as they arise. We welcome the Joint Inspectorate Review report into diversion from prosecution, and we will work with justice partners to consider the recommendations that are outlined and our response to those. In the three years up until 2021, hundreds of less criminals caught by the police then rejected the offer of a fiscal fine as an alternative to prosecution. Having done so, they faced no further action. That is despite the previous Deputy First Minister telling Parliament that their refusal would be treated as, and I quote, a request by the alleged offender to be prosecuted. Now such smoking mirrors can only shake public faith in Scottish justice. So can the cabinet secretary tell me if those who refuse are now being prosecuted and provide the most recent figures for comparison? I am sure that I do not need to repeat that prosecution, and all that matters in and around that, are of course matters for the Lord Advocate and the Crown Office. I will accept the point in relation to our justice system that if the justice system says that we are going to follow a course of action, it is important that we follow through on intent. I will look at the matter that Mr Finlay has raised with me today and will seek to provide him with further information. To ask the Scottish Government how many police stations have been closed down in the area covered by Police Scotland's North East division since the forces foundation in 2013. Police Scotland has confirmed that 21 facilities have been closed since 2013 across the North East division area. It should be noted that five of those closures relate to relocations in the same area, with a further two locations acquired in Aberdeen. Service provision is carefully considered by Police Scotland prior to any decision being made, including consultation. Moving officers to modern co-located accommodation supports the long-term vision of policing, which includes enhanced partnership working and responding to the changing needs of communities, while maintaining visibility and public confidence. This month, Police Scotland celebrates its 10th anniversary, but the SNP's centralisation project has come up at the cost of local police on the ground. In my constituency, Keveney police station's closure is keenly felt, and as the cabinet secretary will be aware, a quarter of all Scottish police counters have shut since the force merged in 2013, and there are plans for more to go. 73 division officers have been lost from the North East region, all thanks to SNP neglect. What can the cabinet secretary tell my constituents who contact me with increasing cases of antisocial behaviour, vandalism, theft and drug abuse, all due to reduced police presence? It is important that Mr Burnett tells his constituents that this Government, since 2017-18, has doubled the capital budget available to Police Scotland, which now amounts to around £50 million. It is also important to stress that police stations remain important, but those are, as he well knows, matters for Police Scotland and the Scottish Police Authority, particularly in relation to the implementation of their estate strategy that was published in 2019. I think that most people would recognise the importance of co-location of public services and how that improves partnership and collaborative working, which is to all the benefit to improving safety for communities the length and breadth of Scotland. Mr Burnett might be interested to know that, by the end of 2022, there are now 64 co-locations, and that is currently 21 per cent of the Police Scotland estate, and that surely has to be a move forward. To ask the Scottish Government what discussions the justice secretary has had with ministerial colleagues regarding action to prevent child sexual exploitation. Keeping children safe from sexual exploitation and abuse is a key priority for the Scottish Government, and I will be meeting with the Minister for Children and Young People in the coming weeks to discuss the matter further. We are committed to ensuring that robust child protection measures are in place, and we are working with partners to prevent abuse and intervene so that risk and harm to children and young people is recognised early and acted on quickly and effectively. That includes online harms, and we continue to press the UK Government to ensure that its online safety bill provides robust protection for children and holds the technology industry to account. I thank the cabinet secretary for that answer. In my region, East Dunbartonshire, the number of crimes recorded as indecent photos of children increased by 140 per cent since 2017 and 200 per cent in from the year ending 2021. There are a lot of actions that can be taken in the short term to prevent the tidal wave of this horrendous crime. I ask the cabinet secretary what preventive action the Scottish Government is taking and how the effectiveness of those actions is being measured. Myscosal raises some very important points, particularly in and around measuring the effectiveness of interventions. It is something that I am closely interested in, not just in the justice portfolio, but it is a germane matter for all Scottish Government ministers who have responsibilities in this area. In terms of the action that we are taking forward, she will be aware of the revised national guidance for child protection in Scotland that was published in 2021. That provides the most up-to-date information on the work to tackle child sexual abuse and exploitation and the support that is taking place in local areas like hers to develop effective evidence-based responses. Our overall response as a Government is, of course, framed by the promise, the UNCRC and Scotland's GERFEC approach, and the matter that she raises in and around the sexual abuse and exploitation of children on online platforms is important. It is a matter that we will continue to engage constructively and collaboratively with the UK Government, bearing in mind where some of those powers rest. To ask the Scottish Government how many people have been sentenced for a crime were aged under 25 when they pled guilty or were found guilty since 26 January 2022? Data is only currently available up to the end of 2022. From 26 January 2022 to 31 December 2022, 10,725 offenders who have been sentenced for a crime were under the age of 25 when they pled guilty or were found guilty. It should be noted that, where an offender is subject to multiple separate proceedings, that offender will be counted multiple times. Without referencing any particular case, the cabinet secretary will be aware that there is widespread public concern that, under current sentencing guidelines, someone convicted of raping a 13-year-old girl could avoid prison and be given a non-custodial sentence because they were under 25 at the time of the offence. I know that sentencing guidelines are set independently of Scottish ministers, but ultimately this Parliament has the power to set sentencing and the particular set minimum sentences for offences, as it is done in a number of cases. Does the cabinet secretary think that it is acceptable that a convicted rapist should not be sent to prison? If not, what is she going to do about it? Before I ask the cabinet secretary to respond, I would remind all members that a case that may have been seen to have been referred to in Mr Fraser's question is a live case, and any references there should take into account the law applicable to such references. For the avoidance of doubt, as just to secretary, I will not be commenting on live cases for either individual offenders in the community or within our prison establishment. Can I assure Mr Fraser that I have a long history in and around the need to tackle sexual offending? It is important to recognise the legislative framework that was passed by the Parliament that frames the duties and responsibilities of the sentencing council. It is important to put on the record that, in terms of the sentencing guidelines for young people, that nothing prohibits the use of punishment or indeed imprisonment as matters that inform the sentencing of undertaken by our independent judiciary. Matters of rape are dealt with in the High Court, and the High Court has unlimited powers in this matter, and indeed can use life sentencing for rape convictions. I hope that it would be at least some assurance to Mr Fraser that 98 per cent of all rape convictions across all age groups in Scotland result in a custodial sentence. It is the view of His Majesty's Inspectorate of Prisons for Scotland that young offenders' institutions are inappropriate for bairns. Can I ask the cabinet secretary what steps are being taken to ensure that young offenders have access to appropriate care and where deemed necessary appropriate secure accommodation? Where it is decided that it is appropriate for a child under 18 to be deprived of their liberty, it is the view of this Government that they should be placed in secure accommodation as opposed to a young offender's institution. That is on the basis of our commitments in and around the promise, the UNCRC. Those are cross-party and cross-parliamentary commitments, and it is also important to put on record that secure accommodation where deprivation of liberty is required is the best place to manage risk and needs of high-risk young offenders. Thank you, cabinet secretary. That concludes portfolio questions on justice and veterans, and before we move on to the next item of business, there will be a very short pause to allow front-bench teams to shift positions you wish.