 Good afternoon. Can I remind members of the Covid-related measures that are in place and that face coverings should be worn when moving around the chamber and across the Holyrood Campus. The first item of business today is portfolio questions. The first portfolio is justice and veterans. If a member wishes to request a supplementary question, they should press the request of speak button or indicate so in the chat function by entering the letter r during the relevant question. I call Question 1, Pam Gozzo. O bryddoch chi'n gwyllwch chi'n gwyllwch llwyafolol i gyddoch chi'n gwyllwch llwtio'r gyfan o'r sylw envelope sy'n gwyllwch i dweudol? As add i'n gwyllwch i gyrwch, Pwy Scolwnt cyffrede Counselorol i ddweudol o gymsglwch Lodau Lent o eu Ches 24, ac oedd yng quizion sy'n gwyllwch i gydwledd gyda'i'n gwahanol. Mae Llywodraeth Cymru hwy ddefnyddio £1.1 miliwn o'i cas i ddweudol i gyddoch chi'n for NHS boards and integration authorities in response to the pandemic, including £6 million towards additional telephone and online support services. £2.1 million was provided to expand the NHS 24 mental health hub to be available to the public 24 hours a day, seven days a week, and Police Scotland collaborated with NHS 24 to develop a mental health pathway, allowing police call handlers to provide a streamlined journey for people experiencing poor mental health, directing callers to the mental health hub. I thank the cabinet secretary for that answer. A chief inspector in my region highlighted the changing nature of modern policing with mental health-related incidents, posing one of the biggest challenges to the force. In some cases, it takes up to eight hours to deal with them. Violent crime is on the rise. There are fewer police officers patrolling the streets than at any time since 2009, and the Scottish Government made a real-term cut to the capital budget. Will the cabinet secretary express his support for our local policing act so that local police have the capacity to respond to rising crime on the streets? My view is that the police have the capacity to respond to crime on the streets and do that extremely well, which is evidenced by some of the lowest crime rates that we have seen in Scotland for many years. It is also true to say that the police in particular are very used to dealing with people who are in a distressed state. They are very much, as we are trying to see across the justice system, trauma-informed in their response. I think that I have done a very good job. I note that the Conservatives proposed no amendment to the budget, so they did not propose any additional funds to police either capital or resource. I assume from that regard that they supported the level of expenditure, the increased level of expenditure that we provided to the police. In relation to police numbers, I point out that we have around 32 police officers for every 10,000 people in Scotland. Across the border, you will find that there are 23 police officers for every 10,000. We have increased police numbers since we came to control in the Scottish Parliament and the Scottish Government. The Government that it supports has reduced police numbers by 17,000, and it is now trying to roll back from that. I think that we have a very good record, and we are very supportive of the police. Of course, it is worth pointing out that decisions as to the disposition of police forces is a matter for the chief constable, and I would hope that the member would support that. To ask the Scottish Government how the trauma-informed approach in the yearly launched vision for justice will be embedded within Police Scotland. For example, if there are any plans for training in this area? It is a very good question. I refer to the previous comment that I made about trying to ensure that the whole justice system is trauma-informed, but Police Scotland has made a pledge, as I am sure the member knows, as the chair of the committee under the NHS national trauma training programme to support our communities, especially those who are identified as being vulnerable and at risk, and that they do that in their daily working practices, lazing closely with national and local partners. On the specific issue around training, they have worked first of all to integrate trauma-informed practices in many of their key areas of business, and they have adopted the use of NHS education for Scotland materials. That includes specialist training to detectives, custody officers, and they have committed to providing specific training to all probationary officers as part of their initial training programme. Two years ago, more than a third of police officers reported that they repeatedly went to work when they were mentally unwell. Ministers at the time said that they were very satisfied with the mental health support. Following additional findings last year, the First Minister said that she fully supported the efforts, but this week the Scottish Police Federation said that there had been no tangible response other than to arrange a meeting within the last few weeks. Does the cabinet secretary really think that that is enough? I think that the root of the point that Willie Rennie makes is a very serious point about the prevalence of mental health within Police Scotland. We know—he mentioned two years ago—that we know that additional pressures have been built up since then, not least through Covid, but also through the work, the non-holiday periods that people have had to work through holidays. We know that there has been a lot of pressure through COP26 and so on. Those pressures will have increased, and I acknowledge that. I was not true to say that that is not something that has been discussed with the police authority. I am with the chief constable. I have discussed it with both the police authority and the chief constable. I will be discussing those and related matters with the Federation this afternoon. It is something that we take seriously. Of course, we are aware of the pressures that are on police officers. One reason why, of course, we have ensured that, in Scotland, unlike other parts of the UK, they have had a pay rise this year and that we maintain the numbers of police officers, which of course can help to reduce the pressures on individual police officers as well. To ask the Scottish Government whether it will work with Police Scotland to provide clear guidelines on legal medical and cannabis prescriptions sent to patients by post via Royal Mail. Guidance was issued by the National Police Chiefs Council on the rescheduling of cannabis-based products for medicinal use in November 2018, and that guidance was shared with Police Scotland. Only individuals who are in receipt of a valid prescription from a specialist clinician are able to illegally possess a cannabis-based product from medicinal use. Those individuals who have a prescription for those products can show that prescription to police as evidence that they are entitled to the product. Police officers can also make inquiries with the prescriber to ensure that the product has been legally obtained. Police in Scotland rely on the hard work of the charity Dogs Against Drugs to assist them in their work to tackle illegal drugs being brought into the islands, recently seizing £25,000 worth of illicit goods. Those dogs are clever, but they cannot tell what is legal and what is illegal, which is what happened to one of my constituents recently, when his private prescription for medical cannabis was seized as a consequence of dog detection at Royal Mail's sorting office. Patients with a diagnosis and a legal prescription for medical cannabis want to ensure that they do not have any negative outcome, such as any sort of criminal footprint. Does the Scottish Government have any plans to help police officers to identify legal prescriptions by introducing a scheme to assist? Is the cabinet secretary aware of an existing scheme called CANCAD, which could be used as another tool in the toolbox for police officers to better assess situations that they may face? I gain a very important point raised by Beatrice Wishart. I should say at the start that the Scottish Government does not support the CANCAN system for a number of reasons, which I am happy to correspond with the member on. However, she is also right to say that people who are in receipt of the prescriptions should have clarity about what the checks are. I am willing, from my part, to write to Police Scotland whether they want to publicise the advice that they use, which in turn is issued by the National Police Chiefs Council. It is a reserved matter, of course, whether they want to publish that, or I know that some of the issues around the member's constituent were to do with the use of Royal Mail. People should have clarity on what is likely to cause them issues, because, at the point of Royal Mail, there is no need for a prescription. However, when it is picked up by dogs, that is when the prescription has to be used. Therefore, I think that there is a need for more clarity here, and, on my part, I am willing to write to Police Scotland and ask them whether they are able to provide that clarity. As one of the co-conveniers who has been thrown in my cai on the medicinal use of cannabis, can I ask the cabinet secretary if the Government are opposed to any kind of scheme, then, if they are not in favour of Cancard, which was designed with the help of doctors and senior representatives of the police federation? Admittedly, that was the UK. We have had a very helpful response from Assistant Chief Constable Gary Ritchie on the whole issue. Would the cabinet secretary be prepared to meet with us and discuss something similar so that no similar incidents that happened will certainly happen again? I am certainly happy to meet members and to consider that. I think that the objections to the Cancard scheme come from the medical profession, at least in part, but I am happy to consider that and to write out to both members with more information and, after that, to have a meeting to discuss it further. To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on what support is being offered to veterans across the country. The member will be aware that the Scottish Government has given an annual update to Parliament, accompanied by a published report each year since 2017, on our support for veterans in the armed forces community in Scotland. I thank the member for his contribution to that debate last year, and I think that I am right in saying it in previous years. I also say that we will provide a similar update in November this year. We also intend to publish a refresh of our veterans strategy action plan detailing our commitments to the veterans in the armed forces community in Scotland during the first half of this year. Gordon MacDonald I thank the cabinet secretary for that answer. The Edinburgh Lord Provost commission on a strategy for our ex-forces personnel recently published a report on their work, which recognised that, whilst progress has been made, there remains a long way to go in supporting our veterans. Will the cabinet secretary consider the findings of the report to inform both national and local policy, particularly in relation to housing, to support the transition from military to civilian life? The Government is currently reviewing its veterans strategy action plan with a view to publishing a refreshed version during the first half of this year. We will work with key stakeholders to determine the extent to which our existing commitments remain valid. Of course, whether there is an opportunity to add to those, we intend to consult with the local authority armed forces and veterans champions, not least Frank Ross, the Lord Provost of Edinburgh, who has been mentioned by the members. That will include the proposals put forward in the document by the City of Edinburgh Council, the strategy for ex-forces personnel. We will consider those views and the findings of the report when developing a refreshed set of commitments to support veterans and the armed forces community in Scotland. Just to say in conclusion to commend Frank Ross for the work that he has done with veterans over a number of years. To ask the Scottish Government what its response is regarding the impact on Scotland to report that the UK Government is unable to give a timescale for the roll-out of the second phase of the veterans ID cards. We believe that it is important that, should it choose to do so, veterans have the ability to easily identify themselves as such when accessing services. I urge the UK Government to press ahead with its plans to undertake a scoping study for provision of digital verification of veteran status and thank them for involving the Scottish Government in the recent discovery work for this project. I think that that involved interaction with consultants. I encourage the UK Government to continue to work collaboratively to deliver a service as soon as possible, which meets the needs of veterans across the UK. I thank the cabinet secretary for her answer. Does the cabinet secretary agree with me that we all want debt of gratitude to our armed forces and veterans community and that an urgent commitment must be given to allow access to the scheme for all of our veterans as soon as possible? I do agree with the member. Veterans are assets to our society and the Scottish Government's ambition remains to make Scotland the destination of choice for service leavers from wherever they come from and their families. By doing that, we can offer high living standards, great job prospects and a society that respects and values their contributions. I would repeat my encouragement to the UK Government to work collaboratively with us to deliver a veterans ID service as soon as possible and it is one that meets the needs of veterans across the UK. To ask the Scottish Government, in light of recent reports of the third successful civil damages claim for rape, whether it will review the reasons why any cases were not prosecuted in the criminal courts. I am grateful to Ms Clark for raising this important and topical issue. I can say that in two of the three cases referred to there were indeed criminal prosecutions prior to the civil proceedings. In those two criminal cases, the jury returned a majority verdict of not proven. In the other case, a decision was taken that there could be no prosecution as there was insufficient evidence and no reasonable prospect of securing a conviction. In 2017, the decision was fully reviewed by Senior Crown Council with no previous involvement. The review concluded that, looking at the evidence as a whole, the decision not to raise criminal proceedings was correct. Before I ask for the supplementary from the questioner or any other supplementary, I should perhaps remind members about the need to avoid going into detail about specific cases or speculating about potential outcomes of any specific cases. Otherwise, members risk breaching any relevant court orders that may be applicable. The standard of proof is obviously different in civil cases, but would the Solicitor General agree with me that, as a matter of policy, there should be a review of all case papers where a civil case is successful? And could she outline what the policy is in allowing private prosecutions, given that we understand from media reports that one of the women concerned is considering that courts of action? I should perhaps begin by making it clear that, of course, there is no necessary inconsistency between a decision not to prosecute or a failure to obtain a conviction in criminal proceedings and success in civil proceedings. The decision maker is different. We have a jury on one case, and we have a single judge, a sheriff and others. The standard of proof is different. In criminal cases, guilt must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt, whereas in civil cases liability is decided on balance of probabilities. Obviously, the rules of evidence and procedure are considerably more relaxed in civil cases than in criminal cases. For example, there is no requirement for corroboration in civil cases, and the rules in relation to hearsay are much more relaxed. I can say that, in relation to policy where civil cases have been successful, that in the two cases in which proceedings had taken place, a review of the evidence led in the civil proceedings was carried out and judged that it would not have made any difference to the criminal case. In relation to the other case, which has been touched on, following success in the civil proceedings, Lord Advocate ordered that a thorough review be carried out by independent Crown Council following the judgment by Lord Armstrong. As I indicated, the review concluded that looking at the evidence as a whole, the decision not to raise current proceedings was correct. Denise Clare appreciates the need for the Lord Advocate to recuse herself from consideration of any private prosecution due to her past representation of David Goodwilly. She is also grateful for the Solicitor General's offer of a meeting, but in the spirit of transparency, will the Solicitor General commit to sharing with Denise Clare the Crown's 2017 review of the original decision not to prosecute? Can I just say at the outset that I understand that the decision not to prosecute continues to cause great upset to Denise Clare and that I am genuinely sorry that Ms Clare feels that she's not been provided with the relevant information? I've been asked about disclosure of information and I understand that she previously attended a meeting with prosecutors in 2011 and that a letter was sent to her MSP in 2017 following the case review in which a meeting was offered. I've already indicated to Mr Finlay that I would be very happy to meet with Ms Clare to explain the reasons for the decision if this would be of benefit to her. I would also be keen to hear from Ms Clare about her experience in the criminal justice system in order to assist Crown Office with her on-going wider review into the prosecution of sexual offences. To ask the Scottish Government how many police officers are stationed in the Scottish borders command area of the Lothian and Scottish borders police division. The information requested is not held centrally by the Scottish Government and I'm sure the member is aware that she's been a member of the Parliament for some years now that the recruitment and deployment of police officers and police staff is a matter for the chief constable who regularly reviews the size and shape of the policing workforce in light of changing demands. Local police divisions have a core complement of officers who are always dedicated locally to community and response policing and who draw on specialist expertise and resources at a regional and national level. The current Scottish Government statistics show that we currently have around 32 officers per 10,000 of the population. We are just over the border from the region of Scottish borders. They have 23 per 10,000 population in England and Wales. I thank the cabinet secretary for that answer. The SNP has cut officer numbers in the Lothian and border division by 59 since Police Scotland was formed. My constituents are concerned that a reduced police presence has left the borders exposed to rural crime. People living in rural areas deserve to feel safe too. I ask that the cabinet secretary back Scottish Conservative plans for a local policing act to increase transparency of rural office numbers. Will he meet me to discuss the need for an official marker within Police Scotland's crime reporting system to record rural offences and hence help tackle rural crime? I am always happy to meet members on issues of concern. I did not catch the whole of the request or the remit for the meeting, but I am happy to meet members. In relation to backing anything that the Conservatives say, it really has to start from a position of agreed facts. The facts are that the Scottish Government has not cut police numbers by 59, as it has said. I have already mentioned, and I think that most people both know and support the idea that the disposition of police forces is for the chief constable to decide. However, I would point out that the hypocrisy in attacking levels of police numbers in one area where, just over the border from that area, they are substantially lower, just because they happen to be overseen by a Government of a different member, a different persuasion. It does not mean to say that that is something that should pass without comment, so I think that there is a hypocrisy in that, as I have mentioned already. It is also true to say that what she says is really an attack on the police service, because it is the case that the police service through the chief constable and the Scottish Police Authority are the ones that decide on this. Before reverting to an argument about budgets, of course, the Tories did not amend the budget. They did not seek to change the police budget in this Parliament, even though they promised for many months that they would give more funding. If we can start from a great fact, then we can perhaps discuss what we can support and not support in relation to Conservative initiatives. However, I reiterate the point. I am more than happy to meet the member to discuss the issues that she has a concern about. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. What discussion has the Scottish Government had with the Lodians and Scottish Borders Police regarding their capacity to deal with reports of violent crime in the area? I think that we do not discuss directly with the Lodians and Borders Police. The discussions that I have will be with the chief constable and the chair of the Scottish Police Authority, and sometimes through other organisations such as the Association of Police Superintendents, for example. The discussions are based on the national police force that we have. I believe that the increased budget for police that we managed to agree this year goes a long way to helping them to meet the demands in terms of crime. There are some levels of crime that have increased. A member mentioned violent crime, although homicides are down at an all-time low since the 1970s when records began. It is a complex situation, but we provide the resources and discuss with the police the level of resources that are required in order to do the most important jobs that they have, which is to meet any incidences of crime in the area. It will be done on a national basis rather than on a regional basis, as is mentioned by the member. To ask the Scottish Government what discussions the justice secretary has had with the UK Government regarding the impact on Scotland of the online safety bill. As yet, there is no finalised online safety bill published by the UK Government, although there has been some engagement between officials in the Scottish Government and the UK Government. I have not yet had any discussions with the UK Government on the impact on Scotland of their proposed online safety bill. On the telecommunications issue, the Scottish Government has clearly been taking important steps wherever it can to better protect people from abuse. Can the Government give an update regarding when the main provisions of the Defamation and Malicious Publications Scotland Act 2021 will come into force? The member raises an important point in the Parliament. As he says, there is a great legislation that will simplify and modernise the law on defamation. I am pleased that the Scottish Government expects the lay commencement regulations in early May 2022 that will bring into force the defamation and malicious publications Scotland Act 2021 this summer. One of the proposals of the online safety bill is David's law, named after Sir David Amos, who is a public servant who paid the ultimate price against hatred. I would hope that, in the spirit of co-operation, the Scottish Government would look favourably upon any such proposals therein and ask, therefore, if the Government would be able to ensure that his officials would work closely with the UK officials on this element of the bill to ensure that all public servants, irrespective of the political persuasion, are afforded the same rights against online abuse and hatred as everyone else outside of this building. I agree that it is a deplorable and tragic act that led to the killing of David Amos and anything that can lead to a situation where that kind of appalling attack can be less likely in the future that somebody would want to support. It is difficult at this stage to give any agreement when the bill is not published. In fact, a number of announcements have been made by the UK Government that has changed the proposed content of the bill, but I will look very seriously and sympathetically because there are some, even from some of the things that have heard reported newspapers, some potentially very productive elements of this bill. We will look very seriously at that and, of course, officials in the Scottish Government and I myself will engage with the UK Government on these issues. To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on what plans it has to introduce legislation to support veterans during this parliamentary session. We do regularly consider the extent to which introducing legislation is appropriate or possible and we also continue to engage with the MOD as it seeks to further embed, for example, the armed forces covenant into legislation through the Armed Forces Act, which received royal assent on 15 December. We work closely with the MOD in advance of its introduction to ensure that it is fit for purpose in Scotland and we continue to work with the MOD as it develops its statutory guidance. However, we are satisfied that the Covenant provisions in the Armed Forces Act do not fall within the legislative competence of this Parliament. I thank the cabinet secretary for that answer, but on 7 December he will recall that he announced or he referenced 22 bills that are planned for the justice and veterans portfolio. However, FOI responses are very clear that the Scottish Government really does not have any plans to go down the legislative route for veterans. Does that mean that the Scottish Government is now saying that it is not willing to make use of the devolved powers at its disposal to create a new top-up benefit for veteran households who are in receipt of universal credit? I think that that matter or consideration of that latter matter would fall to the cabinet secretary in charge of social security, Shona Robison. I have just answered the first part of the question, which is that we continually keep under review things that we want to legislate on. Although it does not feature in those 22 bills, which the member references, a number of other bills that we will have to bring forward will not feature in those 22 bills as well, and it is possible that other bills may come forward as well. The party that he represents has mentioned two or three bills itself that we want to bring forward, so it is not an exhaustive list and we do keep under review the extent to which introducing legislation is appropriate or possible, and we will continue to do that. To ask the Scottish Government what mental health and disability support is in place to support veterans in Scotland to live a healthy life and reach their full potential. We are committed to ensuring that all veterans living in Scotland are able to access the best possible care and support, and that includes safe, effective and person-centred healthcare. We fund two veterans-specific mental health and wellbeing providers, combat stress and veterans first point. Additionally, each NHS health board has an unforces in veterans champion who can offer advice and guidance to veterans. We have bold ambitions going back to the previous question for new Scottish disability benefits, although they come under the remit of the cabinet secretary responsible for that area. We have already identified several ways to provide disabled people, including veterans, with a different experience when accessing the support that they are entitled to, including an approved application process, helping applicants to gather supporting information from a professional to help make decisions and abolishing functional assessments. It also impinges on the previous question and answer about cards and ID cards, allowing veterans to access services more easily. In addition, as part of the benefit take-up strategy, we will continue to engage with our seldom heard groups, including veterans, in order to maximise take-up to ensure that those voices are heard and considered in our policy work. That concludes portfolio questions on justice and veterans. I will allow a very short pause in order for front-bench teams to safely change seats. The next portfolio is finance and economy. Again, if a member wishes to ask a supplementary question, they should press the request-to-speak button or indicate so in the chat function by entering the letter R during the relevant question. Question 1, Stephanie Callaghan. Funding of £754,000 to the Coal Fields Regeneration Trust will have in community-led regeneration in former coalfield communities across Scotland, including in the Oddingston and Baleshill constituency. Our continued funding for the Coal Fields Regeneration Trust is helping to create jobs, enabling more people to develop the skills and qualifications that can help them to secure good work, build community capacity and improve health and wellbeing. The trust continues to support all former coalfield communities, including those in Lanarkshire, through, for instance, the creation of community action plans in Croy, Chapel Hall, Ock and Loch, Rigside and Douglas Water and Blantyre, which act as a catalyst for change. In stark contrast to Mrs Thatcher's heartless devastation of Scotland's coal industry, that still blights many coalfield communities today, including Lanarkshire where I live, the recent Scottish Government budget commits at least £2 billion of the first multi-billion pound public and private investment that we need to see in this Parliament to ensure a just transition between investment in people and communities. First, can the minister explain why he places such emphasis on the importance of workers, communities and industries across Scotland to leading the wider plans to transform Scotland's economy? Secondly, how will those wider economic plans improve the standard of living for all our citizens, including the resonance of early student-base health constituency? Just transition acknowledges that workers and communities have historically been on the front line of significant transitions, such as in the unplanned and deeply unjust closing of coal mines. They must have a say in how those changes are delivered. In Scotland, we are going to plan with industry, with communities and with our highly skilled workforce to secure a truly just transition to net zero. The Scottish Government believes that our efforts to deliver just transition should also reduce child and fuel poverty, because, fundamentally, that work is about using a transition to net zero to build a fairer, greener society for all. Before I call question number two, I hear a lot of chatting apart from members and sedentary interventions. I did not receive one request for an interventionist supplementary on that question, so I just leave that there. Question number two, Paul McLennan. To ask the Scottish Government what analysis has been undertaken of the impact of Brexit on exports from Scotland to the European Union. The new trade arrangements with the EU mean more paperwork and higher costs for Scottish importers and exporters due to the end of the EU transition period. 55 per cent of exporters in the manufacturing industry report higher transportation costs, 42 per cent report higher costs due to red tape and 24 per cent report extra tariffs or taxes. In 2019, Scottish exports were growing consistently in all directions to the rest of the UK, to the EU and to the rest of the world. Now we have clear evidence that this is no longer the case due to Brexit, as Scottish trade in goods with the EU fell by 24 per cent in the latest year to Q3 2021, compared to the equivalent period in 2019. Paul McLennan. I thank the minister for the answer. The food and drink sector has been disproportionately affected in this regard. A recent study by Johnston Carmichael and the Food and Drink Federation in January of this year has shown that many Scottish food and drink suppliers plan to decrease or stop exports to the EU. The survey quiz business leaders at some of the UK's top food and drink businesses on how they were coping with increased costs, additional administration and bureaucracy a year on from leaving the EU. Can I ask what work the Scottish Government are undertaking with the sector and the food sector to retain and grow new markets in the EU despite the disaster of Brexit? Minister. As the practical implications and challenges of the post-Brexit trading environment become clearer, the Scottish Government continues to work closely with partners to provide advice and support to food and drink businesses to help them to adapt, maintain competitiveness and take advantage of new opportunities. The Scottish Government supports companies to consolidate their market positions and rebuild their export potentials with renovation, capability building and developing new market opportunities. Respects specifically to food and drink, that is delivered through our support for the £4.5 million Scotland food and drink export plan that harnesses public and private sector resources to help the industry to exploit the most significant opportunities for Scotland through a dedicated global team of in-market specialists in 10 key locations, including within EU markets. The work of the export plan and in-market specialists is aligned with food and drink sector recovery plan and with our export plan, a trading nation. It mitigates against the challenges of Brexit and Covid. It is seen as a vital initiative as markets across the world reopen following the pandemic. I agree with the minister that creating barriers to trade following the breakup of economic partnerships is a disruptive thing to the economy and cost jobs. What I can't agree is that the SNP's plan to repeat those Brexit mistakes with yet breaking up another economic partnership in the United Kingdom. Has the minister undertaken analysis on the impact of exports from Scotland as a result of Scottish independence? I think that that may have taken us a bit wider than the question on the business bulletin, but I am sure that the minister would be quite happy to answer that question. Yes, indeed. I am sure that any of you is going to have fed down a rabbit warring here. We are well aware of the opportunities that will arise from Scotland being an independent nation, the opportunity to trade with its European partners, the opportunity not to be harnessed and held back by the economic vandalism of the UK Government with respect to Brexit and the opportunities that arise for Scotland's exports across a wide trading opportunities as a consequence of Scotland being an independent nation, able to take a place on other independent nations in the world and to be able to deliver the performance that the Scandinavian countries and other small countries in Europe have delivered because they are not held back by being tied to a Westminster Government that does not have Scotland's interests at heart. As Willie Rennie well knows, analysis has been done on all those aspects and will continue to be. When we get to the point of the independence referendum in the very near future, which will deliver a yes vote as part of that campaign, we will of course provide full information as to the economic perspectives and the positive impact that independence will have for Scotland's businesses. To ask the Scottish Government how it will apply fair work and net zero criteria to the Freeport developments with the UK Government. Fair work and net zero are central to our ambition for Scotland's green ports. We will apply fair work and net zero criteria at three stages of the process. Currently we are finalising the prospectus for applicants and will ensure that that is clear about the Scottish Government's expectations in respect of fair work and net zero. We will scrutinise all bids for evidence of a commitment to embedding fair work practices, including payment of the real living wage and pursuing robust decarbonisation plans and following designations, strict governance and rigorous monitoring and evaluation will ensure on-going compliance on those key priorities and across a whole range of other aspects, where we are very sure and determined that successful green port bids will comply to all required regulation, including payment of the real living wage, delivering on the net zero aspirations and supporting fair work practices. Applications that do not meet those high standards will not succeed. I thank the minister for that answer. Could the minister confirm that if companies were not to provide the living wage or not to recognise trade unions, for example, that they would be ineligible for support? We say that this is a real opportunity to move forward our conditionality agenda, and the member will know because this is part of the Bute House agreement with the Greens that we intend are very keen on something. I am very committed to rolling out conditionality on fair work and real living wage to as many businesses as possible across Scotland in terms of the support that we provide in green ports, on no exception. The Scottish Government is very clear that fair work and payment of the real living wage is a requirement for us supporting any businesses in green port designated areas. It is great news that the Scottish Government is now back to free ports in Scotland. The Scottish Conservatives support Aberdeen Harbour's intended joint bid with Aberdeen City and Shire Council's Aberdeen International Airport in Peterhead port, which could create up to 22,000 jobs. However, FOIs show that the Scottish Government has yet to have any discussions on that with either Aberdeen or Peterhead harbours. Will the minister join me in publicly backing a bid if that comes in? It is incorrect. I had an online meeting with Bob, pardon my pronunciation, Sanguuneti of Aberdeen harbour in the past few weeks, and we talked through the situation with regard to that bid. I am surprised that the Conservatives are nailing their colour to the mass with regard to Aberdeen. Does that mean that they do not support the other nine bids that are potentially coming forward across Scotland? I think that local communities will be interested to hear that. There are nine or ten expressions of interest across Scotland. I have visited many of those and will continue to do so over the coming period. However, the process for green port application is a rigorous process that has taken into account all the factors that have identified. It is right and proper that the process seems to be transparent and fair, and all bids that come forward are treated equally in that regard. That is exactly what we will continue to do. However, as I said, I am very happy to meet other ports and harbours and anyone else who is interested in discussing the issue of green ports in Scotland in more detail. Does the Scottish Government have taken a specific consultation with trade unions and what specific actions and agreements have been met with trade unions with regard to the specification of those ports? I have had two separate meetings with the SNP trade union group on the issue and continue to engage with trade unions. We are very happy to continue to do that. We have been very clear about what the requirements are for the fair work agenda. As I said, I am very committed to taking forward right across my portfolio, particularly in regard to green ports. We are very keen that there will be no degradation in terms of workers' rights. There will be no degradation in terms of environmental standards, and we see that as an opportunity to move forward the fair work first agenda and requirements for payment of real living wage. I am very happy to have further conversations in that regard with anyone who is interested in discussing the issue further. To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on its plans for enabling local authorities to bring in a transient visitor levy. Work towards the draft bill to provide local authorities with a discretionary power to apply a visitor levy, including a series of round-table stakeholder events and formal consultation, was at an advanced stage but was necessarily paused at the onset of the Covid-19 pandemic. Our 2022-23 budget confirmed that we would recommence that work. Giving me continuing impact of the pandemic on the tourism sector in Scotland, we considered it prudent to carefully review the work that is done today and undertake further stakeholder engagement, as set out in the local government finance settlement letter to COSLA, before making a firm decision on the next steps. I thank the minister for that answer, but it just observed that it does not actually tell me when the visitor levy is likely to be brought to Parliament. Could the minister then tell us a bit about the legislation? Will it enable local authorities to decide whether and how they use the powers without needing approval from the Scottish Government? Will the minister confirm that exercise of this levy will not impact on the local government settlement for any council that chooses to use it? I thank the member for the supplementary question. I do not think that it would be correct for me to prejudge the outcome of the negotiations and engagement that we will have with stakeholders and with local government. To answer a specific point around timeshails, which is a fair point, we are obviously in a point right now where we are hopefully emerging from the acute phase of the pandemic. However, we have local government elections on the horizon, so if that is the work that we will be looking to pick up in the spirit that I set out in my original answer to Ms Boyack following the local government elections in the spring. Listening to the minister around stakeholder engagement, it is incredibly important that he meets the hotel industry across the capital, which is the slowest currently to recover following the pandemic. Many in the sector are warning that the introduction of the levy will also impact on their recovery. I hope that ministers will take on board that this is not something many in the tourism industry, which has lost many jobs during the pandemic, want to see. I recognise the points that the member is making. He will be aware from our tax framework, which we published alongside the budget. Engagement is one of our key principles, and that will of course inform any deliberations that we have around the visitor levy. To ask the Scottish Government what discussions it has had with Dundee City Council regarding the local government funding settlement for 2022-23. Ministers meet COSLA and individual local authorities on a regular basis to cover a range of issues. The Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Economy and the Minister for Social Security and Local Government met with the leader and chief executive of Dundee City Council on 21 September ahead of the 2022-23 local government funding settlement. Following the announcement of the Scottish budget on 9 December, both the First Minister and the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Economy on separate occasions met with the COSLA leadership team and council leaders to discuss the impact of the budget on the 2022-23 local government settlement. Council was asked for an additional £100 million to deal with particular pressures. We have heard them, listened and gone further by providing £120 million at stage 2 of the budget bill. The Education Committee in the Parliament is currently holding an inquiry into the Scottish attainment challenge. Third sector providers outlined to committee this morning their on-going concerns around short-term interventions due to the lack of security of government funding, such as in my home city of Dundee. Can I ask the minister if he can give assurances to those providers? Does it remain his government's policy that pupil equity funding should not be used to backfill any cuts, resulting from the lack of available local authority resource? First of all, I would draw the member's attention to the fact that we are undertaking a resource spending review, and that will be a comprehensive piece of work. We would also draw the member's attention to the work that we are doing around the attainment challenge, which is expanding it from the nine authorities to all authorities, recognising that poverty is not unique to those nine authorities, which would previously receive funding for the attainment challenge. We have an equitable process to achieve that in a transition over the coming years. Of course, there is an opportunity for comprehensive consideration of the points that the member has raised through the resource spending review. Last week, it was reported that Dundee City Council did not apply for levelling up funds, despite it being considered a high priority area. Will the minister join me in calling on Dundee City Council to put the politics aside and work with the UK Government so that the residents of Dundee do not miss out on a vital funding stream? I will respect the fact that Dundee City Council is an autonomous body that can make decisions for itself. I would hope that the UK Government recognises that, before levelling up, that cutting across devolved territory and that it shows this Parliament the respect that we show our local authorities. Question 6, Jeremy Balfour. Thank you, deputy president of the city. I ask the Scottish Government what steps it's taken to ensure that the Fair Start Scotland programme addresses the needs of those who face the greatest barriers to unemployment such as the severe disabled people. Well, Fair Start Scotland has been designed to support those who do face the most significant barriers into sustainable work, offering personalised, one-to-one support tailored to individual circumstances. In addition to that, the Fair Start Scotland service providers offer specialist support to people with disabilities, including the opportunity to access individual placement and support and support employment, where that would be of benefit to the individuals. We will continue to work closely with the providers to develop continuous improvement activities to improve the delivery of support. I thank the cabinet secretary for her answer, but can she explain to me why the Fair Start Scotland programme owns 24 per cent long-term employment rate? Well, when it comes to the data, data has been published today, this morning, 23 February, that shows so far that there's been over 41,000 starts on the service, where there were 14,000 moving into work since it was launched in April 2018. In terms of the Fair Start Scotland, it's been designed to support those furthest from the labour market. The majority of people who get jobs will sustain them for at least six to 12 months, which is in line with the principles of the service, and one in three participants have been supported into work. Of those who started work, I could go through the data of the numbers that are sustaining employment over the longer term, which is ultimately the aim of the programme. The critical point here is ensuring those with talent gain skills and employment. However, at a time when we are experiencing labour shortages across the economy, employers continue to report that there are a lack of flexibility in many of the skills programmes that the Scottish Government currently offers. Does the cabinet secretary feel that there's a time and an urgency to review the effectiveness of our skills programmes to ensure that we adequately address those labour shortages as far as we can? I think that Dana Johnson has a good point in ensuring that those programmes are as flexible as possible, not just to tailor them to respond to the challenges that we face as an economy right now, which are acute, but also tailored to specific geographics in Scotland and particular groups. The point with Fair Start Scotland is that it is seeking to help those furthest from the labour market. Quite clearly, each individual who participates in that will need particular tailored support. That's why I said in my opening remarks that it's important that we continue to work with the programme provider to ensure that we continue to improve the activities and ultimately help people into long-term employment. To ask the Scottish Government what steps it is taking to ensure that financial support to assess the rise and cost of living reaches those most in need. Despite the uncertainty in our own budget position, I announced a package of measures on 10 February to deliver £290 million of support to 1.85 million Scottish households. That's in addition to the measures in the Scottish budget to provide a range of support for households, including £197 million, to double the Scottish child payment from April and extend it to all under-16s. The cost of living crisis is immediate, and it's impacting households now. That's why we've worked closely with local government to ensure that they're able to focus on delivery immediately. The problem with that finance secretary is that everyone in this chamber earning £60,000 a year who does not live in a very expensive house will get £150. I'm going to get the £150. Those in most need who are struggling most need to get more support. The criticism that the finance secretary will be aware of is that the poverty alliance has said that your actions today do not just represent a failure of imagination but also a failure to live up to the responsibility to protect people in poverty. My question is, will you listen to what all those organisations are saying? Will you accept that MSPs on £60,000 a year get £150 to help them out when those who are having to choose between eating and eating is wrong? Will you listen to those organisations? Will you think again, look again, and look at how we can help those most in need that are struggling right now in Scotland? The member raises a number of important points. I reiterate the point that I made when I announced that I have listened to those organisations. The difficulty is that I could spend months thinking, planning and using my imagination to use Alex Rowley's words, while families need help now. The plan that we have announced includes targeted support through the council tax structure scheme, which we can use because it is established here in Scotland helping families that are struggling the most to pay council tax, which is a reflection on those families who are struggling the most. We also announced the fuel insecurity fund, £10 million to help those households who are at most risk of self-disconnection, and we announced £150 to households in council tax bans A to D. That is on top of schemes that we have already announced in the budget because we could see in advance the cost of living crisis. That is over and above that. My commitment right now is to ensure that, working with local authorities, that money gets out the door as quickly as possible. That is my priority because families need the help now. Were other European countries implementing measures to help individuals and families with rising energy costs, such as Belgium, which have cut VAT on electricity by 15 per cent, Spain cutting VAT on energy bills by 11 per cent and France restricting increases in power costs to 4 per cent? Does the Scottish Government agree that the UK Government should be implementing cost-saving measures by cutting VAT to limit energy bills to increases to help individuals with rising living costs? In short, yes, I do. Families across Scotland right now are reflecting on their energy bills. That is one of the greatest pressures on household incomes just now. Energy is reserved. We have been calling on the UK Government to implement a VAT cut on energy bills. I note that both the Labour Party and the Liberal Democrats have also supported that call. It would have been one of the simplest means of helping consumers in the short term, but powers over VAT are currently reserved, as powers over energy are reserved. In the meantime, we have done is to deploy funding as quickly as possible to help those families who are most at need. Thank you very much, minister. To ask the Scottish Government what discussions it has had with Inverclyd Council regarding what financial support is available in addition to local government settlement. Minister Tom Arthur. As I have referenced in an earlier answer, ministers meet causal and local authorities regularly covering a range of issues, including funding. The finance secretary and local government minister met with the leader and chief executive of Inverclyd council on 25 November, where the vast majority of funding is provided as part of the local government finance settlement. It is open to individual councils to submit a detailed business case for additional funding outwith the settlement, which the Scottish Government would consider carefully. Examples of funding outwith the settlement include £86.4 million for employability and the £226 million city region and growth deal. I thank the minister for that reply. He will be very much aware of many of the acute challenges that Inverclyd has faced, and many of them are long-term acute challenges. The minister therefore gave me that, despite the vast levels of fairness that the Scottish Government has invested in Inverclyd, including the burden of over 1,400 social rented homes, saving our jobs in diodes, saving our jobs at Ferris Marine and also the city deal funding, many of those challenges that still exist. Therefore, can the minister confirm that Inverclyd council has supplied a business case for additional funding to help to deal with some of those acute challenges? I can confirm to Mr McMillan that, as far as I am aware, the Scottish Government has not received a business case for additional funding for the areas that he has highlighted. That concludes portfolio questions on finance and the economy. There will be a short pause before we move on to the next item of business to allow front-bench teams should they wish to change positions safely. Thank you.