 That concludes General Questions. The next item of business is First Minister's Questions. At question number one, I call Douglas Ross. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. At midnight on Tuesday, businesses in Scotland were legally required to sign up to the SMP Green's deposit return scheme. Thousands of producers rightly decided not to because the scheme is an absolute shamble. Lorna Slater,lluniad y Dáfn i'w ddechrau, gynnwys ddim ddechrau ar 664 dechrau, ond rwy'n adegwyd ar ddadf yn y cwmbrYYYsgrif er mwyn rwy'n adegwyd nesaf rhywfaf. Er rherau ar gyfer, rydw i ddim ddim ddim ddim ddim ddim ddim yn ddegwyd yr yongod gwyfyr yng Nghymru ddim oedd. First of all, yng Nghymru i'w ddim ddig i ddim ddig i ddim yn dweud i ddim yn dweud i ddweudio'r I have deep respect for the concerns that are being raised by business, and the Government will continue to work with business to address those. Frankly, the sheer opportunism of some opposition parties who have supported this scheme, rightly supported a deposit return scheme, previously criticised the Government for taking too long to introduce it, to now indulge in knee-jerk opposition, the opportunism of that, frankly, is breathtaking. I will use a parliamentary term that I believe is polite enough. So, too, is the blatant distortion of some opposition politicians, and yes, I am talking about Alistair Jack in particular. Coming back to the point, and this is an important point, the number of companies in the drinks industry inevitably changes over time. At the outset of introducing this scheme, it was estimated that there were around 4,500 companies. However, significantly less than that will have to register, because once groups of companies registering under one registration are identified, the estimated number of individual producer's importers will be below 2,000. That is not actually the most relevant statistic. The most relevant statistic is the share of the market, the percentage of products that are included. That is over. 90 per cent are now included in this scheme. Finally, if I was to state that in the opposite way, if I was to stand here and say that 90 per cent of producers were registered, but that only covered around 20 per cent of the market, that would be a problem, because that would be a seriously problematic way of approaching this. We will continue to progress with the scheme that is for the benefit of our environment, and we will do that responsibly, because that is what people across Scotland have a right to expect. Douglas Ross. First Minister, when you are in a whole stop digging, surely you or your many, many officials watch Laura Slater. Through the chair please. Absolutely unable to answer a basic question yesterday, but one that is so important. We need to know how many businesses, producers and the First Minister's Government expected to sign up to a scheme when we know only 664 dead by the redline. It is a very simple number that either the First Minister knows and is refusing to tell this chamber or the First Minister does not know. I think that this chamber deserves an answer. Also, the First Minister says that she has deep respect for businesses across Scotland. Businesses are giving this Government a very clear message, loud and clear. Their deposit return scheme is a complete disaster. The Scottish Wholesale Association said that it could be a car crash. UK hospitality Scotland says that it is flawed. In a singun it says that it is unworkable. The Scottish Chamber of Commerce last night after listening to the minister's statement said that business concerns have been completely ignored. Car crash, flawed, unworkable. The voice of businesses across Scotland ignored. So First Minister, even at this late stage will you finally just once listen to Scottish businesses and pause this scheme? First Minister, of course the last time the Government announced a delay to the scheme necessitated by the pandemic, Conservatives were amongst the first to criticise the delay. That is what I mean by sheer opportunism and knee-jerk opposition, but that is what we have come to expect from the Conservatives. We will continue to act responsibly. Coming back to the central point in Douglas Ross's question, it is important. I gave him an answer in my first response, but I also pointed out that anybody looking at this rationally would see that it is the number of bottles, the percentage of the product covered that matters most, because the vast majority of product is produced by a relatively small number of producers. As of yesterday, more than 90 per cent of product, more than 90 per cent of the shade in the market is covered. That is the crucial point. If it was the reverse, that would be a problem. We will continue as we have done. There have already been a range of concerns that have been responded to in terms of reducing the cost. So producer fees are 8 per cent, 30 per cent, 40 per cent lower than originally planned for glass, plastic and metal containers. The day one payment for producers have been reduced and we will continue to liaise with business responsibly and sensibly. However, let us not lose sight of the central point here, which is the purpose and the objective of this scheme. It is about reducing littering. It will reduce littering by a third. It will increase recycling rates of single-use drinks containers towards 90 per cent. It will reduce CO2 emissions by 4 million tonnes over 25 years. That is the equivalent of taking 83,000 cars off the road. That is about the environment. It used to be the case that the Conservatives pretended to care about the environment, but it seems that those days are long gone. Douglas Ross. Very clear. The First Minister is ignoring Scottish businesses again. I am sorry. When she says that opposition in calls to pause the scheme are sheer political opportunism, I would hate to be the health secretary sat next to her. There is going to be some more finger wagging coming in a minute, because of course we know that Humza Yousaf, Ash Regan and Kate Forbes have all said that the deposit return scheme should be delayed. Political opportunism from the heart of the Scottish Government. Kate Forbes. Suspend business at the moment. We will recommence, and I will call Douglas Ross for his third question. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. I have to say that it is getting very tiresome, these constant interruptions in First Minister's questions. We are here, democratically elected, to put questions to the First Minister. When it gets disrupted like that, people watching and people who want to hear the questions and the answers are getting pretty fed up by that childish behaviour. I was kind of on a roll explaining the total political opportunism of the SNP. We spoke about Humza Yousaf, Ash Regan and now let's speak about Kate Forbes. Kate Forbes has said on the deposit return scheme that the First Minister has just defended over the last two questions could create economic carnage. That is one of the more tame things that Kate Forbes has said about the SNP's record. There is just one wee problem. Kate Forbes is the SNP's economy secretary. The SNP's record is Kate Forbes's record. When the SNP Government was slow in paying out Covid grants to businesses, Kate Forbes was running the schemes. When companies demanded the SNP Government reset their anti-business agenda, Kate Forbes was the minister who was not listening. When the ferry scandal ran even further aground, Kate Forbes was fully on board. The new Kate Forbes seems to be saying that the old Kate Forbes isn't up to the job. Can I ask the First Minister which one does she agree with? The Kate Forbes with a terrible record in government or the Kate Forbes who says this government has a terrible record? Douglas Ross said that he was on a roll. I'm not sure whether he meant rolling down the hill, but that seems to be what that question is. I said last week that Douglas Ross was seeming awful scared of Humza Yousaf. It seems this week that he's also very scared of Kate Forbes, which says to me that whoever is standing here in my place in a few weeks time will keep the Conservatives firmly where they belong in opposition in Scottish politics. I, for as long as I am First Minister, will continue to work to introduce sensible schemes that protect the interests of business but also protect our environment, because we have a deep responsibility to do that. I would also point out again that we are in no way unprecedented in introducing a deposit return scheme. Similar schemes are already operational in many countries and territories around the world. Indeed, some of the companies that I understand that are raising concerns, as they have a right to do here in Scotland, are part of those schemes in other countries elsewhere around the world. I read in the newspaper today that the Conservative UK Government is about to announce its own scheme, perhaps as soon as tomorrow, which no doubt will have Douglas Ross squirming, as he often does when his colleagues in London make life difficult for him. We will continue to be responsible for liaising, engaging with business but taking steps that are about protecting our environment and making sure that the cost of dealing with waste, which has to be met, is dealt with fairly. That's what this is all about. I begin with an apology. It's been brought to my attention that I perhaps used industrial language in response to the protesters who interrupted the session earlier. To you, the chamber and everyone listening, including my mother probably, I apologise for that. I won't repeat it. Christine Grahame is asking what I said. I promise I won't repeat it, so I just do want to apologise to you and the chamber. Let's get back to where we were, because I was asking the First Minister about the leadership election and the SNP candidates. The First Minister doesn't seem to want to talk about that. It's no wonder, because this contest is an absolute binfire. The SNP are so split and divided that they even tried to ban the media from watching the hustings. The only thing that unites the candidates seeking to replace Nicola Sturgeon is independence. The candidates have even more reckless plans than Nicola Sturgeon's de facto referendum. Last night, Kate Forbes revealed that she wants to hold a referendum just three months after the next general election. Three months when there are so many bigger issues facing the country. Kate Forbes thinks that a deposit return scheme would cause economic carnage, but holding another referendum to break up a 300-year union will be a breeze. Does the First Minister really think that anybody in Scotland will find Kate Forbes' plans credible? What we found out in that latest question from Douglas Ross is that his so-called role came to a crashing halt pretty quickly. Can I also perhaps share some news with Douglas Ross, the chamber and indeed the country, although I'm not sure it will come as any surprise to the country? The SNP is united in favouring Scottish independence. I think that we're going to increasingly see the country united behind independence as the best way to free ourselves from the impact of Tory governments or indeed from the impact of Labour governments that are often indistinguishable from Tory governments and be in charge of our own affairs and our own destiny. Getting back into the European Union, for example. I look forward very much to the vigor of that debate in years to come. I'm also confident that whoever stands here in my place in just a few weeks time will continue the outstanding record of success of the SNP. It's the SNP that continues to occupy those benches, taking forward decisions for the good of people of Scotland even when those are tough decisions and that Douglas Ross and his colleagues will stay certainly over there but who knows, perhaps over there, in years to come. Question 2, Anna Sarwar. We are in the midst of a cost of living crisis that is hitting people hard, an NHS crisis that is pushing staff to breaking point and putting patients' lives at risk and a wider economic crisis that is leading to business closures across Scotland, made worse by a flawed and chaotic deposit return scheme led by an incompetent Government. At the same time, the SNP has turned in on themselves, more interested in scoring political points against each other rather than focusing on the people's priorities. At this time of crisis, for business, for families and patients, why is it that all people in Scotland see as a Government divided and in chaos? I have to say, maybe somebody here can help me. I have lost count of the number of leadership elections that have taken place in the Conservative and Labour parties in the years that I have stood here as First Minister. I think people in Scotland will welcome seeing a robust debate about the future of our country, covering all of the things that Anna Sarwar has just talked about. They will appreciate seeing candidates for leadership setting out proposals to build on the actions that this Government has taken in recent years. Anna Sarwar talks about the cost of living crisis. One of the things that I am proudest of in my time as First Minister and always will be proud of is the game-changing Scottish child payment. Transformational for families and children across this country, doing more than anything across these islands to lift children out of poverty. I am proud of that and I am confident that whoever succeeds me as First Minister will continue with that record of success. It will be interesting to hear of Nicola Sturgeon's proud of the candidates who are trashing a record in government over the past couple of weeks. The choice that the people of Scotland are being offered by the SNP to replace Nicola Sturgeon is woeful. We have a health secretary who is closing an intensive care unit in air after promising to save it just a few weeks ago. A finance secretary who has completely blocked £15 per hour for care workers, who now miraculously is calling for it, and Ash Regan, who thinks that Scotland could set up a central bank within weeks, three candidates falling over each other to distance themselves from their own government's policies, all you turning on the flawed DRS scheme, all wanting to hit the brakes on a national care service and all over the place on independence. Nicola Sturgeon gave all of those candidates their first step up in politics, so I wonder, First Minister, with the benefit of hindsight, which one do you regret appointing the most? First Minister, I am proud of all the Governments that I have led and I am proud of those who have served in these Governments and the record of Governments. I said on the day that I announced that I would be stepping down as First Minister that nobody would entice me into expressing a preference for my successor, and Anna Sarwar is not going to manage to do that either. However, I am confident that whoever succeeds me will continue with that record of success. Ultimately, my record of my ministerial team in Government will not be judged by Anna Sarwar or Douglas Ross, it will be judged by the people of Scotland. In my time as First Minister, it has been judged by the people of Scotland on no fewer than eight occasions, eight landslide election victories. I think that that is the vote of confidence in my record as First Minister that I will continue to be proud of. At the start of the contest, Nicola Sturgeon told us that it would be a chance for Scotland to see the best talent that the SNP has to offer. Here we are, the top three. Ash Regan, backed by Alex Salmond, Kate Forbes, backed by Jacob Rees-Mogg and the Scottish Greens candidate, Humza Yousaf, backed by Peter Morrell. It may be funny, but this is really serious, because we have 770,000 people on an NHS waiting list. We have families struggling to put food on the table and pay their bills, and businesses are shutting down because of this Government's incompetence and anti-business agenda. At this time of national crisis, when people need a competent Government that is on their side, is this really the best the SNP has to offer? I know that it is quite hard for me to imagine this, but if I was in the shoes of Anna Sarwar or Douglas Ross, what I would be more worried about than whatever was happening in the SNP leadership election campaign was why it is that the only political game in town remains the SNP, and they are lagging so far behind after 16 years of an SNP Government. That says that the people of Scotland continue to put their trust in us. Why do they do that? Take employment in Scotland at the highest level, I think, on record, unemployment at the lowest level. We are seeing in a very, very challenging time for our national health service an increase in the number of patients being treated the longest waits falling. We are seeing a situation in which I hear Christine Grahame say no strikes in our national health service, which makes us the only nation in the UK to have achieved that. We continue to be the best performing part of the UK outside of London when it comes to attracting inward investment into our country. We are lifting more children out of poverty than any other part of the UK. That is why the Scottish people continue to trust the SNP Government. That is true today, and I believe that whoever succeeds me as First Minister, that is going to continue to be true for a long, long time to come as we continue and complete the journey to Scotland becoming an independent country. Question 3, Alex Cole-Hamilton. To ask the First Minister when the Cabinet will next meet. First Minister, Tuesday, Alex Cole-Hamilton. I'm very grateful for that reply. It's an Andrews Wine company, champion small and local producers. Their mission is to offer interesting and lesser known brands to their customers. Their owner Peter estimates that because so few producers have signed up to the DRS scheme, that three quarters of his stock will become unavailable. All they will have left is what you can buy in a supermarket. This is a family run business thrown under the bus and there are thousands more businesses like them. Jobs are on the line and this is starting to cause real harm. Indeed, Fergus Ewing, a loyalist of 50 years, has called it willful recklessness. Her finance secretary Kate Forbes has called it economic carnage. Government incompetence is undermining the very case for DRS, something that could massively reduce our waste and emissions, but only if it works. This is a moment of real jeopardy. It can't wait for the next First Minister because irreversible business decisions are being made right now. Nicola Sturgeon calls it opportunism. I call it scrutiny backed up by an avalanche of industrial concerns. If the First Minister can halt the chaos of the national care service, why can't she pose this? First Minister, first we are not halting progress to a national care service. What we are doing is taking time to both receive the report from the lead committee of this Parliament and then take time to consider that report. If we did anything else, Alex Cole-Hamilton and others would be the first to and rightly criticise us for that. First Minister, I will continue to take all of my responsibilities very seriously for as long as I am in this job. One of those responsibilities is to continue to ensure that my Government continues to engage with businesses about concerns that they have about the deposit return scheme or anything else and to address those concerns and to allay fears that businesses such as the one-sided by Alex Cole-Hamilton have put forward. We will do that responsibly and we will do that in a way that ensures that we can introduce a scheme that is necessary and beneficial to our environment in a way that many other countries have already done, in a way that the UK Government is about to do as well and do that sensibly and responsibly. I think that that is what people do expect from their Government on tough issues as well as on less tough issues and that is the approach that I have always brought to be in First Minister and I will continue to do so. Question 4, Karen Adam. Miss Adam, we cannot hear you currently. Can you hear me now? We can, thank you. The hope has unmuted me. Thank you, Presiding Officer. To ask the First Minister whether she will provide an update on the Scottish Government's response to on-going food shortages currently affecting Scotland. First Minister. We engage regularly with all of the main retailers. We are aware that some are currently experiencing temporary disruption to certain off-season fresh vegetables. Some retailers have introduced a buying limit as a short-term preventive measure to avoid bulk buying and ensure that customers can get what they need. Retailers have provided assurances that there is currently enough stock available for customers if everyone continues to shop responsibly and that the situation is expected to improve week on week and we are monitoring this closely. Given the pressure on food and drink supply chains caused by Covid, Brexit and the war in Ukraine, the rule of affairs secretary wrote to the UK Government last year to raise the cumulative impacts of labour and skills shortages and rising costs. No response was received to that and so the cabinet secretary has written again as recent events have clearly highlighted the vulnerability and the importance of supply chains. Karen Adam. I thank the First Minister for that answer. Former chief executive at Sainsbury just in King said, I hate to say it but it's a sector that's been hurt horribly by Brexit. Liz Webster, chair of Save British Farming said, the reason that we have food shortages in Britain is that we don't have food shortages in Spain or anywhere else in the European Union is because of Brexit. The views from industry are clear. The shortage of basic nutritional necessities can be attributable to deliberate act of Tory policy. Does the First Minister share my utter dismay that the Tories refuse to acknowledge and apologise for the fundamental harms that they have visited on people? Karen Adam is absolutely right here and the voices that she has quoted underline that the food and drink sector in Scotland and indeed across the whole of the UK has borne the brunt, not just of Brexit but of the very hard Brexit pursued by the UK Government particularly through the loss of free trade and free movement. Although it is the case that poor harvest conditions in Spain and Morocco is a key factor here in terms of some shortages, the situation isn't helped by the UK Government's approach to Brexit where our food and drink sector has lost many of the benefits that it had when trading with the EU. The loss of free trade has increased, for example, the additional paperwork required to import to the UK and thus increased the cost of trade. Anybody who denies that, I frankly don't think, is living in the real world. Brexit was a mistake and the way it has been pursued by the UK Government has compounded that error. It is, of course, one of the many reasons why the sooner Scotland is independent and able to re-join the European Union the better it will be for everyone. To ask the First Minister whether she will provide an update on what discussions she has had with the Cabinet Secretary for Education and Skills in relation to bullying and harassment in schools. I am very clear, and I am sure that this is a view shared by everyone across this chamber, that bullying and harassment anywhere, but particularly in schools, is completely unacceptable. The Cabinet Secretary for Education and Skills and I are committed to further work to help address this. Just last week, Education Scotland published a thematic inspection report that we commissioned on the recording and monitoring of bullying in schools. We have since announced and commenced a review of the national anti-bullying guidance. Respect me, Scotland's anti-bullying service is part of that work, and we have invited teachers, parents and young people's representatives to be involved in it as well. Later this month, we are seeking the advice of the teachers panel and the advisory group on relationships and behaviour in schools to further inform our approach. A pupil in my region has been subject to repeated instances of bullying and violence, sometimes even involving weapons. The parents have complained to the school, to the police, to the council and even the ombudsman and now they are running out of options. On further investigation, the parent was appalled to find out that incidents of bullying had not been recorded and an FOI request shows that this under recording of bullying is a common place in our schools. This neglectful SNP Government is throwing pupils to the wolves. Does the First Minister acknowledge that under reporting of bullying incidents in schools is an issue? And will she action the desperate pleas from parents and pupils by implementing an enforcement mechanism to ensure schools are accurately reporting incidents? First Minister, it is important that instances of bullying are recorded properly, comprehensively and monitored. That is why, as I said in my initial answer, we commissioned a report on the recording and monitoring of bullying in schools and Education Scotland published that report, the result of the thematic inspection that they did just last week. That is an important point but one, as I have said, action has been taken to address. Secondly, it is really important and obviously I cannot comment on individual cases but the experience recounted by the member is unacceptable but it will also be the case that that will be repeated many times over in schools across the country. Bullying is unacceptable wherever it occurs but we are talking here about schools and given young people it is particularly unacceptable in schools. We should have a zero tolerance to it. I think that all of us would accept that it is not a new issue in our schools. However, the modern world, particularly the role of social media in the modern world, means that bullying often takes different forms and very pernicious forms today compared to some years ago. The Scottish Government will continue to work closely with local government, recognising the lead responsibility here of government. We all have a responsibility. The daily record campaign is very clear about it and I applaud its campaign. There is a role for social media companies and frankly there is a role for all of us as adults in our own communities to make sure that children and young people are safeguarded and respected. That is a serious issue and one that I want to assure the chamber and the country that the Scottish Government takes extremely seriously. Rhoda Grant. Schools do not take responsibility for what happens to young people on their journeys to and from school. What steps will she take to make sure that children are protected at this time and what steps the police are taking? I think that Rhoda Grant is right and gets to the heart of what is a societal problem and therefore has to be addressed on a societal basis. Obviously, we are focusing a lot rightly on what happens in schools and it is important that local government and individual schools focus on that. Schools cannot be responsible, certainly not solely responsible for what happens outside schools. The police have a key role to play and I know that they take that role very seriously. As I said in my last answer, all of us as adults in communities have a responsibility and a role to play to make sure that children are properly cared for and safeguarded. It is in some ways a complex problem but we should not allow that to take us away from the collective responsibility that we have to tackle. Government, national and local has to be on the lead in this but we all have a part to play and I am sure that all of us take that seriously. Willie Rennie. The First Minister knows that I have deep concerns about the increase in violence in schools. It has always been there but it has certainly increased since the pandemic. There is a lot of distress behaviour in schools but teachers report that they are sick fed up with having to be left to pick up the pieces of this. They do not think that there is sufficient resources to be able to manage it. As part of the reviews that the First Minister has set out, will additional resources be available for schools to help them cope with this crisis? I think that it has been very good and very important for the work that Willie Rennie has done on this. I will give him a commitment that yes, that will be part of the consideration. I know that that is something that the daily record has drawn attention to in terms of funding to make sure that there are places for young people to go but I know that Willie Rennie is particularly talking about resources in schools. Teachers are often at the front line of this particularly when bullying is happening in schools and we must take account of that but that should not take away from the fact that this is not just an issue about what happens in our schools, it is a wider issue about how young people are coping with the pressures of modern life particularly over the last few years and mental health support. Another issue that Willie Rennie has raised often in this chamber is an important part of it but making sure that those who work most closely with young people and that obviously includes teachers have the right support and resources to do that job is an important part of it. I will have further discussions with the education secretary over my remaining few weeks in this post about exactly that issue. To ask the First Minister what action the Scottish Government is taking in light of reports that individuals are unable to be discharged from hospital due to lack of available spaces in care homes. We have provided an additional £8 million to health and social care partnerships to secure provision of 300 extra interim care home beds so that places can be purchased above the national care home contract rate. That has resulted so far in 331 people being able to be discharged from hospitals to those placements with a total of 581 people currently benefiting from an interim care placement. As part of the work of our ministerial advisory group in health and social care pressures, we are supporting local systems to gain a better understanding of care homes data and supporting partnerships to understand local availability and suitability of care home places for people in their care. Our plans for a national care service, which I alluded to earlier on, of course represent the biggest public sector reform in Scotland since this Parliament was established and will help to ensure consistency and fairness at a national level with services being designed and delivered locally. I thank the First Minister for that answer. Last week the Scottish Government issued refreshed guidance on hospital discharge to care homes. The policy states that, where the preferred choice of care homes is not immediately available, the person will be required to make a temporary move to another home with a suitable vacancy to wait. My constituent John Finlay has progressed his MS. He has been in hospital for seven months and is desperate to get out and into a suitable care home. John is 58 years old. Many care homes will not admit people of that age. Therefore, the pull of places he can go to is significantly reduced. This new guidance could see him forced into accepting a place in a home that is either very far away from his community and support network or a home with a very poor track record of care. The First Minister tells us how this is putting patients at the centre and why people like John have their rights denied to them because of the Scottish Government's failure to deal with social care. I am happy to respond in more detail if he wants to send me the details of the individual case, but what I am about to say has general applicability. Firstly, no-one's rights should be denied and no-one should be forced into a place that is inappropriate for their needs. What the guidance is seeking to do is first recognise that for any patient that is a delayed discharge hospital is not the best place for them, so being in another setting is better for them. Obviously, partnerships want to meet preferences. They also need to consider what is the best place relative to a hospital for somebody to be. Individual preferences are important. Of course, the case that has been raised here is not just about preference, it is about needs given the condition. That goes to another point, and I referred to work that is under way to gain a better understanding of care homes data because this is not just about the total number of places available, it is the type of care that individual care homes are offering. Those are complex issues, but they are important issues, and as we continue to reform health and social care, better integrate it and make sure that people get the care that they need in the best place, those are the issues that we need to continue to grapple with to get to the right outcome. That is a general response. I am happy to amplify some of that in relation to your constituents' name, your constituent's name was Individual Case, to hopefully give some reassurance about the matters raised. The Joseph Rowntree Foundation and the Food Bank Network, the Trussell Trust, have stated that inadequate benefits were the main reason for a sharp increase in destitution and food bank use in recent months. Research has reportedly revealed that basic benefits given to low-income households are at least £140 a month below the real cost of food, energy and everyday items. Does the First Minister share my view that history will record with shame how the Tories in action and indifference has caused people in one of the richest countries in the world to face this dire standard of living? I agree very much with Emma Roddick. The Conservatives should be deeply ashamed of the impact of their welfare policies. We have known for a long time that the current UK Government benefits system is not fit for purpose, and people across the country are paying the price of that in ways that Emma Roddick has pointed out every single day. We have called for improvements over many years. For example, we should see an immediate uplift to universal credit and other means-tested benefits. We should see the scrapping of the unjust and cruel to child limit and benefit cap. Those two policies alone were singled out in a recent report from the Commissioner for Human Rights at the Council of Europe. It said that those policies continued to exacerbate child poverty. For our part, we will continue to seek to do the right things through our social security system, in particular with the Scottish child payment, which is lifting children out of poverty at exactly the same time as the policies of the UK Government are pushing them deeper into poverty. The last point that I would make is that if we were able to join up all those approaches and have all social security powers under the ambit of this Parliament, we could do so much more for those who need our help most. Russell Finlay. A year ago I asked about dozens of registered sex offenders who have been allowed to change their names. It turns out that it was not dozens, it is hundreds of sex offenders who are hiding their identities. People have no idea if the person next door may be a dangerous predator. Will Nicola Sturgeon agree that this is wrong and I outline what her Government intends to do about it? I am happy to write to the member to again give the detail of the arrangements in place. We have well established arrangements, not least the MAPPA system, to ensure that the public have protections from registered sex offenders. In terms of changing names, there are requirements on people who change their names to give notification of that. That is not about people being able to hide. Of course, I will happily remind the member of those arrangements in a letter that I will arrange to have written to him. Clare Baker. This week the legal age of marriage in England and Wales has increased to 18. The rise is to prevent vulnerable children and young people being forced into marriage. While Scotland retains the legal age of marriage at 16, can I ask what evaluation the Scottish Government has made of the appropriateness of 16 in light of concerns over forced marriage and coercion? Does the First Minister agree with comments this week from Dr Marcia Scott of Scottish Women's Aid that marriage under 18 is a mechanism for abuse in the worst case scenarios? I have not seen Marcia Scott's particular comments, but I have huge respect for Dr Marcia Scott. I would always pay close attention to anything that she said. I am, of course, aware of the change of law in England and will continue to consider the implications and the case for change here in Scotland. The relevant minister will keep Parliament updated as those considerations progress. Households across Scotland are continuing to face an incredibly challenging time at the moment and will be rightly baffled as to why their energy bills are set to go up despite energy prices falling. Does the First Minister agree with me that the Tory UK Government must now pass on the reduction in wholesale gas prices to consumers and bring down Westminster's cap and bills to £2,000 per year and devolve energy regulation powers to this Parliament? The Conservatives seem to think that it is not appropriate for this Parliament to consider the issues of the energy costs that people across Scotland are having to pay right now. I think that it is exactly the kind of issue that we should be discussing and Paul McLean is right to raise it. The new price cap strengthens the case for the UK Government to reverse. It is planned to increase the guarantee for an average household from April. We result that such an increase would result in there being around 980,000 fuel poor households in Scotland, a significant increase compared to estimates for this winter with the price cap set at £2,500. We have called upon the UK Government to provide additional support and we will continue to do so because people need that support and they need it now. Yesterday, the results from the controversial school sex survey were released. The total participation rate from children and young people was 58.3 per cent in the local authorities that took part. Out of those, eligible to answer the questions relating to sexual activity, only a tiny fraction of school pupils answered. The data proves what I and others have said all along that our children and young people do not feel comfortable answering those types of invasive questions. Will the First Minister finally agree with me that those inappropriate questions should be removed from all future health and wellbeing surveys in our schools? I think that those surveys are really important. We have just had exchanges in this chamber about the need to record and monitor instances of bullying. Because, in my view, manufactured controversy around the survey led to some local authorities pulling out about it, we actually did not get as much information on bullying as we might have wanted to during the survey. We all need to be responsible about making sure that we are gathering information about the real-life experiences of young people that allow local authorities, schools and national government to take decisions that are about protecting their welfare and wellbeing. I think that it is really important to do that and to do that in a way that avoids any temptation to get dragged into another Conservative culture war, frankly. The member talks about controversial questions. Questions of this nature relate to smoking, alcohol, substance use and, yes, sexual health. They have been included in health and wellbeing surveys for years. It is only recently that they have become politicised. Last but not least, questions about sexual health are asked in the equivalent surveys in England, where, in case the member has not noticed that the SNP is not in government, another party is. People affected by historic forced adoption have been campaigning for recognition, support and a formal apology for a very long time. They have support from MSPs in every party in this chamber. Having heard their calls, can the First Minister advise whether she is considering making a formal apology? If so, when? I thank Monica Lennon for raising this issue. I have commented on this before in the chamber. I have expressed my huge sympathy with calls for a formal apology. I have also rightly talked about the legal complexities that the Government has to work through. We are actively considering a conclusion of that work right now. While, of course, those are matters for the business bureau to timetable, I am very hopeful of being able to give an indication of the outcome of that work while I am still First Minister. I am sure that the First Minister will join me in offering this Parliament sincere condolences to the family and friends of all those impacted by the tragic fire at the shore recycling centre Perth early on Tuesday morning. This devastating incident is deeply concerning, not least because this is the second fire in six months at the site. In the days to come, our emergency services will be attempting to establish the facts of the situation. However, does the First Minister agree with me that, following that, there must be an investigation into the circumstances of the fire to ensure that such a tragedy does not happen again? I take the opportunity to extend my deepest sympathies to the family of the individual who sadly passed away following the fire at shore recycling plant in Perth. Early on 28 February, the fire and rescue service were alerted to reports of a large fire within the plant that mobilised six fire appliances and specialist resources to tackle the fire, which involved approximately 200 tonnes of scrap material. They worked alongside partners to maintain safety both on and off the site. The last appliance left at 9pm last night and the fire service will return for a routine check today. Let me put on record my gratitude to our fire service and all who worked at the scene of this fire. The fire service confirmed previous incidents resulted in the review of on-site fire safety measures. They initiated a joint investigation with the Crown Office in Police Scotland. It would be inappropriate for me to comment further, of course, until investigations conclude, but it is important that investigations do take place. Today is World Book Day, and the First Minister is well known as a self-identified avid reader. As she leaves office, how does she feel about being responsible for closing more public libraries than any of her predecessors? I am proud of the support that this Government gives to libraries. I saw many libraries in my constituency, as was the case across the country. I have to close during the pandemic, but I have also watched them reopen and become vital parts of local community. I will continue to support libraries. I will continue to support everything associated with the wonderful world of books. Perhaps I will even look forward to having a bit more time to read them in future. I seek your guidance. Yesterday, Lorna Slater said that there were 2 billion containers in the deposit return scheme, representing 95 per cent of volume. Circularity Scotland, the scheme administrator, said that there are 3 billion containers. If the 2 billion figure is correct, then our biff of being paid to collect 1 billion containers that do not exist. If the 3 billion figure is correct, then the volume registered would not even be close to 95 per cent. Would you be willing to invite Lorna Slater to correct the official record or come to the chamber to explain where the missing 1 billion containers have gone? In response to Mr Golden, I would say that generally the content of members' contributions are a matter for them. However, I do of course expect that ministers strive to respond to the specific detail of questions wherever possible. It certainly is the case that a mechanism exists whereby members, where they become aware of an inaccuracy in any comment, can correct the official report in that regard. We now move on to members' business. There will be a brief pause to allow members to leave the chamber and those in the public gallery who wish to do so to leave also.