 We now move to First Minister's, Questions number one. Kezia environmental assistance to answer your questions. Do you ask the First Minister what engagement she has planned for the rest of the day? We assimilate her engagement to take forward the Governance programme for Scotland. Kezia environmental assistance. Yesterday, the First Minister's poverty advisor said that 56 per cent of children in poverty live in working households. These are the children whose mums and dads go out to work but still struggle to make ends meet. ond i chi i wneud i'r rhannu i gyda'r cras hyn sydd gennymau iawn oedd yn gallu dododol yn ysgrifftiwn? Mae Y First Minister oedd Анw i'n credu eich rhai a'r ysgrifftiwn yn ddiniadu sleidwydau felly yw ffrif yn ei dyddol i siaryr o'r rhywun hwnnw i'i ardal. Yr hyn mae hyn wedi bod gweithio'r cyfnod oes yr ysgrifftiwn yn gorffent. Mae'r gygoning hwnnw i'n cyfrwyng yn gydymiannog hwn i'w mor ffair ni oedd ddim yn dda i'r drafydd, is their right. Last year in this chamber, the First Minister said that she was working with local councils to deliver on her pledge. So, can she tell us whether council funding to deliver 16 hours of free early learning and childcare has gone up or down in the draft budget for next year? First Minister, can I also welcome the report that was published yesterday by the poverty adviser? I think that it is a very solid report that makes a number of recommendations that this Government will consider very seriously indeed done. I note that the poverty adviser says that the policy decisions taken by this Scottish Government have, and I quote, been important in protecting people from poverty. As Kezia Dugdale is well aware, the Government currently funds 16 hours a week of childcare for three, four-year-olds and for vulnerable two-year-olds. I have said in the past that it remains the case that, as well as funding that provision in a global sense, we are working with councils to improve the flexibility of that provision so that it better fits in with the working patterns of parents. We are also determined—this was reflected in the poverty advisers report yesterday—over the life of the next Parliament should the people of Scotland re-elect us in May to double provision of childcare for young people. This is important to parents who will be listening to this. The poverty adviser said yesterday that, as well as quantity, quality was important. That is why yesterday I also announced £1 million to pilot different ways of delivering that expanded childcare. That is our policy on childcare. We will be judged in just a couple of months on our record on that and on many other things. I am still waiting to hear what Labour's policy is. In all of that, there was not even an attempt to answer the question that I asked. The honest answer is that the council childcare funding is being cut by this Government's budget. The First Minister's own poverty adviser rightly tells her that affordable and flexible childcare is key to helping people in work to get out of poverty, yet this SNP Government solution is to cut the childcare budget and slash funding for local services. We know that the First Minister's promises on childcare are currently not being delivered, so what about her latest pledge to almost double the number of free childcare hours by 2020? A few months ago, the First Minister was asked in this very chamber about how those plans would be delivered. She said, We are working with local authorities to determine the expansion of capacity that will be required. That will be a mix of new build and extension of current local authority capacity. Two months on, can the First Minister tell us how many extra nurseries need to be built to deliver on that promise? First Minister, let me take Kezia Dugdale's point in order. In terms of our current policy, we are funding the expansion of childcare that we committed to in this Parliament. Just to remind people who may be listening to this, in 2007, young people three and four-year-olds were entitled to 412.5 hours of free childcare a year. We have extended that by 45 per cent to 600 hours for three and four-year-olds, but we have also taken the additional step of extending it to vulnerable two-year-olds as well. That is the measure of the commitment. The policy that Kezia Dugdale refers to for the next Parliament, and I am delighted that she clearly thinks that I am going to be in the position after the election of delivering this commitment. I take that as a welcome endorsement of the SNP's election campaign at this early stage. However, as I said previously in this chamber, in response to Ruth Davidson on that occasion, we are doing detailed work with local authorities to plan now for that expansion, which will take place over the period of the next Parliament. That will be a mix, and we do not yet know exactly what that mix will be, because we are still working to plan for that expansion. It will be a mix of new build. That is why I have described it as the biggest capital investment or the most important capital investment of the next Parliament, but it will also involve existing buildings that local authorities already use. I have already said that it will involve childminders. One of the proposals that Naomi Eisenstadt made yesterday was to look at what is called blended childcare. We are taking those proposals forward seriously, carefully and robustly. I repeat again that Kezia Dugdale is still to set out what Labour's policy on childcare is. I know what mine is. I know the work that we are doing to deliver it. We just seem to have a vacuum coming from the Benchy's opposite. Kezia Dugdale does not know how many nurseries she needs, but campaigning mums do. The campaign group Fair Funding for our Kids estimates that the equivalent of 650 new nurseries would have to be built to accommodate the extra places that are needed because of the First Minister's latest pledge. She has just described it as the biggest capital expenditure of the next Parliament, but John Swinney's budget this year cuts council capital funding for nurseries by 56 per cent. By the First Minister's own admission, it would cost £880 million to deliver on her new pledge in running costs alone, yet, at the same time, she is taking half a billion pounds out of council budgets. Let's get this just absolutely clear. The First Minister needs 650 new nurseries, but she has cut the capital budget to build them. She needs £880 million to expand childcare services, but she has slashed council budgets by £500 million. Only in the world of the SNP will that deliver a childcare revolution. The First Minister's childcare policy is a mess. Is she hoping that parents are just too busy to notice? To be fair to Kezia Dugdale, I know that her day-to-day working experience right now involves a rather large mess, otherwise known as the Labour Party. No wonder that it is a work that is uppermost in her mind. Kezia Dugdale, in a flurry of statistics, forget some of the key points that she mentioned. First of all, she mentioned capital funding for local authorities. If she is not aware, she certainly should be aware, because John Swinney has outlined it, that the capital budget of local authorities has been re-profiled. Money will be reallocated to local authorities in future years. In terms of the overall council budgets, as I said last week and I think the week before, in terms of the overall revenue expenditure of local authorities, they are looking at a 2 per cent reduction. That is before we take account of additional resources for social care, additional resources through the attainment fund and, of course, the additional investment that we plan over the life of the next Parliament in transforming the provision of childcare. I say again, Presiding Officer, that those are our plans. We have set them out and we will set out the budgets that support those plans. If Kezia Dugdale really wants to give people in this country a choice in just a few months' time, then she has to do more than whine from the Opposition benches. She has to give an alternative, and so far there is no alternative from the Labour Party whatsoever. Kezia Dugdale, Mr Dugdale. There we go, Presiding Officer. It is not a 56 per cent cut, it has just been re-profiled. Almost a year ago, the First Minister told me that she had looked campaigning mums in the eye and told them that she would fix Scotland's childcare problems. After meetings with Nicola Sturgeon and her education secretary, the more parents hear, the less they believe. Judge me on my record, says the First Minister. Here it is, promises not delivered, budgets cut and parents let down. Instead of delivering what families really need, is not it the case that the SNP's childcare plan is just one great big con? Kezia Dugdale knows that we have, in John Swinney, guaranteed local governments a maintained share of the overall Scottish Government capital budget. That is the reality. It might not suit the Labour Party's increasingly desperate narrative, but nevertheless those are the facts. On to the central issue here. I can point to the achievements of this Government in childcare over the life of this Parliament and the last Parliament. Three in four-year-olds are entitled to 45 per cent more childcare now than they were when Labour were in office. Two-year-olds are entitled to childcare that none of them were entitled to when Labour was in office. Not only that, I can point to clear plans for how we are going to transform childcare over the next Parliament. As the poverty adviser said, not only are we allowing more parents, mothers in particular, to get into work, we are also supporting young people with the best start in life. Those are our achievements and our plans, and the people of Scotland will judge them, Presiding Officer. Do you know what, when they are making that judgment, they will also look at what is the alternative? I say again that Kezia Dugdale has said zero about what the Labour Party will do for childcare, and that is why the people of Scotland are casting their judgment on Labour, and their judgment is to keep them firmly in opposition. To ask the First Minister when she will next meet the Prime Minister. This morning, we learned that the number of school inspections has fallen from 491 in 2004-5 to just 137 last year, a drop of more than 70 per cent. Inspections are a vital means of providing parents with the necessary information to make decisions about their children's schooling. Last year, fewer than 6 per cent of Scotland's schools were inspected, meaning that, under the SNP, a child can go right through their school career without ever having had their school assessed. If that rate keeps up, it would take 19 years to get around all of Scotland's schools once. Given that, does the First Minister think that parents are getting the information that they deserve when it comes to looking at local schools? Let me see two things about that. First, as Ruth Davidson knows, Education Scotland undertakes a wide range of different activities to promote quality assurance and improvement in the quality of education that is being provided by our schools. The number of full inspections undertaken varies from year to year, and during the period of the implementation of curriculum for excellence there was a deliberate and, I think, very correct decision taken to reallocate resources to other improvement activities to oversee the implementation of curriculum for excellence. During that period, inspectors were deployed to undertake intensive support and challenge activities with both schools and local authorities. It is also important to point out that work was recognised in the recent OECD report, which, in relation to CFE implementation, said that Education Scotland has been a linchpin in providing the guidance, resources and quality assurance. Ruth Davidson will also presumably be aware of that, because I saw him, the chief inspector, right in the Sunday times to this effect just a few days ago. There will be an increase in inspections over the coming years, complemented by new types of improvement activity, in particular making sure that we use the resource of the new attainment advisers that are working on the Scottish attainment challenge. That is the first thing that I want to say very briefly, Presiding Officer. The second thing that I would say is that Ruth Davidson knows my commitment, set out in the national improvement framework that I published in the first week in January, to vastly expanding, transforming the range of information that is available to parents and to the wider public about the performance in our schools. As a result of the national improvement framework, within the next couple of years, people will be able to look at the performance of pupils in each school and compare that. That is the direction of travel that we are headed in, and I think that it is the right one. Ruth Davidson. Presiding Officer, it was a straight question, and the First Minister did not seem to want to give a straight answer, so I will. No, parents are not getting the information that they deserve. Instead, they are being told by the education establishment that it knows best and that everybody else will just have to lump it. One former director of education said in the press this morning that inspections are now, and I quote, "...virtually useless as a source of information for parents." The First Minister, this morning and on previous days in this chamber, has urged Opposition parties to offer proposals on how to improve a system if they complain about it. We say this. It is time to re-establish an independent inspectorate out with the arms of the Scottish Government so that parents know when their school is measured it is done so entirely separately from those people who are setting the policy. We want more transparency and information for parents and an inspection regime that demands high standards and improvement from coasting schools with parents crucially given regular and up-to-date information. Does the First Minister back that plan? First Minister, the inspectorate is independent. The inspectorate demands high standards from schools. Local authorities also have a statutory duty to ensure that the quality of education is what we would expect. I have already outlined why and what the inspectorate was focusing on during the period of curriculum for excellence and the plans to increase the number of inspections over the next few years. However, I want to do much more than Ruth Davidson has just outlined. I want to give parents and the public direct information about the performance of pupils in our primary schools and lower secondary schools, because we do not have that at the moment. Under the national improvement framework, once that is firmly established, we will see the percentages of pupils in every primary school across our country who are achieving the different required levels of curriculum for excellence. This is a revolution in transparency in Scottish education. For the first time, parents will be able to look at that, the public will be able to look at that, they will be able to look at schools that are doing well, schools that are doing less well, and that will give all of us the information that we need to drive further improvements. I am much more ambitious in terms of transparency than Ruth Davidson is. I have a number of constituency questions. Thank you, Presiding Officer. The First Minister will be aware of the difficulties that Johnston Press has experienced, and it is identifying 21 Scottish titles ranging from Scotland on Sunday to the Arbor of Herald in my constituency as being sub-core, raising concerns over the future of those newspapers. Given the journalistic traditions of some of those titles, their importance to local communities and the jobs at stake, can I ask whether the Scottish Government will engage with the company and do what it can to ensure that those newspapers have a future? Can I thank Graham Day for an important question and give him the assurance that, yes, we will seek to engage with the company. As with any company where there is the potential of job losses, the arrangements that we put in place primarily through PACE will be available should they be required. I can also make a wider point, and that is about the importance in our democracy of a free, vibrant and dynamic media. I think that all of us will be concerned at this latest announcement, coming on the back of recent announcements that we have seen about job losses in other areas of the media. I think that all of us have a duty to make sure that we have a properly resourced media in this country to hold all of us to account, as well as contribute to the national debate that we all want. It was announced this week that at least 80 jobs will be lost to FMC technologies in my disfirmled constituency by June, and the workforce tells me that the real job loss figure could be substantially higher as this figure does not include contract staff. Given that FMC technologies has lost 2,000 jobs worldwide since January last year, there is real uncertainty about job security going forward, and my constituents feel that if they are paid off now or in the future, there is going to be very little chance of them finding employment within the oil and gas industry. What action will the First Minister take to support my constituents working at FMC technologies at this time of low oil prices and high job losses? Of course, we are aware of the situation that the member outlines, and the Government will be engaging with the company. As I said in response to Graeme Dey, we make available to the workforce of any company in this situation the resources of pay, so that we are doing as much as we can to avoid redundancies, but also to help those who are facing redundancy. I am sure that the Enterprise Minister would be happy to meet the member to discuss this particular case in more detail. The First Minister will be aware of this morning's announcement of 100 job losses at Marine Harvest, the bulk of them in the Highlands and Islands and many in my constituency. That is a large number of jobs for small communities to lose. Will the First Minister ensure that all will be done to assist those who may lose their jobs and outline what measures the Government will be putting in place to help with this serious matter? Obviously, as in the case of the previous two companies that I have been speaking about, this will be a particularly anxious time for employees and their families. The Scottish Government is in contact with the company and it has approached Highlands and Islands Enterprise to identify redeployment opportunities. My officials have, as I said, been in contact with Marine Harvest and will shortly be meeting the company and to discuss what can be done to support staff. We remain fully supportive of the sector, which is a key industry for Scotland in terms of supporting employment, particularly in our remote coastal communities. It is currently estimated to generate economic activity in Scotland, worth more than £1.8 billion a year, supporting more than 8,000 jobs. It is extremely important, and the Government's response will recognise that. To ask the First Minister what issues will be discussed at the next meeting of the cabinet. Matters of importance to the people of Scotland. This week, I received a letter from Amazon HQ in London. They boasted that they paid workers £7.20 per hour. Even though that is well below the national living wage, the Scottish Government paid almost £1 million to the company just last year. Does the First Minister think that it is wise for reward companies to pay workers such low wages? All companies should pay the tax that they are due to pay. The Scottish Government, in the limited tax responsibilities that we have, takes tax avoidance very seriously. Of course, I wanted us to have more tax responsibilities, something Willie Rennie argued vociferously again. We will continue to stand up for fairness and companies paying the tax that they are due. I have to take a different view to the one that Willie Rennie articulated in a debate that we did in Dundee on Monday evening, where he seemed to suggest that Fife would be better off without the jobs that are offered by Amazon. I suspect people working in that company would take a very different view as well. I know that she finds it difficult to listen to anybody else, but the question was about wages, not about tax. If she is too embarrassed to do it, I will leave her to defend low wages. No one is saying that Amazon should close, but I want the Government to support good jobs. This is about good jobs. Amazon workers have been in touch this week, too. They confirm what I have said. It is an exceptionally horrible place. The employment agencies creem off from everyone's wages. Meanwhile, Amazon pays hardly any tax in this country. The poverty alliance promotes the living wage. They get a small grant. It is a brilliant project. However, why give Amazon four times as much money for low wages as you give the poverty alliance to champion the living wage? Will the First Minister make a commitment not to give any more grants to companies without wage guarantees? My apologies to Willie Rennie if I misheard his first question. My comments about tax avoidance stand, though, and they stand very strongly. On the living wage, Willie Rennie, I hope, would agree that this Government is arguably doing more than any other Government across the UK to promote the living wage. The living wage accreditation scheme now has more than 400 companies signed up to it. More people in Scotland paid the living wage now than in any other UK nation, in any other part of the UK, outside the south-east of England. That is a point that was recorded in the poverty advisers report yesterday. We will continue to work directly with companies to encourage them to sign up and to pay the living wage. I will ask Rosanna Cunningham, the fair work secretary, the only Government in the UK that has a Cabinet-level Minister responsible for fair work, to engage directly with Amazon and other companies to get more people paid the living wage. We will take whatever action we are required to take to make sure that we are standing up for decent wages for everybody across Scotland. To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government's position is on the Resolution Foundation report, The State of Working Scotland. I welcome the findings of the Resolution Foundation report that was published yesterday, particularly the finding that pay in Scotland has risen faster than it has in any other nation or region in the UK. I am proud that this Government's commitment to the living wage means that 80 per cent of people in Scotland are already now paid at least the living wage, and there are, as I have just said, more than 400 living wage accredited employers. The rise in pay in Scotland will have contributed to one of the other findings of the report that household incomes fell by less in Scotland than the UK average during the recession. That is good progress, but there is much work still to do and the Resolution Foundation gives us some very valuable analysis in making sure that we continue to build on progress. I thank the First Minister for that answer. I was pleased to see yesterday's statistics on employment and, along with the Resolution Foundation report, showing that Scotland now has the highest level of wages of countries in the UK. Scotland is clearly showing that we can tackle inequalities and grow the economy. Can the First Minister tell me what action she will be taking to build on this good foundation to increase jobs and wages? I think that the member is right to note the progress on both wages and employment this weekend. I take the opportunity to welcome the figures yesterday showing the rise in employment in Scotland to record levels and the substantial drop in unemployment. That is all progress, but there is no room for complacency, and that is why we are working to do more in terms of employment and wages. Our economic strategy sets out our mutually supportive goals of increasing competitiveness and tackling inequality, and we will continue to make sure that we support the living wage accreditation scheme and the work of the fair work convention to make sure that, as we hopefully see employment continue to increase in Scotland, that is fair work with people doing a decent day's work and getting a decent day's wage in return. To ask the First Minister in light of the foil and oil prices when the Scottish Government will publish an updated oil and gas bulletin focusing on the impact on jobs. The Scottish Government's focus is absolutely on what we can do to support the industry and the workforce who are facing uncertainty at what is a worrying time for them. We continue to do all we can within devolved powers to help the sector. Last year, I set up the energy jobs task force. The task force has already helped to support more than 2,500 individuals and 100 employers through the current downturn, and it will continue to support the industry to improve collaboration, co-operation and innovation. I thank the First Minister for that response, but it has of course been more than six months since the last oil and gas bulletin was slipped out on the last day of term. In the intervening period, oil has dropped to $27 a barrel, some 70 per cent lower today than the price 18 months ago, and industry experts predicting it dropping further to $20 a barrel. 65,000 jobs lost already and more anticipated. We cannot afford to lose those skills in the future. What action will the First Minister take to protect those jobs and when will she publish a revised oil and gas bulletin so that we can consider the impact on jobs and the economy? We will continue to do all that we can within our responsibilities to support the industry and to support the jobs that are dependent on it. For example, the Scottish Cabinet will hold a special session on Tuesday next week attended by Lena Wilson, the chair of the oil and gas task force, to look at what the task force has already done and what more it can do to support those in the industry. I wrote to the Prime Minister just yesterday, urging him to agree with me that we should accelerate the finalisation of a city deal for Aberdeen to be funded jointly by the UK and Scottish Governments so that we can help Aberdeen and Aberdeenshire councils to invest in the infrastructure that the city needs. We will continue to take all action that we can, but we will also continue to call on the UK Government to make sure that there is an appropriate fiscal regime for the North Sea. I noted the comments of both of BP last week when they said when announcing very regrettable job losses that they were confident in their long-term future in the North Sea. I also noted the comments of oil and gas UK about the future of the sector if we do the right things now. We are determined to do the right things now and we call on the UK Government to do likewise. The First Minister will be aware that this Parliament's Economy, Energy and Tourism Committee produced a report on Monday saying that the oil and gas sector could have a sustainable future with the correct support. I wonder if she would agree with me that vocal campaigns for divestment from the oil and gas industry, from pension funds and others, are unhelpful, are potentially damaging and may in fact, if followed, lead to further job losses than we have already seen. I agree that anything that undermines the industry at this time is unhelpful. I am also aware of the report that Murdo Fraser refers to. I think that it is a very helpful report and it is one of the many things that the Cabinet will discuss as we consider how we continue to give the industry the support that it needs at this time. To ask the First Minister what discussions the Scottish Government has had with the UK Government regarding the possible reintroduction of the post-study work visa. Since the publication of the Smith commission report, the Government has remain committed to working with our UK counterparts to ensure that a post-study work route is reintroduced in Scotland. That has been raised with the UK Government at a number of meetings at both ministerial and official level. We are therefore deeply disappointed and I have to say that I am rather angry that the Secretary of State for Scotland recently indicated without any real consultation that there is no intention on the part of the UK Government to reintroduce the post-study work visa for Scotland. I understand that the UK immigration minister intends to meet the cross-party post-study work steering group and I would expect and certainly hope that the UK Government will take the concerns of the Scottish Government and indeed the united voice of Scottish stakeholders fully on board. I believe that there is a consensus in this Parliament and out there in Scotland to reintroduce the post-study work visa and I think that it is time that the UK Government got on and did it. I thank the First Minister for that answer. I wonder if she would agree with me that not only do the students themselves benefit from being able to work after their studies but the Scottish economy and Scottish society benefits as well from having these people living here. I agree wholeheartedly with that. If we are going to invest in educating the best and the brightest people from all over the world then surely it makes sense to try to encourage them once they graduate from university to make a contribution in our economy to give something back to economic and social life here in Scotland and of course we know that people who come to Scotland from all parts of the world make a real and rich contribution to our society just as Scots who go from here to other parts of the world do there. I think that the UK Government's actions here are short-sighted and wrong-headed and I urge them to change their minds. If there is any credence whatsoever to what we keep hearing about a respect agenda they will recognise the consensus on this issue and do something about it. Thank you. That ends First Minister's questions. We are now moving to members' business so members who are leaving the chamber should do so quickly and quietly.