 The first item of business this afternoon is portfolio questions, and the first section is education and skills. Questions 1 and 8 have been grouped together, so I call question number 1, David Stewart. To ask the question of what assessment is made of how research capabilities and higher education have been affected by Brexit. Richard Lochhead. Given the strong international connections of Scotland's world-leading research base, the UK Government's chaotic handling of Brexit does indeed threaten to disproportionately affect Scotland's university research and further education. The total share of UK and Scottish horizon 2020 projects is already falling according to the latest figures. If there is no deal, this could result in a loss of income for Scottish research organisations of an estimated total £37 million depending on the Brexit date. Around a quarter of full-time research staff at Scottish universities are non-UK EU citizens and there is already anecdotal evidence that fewer EU citizens are applying for research jobs in Scotland, and some of those based here are relocating back to their home countries as well. We will continue to closely monitor the relevant data sources on an on-going basis. David Stewart. The minister will be well aware of the crucial role that the EU plays in research and development within higher education, such as items that he has already mentioned, horizon 2020, inter-egg and EU structural funds. Does the minister share my view that EU funding has been key in the development of UHI in my region, for example, with great examples of the Centre for Health, Science and Ilex innovation and life sciences? What discussion has the Scottish Government had with the UK Government about accessing the UK's shared prosperity fund to fill the huge and substantial research funding vacuum post-Brexit? Richard Lochhead. David Stewart quite rightly highlights one of the institutions most affected by Brexit of any shape or form. Indeed, it's fair to say that the University of Helen's Islands wouldn't exist potentially if it hadn't been for EU funding in the first place. I saw just this week another EU grant being awarded to UHI that was in the news just a couple of days ago. I can assure David Stewart that we recognise the devastating impact on UHI of Brexit should that go ahead. That is a regular issue that I raise with my UK counterparts. As David Stewart suggests, they need to ensure that any funding that is lost from leaving the EU is replicated by the UK Government. We have yet to have those assurances. We have not had any guarantees along those lines. It is important that we have our share of UK research funds if we do leave the EU. The solution is not to leave the EU in the first place. Jenny Gilruth. To ask the Scottish Government what impact Brexit will have on higher education institutions. Richard Lochhead. A lesson of access to European research programmes could see Scottish institutions lose, in some cases, as I have just discussed, and in some cases up to a quarter of their total research funding. A reduction in the number of EU citizens coming to work and study at universities, meanwhile threatens their research excellence and the ability of our institutions to continue providing certain courses, and would lead to a loss of the multiculturalism that is so vital to our campus' success and the experience of our students in Scotland. The Scottish Government continues to work tirelessly with the sector to protect our institutions from the damage of an unwanted Brexit and what that would entail. We continue to make strongly the case to the UK Government, the views of Scotland and those of our universities in further and higher education institutions. Jenny Gilruth. I thank the minister for that response. A fifth of St Andrews University funding comes directly from EU sources. Has the Scottish Government undertaken any analysis of how a reduction in EU funding will impact higher education institutions, the ability to provide a quality education and how that might affect local economies? Richard Lochhead. St Andrews is, of course, one of Scotland's leading higher education institutions. One of the reasons why it is doing well, of course, is due to its European collaboration with its research funding. It gets through the European research programmes, as is highlighted by Jenny Gilruth. As I said in my previous answer, we have looked closely at the potential impact of Scotland. We punch above our weight when it comes to securing horizon 2020 research funding way above the rest of the UK. Therefore, we are going to be disproportionately damaged if we lose access to those programmes. At the very least, in any of the Brexit scenarios should they happen, we have to have full participation in the future horizon 2020 funding programmes. As yet, as I said before, unfortunately for St Andrews University and the rest of our institutions, we have not had any such guarantees in the UK Government as yet. I ask for shorter questions and answers for the supplementaries, please. Gillian Martin followed by Willie Rennie. Thank you, Presiding Officer. Brexit will also affect students from EU countries wishing to study our universities. The UK Government has talked about three-year study visas, but given that Scottish undergraduate courses last four years, what is the Scottish Government doing to highlight to the UK Government that a three-year visa system will simply not work in Scotland? Richard Lochhead. Well, today it so happens. I met the chairs of the university courts for a meeting, and I think it's fair to say that their number one concern that they were expressing to me, amongst many concerns from Brexit, was the impact of the UK's immigration policy. The ludicrous infuriating fact that the current immigration policy for students has been designed around the English degree and not the Scottish degree of four years, as was highlighted by Gillian Martin. That just gives any evidence if anyone still needs it, that Scotland is an afterthought when it comes to UK policymaking and its impact on Scottish further and higher education. It is disgraceful and it has caused a lot of anger amongst our institutions and, of course, our student population as well. We are making the strongest possible representations to make sure that, should we leave the EU, that the subsequent immigration policy takes into account the distinctive nature of Scottish higher education? Willie Rennie. I think that the minister will agree with me that the best way to make all of this stop is to stop Brexit altogether. The most important thing is also that we maintain relationships between the European universities and the Scottish universities. Has he had any discussions with higher education ministers in European countries about keeping those close relationships together so that, when we stop Brexit, those relationships can continue? Richard Lochhead. That is an important issue that Willie Rennie raises. We have discussed maintaining our relationship with European institutions with Scottish higher education institutions and we have lent our support to their relationships with the European institutions. We have some plans to reach out directly from the Scottish Government to them. I know that the UK Government claimed to have done that as well because we raised that with them at our meeting with the UK ministers. They say that they are in contact with the European institutions. It is certainly an issue that is at a high upper agenda and we are certainly going to pursue it because we absolutely have to protect those very valuable relationships. Question 2, Annabelle Ewing. To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on progress with the operation of the developing the Young Workforce programme in Fife. Jamie Hepburn. We have seen good progress in developing the Young Workforce in Fife. Collaboration between Fife College and local schools is ensuring that career education is central to the curriculum offer, supporting young people to identify their own skills and learn in a range of settings within their senior phase. In addition, the D.Y.W regional group has connected schools and employers a significant partnership. There is an Andrews Link's trust to providing a wide range of programmes, including new opportunities to their pre-employment academy for young people at risk of a negative destination. Annabelle Ewing. I thank the minister for his answer and I am pleased to note that good progress is being made in Fife. It is a key issue for the programme's architects, where Ian Wood was to see primary school children involved. Can the minister provide an update as to whether all primary schools in Coutinbeath constituency are now participating so that pupils can be inspired from a young age about the wide opportunities of the world of work? Jamie Hepburn. The short answer is yes. There is a very strong focus in the D.Y.W in the Coutinbeath primary cluster. For example, Kelty Primary has created a teaching resource folder that assists with embedding the D.Y.W into the curriculum at Benarth Day primary. It meets with local employers to co-design programmes and engage them between industry and education. Crossgates primary school runs a skills and enterprise academy programme. The six primary schools and Miss Ewing's constituency are going to take part in the 7th of June in the Green Power Trust goblin car race event, which involves in working with local engineering firms and the small and medium enterprises to design and build from scratch a car race event. That will take place in 7th of June at Race 1 Coutinbeath. I am sure that Miss Ewing will be delighted to be there if she is available. Question 3, Miles Priggs. To ask the Scottish Government what proportion of graduates from Scottish medical schools go on to work in the NHS in Scotland. Richard Lochhead. From the Higher Education Statistics Agency's Destination of Leavers from Higher Education Survey, in 2016-17, of those working six months after graduation, around 66 per cent, two thirds of clinical medicine, UK and EU domicile graduates were from Scottish higher education institutions and working for an NHS organisation in Scotland. Miles Priggs. I thank the minister for that answer. In July 2018, before the member became the minister, he said in the press and journal that we need radical interventions to effectively handcuff more doctors trained in Scotland at that public expense to the Scottish NHS, at least for a set period of time. Although I do not agree with the language used, what progress is SNP ministers making to develop a bonding scheme? Richard Lochhead. I congratulate the member's research for digging out these fantastic quotes from local member for Murray constituency. I should say that the Scottish Government, of course, is continuing to look at other initiatives to address this issue, but I have taken a number of bold steps over the last couple of years alone, which I am sure the member is aware of. Indeed, the medical undergraduate intake since 2007 has increased significantly, but just from 1819 there were 953 places up to 1,038 scheduled for 2021. Indeed, there has also been an increase of Scottish domicile intake from 485 from 2015-16 to 515 for 2017-18. As the member will know, we take advice from a committee of medical professionals on the workforce demands, and that is where we take our guidance from a number of graduates and the graduates required in Scotland. We are continuing to look for even more bolder steps, but we have taken a number of bolder steps that are set to make a material difference. Question 4, Finlay Carson. To ask the Scottish Government what its position is on expert advice presented to the Education and Skills Committee regarding a reduction of subject choice in schools. John Swinney. The curriculum for excellence provides significant flexibility to ensure that schools now have the freedom to design a three-year senior phase, including a range of courses and qualifications tailored to meet the needs of young people at school. Wherever possible, subjects should ensure that young people can choose their preferred subjects in the senior phase working with partners to do so. What matters is the qualifications and awards that pupils leave school with, and not only what they study in S4. Last year, a record proportion went on to positive destinations, including work, training or further study. Finlay Carson. I thank the cabinet secretary for that response. The cabinet secretary will be aware of the copious amount of evidence presented to the Education and Skills Committee on the teaching of several levels of course in the same classroom. Evidence suggests that it has substantial repercussions for subject choice and teacher's ability to prepare students, particularly in science subjects. Can the cabinet secretary say how many schools are being forced to teach multi-level courses in science subjects in Galloway and Western Fries? John Swinney. I do not have that information to hand, but I think that Mr Carson should know that multi-level teaching has been a feature of Scottish education for a long, long time. Indeed, multi-level teaching was around when even I was at school, which is not yesterday, so this is not a new phenomenon. I would just simply say to Mr Carson that every effort is made to meet the needs of young people in their choices of subjects. I think that it is important as we look through this debate that we take a whole range of different evidence. Mr Carson cited evidence that the Education and Skills Committee has seen on the subject. He may also have seen the comments of another expert, Professor Mark Priestley, of the University of Stirling, who yesterday said that this is not new use, to which Mr Carson refers. It is at least the third time that we have seen a moral panic about curriculum narrowing, each one based on low-level, superficial and sometimes flawed analysis of largely publicly available data. There is a need for a more nuanced approach. That is what I am interested in, which we will take forward in the debate that is about to happen this afternoon, to make sure that we meet the needs of young people in Scotland. Emma Harper. The number of subjects pupils sit is a matter solely for the individual schools and head teachers to determine and should not be a matter for local authorities. Does the cabinet secretary therefore agree that members should ensure that they have their information correct before misleading statements to local press, therefore misleading the public, parents and teachers? Does he agree that all evidence should be considered to reach an evidence-based conclusion? John Swinney. I think that there should be accuracy in statements that are made and in the detail that is provided. I am not sure what Emma Harper refers to, but I am sure that they are well validated. It is important that we have an evidence debate on the subject, because the future of young people depends on the way in which we look at that evidence. Question 5, Jackie Baillie. To ask the Scottish Government what support it provides to young people from armed forces families when applying for further and higher education. Richard Lochhead. We are committed to supporting all students, including those from armed forces families. Members of the armed forces and the families who are ordinarily resident in Scotland can, assuming they meet the normal eligibility rules, apply to the students towards the Agency Scotland to fund their higher education tuition fees. That is in addition to potential living cost support of both bursaries and loans that may be available, again in line with well understood criteria. In relation to further education, members of the armed forces and their families who are ordinarily resident in Scotland have rightly raised a number of issues in relation to constituency cases and correspondence with myself, and we are actively looking into those concerns, so I clearly hope to be able to update her more fully in due course. Jackie Baillie. As the minister knows, my constituent, Abigail, has been living with her grandfather in Scotland since June 2018. Her parents sold their home in England as her father has been transferred to Faslane, and Scotland will sell her home, but he is at sea for six months, so they have not yet bought a house locally. Abigail wants to study engineering, but she has been denied funding to go to college because she does not meet exactly the residency criteria. It seems desperately unfair and goes against the spirit, I believe, of the armed forces covenant. I am grateful to the minister for his letter of an hour ago. Could he outline what further consideration is being given to this because there is clearly some urgency if Abigail is to go to college this year? Richard Lochhead. I have asked my officials to look into this case in more detail. I was keen to reply to the member before today's question to put a picture as to what we were thinking. Clearly, there are different arrangements for further education, higher education, and the issue with further education is the fact that there are no reciprocal arrangements with the other UK Administrations. Therefore, clearly she will understand that we cannot find ourselves in a position where we are doing one thing and the rest of the queue is doing something different. I ask her to rest assured that I am looking at this. I think that there is something to be looked at here, but clearly we do have a law and we do regulations, so we have to look at them carefully. I have a quick supplementary please from Maurice Corry. Could the minister advise what measures are in place specifically to help veterans who may need some form of additional learning support? Does the Scottish Government feel that more could be done to help veterans to succeed once they have a place in further or higher education? Richard Lochhead. The Minister for Veterans, Graham Day, is taking an interest in those issues. I can assure the member, and I am happy to update him on our conversations that are planned on what extra support could be made available for students from armed services who have extra needs when they are at further higher education. There are some measures in place that I understand, and I would be happy to write to the member about that. Question 6, Daniel Johnson. To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to the announcement that SQA staff are to be balloted for industrial action. John Swinney. That is an operational matter for the Scottish Qualifications Authority, but I can assure Daniel Johnson in Parliament that the Scottish Government is in regular contact with the SQA to monitor the safe delivery of the 2019 exam diet and to ensure that appropriate contingency arrangements are in place. I would take this opportunity to urge the Scottish Qualification Authority and the union's concern to continue their discussions to reach a resolution. Daniel Johnson. The SQA are due to meet with the advisory conciliation arbitration service again next week. So can I ask what specific action the education secretary will take to ensure that the concerns of staff are taken seriously by the SQA, especially given how long it took them to engage with trade unions in the first place, but also to ensure that work forces confidence in the leadership of that organisation is restored. First of all, I would say that some of the trade unions have been in agreement with the restructuring proposals that have been taken forward by the Scottish Qualifications Authority, so it's not all of the trade unions that are involved in the particular action that Mr Johnson cites. I think in general it is good and constructive practice for there to be effective and engaged dialogue about resolving any of these questions because the requirements application of the fair work principles would be consistent with that whole approach and we would expect the SQA to operate under that basis. I do hope that the discussions that take place under the auspices of ACAS will be constructive discussions to lead to a resolution. On the question of leadership of the SQA, Daniel Johnson may have noted this morning that the announcement was made of the appointment of the successor to Janet Brown as chief executive of the Scottish Qualifications Authority and I'm delighted to congratulate Fiona Robertson on her appointment to that significant role in Scottish education. To ask the Scottish Government how it is seeking to improve educational support for young adults when transitioning from children to adult services. The most recent statistics indicate that 94.4 per cent of all school leavers had a positive destination including work, training our further study in three months of leaving school. We recognise the importance of preparing our young people for life beyond school and the range of supports in schools across Scotland to help pupils with this. In addition, education authorities have specific duties to prepare pupils with additional support needs for their post-school transition, which should happen no later than two years before they leave school. Cabinet Secretary, my constituent Jennifer is turning 18, has both physical and cognitive impairments and has been supported in specialist education throughout her time at school. Jennifer, considering NQ and work and living skills at college, has only recently been notified of her adult social worker and they will meet for the first time shortly. It is very unclear how the council will support Jennifer, including the use of self-directed support, which can be restrictive within Glasgow City Council, yet she is a major decision to make on her educational future. How can we assure local authorities that we can better support families to plan for such transition, such as Jennifer's? Jennifer and her mother, Crystal Fuel Glasgow City Council, have assisted far more and at a far earlier stage. John Swinney. I am concerned about the details that Mr Doris has raised with me. I would reiterate the point that I made in my earlier answer that at least two years before a young person is considered to be leaving school, there should be engagement to begin to handle the transition arrangements, which are recognised to be significant particularly for young people with additional support needs and who may also have disabilities. We are working with a range of organisations, with integration authorities and social care providers to ensure that our approach addresses the very circumstances that Mr Doris raises. I am very happy to look at the specific case to see if there is any further intervention that the Government can encourage to ensure that Jennifer's needs are best addressed and that she can make that effective transition to a post-school environment. That concludes the questions on education skills and we will move on to the portfolio of health and sport. Can I ask that some thought is given pleas to fairly short questions and answers, particularly with supplementaries or we won't manage to get through them all? To ask the Scottish Government what impact reductions to the Fife health and social care partnership budget will have on its ability to meet rising demand for social care. Jeane Freeman The Fife integration joint board budget has not decreased but has increased by £14.7 million this year, taking their budget to a total of £511.7 million. The IJB board has reduced its budgetary pressures by nearly £9 million since it was established in 2016-17. The deficit which continues to need to be addressed needs to be addressed by NHS Fife and Fife Council and the IJB and together with COSLA we are engaging with them to systematically reduce that deficit in a planned way without reducing capacity. Willie Rennie The demand for social care is rising and there is a £15 million gap in the budget of the partnership. As a result the Leng Centre and the St David's Centre in my constituency are to close. Charges have increased and complex and respite care packages are to be cut. So what is the Cabinet Secretary going to do to make this stop? Jeane Freeman First of all I'm going to use accurate figures. There isn't a £15 million gap. There is at the moment in the 1920 budget a £8.5 million gap which, as I said in the answer to my first question has come down from some £15 million which is a deficit budget that the IJB was started off with and was a deficit budget agreed by NHS Fife and Fife Council. What happens is that every year since then both the council and the health board agreed to reducing the IJB's annual overspend which seems to me to be an important way of bringing down a deficit that the IJB did not create since it was there when it started and that is exactly the approach that we are trying between COSLA and ourselves to get the three parties the IJB, Fife and Fife Council and the health board they take a systematic approach to reducing that deficit which would not cost the health board or the council any more money than they have already put out annually but would allow the IJB to operate on a sound of financial footing and in terms of the increased demand of course that is why in my health budget that was approved by this Parliament we provided an additional £160 million through local authorities for the purpose of integrating health and social care in order to recognise the additional demands being placed on them from that rising demographic challenge supplementary Alexander Stewart thank you to ask the cabinet secretary what discussions have taken place between Fife health and social care partnership and the Scottish Government around the increase in social care service charges and what the likely impact will be so the question of social service care charges is a question for local authorities to determine that is for them to reach decisions in terms of how they wish to allocate their resources and apply that across all the responsibilities they have however across the country there is disparity in this question and there are some concerns raised directly with me with members about it all of that is factoring into the current review that we are undertaking on adult social care which also includes the leadership of those on the receiving end of social care so that we can find a better position overall to ensure that there is a consistent standard across the country for the delivery and the charging of social care question number 2 Liz Smith which NHS boards offer robotic assisted prostatectomy as a method of surgery for prostate cancer All NHS Scotland boards offer robotic assisted prostatectomy and they do that on a regional basis across 3 high volume centres in Edinburgh Aberdeen and Glasgow Liz Smith I thank the cabinet secretary for that, it has been brought to my attention however that patients in NHS Tayside gyntaf o'r prosesurgynogi pan yw'r port ddiwanedd ar gyferwyr. Felly, rydyn ni'n hyn o chesbwyll yn syniadau o gydfodol i ddargiadau yn teisidol, ac roedd y ddwygarnau i ddyddiaeth, losgau ar gyferwyr ach ynw'n teisidol, am gydag ymateb. Jane Freeman. A wedi hyn i fyfwrdd i Ms Smith yn fy ngysylltu, beth oedd mae i iawn y prifswyd ddau'r llunio hwn yn fawr o'r ddysgrifiad waith amser amdano, lle mae'n fawr o'r prifwyd yn cael ei ddechrau nile oherwydd na thymau oherwydd yn amser yr enrydd rhaid ei ddenganiadau, mae'n gwylliant y brifelio ac yn dweud. Mae'n mwynhauio rhaid i gael eu prifwydau i'r prifwyd. Mae'n glenif ydych chi'n gwych i'r prifwyd, i ddechrau i'r Prif Weinidog maen nhw'n cyffredinol ar gwybod i mwy fwy o ymgymproses. Mae hi fydd yn siŵr i gyfnod i ddeitartu chi, ac yn gwneud y broses hwnnw, i chi'n ddangos ffordd i ddod dependid yn gwweithio fyddo i'r ddechrau'n fucweld. A bryddau i'r fforydd o ddim yn gweld iddo i ddynistig o ffordd i ddynistig o ddydd for patients in NHS Tayside and then properly they bring that to us. That's not happened but it may of course happen in the future. Question number three, Peter Chapman. To ask the Scottish Government how much compensation has been paid to NHS grampian staff in each year since 2016 for incidents or injuries in the workplace. Jeane Freeman. I'm grateful to the member. The total level of compensation claims by staff since 2016, the total amount is £144,000. That over 2016 to 2018 breaks down as £16,500 in the first year, £30,823 in 2017 and £96,771 in 2018. Peter Chapman. I thank the cabinet secretary for that answer. This is a significant sum and has risen year on year. Those payments were made for a variety of incidents including exposure to contaminated blood and violence at the hands of the public. This government has presided over a staffing crisis over the last 12 years. Fewer employees are being asked to do more. As a result, front-line staff work in demanding and stressful environments. Of course, the real issue here is NHS grampian has been consistently underfunded by this Government. I believe that by the time the region was given a fair share of resources, does the cabinet secretary agree? Jeane Freeman. I'm not going to agree with factually inaccurate statements. First of all, there isn't a staffing crisis driven by lower the usual numbers of staff. In fact, our staffing numbers across the board have increased in NHS Scotland. The member has heard me say this many times. I'm very happy to send him yet again the detail of that. Nor is NHS grampian underfunded. We've been through this before. Nonetheless, the important point of this question—I'm disappointed that Mr Chapman didn't get to it—is the safety of our staff. The work that we do across all our health boards to ensure that staff are protected as safe as possible and that, where instances of violence or aggression or unsafe practice damages them, we take those very seriously, we look to review our policies and see where improvement might be made and we make compensation where that is the case. I think that there is another way of looking at this and that is to see that the indicators are that we take those very seriously. My final point is that all the policies and all the practice that we undertake in terms of keeping staff safe, including the increased work that is under way in terms of mental health and wellbeing, are undertaken directly with the staff organisations and trade unions that are involved, and that is exactly the right way to do it. How much compensation was paid to NHS grampian staff in each year since 2016, specifically for bullying? Could the cabinet set to provide the figures perhaps in writing for each Scottish board? I am particularly interested in NHS Highland and Tayside for staff who have expressed long-standing persistent concerns about bullying. I do not have that specific figure available, but, as Mr Stewart has said, I am very happy to provide him with as much of that information as we hold centrally as soon as I can. To ask the Scottish Government when it last met NHS Fife and what issues were discussed. Scottish ministers and Government officials regularly meet with representatives of all health boards, including NHS Fife. I last met the chair of the health board on 25 March. Is the cabinet secretary familiar with improving the cancer journey service that was initially piloted in Fife and then rolled out, along with Macmillan Cancer Support, which sees partners from Housing, Health, voluntary and financial support services working together to support people with cancer? With figures from the Scottish Cancer Patient Experience Survey published yesterday, showing the need for more signposting for patients towards support and welfare advice, and the need for health partners to have a stake in that, and also revealing that less than a third of people received a care plan, what is the Scottish Government doing to support the sharing of best practice, such as the ICG service in Fife, more widely? Jeane Freeman. I am grateful to Ms Baker for raising what is a really important question. The survey, as she knows, is one that was conducted by Macmillan Cancer, and the work that we undertake in this area is jointly with Macmillan Cancer Services. That survey also indicated over 90 per cent satisfaction rate—95% and 96% satisfaction rate—on the part of patients in terms of the care that they received. However, significant improvements are required on the information that people receive, both at the time of diagnosis and the capacity to go back once they have absorbed that diagnosis and asked for the questions and get further information. With Macmillan Cancer, we will now analyse the results of that survey and look at the specific areas of improvement that we need to make. I hope to be able to update the chamber on that shortly. Supplementary, Mark Ruskell. Thank you. The Fife health and social care partnership was due to meet last week to approve a new multidisciplinary model for out-of-hours services in St Andrews. However, the meeting was cancelled, leaving communities stuck with the same contingency arrangements that they have had for the last year. Can the cabinet secretary provide an update on the reasons for that delay and for how long will patients in North East Fife have to travel nearly an hour to out-of-hours appointments in Cacoddy? Jeane Freeman. My understanding is that the Fife health and social care partnership is due to meet at the end of May, where they will receive a number of proposals in terms of the delivery of services throughout Fife and including North East Fife. The member will recall of course that in the latter part of last year, I specifically asked the IJB not to proceed at that point with the proposals that they had at that stage because there was a significant degree of local concern about those, including local concern around their engagement on that, and there were specific requests to the health board from two local organisations. I understand that I am not aware therefore of any reason why a more recent meeting has been cancelled. I understand that improvements have been made, that there have been significant discussions in North East Fife, including with the university, that look to provide some answers to the concerns that local people had raised about the accessibility and the delivery of service. There is increased use of paramedics, advanced nurse practitioners and so on, and the detail of that, Presiding Officer, I am happy to ensure that the member has that, but it will be the end of May when the IJB, as I understand it, considers all the proposals. I have another four questions here, and I know that I am not going to get through them all. Cabinet Secretary, I know that you like to give lots of information, and that can be appreciated, but if you could perhaps truncate your answer somewhat, I know that it is difficult. To ask the Scottish Government what steps it is taking to minimise the risk to patient care arising from warnings of budget deficits in NHS Ayrshire and Arran and other NHS board areas. I am not sure what evidence the member has to suggest that patient care is at any risk in NHS Ayrshire and Arran. It is going to receive another £720 million. Its most recent results in terms of hospital standardised mortality ratio, published in February of this year, are improved even on the Scottish results. All the indicators that we have in terms of patient safety are showing that NHS Ayrshire and Arran is doing better in some instances than the rest of Scotland, and of course Scotland is doing very well on those kind of indicators, so I am not really clear what concerns the member has specifically. John Scott. I thank the cabinet secretary for that answer. However, Lewis MacDonald, Lewis Morrison, chair of the Doctors Union BMA Scotland, has said that his members say on a regular basis and indeed reported in a major survey that 97 per cent of doctors feel that inadequate resources are affecting the quality and safety of care, and I have particular concerns about NHS Ayrshire and Arran. What will the Scottish Government do in order to help doctors to deliver better patient care in Ayrshire and Scotland? Jeane Freeman. Of course, I firmly believe that, as indeed Lewis MacDonald does from the BMA, that the new GP contract is a significant step forward in helping doctors and particular GPs to do the work that they need to do. However, if Mr MacDonald or Mr Scott likes to bring me their specific concerns, I will of course look at them. Can the cabinet secretary advise the chamber as to the percentage of Scotland's resource budget allocated to the NHS, and can she confirm whether all health benefit consequentials are assigned to NHS Scotland? If so, does she agree that any shortfall on NHS funding in Scotland is down to the austerity of Mr Scott's UK Tory Government colleagues? Jeane Freeman. Health expenditure is the largest element of the Scottish Government's budget, accounting for 43 per cent of total Government expenditure, a rise from 37 per cent in 2010-11. This year, it will exceed £14 billion, and our recently published medium-term financial framework sets out a proposal for further funding of £2.7 billion between now and 2023-24. Of course, Mr Gibson is perfectly correct. In real terms, our budget will be cut by 6.8 per cent in terms of what it should be, and that is entirely down to the approach of the Westminster Government. To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to research from Glasgow Caledonia University that suggested a tenfold increase in HIV infection rates among drug users in Glasgow. Thank you, Mr Sarwar, for bringing this important question to the chamber. I know that it will be appreciated by the people who lie behind those figures. I welcome the research from Glasgow Caledonia University and Health Protection Scotland on the causes of the outbreak of HIV identification and identified in 2015 amongst people who inject drugs in Glasgow. The research was done in collaboration with NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde and is an example of the kind of joint working that has been vital to tackling the outbreak. The most recent HIV figures that were published yesterday suggested that the outbreak is coming under control, but there is no room for complacency. Prevention of HIV transmission remains a clear priority for the Scottish Government. I also support the Government's calls for a safe injecting room in Glasgow to help to tackle the issue. Alongside that, will the Scottish Government commit to two things. One, to have a new drug strategy that reflects the reality in too many of our communities across Scotland. Secondly, what urgent action it will take to tackle homelessness, which is also identifying one of the key reasons for the increase. Mr Sarwar, for his further question, both the points that he makes are very important and they are both points that are recognised within the new drug strategy. We absolutely acknowledge that more must be done to tackle the harms and the deaths associated with drug use. It is complex, and that is why our strategy challenges our stakeholders to adapt and service providers to adapt to ensure that they provide a high-quality person-centred approach and to better engage with and meet the needs of those who are most at risk as a result of their drug use. The member is right to talk about the safe consumption facility. It is a really important and evidence-based proposal that will make a difference that would save lives. I have to emphasise that, if the UK Government is not prepared to take action that will save lives here in Scotland, it should transfer the power to this Parliament where we can make those decisions to save those lives in Glasgow and elsewhere in Scotland. In September 2017, Glasgow Greater and Clyde closed the needill exchange in the city centre. That has widely been noted as part of the increase in infection rates that we have seen. Does the cabinet secretary now think that that was a mistake? I will not take the promotion. The member makes an interesting point. Obviously, the service within Glasgow central station decision was not one that Glasgow health and social care supported, and it was a regrettable decision that those services were removed. Since then, we have been working with Glasgow health and social care partnership as they look to address the wider issues. Specifically, I know that the service in Glasgow is now providing and developing outreach work, where they are taking that service directly to those people who require it. That is proving more adaptable because it is able to move to wherever it is required. It was regrettable that that decision was taken. It was not one that was within our control, and we tried to reverse that. I know that the previous public health minister had a lot of engagement to try and turn that around, but it is good to say that Glasgow health and social care partnership is working to find alternative provision in the area. That concludes portfolio question times. I apologise to Colin Smith and Mark McDonald for not reaching their questions. I also make an observation that, in this particular portfolio, ministerial responses did take a long time. However, in fairness, I have to say that some of the questions that were put were asked for an awful lot of information, and some of those questions may well be better considered as written questions in the future in order that we can make sure that everyone gets a fair shout at health portfolio questions. Thank you very much. The next item of business that we will move on to when everyone is settled. Well, not everyone when the main players are settled.