 Y Llywyddyn cyffredinol yn y gyllidegau gael yombag, a'r ystafell o gyllidegau gyllidegau gyllidegau genedlau gyllidegau. I start by reminding members I'm the PLO to the Cabinet Secretary for Education. To ask the Scottish Government what steps it has taken to close the attainment gap. Minister Jamie Hepburn. The Scottish Government has committed £750 million during the course of this session through the attainment Scotland fund to provide target support for children, schools and communities to close a poverty-related attainment gap. In 2017-18, we allocated £120 million directly to the head teachers on the basis of the numbers of pupils in primary and secondary 3 known to be eligible and registered for free-school meals at the rate of £1,200 per pupil. That funding is on top of the existing £50 million attainment Scotland funding that will continue to provide target support to specific Scottish attainment challenge authorities and schools in the communities with high levels of abet purvation, as well as a number of national programmes. Jenny Gilruth. I thank the minister for that response. Across the water in the glorious kingdom of fife, The Labour Party is proposing to cut 100 front-line teaching staff from our schools. In leaving, they plan to cut speech and language provision in Mount Fleury primary school. In 2015, they closed Tansol primary school in Glennothys. Does the minister agree with me that it is high time the Labour Party got their act together when it comes to closing the attainment gap and put kids before Labour's cuts? I would certainly share in the glory of Fife with Jenny Gilruth. I would recognise that those are decisions directly for Fife Council, but at a time when we are seeking to make progress to further close the attainment gap when we are working together with local authorities towards that end through the development and young workforce strategy. We have provided some funding through the innovation fund, the schools programme and the pupil equity fund of around £11 million to Fife that shows that we are certainly up for the challenge of reducing the attainment gap in Fife, just as we are across the country. That will, of course, require all our partners to work with us towards that end. Liz Smith, at yesterday's education committee, serious concerns were raised by a number of professionals for additional support for learning, making it clear that there are weaknesses within the teacher training for additional support. Could I ask what the Scottish Government is doing to address those concerns? Of course, we are investing in a range of activities to support the up-skilling and training of professional teachers across the country. We have seen a significant increase in the intake. This year, we will continue to invest in that area. If any concerns are brought to our attention about specific areas, then it is incumbent on us to look at that. Of course, we will look at any evidence that the education committee gathers. Alex Cole-Hamilton To ask the Scottish Government what evaluation has been made of its previous suicide prevention strategy and how it will underpin its updated mental health strategy. No formal evaluation has been made of the suicide prevention strategy 2013-16. However, over the last three years, the Scottish Government's suicide prevention, implementation and monitoring group met on seven occasions and advised on progress with the various commitments. Adjustments have been made as appropriate to actions arising from the commitments in light of this discussion and advice. The engagement process for the mental health strategy included discussion about suicide prevention. We have also undertaken some engagement with key stakeholders from the NHS, the third sector and academia to help inform areas to focus on in a future suicide-preventing strategy or action plan. We therefore have evidence from those processes about stakeholders' views on suicide prevention. Later in 2017, we will undertake some wider engagement in order to allow stakeholders the opportunity to feed in their views. Alex Cole-Hamilton I thank the minister for that answer. This chamber will be well aware that suicide still represents the leading cause of death in men under the age of 50 in Scotland. Nearly 15 years have passed since the Choose Life initiative was launched and that saw an 18 per cent reduction in suicides in this country. It shows that policy focus can have a positive impact in this area. To this end, can the minister indicate when the last suicide prevention strategy, which she expired last year, will be replaced and what measures it might contain? The minister said that, as I indicated in my answer, we continue to monitor the effectiveness of the current suicide prevention strategy, which, of course, continues until a new one is published. As the member is aware, at the moment, we are concentrating on the mental health strategy, but, as I said in my answer, we will review the current suicide prevention strategy in due course. Keith Gibson From 2011 to 2015, the rate of suicide in NHS Ayrsharnan, Grampian and Tayside were significantly lower than in the rest of Scotland, while in Lothian and Highland suicide rates were significantly higher. That is even when deprivation and other factors were considered. Can I ask the minister if the reasons why those differences have been examined in order that lessons learned can help to reduce suicide rates elsewhere in Scotland? The minister gives him some questions. As he knows, suicide is a very complex phenomenon with a wide range of determinants. Any assessment of difference between rates of suicide in local areas must be treated with caution, because in local areas the absolute numbers are much smaller than national numbers. We are investing in research such as the Scottish Suicide Information Database, which is helping to cast new light on factors behind individual deaths by suicide. That includes consideration of suicide trends in local NHS board areas. That research will help to inform our engagement later this year on future priorities for suicide prevention. Provision of services, as the member knows, is a local responsibility, and individual NHS boards work with their partners to tailor local suicide prevention work to fit locally-assessed needs and circumstances. There is clearly a link between deprivation and suicide rates to what work is the Government doing to tackle inequality in Scotland, which is rising in the last 10 years. Secondly, I will follow on from Alex Cole-Hamilton's question. You are three times as likely to commit suicide if you are a male but only half as likely to access mental health services, so how can we get the message across to the most deprived communities and to the hardest to reach males to access those vital services? As the member knows, across Government, we are doing all we can to reduce inequality, and that is a key factor in the health department and directorate. That is why it is important that provision of services is a local responsibility so that local partners can work to fit the needs of their local communities. The minister has recognised that there is a need to refresh local suicide prevention action around the country. Can she update to Parliament how local suicide prevention schemes will be supported as the national strategy is developed? As the member indicates, I am aware of the MSPs, including myself, having had a number of emails on this particular issue. That will be taken into account when we develop the next strategy. Question 3, Iain Gray. Do you ask the Scottish Government what recent discussions it has had with retail banks regarding branch networks? Minister Paul Wheelhouse, Scottish Government ministers meet regularly with the retail banks to discuss a wide range of issues, including branch closures. I appreciate Mr Gray's concerns over the closures recently announced in his constituency, which will have an undoubted impact on local communities. Those concerns are shared by many as banks continue to change the way they choose to deliver services to their customers, albeit we also recognise that shift over to digital banking is having a significant impact on the footfall in some branches. While we recognise declining branch activity may be a driver for banks today, we would urge banks to avoid acting precipitately and to see branch closures as a last resort and, before closing a branch, to consider consultation with local stakeholders and communities to explore all practical options to retain a branch. We are viable to do so and to consider alternatives to reflect the needs of many customers who have a strong preference or indeed need for face-to-face contact. Iain Gray. Indeed, Preston Pans in my constituency recently lost its last bank, an RBS branch, and now nearby Trinent is down to one bank with the TSB closing their branch there. I do appreciate, as the minister made clear, that those decisions are not in the control of government. Can I ask the minister and his colleagues to take every opportunity to perhaps go a little further than he did in his answer and impress on those banks that they benefited from a great deal of public money and that the public deserves better in return? I very much recognise Iain Gray's point that has been made to be by a number of members, and I know that Iain Gray has been proactive on this issue. Kenneth Gibson and other members in the chamber have raised similar issues in their constituency, so I give an undertaking to Iain Gray that I will and indeed other members across the chamber who have expressed an interest in this area to work with the banks to identify what we can do to tackle this challenge. We have to recognise that our fundamental change is taking place in banking, but I would hope that we can also find ways to try and preserve branches where possible and to work both UK Government, Scottish Government and indeed to working together to try and make sure that we are reserved powers and to intervene here that we have the right environment to protect branches. However, I take the point entirely that branches that have significant public stake in them, controlled by UK Government, could do more perhaps to protect the branch network. To ask the Scottish Government what it is doing to assist people in the oil and gas industry who are facing redundancy. Mr Paul Wheelhouse, the Scottish Government has done everything it can to minimise redundancies in the oil and gas industry, but where that has not been possible, we have supported affected employees through our initiative for responding to redundancy situations, the partnership for action for continuing employment or pace, which has focused significant efforts in the north-east with four large events attended by around three and a half thousand people. A fifth employment support event will take place in Aberdeen on 29 March. Furthermore, the energy jobs task force has brought together key partners to maximise employment opportunities, and we have set up a £12 million transition training fund that has so far enabled more than 1,600 former oil and gas workers to receive support for training from the fund. Training programmes procured by the fund will look to create 755 employment opportunities through two procurement rounds, and the fund is also supporting 12 individuals to retrain as teachers in STEM subjects in the north-east. Gillian Martin Thank the minister for that answer. Recently, I found evidence that many companies are not even considering giving interviews to applicants that have come from an oil and gas background, since I revealed this evidence publicly, I have been inundated with emails from constituents and workers all over Scotland who say that they have felt discriminated against. I have contacted the UK employment secretary about this over a month ago and have had no response to my request for guidance and action. Can the minister outline for me the Scottish Government's response to this issue, which has affected many skilled people genuinely wishing to move into other sectors for employment? It is deeply concerning to hear the reports that people are being discriminated against. It is absolutely right that Gillian Martin has raised this with UK Government ministers who clearly have responsibility in this area. I am very disappointed that, although I am not entirely surprised to say that Gillian Martin has not yet received a response to her correspondence, but if Gillian Martin would be willing to get permission from those who have provided that information to share that with me, I would certainly undertake to take this issue up with my colleague Jamie Hepburn and UK ministers to make sure that we take it further. We are fully committed for our own part in the Scottish Government to promoting fair work practices throughout Scotland, and we will continue to lobby the UK Government for full set of powers around employment law in order that this Parliament, regardless of the party, can adopt a more proactive role in addressing exactly the kind of issues that Gillian Martin has raised on behalf of her constituents. Lewis MacDonald Thank you very much. The minister will know that John MacDonald, the interim chief executive of OPETO, gave evidence to the Scottish Affairs Committee last week in Aberdeen about, in particular, the Scottish Government's approach to the apprenticeship levy in relation to the oil and gas industry, and raised concern of the unintended consequence of the Scottish Government's approach might be to incentivise oil companies to conduct training in England rather than in Scotland, because of the different way in which the levy will apply. Given his evidence and his call for a rethink by the Scottish Government, will the minister give an undertaking today to carry out such a rethink? John MacDonald I certainly would first want to put on record our concern, which I know my colleague Jamie Hepburn has mentioned a number of times in his chamber, that we were not consulted on in position of the apprenticeship levy, which clearly has a big impact on major employers in Scotland, and that was a fundamental failure for the part of the UK Government to engage the Scottish Government in its responsibilities. However, I take on board the very serious point that we need to make sure that we have sufficient support for oil and gas employers in training. I know that there has been very good engagement between Mr Hepburn and OPETO, but I certainly will continue in my own dialogue with OPETO and Mr Hepburn as to how we can ensure that the training packages that are available for the oil and gas industry are as good as they can be. However, I would point out that the funding that came with the apprenticeship levy announcement was merely replacing funding in the block grant. Clearly, that is a concern to us that this is not new funding. Therefore, again, why is such a failure on the part of the UK Government not to consult the Scottish Government in the first place? Gail Ross To ask the Scottish Government how it works with rural community councils to develop community empowerment, devolve powers locally and help to reform local government. Minister Kevin Stewart It always has to be remembered that the statutory oversight and responsibility for community councils rests with local authorities. That said, the Government welcomes the approach of those community councils who already undertake a wide range of roles and activities for the benefit of their communities. Over recent times, the Government has been working with COSLA, the Improvement Service and Edinburgh Napier University to support community councils in their role across Scotland. In addition, the Community Empowerment Act will create opportunities for communities and community councils to enter into dialogue with public authorities about local issues and local services on their terms. Through our community choices programme, we have been supporting communities and community councils in the Highlands and across Scotland to be able to make decisions on local spending priorities. Gail Ross I thank the minister for that answer. I note in my constituency of Caithness, Sutherland and Ross that many communities feel on the periphery of decision-making by councils, and, although progress has been made in terms of participatory budgeting, many rural communities in my constituency feel that their voices are not being heard by those in the council. Are there any plans for a more proactive approach for those communities from the Scottish Government in future? Gail Ross I thank Ms Ross for her question. I am pleased that she referred to the use of participatory budgeting, which is the potential to make a real and positive contribution to communities' involvement in decision-making. I point to the chamber the ambitious programme that took place in Kinyan, Aniel and Shear in Barra in the US. A £0.5 million budget was up for decision-making by the community. I would like other authorities to follow suit. Further, we set our intentions to decentralise local authority functions budgets and to democratise oversight to local communities and to review local government in our programme for government. We continue to work with local government to develop the scope and timing of that review. Stuart Stevenson To ask the Scottish Government what the impact would be on the fishing industry of the UK Government considering it a medium priority in its negotiations on leaving the EU, as suggested in a recently leaked memo. I have asked UK ministers repeatedly for an assurance that Scotland's fishing industry will not be expendable as it was in the 1970s. UK ministers have failed to give such a guarantee. The memo, if indeed it is genuine, serves only to increase my concern that, once again, the UK Government is not taking seriously the importance of the fishing industry to Scotland. It also indicates why it is vital that Scotland is fully involved in all negotiations relating to Scotland's future in Europe. Scottish waters are among the most valuable in Europe and, with the right management and policy approach to support both offshore and onshore interests, they can help us to build growth in Scotland's rural and coastal communities. Stuart Stevenson Can I further ask the cabinet secretary in the light of the silence from the UK Secretary of State? I suspect that I know the answer. Are there any guarantees that have been given about funding levels that support fishing communities and that are a very important part of the support that flows from the current arrangements with the EU? Last week, I and my colleagues met Andrea Ledzeman and her fellow UK ministers. I cannot say what she said at that meeting because of the rules under which it was conducted, but I am able to state that I asked for an assurance that the pre-referendum pledges made by Andrea Ledzeman and George Eustace that EU funding of £500 million a year to our rural economy would be matched. Those were the pre-referendum pledges. Since the referendum, there has been radio silence. I specifically asked Andrea Ledzeman to confirm that she would match her pledge, her unequivocal pledge, that the UK Government will match the funding of the EU. We are still waiting for a reply, but, of course, we shall fight and fight again for a fair deal for Scotland's fishermen. That is why we will fight to prevent them being sold out now, as they were in the 1970s, when it emerged after the referendum that an internal memo in Whitehall said that the Conservatives regarded the Scottish fishing interests as, quote, expendable. In light of the cabinet secretary's previous answer, can I ask him, as the Scottish Government in favour of Scotland remaining a part of the common fisheries policy? We have put forward our alternative paper, Scotland's Place in Europe, where we would be able to come out of the common fisheries policy. Sadly, the UK Government, despite Mr Russell's frequent meetings with Mr Davis, has said precisely nothing whatsoever in response to that very serious paper, which sets out proposals that would protect Scotland's interests and make clear the importance of single market membership to our economy, as well as that we would not be happy to remain constrained by the CFP as an acceptable option outside of Scotland.