 That concludes general questions and will turn now to First Minister's questions, question number one, Jackson Carlaw. Yesterday, the head of Scotland's universities said that there is a growing concern that that the students in some schools, particularly in deprived areas, are losing out because of the lack of subject choice. Does the First Minister agree? I know that there is an Education Committee inquiry into this just now and we will certainly ond o bob dad bugs yn Hy� bottles. Beithinquircau fath drive 적ydag ac gyll y cywyddiant, gyda ni'r syniad honed ochre phai sy'n gwyb円, mae nu ei gadw cael Govern ddiant ar Luckywyd, a byddwn i ein hamlet o gymdag dgoliantau. G attacking in our schools we are seeing the number of pupils leaving with ed Copper employment has risen, the same has trw at level 6. The number of pupils going on into positive destinations is also at record levels. Drawing evidence is now that the attainment gap between the richest and poorest is beginning to close, so we will continue to play close attention to the matters and continue to focus on what needs to be done to yn gweddwnt i gyda i wneud went at i llawer o bellywn.ifiable education, Siobh Grant? I believe that the breadth of subjects in which students can achieve qualifications does matter. Let us just examine what is now emerginguliflower tid whereas previously schools would offer around eight subjects on s4 in a majority of cases that is reduced to six. A massive reduction in subjects like modern languages being taken in secondary school, with children in deprived parts of Scotland by far the worst affected. We raised that a year ago with the First Minister, yet from the evidence that we have heard this week, her government remains in complete denial. Why? First Minister. Again, as I am sure Jackson Carlaw is aware, the general phase of education now goes on to third year, which is longer. There is a broader range of qualifications and other awards available now. As I said in my previous answer, if you look at level 5 qualifications, the percentage of pupils getting a qualification at that level has risen since 2009. The same is true of qualifications at level 6, which is, broadly speaking, higher. We are seeing the gap narrowing. What we have to judge our education system by is not the number of qualifications in one particular year, but what young people are coming out of school with. We also see record numbers going into university, including record numbers from our deprived areas, going into university. Those are all positive developments, but we think that there is more work still to be done, which is why we have the programme of reform of education under way. Jackson Carlaw. First Minister illustrates in that answer that she is in denial. When our own main education agency was asked just yesterday by how many teachers we are short in each subject, they declared that they did not know but that they were looking into it. That brings us to the nub of the problem. We learned this week that three quarters of schools say that a lack of teachers is a constraining subject choice to some extent or to a great deal. No matter what spin she puts in it, teacher numbers are down under the SNP, down by 3,100. Is it simply the case that if you cut teacher numbers, you restrict the subjects that pupils can take? First Minister. In terms of teacher vacancies, the number of vacancies in the subjects will vary from time to time, but generally, vacancy numbers are down in our schools. In terms of teacher numbers—since I became First Minister—teacher numbers have increased in Scotland by 1,242. We have the highest number of teachers in our schools now since 2010. We have the highest number of primary school teachers since 1980. Of course, the recent pay award for teachers will help us to recruit and retain teachers even further. In fact, the contribution that the Scottish Government has made to that award is specifically geared to do just that. In terms of the issue of attainment, let me give a bit more detail of my earlier answers. Take qualifications at level 5. I should say that we have changed a little bit how those figures are counted, so I will enter that caveat. Broadly speaking, where we are able to make a direct comparison—I know that they may not want to hear that, but I suggest that they listen—in 2006-07, when this Government came to office, the percentage of pupils getting a level 5 qualification or better was just over 71 per cent. That is now 85.9 per cent. At level 6 hires, back in 2006, the percentage of pupils getting a level 6 or better qualification was 41.6 per cent. Last year, that was 62.2 per cent. Those are the facts. We are seeing attainment improve and we are seeing the gap in attainment narrow. That is good progress, but I will be the first to say that there is more work to do and we are getting on in doing it. Jackson Carlaw Of course, the achievement of students is to be celebrated, but this question is about the breadth of subjects they can take qualifications in. First Minister, more than 1,000 people have written to the very inquiry that you have just made reference to, confirming the point that I have just made about teacher numbers reducing the availability of subjects in schools. First Minister, Gail Gorman, the chief inspector of education, said to this Parliament yesterday that the failure to recruit teachers can, and in some cases does, limit opportunities to lead extensive curriculum improvement. We know that subject choice in Scottish schools has narrowed significantly under the SNP, and we know schools say that a lack of teachers, fewer in every single year this Government has been in office, is a core reason. A year ago, when we raised this at First Minister's questions, Nicola Sturgeon said that she would work hard to ensure that young people had a wide choice of subjects to take in secondary school. Yet, a year on, we are back here again. She said that education would be her number one priority. Is not it time that she acted as if it was her number one priority? First Minister. That is why we are seeing the improvements that I have just cited in the chamber. We see more people staying on longer at school, more people doing a broader range of subjects over a number of years. That is a good thing. That is exactly what curriculum for excellence is designed to achieve in terms of teacher numbers. Teacher numbers have risen in each of the last three years. Now, of course, we have a higher number of teachers than at any time since 2010, and as I said, a higher number of primary school teachers since I was at primary school. Of course, we are seeing attainment increase, so those are the facts. Jackson Carlaw talks about difficulties around teacher recruitment. That is not something unique to Scotland. The Education Secretary in England just in January said that it has become increasingly difficult to recruit and retain staff. That is a challenge for many countries, but it is a challenge that this Government is addressing by the action that we are taking to recruit and retain teachers. We can see in the exam passes and qualification statistics that I have just cited that our young people are doing better as a result. I would hope that everybody across the chamber, even Jackson Carlaw, would find it within themselves to welcome that. Yesterday afternoon, the First Minister announced that she does not believe that the Prime Minister is ready to give ground on a Brexit deal. The Labour Party also continues to vehemently oppose a no-deal Brexit. Today, we have returned in good faith to make concerted efforts to avoid that no-deal Brexit. However, there is no escaping the fact that, thanks to Theresa May and the Tories, we are now facing the cliff edge of a no-deal Brexit. Can the First Minister update Parliament and the country on her Government's resilience committee's plans in the event of a no-deal Brexit next week? The Scottish Government resilience committee will meet again this afternoon. I will chair that meeting as I have chaired meetings on a weekly basis for some time now. We are planning across the whole range of our responsibilities to ensure that, as far as we possibly can, we mitigate the impact of a no-deal Brexit. I will be very candid with the chamber, no matter how much planning or contingency work we do, it will not be possible to mitigate every impact of a no-deal Brexit should that happen, which is why it is so important all of his work to avoid that scenario arising. Yesterday, in Westminster, I had a very constructive meeting with Jeremy Corbyn. I also met the Prime Minister. In the meeting with the Prime Minister, I set out to her again the Scottish Government's single-market customs union compromise. That is not our first preference, but I said that I was willing to look at, with the Prime Minister, where there may be issues of agreement around that. I also said that I was willing and keen to talk to her about how we could allay, for example, our concerns about migration, given the demographic needs of Scotland. All I really got in return for the Prime Minister was the reasons why she did not agree with me on those things and why her deal was actually the best one. She wants to know where the rest of us are prepared to compromise, but I got no sense at all from her at any stage yesterday of where she is willing to compromise. From what I read after his meeting with her, Jeremy Corbyn and his colleagues got pretty much the same impression. If the Prime Minister wants to find a compromise, it is time that she started to set out where she is prepared to compromise. It is also time that everybody across the House of Commons unites behind initiatives, such as Joanna Cherry's motion earlier this week, to make sure that we take the risk of a no-deal Brexit away once and for all and for ever. I welcome that co-operative tone, but let's focus on something specific to the Scottish situation. Last week, the chief medical officer and the chief pharmaceutical officer said that steps were being taken to deal with any shortfall of medicines as a result of a no-deal Brexit. The health secretary previously stated that the Government wanted to have six weeks' worth of medicine in storage on top of normal stock levels by the end of March. Medicines like insulin, which over 30,000 people in Scotland rely on every day. Can the First Minister take this opportunity to reassure the public that Scotland now has access to six weeks' worth of reserves of all the medicines that we need? That is the broad assurance that we have from pharmaceutical companies. We continue to work to make sure that information is up to date and that those stockpiles remain, given that the date for a possible no-deal Brexit has changed and may change again. Those plans require to be kept under constant and on-going review. I can assure the chamber that they will be. Obviously, we hope that we are not in this situation. The Presiding Officer has indicated that, if we are facing a no-deal Brexit at the end of next week, Parliament will be recalled from recess. I welcome that assurance and the Government then will have the opportunity to set out up-to-date, up-to-the-minute details of the preparations across a whole range of those issues. I couldn't help but notice that, while Richard Leonard was asking me that very important and serious question, the Conservative benches were laughing. This is not a laughing matter. Every Conservative in this chamber and every Conservative politician across the country should be hanging their heads in shame at the fact that they have brought this country to the brink of crisis. I thank the First Minister for that answer and let me turn to something else, which is extremely serious. The finance secretary said that Brexit would represent an economic shock on the scale of the 2008 global financial crisis. In the forward to his budget, he said—I can quote him—however, if we face a no-deal or cliff edge Brexit, I will have to return to Parliament to reassess our spending priorities. How will the First Minister bring to Parliament those revised spending priorities? Will she commit to presenting her proposals for consideration by Parliament next week in the event of a recall in the light of a no-deal Brexit possibility? First Minister. That is a serious issue. First, I hope that the finance secretary does not have to return to Parliament with revised budget figures, because I hope that we do not find ourselves in a no-deal scenario. If we find ourselves in that scenario, it will be important that the finance secretary does that as quickly as possible. I do not think that it would be reasonable to expect that to be next Thursday or Friday, but as soon as possible after that, for full consideration by the Parliament, he would intend to do that. If we are in this scenario and, as I say, let us all hope that that is not the case, there will be a substantial shock to the UK economy and to the Scottish economy. Within that, we will do whatever we can to mitigate the impacts of that, but many of those levers lie in the hands of the UK Government. Firstly, many of the levers that would allow us to avoid a no-deal scenario, but also the levers that will require to be pulled if we find ourselves in that situation. I, when I was in London yesterday, also took part in the UK Cabinet Sub-Committee on No-Deal Planning, John Swinney and Mike Russell have attended previous meetings of that sub-committee. One of the issues on the agenda was the UK Government's planning for the economic response. I made the point that I do not think that the scale of what they are planning is sufficient to meet the potential scale of the challenge. We will continue to do what we can, everything we can, and press the UK Government to do likewise. I repeat again, and this is an important and very important point. If we find ourselves leaving the European Union next week or at any stage with no deal, none of us will be able to properly and fully mitigate the impacts of that, which is why all of us should be focused on doing everything that we possibly can to stop that happening. I have a number of constituency supplementaries. The first is from Liz Smith, to be followed by James Kelly. Liz Smith. Thank you. First Minister, a constituent contacted me this week to inform me that she is being told by NHS Tayside that she is one of the 300 breast cancer patients who may have received a lower dose of chemotherapy than she should have done for her treatment. This issue was raised in the findings of the recent healthcare improvement Scotland report into NHS Tayside, but just as importantly, it was raised in the media almost a year ago. Can I ask why it has taken such a long time to address those concerns and what steps the Scottish Government is taking to investigate the variations in cancer treatments across Scotland? First Minister. Firstly, a whistleblower wrote to the then health secretary, Shona Robison, in May 2018 about this issue. Shona Robison immediately arranged for that whistleblower to meet with the chief pharmaceutical officer. In July 2018, the chief medical officer and the chief pharmaceutical officer asked healthcare improvement Scotland to examine the practice of lower dosage of chemotherapy in NHS Tayside. That resulted in the publication of that report earlier this week. The findings and the recommendations of the HIS report were considered by an independent expert group to understand any potential impact on Tayside patients arising from the different approach. The group has made clear that any risk of a negative impact to patients is small. A further expert group led by Professor Aileen Keill of the Scottish Cancer Task Force will fully consider all of the HIS recommendations and how they can best be delivered. It expects to report its findings in June. NHS Tayside has already announced that it will be making changes to its breast cancer chemotherapy treatment to bring them in line with the rest of Scotland. I hope that that gives some assurance on the broader issue of variation across different health boards. This is something that the Scottish Government looks at closely. For example, an atlas of variation is often a way of looking at some of those. Where there is apparent variation, it is then possible to look into whether that is for good reasons or not an action can be taken. That is an issue that we take extremely seriously, as I hope the actions that the then health secretary took demonstrate. James Kelly is to be followed by Christine Grahame. Thank you, Presiding Officer. Workers at the Central Cercol Centre in Glasgow are deeply concerned that the news that 285 jobs are under threat with their site-facing enclosure. The proposed jobs cuts in Glasgow are the thin end of the wedge and will be deeply worrying to workers and their families. Any loss of those jobs would have an adverse effect not only in Glasgow but the wider Scottish economy. I know that, as a Glasgow MSP, the First Minister will share my concerns about that development. Can I ask the First Minister what steps the Scottish Government can take to support the workforce in its efforts to ensure that those regressive job cuts do not go ahead? I am grateful to James Kelly for raising an issue. I do very much share the concerns that he has expressed in the chamber. I am concerned to learn of the developments at British Gas and my thoughts, of course, are with the employees that are affected. Jamie Hepburn, the business minister, is pursuing a call with both the Central Cercol and the GMB as soon as it is possible for that to happen. Scottish Enterprise is also establishing contact with the company and will provide whatever support it can. Of course, British Gas is the UK's largest energy supplier. It is a significant employer in Scotland and we want to do everything that we can to protect jobs within it. I will ask Jamie Hepburn to ensure that he keeps James Kelly up-to-date and any other member of Parliament who has a constituency interest in that matter. Christine Grahame Thank you, First Minister. It gives me no pleasure to raise yet again failures on the Borders railway. However, just today there were two peak-time cancellations and, as a result of overcrowding on later trains, two people fainted, one even requiring medical assistance and there was also a pregnant woman made ill. Does the First Minister agree with me that, for Alec Hines to claim at committee last week, customers are already benefiting from improved service delivery that he needs to get out and about on the Borders trains to hear what my constituents think of his improvements? The First Minister I completely agree that the level of discomfort and inconvenience for passengers, as a result of overcrowding, in no way reflects the service level for which this Government and, indeed, Scottish taxpayers are paying. I have been informed that the cancellations today are a consequence of a train that failed early this morning, but I will certainly reinforce to Mr Hines and his colleagues the critical nature of providing a service that passengers can rely on and feel safe and comfortable to use. Improvements across ScotRail's services have been patchy with passengers in the east of the country continuing to be let down by ScotRail. The Cabinet Secretary met with senior Abellio officials on Monday this week to reinforce the absolute requirement for improvement. I said a couple of weeks ago in this chamber that ScotRail is in the last chance saloon, and I repeat that today. They must meet the commitments contained in the performance remedial agreement that they have now signed up to. Tom Mason Thank you. The First Minister will be aware that teacher absences in Aberdeen have been risen by 60 per cent in the last year alone, reaching a total of 2,486 staff days since September 2018. Why does the First Minister think that our teachers are so stressed that they need to have so much leave, and what does she plan to do about it? The First Minister We are working hard to reduce unnecessary workloads on the part of teachers. We have also just agreed with the teaching unions a pay deal that will significantly increase the pay of teachers and the recognition for the job that they do. Obviously, I am happy to ask the education secretary to speak to the local council about particular issues in that part of the country, but we will continue to take the actions that I have already outlined in the chamber today to ensure that teacher numbers continue to rise and be appropriate to the level of demands that are placed on our teachers. Willie Rennie I want to ask some questions on an area of agreement. I share the First Minister's anxiety that there may be a hasty Brexit agreement between the leader of the Labour Party and the Prime Minister. Because that agreement will not be in the withdrawal agreement, it could be unpicked by Boris Johnson if he takes over from Theresa May later this year. When she met Jeremy Corbyn yesterday, did she get an indication about how he was going to address this issue? On a people's vote, it seems clear to me that if there is an agreement between the Prime Minister and the leader of the Labour Party, there will be no people's vote. Is that her understanding? The First Minister On the first issue, I am very concerned that a deal may lead to a legally binding withdrawal agreement being passed that would irrevocably take the UK out of the EU on the strength of non-allegally binding commitments about the future relationship that could, as Willie Rennie says, be ripped up by a future Prime Minister, perish the thought such as Boris Johnson. That is a concern that I expressed strongly to Jeremy Corbyn and his colleagues yesterday. It is up to him whether he wants to listen to me, but if I was in his shoes, I would be very, very wary about doing a deal on that basis with the Prime Minister. On a people's vote, it was not clear to me from my discussions with Jeremy Corbyn yesterday which way the Labour Party will go on that issue. There is obviously a division in the Labour Party—that is fair enough—but it is absolutely vital, given the mess that this process has become, that what we do not see is a cobble together behind closed doors, least worst compromise cooked up between the Prime Minister and the leader of the opposition. Far better now to request a long extension from the EU to fight the European elections to make that possible, by all means then to allow the Commons to come up with what a compromise might look like, but then to ask the people across the UK whether they want to accept a second best compromise or whether, given everything that we have learned over the past three years, they might think that the best option for the whole of the UK is to remain in the EU. That is right, because we remainers are concerned that a deal could be done behind closed doors, giving away the real benefits of the European Union without having the people having that final say. I just want to be clear about compromise. She has talked about it today, she talked about it yesterday, she has referred to our paper in 2016 that talked about single market membership and also the customs union. That was her main position until I charmed her to support the people's vote. She did change her mind after I asked her. Can I have some clarity about what she now means about compromise? Will she insist on a people's vote in all circumstances or is she considering reverting to her original position? I encourage Willie Rennie to keep up with the charm, I think that it is much more befitting of his status in this Parliament. I want to see a people's vote in all circumstances. I have tried to set this out before. This is not a situation of my choosing, it is not a situation of Willie Rennie's choosing. My preference is for Scotland to remain in the EU, and I will do everything that I can to try to bring that option about. However, if we are faced with that choice no long at any stage—I hope that this is not the case—with that choice no longer being open to the UK, it will always be open to Scotland down a different route that I continue to hope to charm Willie Rennie into agreeing with. However, if that option is no longer available to the UK, I will want to protect Scotland against a hard Brexit. That is why we have put forward previously and voted in the House of Commons on Monday night for a single-market customs union compromise, but that is not my preference. Right now, those of us who want to see this Brexit mess stopped in its track and the UK, given the option of staying in the EU, should continue to be fully behind efforts to put this issue back to the people. I think that that is the right thing to do now. Indeed, it is the most democratic thing to do now. Some further supplementaries. The first is from Ruth Maguire, to be filled by Alex Rowley. Presiding Officer, a study published in the British Medical Journal links the introduction of the HPV vaccine a decade ago, with a 90 per cent reduction in cancer-causing HPV in Scotland, demonstrating the significant and continued benefits of the vaccination programme. Can the First Minister confirm the Scottish Government's intention to roll out the vaccine to boys? If so, when will this happen? First Minister. Well, I really welcome this positive report from the British Medical Journal. In Scotland, uptake for the HPV immunisation programme remains high and continues to exceed 80 per cent. What we saw in that report today is that that is leading to a 90 per cent reduction in the cancer-causing HPV in Scotland, which is absolutely remarkable and wonderful. The Scottish Government remains committed to our efforts to ensure that girls' benefit from the vaccine, which, as the study shows, will save lives, is saving lives. We want to build on that success, and we will extend the HPV vaccine programme to boys later this year. Of course, it remains important in the meantime that women continue to take up the invitation for their regular cervical screening. Smear tests save lives. It is a unique test as it can prevent the disease before it even begins. Treatment, as a result of screening, prevents 8 out of 10 cervical cancers from developing. I hope that everybody across the chamber today will welcome the news that the HPV vaccine is already an enormous success story. Alex Rowley, to be followed by Jamie Greene. Alex Rowley. Presiding Officer, it is now clear that Fife has lost out on the £2.8 billion worth of work from the Murray and King Cardin wind farm projects. In fact, it is a fact that, as part of that consent for King Cardin, there was commitments given to substantial amounts of work to be done in Scottish yards. What is the First Minister going to do about developers renegan on those commitments to Scottish yards? Given that the five yards are owned by Scottish Enterprise, what action plan is going to be put in place to ensure that investment comes into the five yards to ensure that they are fit for the future? First Minister. I thank Alex Rowley for raising the issue. I, with the finance secretary, met with DF Barnes last week, the owners now of BiFab, and we had the opportunity to discuss their understandable frustrations that we share about the recent experience of bidding for some of those contracts. We also discussed issues around investment in and infrastructure at the yards, and we were able to assure the company that we will continue to do everything that we can to support them in those discussions that are on-going. We also discussed, and I know that this is an issue that has been raised by Gary Smith and Pat Rafferty, of the union's concerns about real concerns about whether or not, and probably not, BiFab is operating on a level playing field. I think that I said when Alex Rowley last raised this issue that we are going to convene at a summit to look at some of those issues and try to get to the heart of that, because I believe strongly, very strongly, that BiFab should have and indeed does have a bright future if we can resolve some of those issues. I am absolutely determined that working with the company, working with the unions and working with others, we will resolve those issues and make sure that the company does have the future that it deserves. Jamie Greene I have raised the issue of free personal care in this chamber numerous times with the First Minister. Just yesterday, I received correspondence confirming that North Ayrshire is a backlog of 100 people waiting for funding. The correspondence from the health and social care partnership reads, free personal care can only be provided within available financial means, but due to budgetary pressures, there is a waiting list for funding. Every one of those people are waiting for funding for a solution to meet their needs. First Minister, if free personal care is so universal, then why are so many waiting? First Minister? Free personal care has been there for many years for those over 65 who are assessed as needing it. Of course, as of Monday this week, it has been extended to those under 65s. I am happy to look at the correspondence, have the health secretary look at the correspondence if the member wishes to pass it to us, but it is important that we work with integration authorities to make sure that those who are assessed as needing care get it. Of course, gently, if we followed the Tory proposals on our budget, we would have to be taking hundreds of millions of pounds out of the budgets of the health service and integration authorities. We are increasing the money that is going to the health service, we are increasing the money that is going into social care and, of course, those are proposals for increased funding that the Tories voted against when this Parliament considered the budget. Mr Stewart Stevenson This week, we heard Michelle Ballantyne say that I would be quite happy if the Government had nothing to do with the running of the NHS. This is a lady who received her education as a nurse from the NHS who worked in the NHS. Is it not absolute Tory hypocrisy that she now seeks to undermine the NHS? I think that the Scottish Conservatives are probably starting to wish that Michelle Ballantyne would make fewer interventions in this chamber, but, obviously, I was in London yesterday and I was not in the chamber. I did not hear the comments. I have seen them as reported. As far as I am concerned, the NHS must always stay in public ownership, in public hands, run by the public. As long as I or my party have anything to do with it, that will continue to be the case. I think that Michelle Ballantyne's comments yesterday will underline the concern that many people have that the NHS would not be safe in conservative hands, because they would want to privatise it at the first opportunity that they got. First Minister, how the new domestic abuse act will help reduce violence against women? The Domestic Abuse Scotland Act 2018 came into effect on Monday. It creates a specific offence covering not just physical abuse but forms of psychological abuse that were previously difficult to prosecute under existing law. We know that the vast majority of victims of domestic abuse are women. Strengthening the law is one part of equally safe, our strategy to prevent and eradicate all forms of violence against women and girls. We have worked closely with justice partners to ensure that the justice system is ready for its implementation, including funding Police Scotland to support the development of training for 14,000 police officers and staff. An extensive public awareness campaign has been launched to raise awareness of the fact that psychological abuse and coercive and controlling behaviour is domestic abuse. Rona Mackay. I thank the First Minister for that answer. Coercive and controlling behaviour has the most damaging and long-lasting effects on individuals. Does the First Minister agree with me that the public awareness campaign will send a clear warning to abusers that all forms of domestic abuse are criminal and that perpetrators shall expect to find the full consequences of their abusive behaviour? Yes, I wholeheartedly agree with that. It is also important that we have the public awareness campaign to ensure that the public is aware that the law has changed and that victims understand how they can get help. In fact, victims understand that the behaviour of this nature is a crime. I visited with the Justice Secretary, Women's Aid in the East End of Glasgow last week and spoke to survivors of the type of abuse. They say that, for many people, suffering this abuse is often the first barrier that makes them understand that it is behaviour that is unacceptable. We must reinforce the message that coercive and controlling behaviour is domestic abuse and that this new legislation will help to hold perpetrators to account. That public awareness campaign that I have mentioned is running across multiple platforms, television, radio, online and print, and we are working with a number of third sector groups, Women's Aid, Assisted Shack T Women's Aid and Abused Men in Scotland to develop this campaign. Again, I hope that it is something that all members will get fully behind. Margaret Mitchell Thank you, Presiding Officer. I too warmly welcome the new Domestic Abuse Act. Having the management of offenders bill makes it possible for domestic abuse and sexual offenders who would otherwise be in prison to be released and monitored electronically, and if they then breach exclusion zone conditions, there is a very real danger of something adverse happening very quickly to domestic abuse victims. How will the First Minister ensure that those breaches will be responded to in real time with the immediacy that is required to protect those victims? The First Minister We will continue to work very closely with organisations like Women's Aid, which represent women who have been the victims of abuse, to make sure that as we take forward broader reforms in our justice system, the needs of those who suffer abuse are absolutely the heart of everything that we do. In fact, in terms of recent changes or changes in training around the presumption against short sentences, that is a discussion that is taking place. Sentencing, of course, is not a matter for Government. Sentencing is a matter for courts. As a result of the new bill—and I think that this was an amendment introduced by Linda Fabiani—there is now a duty on courts in all domestic abuse cases to consider imposing a non-harassment order to protect the victim. That will enable the criminal court for the first time to use a non-harassment order to protect children as well as the adult victim of the offence. Those are important issues to raise, and it is absolutely vital that in all aspects of the justice system we have victims of domestic abuse very much at the heart of everything that we do. To ask the First Minister whether she will provide details of the scope and remit of the Scottish Government's new task force to tackle drug deaths. Public health minister will convene an expert group to examine the key drivers of drug deaths and advise on what further changes, either in practice or in the law, could help to save lives and reduce harm. As was outlined in the new drug and alcohol strategy a few months ago, we must recognise that there are limitations in relation to public health outcomes associated with the misuse of drugs act 1971. It is also the case, of course, that everybody appreciates that the issue of drug deaths is complex. No one approach, one group or one service can do all that is needed, so it is important that we make sure that everybody is working together. The expert group that is being established will also learn from the Dundee and Glasgow work on drug deaths to help inform our continued efforts to tackle the issue. Does the First Minister understand the frustration of families across Scotland that it has taken the SNP Government so long to wake up to this tragedy across our country? Anasawa, Monica Lennon and myself called for this action over the last three years and SNP ministers have failed to act. Given the level of concern about drug deaths across our country, how will the First Minister make sure that colleagues across the chamber are a part of the task force? Experts and charities, many of whom agree with us that it is time that we urgently see a new focus on helping people to end and not just manage their addictions. How will everyone be included to make sure that that work is taken forward? First Minister. We will continue to work across the chamber to do the right things in what is a complex and challenging issue. I represent a constituency, as the member knows, in Glasgow. I regularly speak to those who have experience of drug use and families who have been affected by drug use. Those conversations often underline for me the complexity of this issue but also some of the things that we need to do. It is important, as I said in an exchange a couple of weeks ago with Jackson Carlaw, that we are prepared to look not just at some of the traditional actions that we take but at new approaches as well. The issue of safe consumption facilities is one that is raised regularly in this chamber, which the Tories in a seemingly knee-jerk way have just set their face completely against. The Home Office wrote in a letter to the Glasgow Health and Social Care partnership that it acknowledges that there is some evidence for the effectiveness of drug consumption rooms in reducing health risks for drug users. If we are to be serious about that, all of us have to be serious about it. All of us have to have the humility to accept that some things in the past have not worked and that we have to be prepared to have new approaches. However, that cuts both ways. If Opposition parties want, as I hope they do, to be part of that, I would again ask the member to rethink this issue. When he has done so, perhaps use any influence that he has in the UK Government to change their position on that, because changing their position on that would be one way of helping us to take those issues forward in a positive way. John Finnie. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I thank the First Minister for her comments. She is aware of the clamour for action about this public health crisis. There is a clamour to First Minister from people with drug problems to get opiate replacement therapy. The figure at the moment is 35 per cent in Scotland. It is 60 per cent in England. A third of the drug-related deaths in 2014, the individuals had no contact with drug treatment. I welcome the task force in its anticipated work. Some issues cannot wait. Will the First Minister, as a matter of urgency, address an acceptably low percentage of people with drug problems in treatment and ensure optimum prescribing and support to tackle the unacceptable level of deaths? First Minister. I am happy to ensure that this is an issue that is looked at. I am sure that this is an issue that has been and is being looked at. It may be something that the expert group wants to look at in the early stages of its work. Obviously, prescribing decisions are for clinicians to take based on the best interests and the needs of those that they are prescribing for. However, the disparity that John Finnie has just cited in terms of opiate replacement prescribing rates is certainly something that, in the full scope of the work, should be looked at. My view on this is that nothing should be of the agenda here. This is a serious, complex, challenging issue. Some things that are already being done, we know are effective, other things are perhaps not effective and there are things that are not currently being done that we have to open our minds to. If everybody involved has that spirit, then here in Scotland, as we have done in so many other public health issues, can find a way of leading in the right direction on this. That is what I hope we can achieve. To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government's response is to report that many pregnant women and homeless children are being housed by local authorities in substandard temporary accommodation. Temporary accommodation provides an important safety net in emergencies and our ending homelessness together action plan is very clear that this accommodation must be high quality with stays as short as possible. The vast majority of families with children or pregnant women are given temporary accommodation in the social rented sector. For others, the unsuitable accommodation order provides extra protection to ensure that families don't stay in unsuitable accommodation, for example, bed and breakfast for more than seven days. Breaches of that should not be tolerated and the housing minister has already met with councils concerned to discuss solutions. As part of our plans to transform temporary accommodation later this year, we will also consult on extending that protection to all homeless households. The consultation will ask for views on suitable sanctions for any council that fails to comply. I note that the First Minister talks about high-quality temporary accommodation, but all over the country people are being put in smelly, run-down private hotels and bed and breakfast mainly due to a lack of social housing stock at exorbitant costs to the taxpayer. The Herald and Sunday confirmed horror stories of single rooms in grotty hotels with no cooker, no fridge and residents being locked out for being five minutes late in getting to the accommodation. In some cases, there is nothing temporary about some temporary accommodation. If we could focus on what could be done immediately to recognise a scandal, I know that there is a lot of on-going work, but would the First Minister kick in to touch recommendation 20 of social bike commission's report, which looks at enforcing legally enforceable standards for temporary accommodation, starting with at least the right to a cooker and the right to a fridge? The First Minister will consider all recommendations of that nature. As I said in my original answer, one of the things that we will consult on are suitable sanctions for councils who are not complying with the rules in the area. It is important to say that the vast majority of families are in temporary accommodation in the socially rented sector. We have that time protection now for families, women with children and pregnant women, and that is what we are looking to extend. Breaches of that—the increase in breaches is due to the restriction of the time limit, but breaches are not acceptable, which is why the housing minister has been taking action with the councils concerned. The recommendations that came from our task force, we are determined to implement those recommendations so that we transform temporary accommodation but also, in a broader sense, reduce the circumstances in which anybody has to go into temporary accommodation in the first place. The First Minister's question is about a point of order, Mr Stevenson. Earlier in questions, Tom Mason raised an issue relating to teachers in Aberdeen. I am aware, as some others will be, that he is the councillor for Mid-Stocket and Rosemount in Aberdeen. I am sure that it was utterly inadvertent in his part not to draw our attention to that fact. Will you now give him the opportunity to put on the record that he had an interest in the matter that he raised? Thank you, Mr Stevenson. That is neither a point of order and, as you will know, is a matter for members' judgment whether or not to declare an interest. That concludes First Minister's questions. We are going to move on now to members' business in the name of Rachel Hamilton on long-term decline in salmon stocks. We will just take a few moments for the member and for the ministers to change seats.