 ac mae'r fawr i'r wneud i gyrsgawr. That concludes general questions. We turn now to First Minister's questions. Question number 1 from Ruth Davidson. Thank you, Presiding Officer, to ask the First Minister what engagement she has planned for the rest of the day. Presiding Officer, following the launch of the East Africa crisis appeal by the Disaster's Emergency Committee yesterday, we are announcing today that the Scottish Government will donate £200,000 to the appeal. Those funds will support agencies to provide vital supplies of food, water and medical treatment to those who were affected by the famine in South Sudan that was declared by the United Nations on 20 February. Later today, I will have engagements to take forward the Government's programme for Scotland. On behalf of my party and myself, I thank the First Minister for that answer and welcome the contribution that the Scottish Government is making. To ask the First Minister how she can divert this country into another unwanted divisive referendum when she can't sort out issues in our local schools. First Minister. Of course, I and the education secretary work to raise standards and close the attainment gap in our schools each and every single day, and that will continue to be our priority. Turning to wider issues, the reality here is quite simple. I want to give people in Scotland a choice over their own future. We know that change is coming. The EU referendum last year made that change inevitable. We know that the Tories want to lead us off a hard Brexit cliff edge. I think that the people of Scotland should not simply have to accept being told what their future should be by a Conservative Government that we don't support. Instead, we should have the choice to choose a better future, and that is a choice that I intend to give to the people of Scotland. I thank the First Minister for her answer to my question, but I wonder if it would have been delivered with quite the same tone had she known that the question that I put wasn't actually mine. It was a question that was put to one of my MSPs earlier this week by a parent who contacted our office. A parent, a Deputy First Minister, John Swinney's local high school in Blair-Gowry, who, like all parents there, received a letter from the school head earlier this week to see if a relative could fill in to teach maths because of a lack of cover, and who was furious to see on the very same day that the First Minister of Scotland standing in Bute House, putting her job to one side and threatening to take Scotland back to another divisive referendum on independence. When the First Minister meets parents who are frustrated with the decline in standards in schools, how does she explain to them that another referendum will help their child? Let me firstly address the situation in Blair-Gowry high school. There are, as the education secretary has said many times in this chamber and out with it, a number of different parts of the country in specific subjects where there are challenges right now with teacher recruitment. That's why we have increased the intake of students to initial teacher education. It's why we have expanded the range of routes into teaching to make the process faster for those individuals. What the situation at Blair-Gowry high school is is seeking to identify teachers that are properly registered teachers to come in and teach maths there. Of course, the law says that teachers have to be properly registered. We will continue to address the challenges in our education system as we will continue to address the challenges that exist, whether they are in health, education or any other area. It's because the people of Scotland see as addressing the challenges that they continue to have confidence in this Government to run this country. I see it as part of my job to protect Scotland's interests. I see it as part of my job to protect Scotland from the prospect of a hard Tory Brexit. The reality is that Ruth Davidson knows that Brexit is going to be a disaster. How do we know that? She told us that Brexit was going to be a disaster, but now Ruth Davidson tells us that we have simply got to accept Brexit, not just Brexit but a hard Brexit, regardless of the consequences. We had the site yesterday of David Davis saying that they haven't even bothered to do an analysis of the costs of a hard Brexit. Luckily, analyses have been done by others. We know that the path that the Tories are trying to take this country down could cost every household in this country more than £5,000. In answer to Ruth Davidson's question about the impact on young people in our country, the impact of Brexit on everybody in our country is going to be disastrous. That is why I have a duty to allow people the choice to opt for something better. Ruth Davidson. The truth is that a referendum won't help pupils in Scotland and it won't help patients to come off waiting lists and it won't help to solve the GP crisis and it won't cut violent crime. It will just take this Government away from the day job, which is supposed to be its focus. Can I tell the First Minister something else that parents are asking? How is independence going to help my school? This morning we read that an independent Scotland would be £11 billion in the red and would need higher taxes, lower spending and increased borrowing just to fill the gap. The same warnings were given before 2014, the same warnings that the First Minister chose to ignore. Is it her policy once again to ignore the evidence and carry on regardless? First Minister. Scotland has a deficit like the UK has a deficit. Let me say this. That is a deficit created on Westminster's watch and it's about time we had the tools and the ability to work out deficits that Tory and Labour Governments have created in Scotland. However, let's look at the alternative to independence, more Tory austerity. Tory austerity extending well into the next decade, cut to Scotland's budget by the Tories by the end of this decade will be 10 per cent in real terms yesterday. Ruth Davidson talks about the day job. Yesterday we saw the biggest U-turn from the Tories in decades blowing a £2 billion hole in their budget and, because of Brexit, every household in this country could be facing a bill of £5,000. I think that Scotland deserves a choice, and that choice is this. Take control of our own finances to build, grow and innovate our way to a better future or allow Tories to continue to make the same mistakes over and over again and make the situation worse. Presiding Officer, the First Minister chose earlier this week not to come before this Parliament spell out her views on a referendum. Will I choose to put this Parliament first? The Scottish Conservatives reject the proposals set out by the First Minister on Monday. A referendum cannot happen when the people of Scotland have not been given the opportunity to see how our new relationship with the European Union is working, and it should not take place when there is no clear political or public consent for it to happen. Our country does not want to go back to the divisions and uncertainty of the last few years. Another referendum campaign will not solve the challenges that this country will face. We don't want it, we don't need it, why won't she listen? I was elected as First Minister less than a year ago. They don't want to hear this. I was elected as First Minister a year ago, with the highest constituency share of the vote in the history of devolution, on a manifesto committee that should have the right to hold another referendum if the Tories tried to drag us out of Europe against our will. That 46 per cent share of the vote is 10 per cent points higher than the 36 per cent share that the Tories use to have the EU referendum in the first place. We hear from the electoral commission this morning that the vote share that they may have got in the 2015 election was rather dodgy, but this Parliament has an independence majority in it as well. Ruth Davidson says that she wants to put this Parliament first. Let me issue this direct challenge to Ruth Davidson and to the Conservative Party. If, on Wednesday, next week, this Parliament votes for an independence referendum to give the people of Scotland a choice over their own future, will the Conservatives respect the will of this Parliament or are the Conservatives running scared? Do you ask the First Minister what engagements she has planned for the rest of the week? Engagements to take forward the Government's programme for Scotland. Kezia Dugdale. Andrew Wilson is responsible for rebuilding the SNP's battered economic case for leaving the United Kingdom. This week, it was reported that he told Nicola Sturgeon that it could take up to 10 years for Scotland's economy to recover if we leave the UK. Does the First Minister think that a lost decade is a price worth paying to drag Scotland out of the United Kingdom? The reports that appeared this week about the work of the growth commission were 100% wrong. Plain and simple, Andrew Wilson himself has said that, on the contrary to what was reported, the work of the growth commission is looking at how we get from the position that we are in right now, saddled with a deficit created by Labour and Conservative Governments down the generations to a stronger and more sustainable future. The question that I think for Kezia Dugdale is this, is she happy to see Scotland locked in to Tory austerity not just for the rest of this decade but into the next decade as well? Is she happy to see Scotland at the mercy of Tory cut after Tory cut after Tory cut? Or this time, is she going to stand up for the right of this country to choose a better future for itself? The First Minister is so confident of the contents of that growth commission that she should publish it. Of course, we have been here before. SNP ministers assert one thing in public and admit another in private. We all remember John Swinney's leaked paper, which warned of cuts to public services and to our pensions. Now we have Andrew Wilson who has revealed in private what Nicola Sturgeon refuses to admit publicly that leaving the UK would be devastating for Scotland's economy. It would mean even more cuts to schools and hospitals and cuts to those most in need. The First Minister said this week that she did not want a fact-free debate, so let's start with one fact that she can't deny. Isn't it the case that, according to her own Government statistics, leaving the UK would mean £15 billion worth of extra cuts? The band is well and truly back together, isn't it? Tory and Labour come to talk this country down. Here's the reality. Scotland has a deficit created on Westminster's watch, and we have to deal with that deficit whether we are independent or not. Isn't it much better to have the tools and the powers of independence to deal with that deficit consistent with our own values and not Tory values? We face, if we are not independent, years and years and years of Tory austerity. I don't want that for my country, and I think that it is shameful that Labour now backs that for this country. Labour is just all over the place on this. It cannot even get their own story straight. We've got Kezia Dugdale telling us that Labour will vote against another referendum. Jeremy Corbyn comes and tells us that UK Labour will not vote against another referendum. No wonder Labour's new slogan is, We're Divided Enough. Down, because it's about the money that we have to spend on our public services. The First Minister used to say that education was the defining priority of her Government. Now even she laughs when journalists ask her if that is still the case. The reality is that this Government will once again grind to a halt for years. Closing the attainment gap, that's not the priority any more. Fixing the mess that she made of the NHS, on the back burner, investing in the care of the elderly, while that can wait too. Can the First Minister tell us this? Does she plan to spend the next few years leading a Government or a campaign? I'll continue as First Minister to lead a Government that is focused on making sure that we are raising standards in our schools, continuing to prove the national health service. Do you know what? All of these things get more difficult if we are subjected year after year to Tory cuts. Tory cuts that are going to be made worse by the hard Brexit that the Tories are pursuing and Labour seem willing to support. It is absolutely shameful that, instead of standing up for Scotland, Labour simply supports the Conservatives and whatever they want to do. I want this country to take charge of our own future so that we can build a better country than Labour and the Tories have managed to do. When people have a choice—as I am determined that they will have—a choice to say what kind of future they want, I will be arguing for this country to be in charge of our own finances, in charge of our own future, in charge of building a fairer society and a stronger economy. Kezia Dugdale will be on the side of Ruth Davidson and Theresa May, yet again, and her party will continue to die as a result. Thank you. We have got three constituency questions. First of all, Tavish Scott. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. The First Minister will be aware that NHS Shetland have decided that Shetlanders with medical appointments in Aberdeen must now use the 14-hour overnight ferry service rather than a 45-minute flight south. This policy will mean two days away from home and work for Shetlanders. There has been no consultation. The managing director of Loganair tells me that there has been no formal negotiation with the NHS to reduce flight costs and therefore make savings. NHS Shetland said last night that it could consider closing GP surgeries or the maternity unit in Lerwick. If I suggested such a course of action, the First Minister would accuse me of scaremongering. Can I therefore ask the First Minister to tell her appointed board to reverse this decision until there have been commercial negotiations with Loganair, a public consultation and a full understanding of what any change to the existing travel policy would mean from islanders from Unst to Fair Isle? NHS Shetland has already provided assurance that decisions regarding travel arrangements will continue to be clinically led and patients for whom ferry transport is not suitable will continue to be offered air travel. It is vital that the board ensures that it continues to provide high-quality direct patient care for the people of Shetland and we will continue to work with them to reduce the number of patients who need to travel at all for appointments or treatment, for example by expanding the use of video consultations on Shetland. I will ensure that the comments that Tavish Scott has made in the chamber today are conveyed to NHS Highland and I am sure that the health secretary would be happy to meet him to discuss those issues in more detail. As politicians get all flustered about constitutional politics, back in the real world, 400 workers face losing their jobs at Ethicon in Livingston as Johnson and Johnson threatened to close a plant that has been profitable for three decades. Will the First Minister agree to meet with me and representatives from Unite the Union to represent the workforce so that we can all see what we can do to retain jobs at Livingston? Of course, we will always be more than happy to meet with unions and representatives of the workforce. I can tell the member that we are already engaging with Johnson and Johnson. Both myself and the economy secretary have engaged directly with the company as have our enterprise agencies and we are exploring every possible support for the site. The work that has been done so far has been detailed and intensive, looking at what we can do both to help address immediate business challenges and to maximise the site's future potential. We will continue with that engagement and give as much support as we can to the workforce. As I said at the outset, of course, we will be happy to meet representatives of the workforce at any time. In light of the recent traffic incidents on the 4th road bridge and the serious effect that that has had on residents, businesses in Mid Scotland and Fife and in the Lothians, will the Scottish Government undertake to have urgent talks with Transport Scotland to put in place additional measures besides the tougher penalties that are being imposed by the police on the offending drivers so that more is done in the first instance to prevent the blatant disregard of traffic restrictions? This was another very regrettable incident on the 4th road bridge. A multiagency response was very quickly put in place to respond to the closure and it worked effectively to manage the associated travel impacts and to get the bridge reopened as quickly as possible. Let me thank everybody who worked hard to make sure that that happened. I can tell the chamber today that Transport Scotland will shortly host a stakeholder conference to discuss what more can be done to prevent those incidents. That will include the Traffic Commissioner Police Scotland, the 4th bridge operating company, local authorities and industry representatives from the freight sector. We are also committed to the largest road investment programme, including the £1.35 billion Queensford crossing project. As part of that investment, wind shielding has been fitted during the project to mitigate any wind-related closures on the new bridge. However, in terms of the existing bridge, it is important that we continue to explore what we can do to avoid people flouting the advice and resulting in closures that should be completely avoidable. To ask the First Minister what issues will be discussed at the next meeting of the cabinet. Matters of importance to people of Scotland. Is it possible that an independent Scotland could not only be outside the United Kingdom single market but also outside the European single market too? I want Scotland to be in the European Union. I want Scotland to be in the single market. That is why I think that it is important to give people in Scotland that choice. What we know right now, though, beyond any doubt, is that if Scotland does not become independent, we are not only out of the EU, but we will be out of the single market as well. By considering independence, we give ourselves the ability to secure our relationship with Europe and to secure the jobs, the investment and the collaborations that depend on that. That is why giving people in Scotland the choice is so important. The First Minister dodged the question. It was a simple question. Could we be out of both single markets? The answer is yes. The reason is this. It is just as difficult to get into the European single market as full EU membership. All 27 EU members would need to agree. We heard from the Spanish Government again yesterday. Her route guarantees nothing. It is exactly the same hurdle. That is why the First Minister's plans could leave us outside of the UK and the EU single markets. If she thought that a Conservative hard Brexit was going to be damaging, just wait for this. It is absurd to use the EU as an excuse for another referendum when there is no guarantee that Scotland could get back into the EU. She is suking up to the Eurosceptics on her own side while cynically selling out the pro-Europeans on the sly. Why can't she just admit that? Willie Rennie spends most of his time suking up to the Tories, so I will take no lessons from him. I really cannot believe the brass neck with which Willie Rennie has just asked that question. Remember that Willie Rennie is one of the politicians—Ruth Davidson is another one, and Kezia Dugdale is another one—that, in 2014, looked the people of Scotland in the eye and said, if you vote no on the referendum, your membership of the European Union is secure. If you vote yes, you are allowed in. Two and a half years later, where this Unionist alliance has contrived to make sure that we are facing and being taken out of the European Union against our will, it has the absolute temerity to stand up again and try to scaremonger that it is independence that is putting our EU membership at risk. It is absolutely breathtaking in its hypocrisy. I will tell you this—the people of Scotland will simply not fall for it again. Willie Rennie? We know from the First Minister that the more she blusters, the more she hides the truth. I will ask the question again. Will Scotland be guaranteed to be a full member of the European Union or not? Can she guarantee that, if she can, it is all bluster just again? The First Minister. Independence gives us the ability to be in the EU to secure a relationship with Europe, not being independent, but to guarantee that we are out of the EU and out of the single market. Willie Rennie, who has a PhD in bluster, has a position that is completely incoherent. Willie Rennie wants there to be a second referendum across the UK to give the people of the whole UK a choice, even though he knows that there is not a chance of that happening. However, here in Scotland, where there is the opportunity for people to have a choice, Willie Rennie is completely opposed to that. According to Willie Rennie, we have just got to accept Tory hard Brexit come what may. I think that it is about time people in Scotland had a choice so that we can take the future of our own country into our own hands. The First Minister tells us whether discussions were held with the Treasury ahead of their planned national insurance tax hike, or at the point when they realised they had broken their manifesto promise, or before they decided to U-turn, or even after yesterday's embarrassing climb down, given the impact that this would have on many self-employed people across Scotland. I know that there were no discussions with the Treasury either about the original policy or about their embarrassing U-turn yesterday. The Tories are in complete and utter chaos. We have had lectures of we not week after week from the Tories here about tax, and yet it was a Tory Government that was going to hike taxes up on self-employed people, and then a screeching U-turn changed their minds. We will get on with doing our best to deliver for the people of Scotland while the Tories continue to descend into utter chaos. Andy Wightman This week, I learned in response to a written answer that of 120 secondments into the Scottish Government, almost universally from other bodies in the public sector, the Association of Salmon Fishery Boards were seconded. That comes in the back of a previous question, revealing that the director of policy of the National Farm Union of Scotland has been embedded within the Scottish Government since November 2016. Three days a week, he works lobbying the Scottish Government on behalf of his organisation, and two days he works at the heart of government developing policy. Does the First Minister believe that this is a healthy development? Will she explain exactly what the purpose of those representatives of the landed class is at the heart of government, and does she agree with me that there is an obvious conflict of interest? The First Minister? No, I do not. I think that it is right. I know that it is not fashionable to consider the views of experts that have been worth listening to these days, but I think that it is right that, in Government, we have expertise from a range of different areas, helping to inform and develop government policy. We do that from a range of different interests, so that there is a broad spectrum of expertise feeding into government policy. I am happy to correspond with Andy Wightman if he has particular concerns around that. In general, Government is using the expertise that exists across our country, I think that that is a good thing that should be welcomed. Rona Mackay Chas the First Minister, how people will be given the opportunity to shape Scotland's new social security system? Key to the design of our social security system, as we have said, is working alongside people who have, themselves, got direct personal experience of the current social security system. We want to hear directly from them about what works, what needs improved and what our new system can do to better support them. Of course, from today, people across Scotland will begin to receive letters inviting them to join the experience panels that will shape our new social security system. The invitations are being sent to 18,000 people who have recent or current experience of the system. I hope that people will take the time to look at the invitation to join the panels and will take the opportunity to be part of building a new social security system in Scotland that will have fairness, dignity and respect at its heart, all principles missing from the social security system under Westminster's control. To ask the First Minister what guidance the Scottish Government has issued regarding the use of the pupil equity fund. On 1 February, the Deputy First Minister announced the pupil equity funding school level allocations for 2017-18. Draft national operational guidance was published on the same day and is issued to local authorities and direct to schools. The guidance sets out clear principles to support schools and local authorities to work in partnership and plan how to effectively invest the additional £120 million to raise attainment and close the attainment gap. I have been absolutely clear, as has the Deputy First Minister, that this funding must be used at the discretion of headteachers. It must be additional to existing provision and it cannot be top-sliced for other purposes. It must be used to improve the educational outcomes of children most affected by poverty. The First Minister will be aware of reports that North Lanarkshire Council has proposed that headteachers have turned a considerable proportion of the pupil equity fund to the general education fund. The pupil equity fund is intended to go directly to headteachers for the most deprived children in Scotland to help address the attainment gap. Does the First Minister share my concerns that this is an important proposal from a Labour council? I am indeed aware of the issues raised in relation to North Lanarkshire's pupil equity funding. I am particularly disappointed that the Labour council has chosen to cut classroom assistance, making that decision on 23 February, despite the options open to them to avoid this. The expectation that headteachers should then subsidise the cut with their pupil equity funding is simply unacceptable. Those issues have been raised with the council and discussions are continuing. I very much hope that the council will reconsider its approach. I think that it is really important to be very clear. We in the Scottish Government will only release this funding if the council agrees that it goes to the schools as intended and that it is not used by them to pay for existing resources. Anything else would, quite frankly, be a betrayal of the disadvantaged children of North Lanarkshire. North Lanarkshire Council is facing a £27 million cut to its core budget. It is trying to protect and enhance the jobs of over 200 classroom assistants exactly to raise attainment and close the gap. It is supported by the EIS, by Unison and by its headteachers, 77 of whom have written to the Deputy First Minister to say that. In response, the Scottish Government is threatening to cut almost £9 million more from its budget. Can the First Minister explain how this politically motivated blackmail is supposed to help school children in North Lanarkshire? Interestingly, it is omitted to tell us something else that North Lanarkshire council is choosing to do. It is choosing to freeze its council tax next year. So, clearly, having asked us for the ability to put the council tax up, they decide that they do not need that money. Instead, they are going to try to pilfer resources from the pupil equity fund. Now, this Parliament was very clear that the pupil equity funding, £120 million of it, was money to go direct to schools to be used at the discretion of headteachers. Iain Gray tells us that, apparently, there are people who support the approach of the council. The Association of Directors of Education, as I understand it, do not support the approach of the council. That is quite simple. That is money that we want to give direct to headteachers, direct to schools, but North Lanarkshire council wants to use it for something else. We are determined that this money is going direct to schools. It is utterly shameful that Labour is defending an approach that would see that money used by North Lanarkshire to fund things that it is their responsibility to fund. Brian Whittle Thank you, Presiding Officer. Could I ask the First Minister, in light of this controversy, what measures will we put in place to assess if the key principles behind the pupil equity fund, namely that headteachers, will have access to the full amount and that the spending must be on additional activities to those currently employed, will be adhered to? The First Minister Is what the guidance that I refer to in my first answer is there to ensure that there are clear principles guiding how this money is used and that we are then able to monitor and assess the benefits of this money. Let's get back to the core issue here. Week after week, absolutely rightly and understandably, Members of the Opposition come to this chamber, and I have no complaint about this and raised the issue of the attainment gap. I have said repeatedly that closing that gap is my priority. That is why we have set up a pupil equity fund of £120 million that is being directed to schools to help particularly young people living in disadvantaged circumstances. That is what this is all about. That is why it is so deeply concerning that we have a local authority that sees the opportunity just to cut something in its budget and substitute that cut with money from the pupil equity funding. That is not what it is for, that is not what it is about and if that approach is allowed to continue, then frankly that is a betrayal of the most disadvantaged pupils in North Lanarkshire that are meant to benefit from the fund. As First Minister, I am not prepared to allow that to happen. Question 5, Annie Wells. To ask the First Minister what action the Scottish Government is taking to tackle gun crime. The number of recorded crimes and offences in Scotland involving firearms has fallen by nearly three quarters in 10 years and firearms crimes where a person was killed or injured fell by over 25 per cent between 2014-15 and 2015-16. The Scottish Government has taken action. We have some of the strongest firearms legislation in the world and have strengthened that further with our new air weapons licensing regime. Police Scotland is committed to tackling gun crime and to clearing up rates for those offences remain high, but there is absolutely no room for any complacency. Recent incidents show that we must keep the situation under review and continue to address gun crime wherever it occurs in our communities. I thank the First Minister for her answer. That will unfortunately come of little consolation to the people of Glasgow, a city that has seen five separate incidents of serious gun crime in the past 12 months alone. We know that between 2014-15 and 2015-16, cases of attempted murder or serious assaults increased in Scotland by 27 per cent. Despite those being mostly targeted attacks, those crimes are taking place on the streets, with one in particular in Glasgow happening outside of primary school. What conversation will the First Minister now have with Police Scotland to ensure that those crimes do not take place in our streets and that innocent bystands are not put at risk? Those are really important issues. Let me be clear, both I and the Justice Secretary periodically are updated and briefed by the police on some of the types of incidents that she is referring to and updated on the work that the police is doing to try to combat those kinds of offences. I think that it is important to reiterate that gun crime generally is falling. It is falling, as I said, by nearly three quarters in the past 10 years. Of course, crimes where a person was killed or injured by a firearm fell by 25 per cent between 2014-15 and 2015-16. The incidents that Annie Wells refers to in Glasgow, part of the country, of course, that I represent are deeply concerning. One of the incidents was indeed in my constituency. Those, according to the police, are targeted incidents linked to serious and organised crime. That makes it very important that the police continue to use the resources and the intelligence that they have to properly deal with those offences and bring to justice those who are responsible. Those are important issues that I and the Justice Secretary will continue to be updated on by the police. I do not think that they should allow us to be taken away from the fact that gun crime generally is falling. That is a good thing. We should not be complacent, but it is a good thing, and it should give reassurance to communities all over the country. 6. Daniel Johnson To ask the First Minister how the Scottish Government will ensure that changes to unit assessments will not increase teacher workload in light of reports that 63 per cent of teachers believe that they will. The changes to the qualifications were announced by the Deputy First Minister following discussions with the assessment and national qualifications group and the curriculum for excellence management board. The Scottish Secondary Teachers Association, whose survey is being referred to, is represented on both groups. The changes mean that teachers and young people will not have to undertake formal unit assessments during the year. That is what teachers and others told us was significantly contributing to workload. Indeed, the moves were welcomed by teaching unions last year. We continue to work with partners, including the SQA Education Scotland and teacher unions, to ensure that workload is reduced as a result of those changes. The assessment and national qualifications group is in fact meeting this afternoon, and we will continue to discuss the implementation of the changes. Daniel Johnson I thank the First Minister for that answer. John Swinney came into his new job, promising to slash teacher workload and burden. However, the survey reveals that teachers think that the changes to unit assessment will increase, not decrease, the workload, and especially in science. Can I ask the First Minister what work and assessment has been made to make sure that those measures will have a positive impact on teacher workload? Can she reassure the chamber that that will not lead to just yet another embarrassing backtrack and delay arising from ill-thought-through reforms from the Deputy First Minister? The First Minister I am not sure if Daniel Johnson listened to the first answer that I gave him. He would have found the answer to what he just asked me in the answer that I gave him. Firstly, the reforms that he talks about have been ill-judged and rushed. We are actually the reforms that teacher unions wanted to see in order to play a part. They are not the only change that has been made to reduce teacher workload and unnecessary bureaucracy that teachers have to deal with, but they are an important part of that. That is the intention of them. Clearly, in doing that, it is important that steps are taken to make sure that the integrity of the exam system is not undermined. However, as I said earlier on in terms of the question about what we are doing, I referred to a meeting this very day of the assessment and national qualifications group to make sure that the concerns that have been shown in the survey that he refers to do not materialise, that those changes that have that intention turn out to deliver that in reality. We will continue to work with teachers and others to make sure that that is the case. I would have thought that Daniel Johnson would have welcomed that. The fact that this Government is listening to teachers' concerns about work roads is welcome both for them and for children and young people. Can the First Minister advise what other measures are being taken to free up time for teachers to teach? Addressing the issue of workload, as I said to Daniel Johnson, has been a priority for the Deputy First Minister. Literally thousands of pages of guidance have already been stripped away and a teacher panel was established to test proposals to reduce workload, proposals that go beyond the ones that are the subject of this question. Last year, every teacher in Scotland was sent a clear and concise statement on curriculum for excellence, along with benchmark guidance on literacy and numery. That definitive guidance makes it clear what teachers should and should not be required to do. We are determined to take the actions that will free teachers from unnecessary bureaucracy and workload. We are determined to free them to do what they do best, which is to raise the bar for all and close the attainment gap in our schools. We have heard today from the SSTA that there is now a crisis in recruiting head teachers because of a workload. Will the First Minister agree with me that the Scottish Government's claim to be committed to reducing teach and head teachers' workload is absolutely not happening and that there is a real threat now that we will lack leadership in schools because people simply want to apply to become head teachers? I do not agree with that. I fundamentally disagree with that. We have listened to teachers, including head teachers, and we are taking the steps that I have outlined today that will reduce unnecessary work loads for teachers. We are doing that in partnership with teachers. I understand that, as we go through that, we will hear skepticism as we have from the SSTA about the effect that those changes will have. It is our job to make sure that those changes are implemented in a way that they will have the desired effect. We are listening, we are introducing those changes and, as I have said in previous answers, we are getting on with implementing those changes so that we make an appreciable difference to the workload of teachers in our schools across the country. The First Minister made it clear that it was important to listen to the will of Parliament. Last week, the Government lost a vote in Parliament and, a week before, it lost two votes in Parliament. On those occasions, you said from the chair that those votes were non-binding votes. I would like to hear from you another ruling, Presiding Officer, whether the votes after the debate next week on Tuesday and Wednesday are also non-binding. Motions of this Parliament are not binding, as the member knows. That is not a point of order. We will move on to members' business in the name of Ross Thompson, and we will just take a few moments to change seats.