 Glockeration today. We start this morning with General Questions—Question 1, Brian Whittle. Thank you, Presiding Officer, to ask the Scottish Government what support it will provide to proposed good combination growth deal. as I made very clear to the three council leaders when I met them on 8 March, I am fully committed to finding ways to support the regional economies to thrive in Scotland. Together with Scottish Futures Trust and my officials, cyhoeddau, mae oedd yn gyntaf iawn i ddefnyddio'r rejectedd ymatech yn gweithio'r lliforyddio. Maith yw meddwl am ddwlonwch gawr i ddechrau o ymwysigau cyhoedd yn gweithredu, ac mae'n gofyn i ddau'r adegau maeth amser arall o'r parwfyniadau yng nghymru ar hyn o'r ddugodau cyd-dau i dda, mae ddim gyd yn ei ddweithio ar gyfer angen ei hoffi mwyaf. Roedd oes arlas y Government, mae ein gweld ar rOMYR Challeg yng nghymru a ddefnyddio'r gyda'r syniadol syniadol? Brian Whittle. I thank the minister for that answer. Jamie Greene John Scott and I recently met Greg Clark, Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy and also arranged a meeting between the secretary and the Ayrshire growth deal team to establish how the Ayrshire growth deal fitted in with the new industrial strategy framework. It was a very positive meeting but, as the minister will know, the timeline starts by initially aligning local government and private enterprise funding to get a commitment from the Scottish Government of what projects it will support and the level of funding it is prepared to invest prior to the UK Government looking at any shortfall. That will be an on-going process as many projects come online. With that in mind, can the minister tell Parliament if the Scottish Government has done this assessment and quantified what they mean by the commitment to the support of the Ayrshire growth deal? I would say to the member that the process that we follow is similar to the city deal process and the proposals that come from the local councils and their partners and we analyse those and see which ones are best able to be susceptible to support which will help to generate economic growth in the area. We are going through that process and the councils are well aware of that process. We have made that point clear to them. I have also said in my own meeting with Greg Clark that what we would like to see is the UK Government having moved away from the city deal model once all the cities in Scotland have been through that process. To now talking about the industrial strategy might be the means by which additional support might be provided in this case. If that is the case, it is much better and I said this to Greg Clark that we work together on that to maximise the benefit. We did ask and have asked a number of times for the UK Government to be part of the Ayrshire growth deal as the three local authorities have done. We refused to do that but it is still possible that through the industrial strategy we could work together and I would encourage the UK Government to do that. In the meantime, we will continue to process the proposals that we have received from the growth deal partners. Kenneth Gibson. Thank you, Presiding Officer. On 10 February, I submitted a motion for members' business on the Ayrshire growth deal non-partisan. It even said, and I quote, that the UK Government has displayed an encouraging attitude and expressed its support for the initiative so far after Patricia Gibson MP led a Commons debate on the deal on 19 January. She then wrote to all the Ayrshire Tory MSPs calling on them to lobby the chancellor to back the deal which all three Ayrshire councils and the SNP Government support. None gave her the courtesy of a reply. Does the cabinet secretary agree that he is disappointing at best and not a single Tory or other opposition MSP supported a debate on the Ayrshire growth deal in this chamber and nor did the chancellor even mention it in his budget speech despite heavy hints, let alone allocate a single penny of the £359.8 million required to generate and stimulate the real and lasting economic growth that Ayrshire so badly needs? What I can say to the member from my point of view, I have consistently expressed my desire to take forward discussions with the UK Government to support the deal. I have done that both in writing and face-to-face with the UK Government. It is unfortunate that we have not had explicit support from the UK Government to the growth deal itself along the lines of the city deals that we have worked together on in the past. I am still hopeful though that there will be some involvement by the UK Government, including financial assistance to some of the ambitions of the growth deal. Derek Mackay wrote to the chancellor ahead of his recent budget to ask him to join us in tripartite discussions but the UK Government failed to make that commitment. The Scottish Government will continue to support the progress of the Ayrshire growth deal, as I have mentioned, to determine priorities, timeline and next steps. I have recently discussed support for the Ayrshirs with Greg Clark on this matter, as I am sure the member will as well. To ask the Scottish Government how it is assisting local authorities to provide welfare support advice. Local authorities have statutory duties to fulfil in the provision of advice support in a number of areas. In total the Scottish Government will spend around £21 million on advice-related projects in 2017-18. Of this £660,000 will be provided to local authorities through the Scottish legal aid board funding programmes to provide support advice provision for people affected by debt and the UK Government's welfare cuts. Since 2013, the Scottish Government has provided some £6.85 million to Citizens Advice Scotland for the provision of welfare advice across its network of 61 bureaus in 30 local authority areas. Additionally, we estimate that around £5.6 million of funding for local authority financial inclusion related projects will be provided between April 2015 and June 2019 through the European social fund to support people affected by poverty and social isolation. In 2017-18, we are providing local government with a total funding package amounting to more than £10 billion and many councils are utilising this in addition to what I have already said to both fulfil a range of statutory duties to fulfil a range of statutory duties to provide advice and provide additional welfare support too. That's our one. Presiding Officer, like the minister I opposed Tory welfare cuts, but it appears that the Scottish Government is happier to court grievance for men anger and wave flags than to actually get on with the job of governing. We already know that the Government's recent benefits update campaign lasted just a week and had a budget of just £6,000. Now the minister has shamefully decided to cut £600,000 of funding to welfare support and advice services in Glasgow alone. A decision that Tories would be proud of. How can the minister justify this shameful attack on the most vulnerable in our communities? Minister. Well, Presiding Officer, I think that we knew that one was coming. It is a matter of some regret. Members would not shout at me, but let me speak. It is a matter of some regret that political point scoring yet again is at the forefront of Labour's mind rather than looking at the detail of what this Government is doing to support individuals across Scotland who are facing the damaging austerity cuts imposed by the UK Government. Misinformation and misrepresentation of the facts serves our constituents and the people of Scotland poorly. I think again about that matter. What we have done is prioritise our use of the available funding to those areas most in need including those most affected by the roll-out of universal credit. It is wrong to suggest that this Government is not funding advice and support services in Glasgow because we are as we are across constituencies in Scotland. If the member had done me the courtesy of listening to what I said previously in this chamber about the benefit take-up campaign he would understand that along with Citizens Advice Bureau we jointly agreed on that first stage and that more of that work will come forward over the next four years. Can I say a great deal more than Labour ever did when they were the Scottish Government? Thank you, Presiding Officer. To ask the Scottish Government what benefits the Glasgow City Deal will bring to Motherwell and Wishaw. The Scottish Government is a full partner in the Glasgow City Region Deal which is now in its delivery stage and is contributing up to £500 million over 20 years into the £1.13 billion Glasgow City Region Deal infrastructure fund. The deal empowers Glasgow and its city region partners to identify, manage and deliver a programme of investment in infrastructure. Three core North Lanarkshire projects have been identified by the Glasgow regional partners for delivery within the first 10 years of the deal accounting for a total capital investment of around £170 million. Those projects include potential investment in strategic roads infrastructure to improve access between Motherwell and the M74 and to improve road and pedestrian links within Motherwell town centre. The Ravenscraig site in my constituency has been a national priority since 2013. Can I have the insurance of the cabinet secretary that when capital expenditure is being considered across portfolio areas that the unique opportunities that this Brentfield site has in relation to infrastructure central belt location and land be considered to ensure that further regeneration of the site can be achieved? First, to reiterate to the member that in relation to the Glasgow city region deal that it is up to the partners to prioritise the projects that have been supported by both ourselves and the UK Government. The Scottish Government remains committed to working with North Lanarkshire council and other parties on options for the further redevelopment of the Ravenscraig site. Over £45 million has been invested to date in remediating the site and delivering a first phase of development. Market conditions, though, as the member knows have rendered it impossible to deliver the proposed phase 2 of the Ravenscraig limited master plan. That is why, in August 2016, Scottish Enterprise approved a contribution of up to £415,000 to part fund the development of a new master plan which will in turn enable Ravenscraig limited to identify a realistic deliverable phase 2. A draft of the new master plan is due in late spring early summer this year. Graham Simpson. There have been cross-party concerns over some of the projects in the Glasgow city deal. Road schemes in particular have been plucked off dusty shelves, having lain there sometimes for decades, dusted off and thrown into the mix on the back of business cases which frankly don't stack up. Holytown Link Road in North Lanarkshire and Stewartfield Way in East Kilbride are just two for which there is little to no justification. Clare Adamson is right to point out that there would be a useful area for city deal money to be spent but, as far as I can see, there's nothing planned there. Such are the concerns that the local government and communities committee will be doing its own inquiry into city deals. Does the minister agree with me that the Glasgow city deal should be refreshed in order to deliver the economic growth across the region that it was? I would not want to rule out looking afresh at these things but I point to the fact that the basis of the city deal includes an assurance framework that both the UK Government and Scottish Governments have signed up to. If there is dissatisfaction in terms of the assurance framework, then it might be that the member would want to take that up with the UK Government to see if they share that dissatisfaction. I have not had that feedback from the UK Government as things stand. It is the case that perhaps the new local authority elections provide us with the opportunity to look afresh at these things. As to whether projects were taken off dusty shelves, were put forward, were those put forward by the local authorities themselves and we agreed to support them. They are the ones that chose the priorities and we have backed them up in that choice. Question 4, Neil Findlay. To ask the Scottish Government how many women in Scotland have been implanted with transvaginal mesh since 2007. Minister Maureen Watt. 13,665 women in Scotland have been implanted with transvaginal mesh since 2007. Neil Findlay. The minister will be aware of the devastation felt by Scottish mesh survivors who feel the review into the use of mesh was a whitewash. If the Government is confident that it is not a whitewash when will they bring forward a debate on this very important issue to the women and men of Scotland? As Neil Findlay knows the chamber had the opportunity to question the cabinet secretary when she came with a statement to Parliament on 30 March. The cabinet secretary is also due to appear in front of the petitions committee and I think that once that has taken its course if a debate is required then the ministers are happy to agree. Question 5, Sandra White. Thank you very much. To ask the Scottish Government what action has been taken to preserve green spaces. Minister Kevin Stewart. Thank you, Presiding Officer. Scottish planning policy requires local development plans to identify and protect open spaces that have been identified as valued and functional. The national planning framework aims to significantly enhance green networks particularly in and around our times in cities. Sandra White. I thank the minister for that reply and my constituents of Glasgow Kelvin, North Kelvin Meadows and Greenspace owned by Glasgow City Council were saved after the local community came together to oppose the planning application from a developer and subsequently called in by the Scottish Government. Can the cabinet secretary advise what the Scottish Government can offer in further support to communities campaigning to save green spaces such as Kelvin Meadows and others and how this support is communicated to those local communities? Minister. I know that Sandra White has been a keen campaigner on the issue of North Kelvin Meadows. Let me assure her that the Scottish Government has taken action to support green space. I understand that North Kelvin Meadows is owned by Glasgow City Council. Thanks to our community empowerment act there is a right for community bodies to make requests to local authorities for any land that they feel that they could make better use of through the asset transfer process so that may be an option there. Asset transfer, of course, will give more communities the opportunity to have control of land or premises to help them develop their own economies and environments. Any community body interested in using asset transfer to preserve green space in their area is a programme that is funded by the Government to help community groups to take on land or to build assets for their communities. To ask the Scottish Government what progress it is making in closing the attainment gap in the Scottish Borders. The Scottish Government through the Scottish attainment challenges provides increased support for local authorities, in their work to close the poverty-related attainment gap. The Scottish Borders have received over £315,000 from the attainment Scotland fund over the course of the last two years and will receive £1.8 million of pupil equity funding in 2017-18. Headteachers will have the flexibility to target resources at interventions they know will help to close the attainment gap and they are currently preparing their plans for use of this funding. I thank the cabinet secretary that the gap in the Borders remains one of the worst in Scotland. Indeed, the Scottish National Party's record on education in the Borders over the last 10 years is not good. Class sizes are at a record high as teacher numbers have dropped by nearly 80. The number of supply teachers are plummeted by 40 per cent. Only one in 10 primary one to three pupils are in smaller classes. A record low despite this being an Scottish National Party election pledge and the standard of education across Scotland is that teachers work incredibly hard on the Scottish Borders but they and pupils are being let down by this SNP Government. Is this a record that the cabinet secretary is proud of? We know the cheerful, optimistic tone that John Lamont will be taking to the doors of the Borders over the course of the next few weeks. I was going to be generous to Mr Lamont to say to him that I know that he will be leaving us tomorrow but on the basis of the miserable tone that he has expressed he cannot realise the significant investment that has been made in the Borders and I look forward to making sure that the young people and the electors of the Borders understand the strenuous efforts that this Government is going to make to close the attainment gap in the Borders and I look forward to Mr Lamont being a distant observer of the process. To ask the Scottish Government what discussions it has had with the Welsh Government regarding organ donation since the Human Transplantation Wales Act 2013 came into full effect in December 2015. Scottish Government officials have been in regular contact with Welsh colleagues since the introduction of the Human Transplantation Wales Act and are due to meet soon Additionally, the OPTAC system in Wales is discussed at regular meetings on organ donation such as NHS blood and transport board meetings and taking organ transplantation to 2020 strategy meetings where all four Governments of the UK are represented. The Scottish Conservatives supported the Scottish Government during the progress of Anne McTaggart's bill when the Government took the view that we should wait to see what the bill was. The Government at that time undertook early in this Parliament to bring forward fresh proposals in the light of that. We are now almost 18 months since the introduction of the change in Wales. Can I ask the minister when that early introduction of new fresh Scottish Government proposals will come? As Jackson Carlaw knows the Scottish Government has recently made a presumption in favour of moving to an opt-out system assuming that it can be introduced safely. The consultation responses are being independently analysed and we will learn from that analysis as well as from the experiences and evidence from elsewhere in the world including Wales. We will look at that analysis carefully before reaching a decision on the way forward. We expect to receive the analysis in May and will take steps in the months thereafter.