 The Good Morning, out of business agenda is general questions. To try and get as many people as possible, I would prefer short and succinct questions and answers to match. Question 1, Richard Lockhead. Can I ask the Scottish Government what the timetable is for the Good Food nation bill and whether it will include addressing the health implications of multy buys. Cabinet Secretary, Fergus Ewing. Presiding Officer, work has begun to prepare a consultation that will inform the content of the good food nation bill. Decisions on the bill timetable will be taken in the context of the government's overall legislative programme. The content of the bill will be informed by the outcome of the consultation and by any actions required to give effect to a range of government priorities. Richard Lochhead. Thank you. The cabinet secretary will be aware that many organisations such as the Scottish Food Coalition and other organisations and many individuals are very keen for the good food nation bill to help to transform our food culture in this country. Despite the fact that we have the beginnings of food revolution in this country in recent years, there is still much more to do in tackling food poverty and obesity and other issues. Is the cabinet secretary aware of the UK's paper just in the last few days, which indicated that 40 per cent of all calories are as a result of price promotions in our supermarkets in relation to unhealthy foods? Indeed, it also pointed out that 7 in 10 Scottish adults support banning promotions of unhealthy foods in our supermarkets. Is this the kind of issue that he believes the bill can address or, indeed, even better? Is there any short-term action that the Scottish Government can take to address that important issue? The member is quite right to raise the report. I have not myself studied it. I think it is within the purview of my colleague Eileen Campbell, who has responsibility for public health. I know that she will take that matter very seriously. I just last week met representatives of the Scottish Food Coalition to discuss their ideas for inclusion in the bill. I have also invited the Food Commission to provide advice to ministers on the bill, and I would welcome contributions from members across the House from all parties. That is a great opportunity for Scotland to tackle measures relating to improving our nutrition and food health. Brian Whittle, in terms of multi-food buys, we would have to differentiate between the type of foods that we do not want people to eat, because we would be encouraging multi-food buys across fruit and veg and other healthy foods. In the good food nation bill, will we be addressing the issue of public food procurement in our schools, food in our schools and hospitals, and ensuring that local food is procured as wherever possible? Mr Whittle, in his former career as an international athlete, is well placed to be an advocate for good choices in dietary matters. He is absolutely right to raise those matters. He is taken very seriously by all the members of the Scottish Government. In relation to his second question, I recently convened the first summit on food procurement to ensure that, as far as possible, in the public sector—whether it be in our hospitals, in our schools, in government and public sector institutions as a whole—we procure as much of our food locally as possible. We have made considerable progress in that over the past 10 years. I believe that the take-up of local produce from Scottish farmers and other primary producers is increasing by a very substantial margin, and that work is on-going. To ask the Scottish Government what action it is taking to improve access to transport for people in rural areas. We are committed to improving rural transport, and that is reflected in our ambitious plans to dual both the A9 and the A96, major investments such as the Borders Railway, and on-going subsidies of more than £1,000 million per annum for public transport and other sustainable options generally, and periodic reviews of our legislation, strategies and policies such as the current review of the national transport strategy. I thank the cabinet secretary for that answer. I asked this question because, two weeks ago, one of the local bus services that runs from Breekin in my hometown in my constituency to Montrose was cut. This was a valuable service for people commuting for work, but also the service ran to Montrose railway station, which is on the main east coast rail link between Aberdeen and London, and ran at key times for commuters. With rural communities also badly impacted by bank closures, the fact that all towns have things such as job centres among other services, does the Scottish Government recognise the need to support and preserve rural transport links? The cabinet secretary raises a number of issues that are absolutely essential for rural life and are real problems for her constituents and others, and she is right to raise them. We take that extremely seriously, and we provide subsidy for bus services through the bus service operators grant, which is paid to operators to help to keep fares down. For 2017-18, we have increased the budget to £53.5 million, so we take that very seriously. A substantial funding is made to help local rural transport in particular. Liam Kerr For older people in rural areas, community and charity buses are often the only direct link to healthcare and other vital services. Does the minister support calls from this party to increase access to such services by extending the free bus pass scheme to community transport? I recognise the substantial contribution that community bus services make. No more so, I believe, than in the Straspay area, where the scheme is, I believe, an exemplar. We all wish to see such schemes flourish and continue as they provide a very useful service to a great many people in rural Scotland. We support the aims and aspirations behind the question, and I am very happy to consider any specific coherence policy suggestions that any member may have. To ask the Scottish Government what steps are being taken to improve safety at the Junction 21 slip road, where the M74 joins the B7076. Of course, safety is the top priority. We take our obligations very seriously. Following concerns raised by Kilpatrick Community Council about the safety of the junction, a comprehensive safety review was carried out. The review concluded that the junction layout, road traffic signs and road markings are appropriate, and that they comply with current design standards. A refurbishment of the road markings at the junction and road traffic signs was completed in October last year, with additional signage enhancements recently carried out. Oliver Mundell, I thank the cabinet secretary for that answer. Given on-going community concerns and a number of serious near-missies at the junction, will the Scottish Government commit to sending Transport Scotland officials down to look at the site and to meet with representatives from the local community councils? I have informed that, in the last three full calendar years, there were two slight personal injury accidents, both in 2015, on the B7076 at the bottom of the junction, 21 northbound offslip from the M74. I am happy that the member makes representations to my colleague Mr Yousaf, who is primarily dealing with the matter, and should he wish to make such representations, he will, of course, be taken as they always are very seriously indeed. I think that it would be not unreasonable to make the point, however, that it is the responsibility of every driver to observe safe driving practice, and the prime responsibility must always rest with every single one of us to ensure that we drive safely on our roads. To ask the Scottish Government what impact the UK Government's benefit cap will have on individuals and families in Scotland. Minister Jeane Freeman. The latest EWP figures for February 2017 show that over 3,600 households and 11,000 children in Scotland are currently affected by the new cap, to thirds of whom are lone parents, and while the average weekly cut is £59, some households are having to cope with losing £200 each week. That is increasing hardship and difficulty for already vulnerable households and children is unacceptable and the UK Government should reverse that policy. Ben Macpherson. I welcome the minister's comments there, and I'm glad that she's joining with me to call on the UK Government to reverse those cuts, especially given the damaging impact that they are having on communities, including in my constituency, particularly in North Edinburgh, where people and families and their children are facing increased hardship and in some cases homelessness due to the issues surrounding the benefit cap and other UK Government welfare reforms. Can I ask the minister what we can do together to put pressure on the UK Government to reverse those cuts, as she specified? Minister. I thank the member for that additional question. Of course, the benefit cap, as members will know from our previous statements in this chamber, is an issue that we are directly addressing with the past UK Government and will do with the incoming UK Government with respect to its effect as they intend to apply it to devolved benefits and the impact on individuals, an effect that we believe very strongly, firmly undercuts the agreement in the Smith commission and the fiscal framework. I'm very happy to advise the member that we consistently press the UK Government to reverse policies that, ironically in a social security system that they operate, which assesses need, then chooses not to meet it. Having come this morning from a very helpful discussion with East Lothian Council on the impact in its residents and on that authority in terms of the full roll-out of universal credit, I am pleased to say that we are now looking to working directly with our newly elected local authorities, with COSLA as it forms itself under those new regimes, in order to increase pressure collectively from Scotland to the UK Government to reverse all of the changes that they have introduced, which evidence shows have a direct impact on vulnerable families, on children in particular and, of course, on women. To ask the Scottish Government when it last met the chief executive of NHS Greater Glasgow in Clyde and what issues were discussed. Cabinet Secretary, Shona Robison. I recently met the new chief executive of NHS Greater Glasgow in Clyde, Jane Grant, on Thursday, 18 May, and we discussed matters of importance to local people. I thank the cabinet secretary for that answer. Last week, the cabinet secretary held a small invite-only meeting in Paisley and was faced with strong opposition from local parents and members of the kids need-our-ward campaign, who are deeply worried and angry over the proposed closure of the children's ward at the town's Royal Alexander hospital. In addition to that, parents and families across Inverclyde are growing increasingly concerned about the downgrading of the Inverclyde Royal hospital's midwife birthing unit. Local residents have vigorously opposed the proposed changes, with a 7,000-strong petition opposing the downgrading of the birthing unit. Ultimately, the final decision over the downgrading enclosure of the children's ward at the RAH and the downgrading of the birthing unit at Inverclyde Royal hospital lies with the Scottish Government. Will the cabinet secretary consider the anxiety and concern expressed by parents and families across west of Scotland and take decisive action to reverse the closure of the children's ward at the RAH in Paisley and the birthing unit at the Inverclyde Royal hospital? First of all, I had a very productive meeting on 19 May with local parents, who were able to express directly the issues and concerns that they had. As I said to the parents at that meeting on 19 May, I would be happy to meet with any other local concerned parents. Indeed, we made sure that my contact details were given to anybody who was taking part in the protest outside the meeting and we will lay them out and set up further meetings as required in addition to a visit that I will be making to the RAH ward 15. Of course, as Mary Fee quite rightly says, the decision rests with me, and it is quite right that I take a due process and hear those concerns as part of that process. I will take time to do that in coming to a decision about ward 15 at the RAH. In regard to the Inverclyde birthing unit, as Mary Fee should know, Greater Glasgow and Clyde have been undertaking its own review of maternity and neonatal services in Greater Glasgow and Clyde, and we will be making a decision on its next steps based on that review. She is being a little pre-emptive in suggesting that those proposals are with me now. They are not, because Glasgow has not submitted any formal proposals to me around the birthing unit at Inverclyde. We should allow Greater Glasgow and Clyde to undertake the work that they are undertaking about maternity and neonatal services and then take a due process and go forward from there. Stuart McMillan Sorry. Recently, the county telegraph reported that employees and consultants have been informally told that the ITU department, which caters for patients at the RAH, who need intensive treatment after operations will close in January, can the cabinet secretary inform me of the issue that was raised with the chief executive of NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde? Why, then, has there been no official dialogue from Greater Glasgow and Clyde health board staff and elected representatives over current plans for the ITU department? The member will be aware that NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde responded to concerns confirming that there are currently no proposals to alter the services delivered from the ITU at Inverclyde royal hospital. I would expect all health boards to undertake proper and meaningful engagement with local stakeholders in the shaping and delivery of healthcare services. Local people can be assured that the NHS in Scotland has well established guidance on service change. It remains the case that any proposals designated as major change would have to be the subject of formal public consultation and, ultimately, ministerial approval. However, to reiterate to Stuart McMillan that there are currently no proposals to alter those services from the ITU at Inverclyde royal hospital, and nothing has come to me. The future of ward 15 has been uncertain since 2011. We support calls for the cabinet secretary to step up and take responsibility by making a decision on this proposal. When will staff, patients and families be informed if services are to be moved to the royal hospital for sick children? Perhaps if the member had listened to my previous answer, he would have heard me say that the decision does lie with me. The process that I am undertaking at the moment is to listen to those local parents and concerned people within the area. I will be undertaking a series of meetings to make sure that those views are heard. I would have thought that the member would have welcomed that, because surely he would not want me to make a decision without having heard the views of local people. I think that that would not be doing his constituents a very good service. To ask the Scottish Government how many meetings it has had with production companies since January 2017 regarding locating a new film studio in the Lloverian region. The Scottish Government has had no meetings. However, Scottish Enterprise has met developers about opportunities as part of the on-going work to ensure that Scotland has an enhanced range of studio facilities. I thank the cabinet secretary for her answer. Does she believe that we need more than one national film studio in the Lloverian region? If so, how many? Secondly, will the Scottish Government look at all applications that come forward with equal weight? We have committed to supporting a range of studio facilities. Indeed, my initial answer said that we are looking at on-going work to ensure that Scotland has an enhanced range of studio facilities. We currently have a number of studios that are used. For example, the pyramids in basket was used for train spotting. Leveson facilities was used for Churchill. It is important that we have permanent facilities, and a number of those are already in development. We would certainly want to encourage any private sector developer who has an interest in the area to bring forward proposals. Our authorities and our public bodies will engage with them. Will the cabinet secretary ensure that any part of the proposed location on the site in Midlothian takes full account of the traffic pressure on the A701, which is already congested in a bottleneck, with housing developments down that spine, which is causing great difficulties to my constituents, particularly in Penicook? As a member might be aware, the planning process is not fully completed. The member will understand that I cannot make any detailed comment. The reasons for the ministers proposing to grant planning permission are set out in the Government's letter dated 3 April, which is publicly available. I refer the member to that publication. Runa Mackay Can the cabinet secretary advise on what the public sector is doing to make Scotland an attractive place to film productions? In addition to enhanced studio facilities, we are also making sure that production fund is enhanced. On top of the nearly £11 million that Creative Scotland invested in 2015-16, we have also produced a production growth fund of £3 million, £1.875 of that has already been awarded. Films that have benefited from the production growth fund include trainspotting, Churchill, Hush, Trust and Smile in plain sight, Loch Ness and The Wife, and the Scotland-based thriller The Keepers Star and Gerald Butler will also receive funding to help to ensure that Scottish film people can benefit from the opportunities that the film has in improving our skills and capacity for future film opportunities. Thank you. Before we turn to First Minister's questions, members will wish to join me in welcoming to our gallery Mrs Muturam Arras, President of the Parliament of Baden-Lortenburg.