 Rwyf bod gynnig i'w typo'r cwestiynau'r cwestiynau, would you, Mr MacFarlane? Gweld rydw i ddim yn gwrs â'r cyfarchiadau, ond ond ond ond ond gwrs â'r cyfarchiadau. Pan oedd y gweith answersu'r cyfarchiadau y cwestiynau'r gwaith oedd yn mynd i ddim ai ddim yn gwybod yn gyfrifiadau? Jo Gweld rydwg wedi'u cyfarchiadau yn gweithiasu'r cyfarchiadau. Mae cwestiynau llwydd aeth gwaith yn ei gwybod oent yn gyfrifiadau, ond, hynny'n attitudes have been of national significance. Am yr unspt I ask it again now. Does the cabinet secretary have any concerns about the conduct of Police Scotland's counter-corruption unit? The member will be aware that the Scottish Police Authority has requested the HMICS to undertake a review of the counter-corruption unit following the IO co-investigation last year, and that review is presently taking place. It would seem that the most sensible thing for us all to do is to wait for the outcome of that review that the HMICS is undertaking. I have no doubt that, at that point, both the Scottish Police Authority and the chief constable will want to consider any further measures that they believe is necessary in relation to the counter-corruption unit. It has been reported in the media that the counter-corruption unit's powers would be handed to Perc, the police investigations and review commissioner. If that is the case, the cabinet secretary would have to get involved because commissioner's powers are set in statute. Can the cabinet secretary tell Parliament whether the Government has had any discussions with either Police Scotland or Perc about such a legislative change? It is always dangerous for any member to come to this chamber and to base their question on the basis of what is contained within a newspaper report, which I am sure all politicians aware of are not always necessarily as accurate as some members may believe they are. As I have already mentioned, we have not been made aware of any plan changes to the counter-corruption unit. Again, I reiterate the most sensible thing for us all to do is allow HMICS to undertake the review once it is reported to the SPA. I have no doubt that it will want to consider its findings alongside that of the chief constable's view on any actions that should be taken in moving forward. The Scottish Police Federation and retired officers have raised a number of concerns, some of those with the justice committee, about the culture and work practices adopted by the counter-corruption unit, including disproportionate investigation into their private lives, the use of detention of up to seven hours and escorting them to washroom facilities during breaks in their interviews. Will the cabinet secretary engage with the SPA to ensure that human rights and natural justice are concepts to be extended to those who would investigate allegations against police officers to ensure proper proportionality? I am aware of the evidence that was provided to the justice committee, and I am also aware that the commissioner for PIRC also requested specific evidence of those matters. It is my understanding that there has been no evidence provided to the PIRC on those particular instances. If there are allegations being made about how the counter-corruption unit has operated, or even how PIRC has operated, it is important that evidence is submitted so that those issues can be considered. I am sure that the member would recognise that there is an issue where members have often stated that the Scottish Police Authority does not get ahead of themselves and get involved in matters that need to be reformed within Police Scotland or to address issues of concern that have been raised in Police Scotland in the past. Here we have the Scottish Police Authority doing exactly what I think it should be doing, and I was asking HMICS to carry out a review of the counter-corruption unit. Once it has actually completed that review, it would seem that the most appropriate and sensible thing to do is to wait for that report to be completed and then for the Scottish Police Authority to consider that along with Police Scotland and any further measures that it is taking. I think that that demonstrates the governance process within the new structures of a single police force here in Scotland operating in a way that it should, where the Scottish Police Authority should be looking into those matters, and that work is already on going at the present moment. I have got no doubt that it will consider HMICS's report in due course once it has been submitted. Margaret Mitchell. The whole issue surrounding transparency and accountability in the counter-corruption unit has raised questions about how easy it is for police officers with legitimate concerns to report those in confidence. The public generally recognises that activity is whistleblowing. Here the person making the disclosure to be covered by the definition of whistleblowing must believe two things. One, they are acting in the public interest, and two, they must reasonably believe that the disclosure tends to show past, present or likely future wrongdoing. Does the cabinet secretary still support his definition? What action will he take to ensure that the SPA's monitoring of police officers' ability to take advantage of whistleblowing procedures is robust? As a member will be well aware, those are largely matters that are operational responsibilities for Police Scotland. I am also aware of the evidence that the member received recently in exchanges with the chief constable, Phil Gormley, when he was before the committee and set out some of the issues that he is considering at the present moment. Alongside the chief constable was the chair of the Scottish Police Authority on looking at how complaints are being handled and the measures that they can take. The member is effectively asking a question of me that she has almost already asked both the chief constable and the SPA and that they have provided her with an indication of the work that they have on going and turning the organisation in looking at those very issues. Given the role that the SPA has in the governance of Police Scotland and the way in which the new chief constable is looking at those matters, I think that we should allow them to do that and to see how they can improve on the present arrangements at this given time. I am always prepared to look at trying to address issues where we can improve areas within our justice system, including within the police service, but I also think that it is important that the structures that we have put in place that members are quick to criticise when they feel that they are not operating effectively when they are undertaking work in some of those areas, we should allow them to do that and allow them to do that in a way that allows them to look at the evidence that has been provided to them to try to improve the existing system. To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on negotiations to save the steel plants at DL and Clybridge. The Scottish Steel Task Force is doing everything within the power of the Scottish Government and involved partners to secure a viable future for the steel plants at DL and Clybridge. Discussions are on-going, but it is not possible to comment further due to the commercial sensitivities surrounding any potential deal and further speculation at this stage, Presiding Officer, would not be helpful. John Pendlin, I am sorry, minister, I continue. I was planning to, thank you Presiding Officer. I can assure members that we are leaving no stone unturned in our efforts to achieve our primary objective of securing an alternative commercial operator for these sites and have made significant progress in the following areas. Firstly, business rates. We have legislated for a business rates relief scheme at DL and Clybridge from 1 April 2016 up to the 2017 revaluation, and the state of the industry will be considered in the next revaluation. On energy, we are working both to reduce energy consumption at the sites and also to reduce the cost of energy on skills. SDS has developed a £195,000 upskilling programme for key staff to safeguard the future manufacturing capability across the two locations. There are 23 participants, including a mix of process operators, tradesmen, managers and specialists, each with individual and tailored training plans. Over 1,001 training days in total already completed or planned to end June. Environment, the SPS put in place a team of specialists managed by the head of operations in the west of Scotland to ensure the best possible advice to Tata and or any new operator. Finally, procurement, we are implementing measures to address the barriers preventing UK suppliers of steel from competing effectively for public sector contracts in Scotland, including in the supply chain and the Procurement Reform Scotland Act 2014, places sustainable and socially responsible purchasing at the heart of public procurement in Scotland. Minister, my apologies for interrupting you. You shouldn't have stopped for breath. John Perlund. I thank the cabinet secretary for that reply, and I'm sure he will not be surprised to hear that I consider getting people back into their jobs as a priority. Can he assure me that absolutely everything possible has been done to ensure that the election does not delay a deal in any way, including putting in place all the Government's support and spending that might be necessary to achieve the rapid re-employment of personnel and the return of production at all the plants? Minister. I will take very seriously the warning about breathing. I absolutely agree that the priority for us all across this chamber is, as Mr Pentland has said, to safeguard the jobs. That has always been the rationale of our primary objective to secure a potential future for the sites and to continue steel operations in Scotland. It's a perfectly fair question as to the political timetables and commercial timetables. Sadly, they very often do not coincide, but I can assure the member that everything possible is being done to bring matters to a conclusion. I remain hopeful that that can be reached, but it would be imprudent to go into any matter of detail and frustrate, although that might be for members. I give my personal assurance that everything possible has been done and will continue to be done. Clare Adamson. I'm sorry, Mr Pentland. There's a pattern, do you want it again? No, I'm quite happy with that. I consider the secretary to make me run out of breath. Clare Adamson. I'll try not to run out of breath. The minister may know that I visited BRC in Newhouse on Monday and saw the preparation of the steel there for the Aberdeen-Western peripheral route. A significant recent contract awarded to BRC despite a bit of scaremongering that this was going to be awarded out with Europe. Does the minister agree that we need to all get behind the steel industry in Lanarkshire? Part of that is recognising the significant efforts of this Government and not referring to that as they are far, far from a token gesture as they were described earlier. I recognise that Clare Adamson has done a power of work on those matters in relation to procurement in particular, including attending meetings in Brussels to make sure that the Scottish interest is not neglected. I commend her for doing that and for the other members across the chamber who have given their time to the eight meetings thus far of the task force. I agree that things are beginning to look up for the whole steel sector in Scotland. I'm pleased to see that the BRC continues to be successful, including providing steel to the Aberdeen-Western periphery routes, contrary to the implication of some press speculation that was drawn to my attention. The work that we have done on business rates, energy, environmental skills, retention and procurement is certainly not a token gesture. All our work has been in support of the main objective to retain a successful steel sector in Scotland. Margaret Mitchell. While business rates relief has been reinstated for a limited period, for the two plants on the basis of them being derelict or mothbald industrial buildings, can the minister confirm if there's any reason why, other than the EU state relief regulations, that the two plants that Dale and Clyde bridge receive enterprise status to help them to be more competitive? I think that the key phrase there is other than state aid rules. I'm afraid that the import of state aid rules is to restrict the maximum total aid that can be granted to a certain sum over a period of two or three years. We have discussed this, Margaret Mitchell, and she has pursued this issue persistently, as is perfectly reasonable. You see, because the state aid rule says that you cannot provide aid in excess of the figure, the import of doing so, the consequence of doing so is that you may be in breach of state aid. If you're in breach of state aid, then you risk infraction proceeding. If you risk infraction proceeding, then instead of the possibility of a deal being done and going through, then you end up in a difficult situation with the EU commission. That wouldn't help nobody. I think that it is reasonable to say, because the points that were made in the task force is not confidential, that our efforts on business rates have been appreciated. They have been appreciated by all parties. I do think that we have already demonstrated that we have exhausted, or nearly exhausted, the maximum relief that we can provide. I think that it's not perhaps the quantum, Presiding Officer, of the amount of relief that has been appreciated by the parties involved. It's the willingness of the Scottish Government to get our sleeves rolled up and provide every single help that we can. That is what businesses appreciate. Not necessarily the precise amount of money, which, as I say, has a threshold fixed by Brussels. Many thanks. That concludes topical questions for this day and indeed this session. We now move on to the next...