 Fel ydych chi'n gyfhwyntion hwn, ddechrau graddartrvalue. Rydw i'n fawr i'n meddwl i mi teachers gyda slicku cyflodein o'r rai i gyflodein. Dydw i'n meddwl i'n meddwl i gyflodein o'r mud o phroletaidd oedd y Peslau Gallan. A Facebook plea was recently made for volunteers to help under pressure NHS staff at the A&E department of the Royal Alexandria hospital in Paisley. Does the First Minister still think that there is not a crisis in Scotland's NHS? I make very clear to Kezia Dugdale and to members across the chamber the circumstances of the Facebook advert that Kezia Dugdale talks about. NHS go to Glasgow and Clyde. We are seeking volunteers to offer a befrending service in the accident and emergency of the Royal Alexandria hospital. NHS Glasgow has similar befrending volunteers working elsewhere in the hospital currently. Those volunteers do not replace NHS staff, they do not give any form of clinical care, instead they might accompany patients who are on their own and can provide general information to patients and to relatives. All health boards have volunteering policies, and volunteers have provided support to patients in the NHS for many, many years. I think that this is a good opportunity for all of us across the chamber to thank the many people who volunteer in our nation. Kezia Dugdale, volunteers play a valuable role in their NHS, but there is no avoiding the fact that this is the first time that the befrending service has been extended to A&E, and by God you need a friend if you have been waiting 17 hours in an A&E department. I will go from speaking to NHS patients and staff across Scotland that our health service is at breaking point. Those are people who need treatment and the dedicated staff who provide it. They do a wonderful job, but they are struggling and they need support from their Government. Can the First Minister tell us whether the rise in the number of acute patient cases in Scotland's NHS has been matched by staff increases? The First Minister has been a 6.5 per cent increase in the number of staff working in the national health service since the Government took office. We are all well aware of the pressures on our national health service. A couple of weeks ago, when Kezia Dugdale and I had an exchange on the challenges that face our national health service in England, I explained the increase in attendancies—perfectly genuine attendancies—that Greater Glasgow and Clyde in particular had been seeing at its accident and emergency units from very sick older people—many of them frail elderly people with respiratory conditions. We know the pressures that our health service is working under. That is why this Government has been increasing funding for our health service. It is why we have been increasing the number of people who work in our health service. Only this week, the health secretary announced an additional £100 million to tackle the challenge of delayed discharge in our health service. We will continue to do everything that we possibly can to support those working at the front line in our national health service. It is perhaps because we worked so hard to do that that a poll this week found that twice the number of people in Scotland trust the SNP with the health service than trust Labour. Kezia Dugdale, time and time again, the First Minister comes to this chamber to tell us about increased NHS staff numbers. We heard it again there today—6.5 per cent—but the reality is that the number of acute NHS patients in Scotland has risen by more than 10 per cent. That is an extra 1.4 million patient cases since 2007, yet the number of NHS staff to treat those patients lags far behind. The Scottish Government's £30 million this year to tackle the problem of bedblocking is welcome, but it is not enough because tackling bedblocking is not the whole picture. The problem is not just at the back door—it is on the front line. Scottish Labour would use the Barnett consequentials to set up a £100 million front line fund to deliver more NHS patient services in the evenings and weekends where they are needed the most. Let us try that consensus thing again. Will she back Scottish Labour's plans for the NHS? When Labour finally comes up with some coherent, costy plans for the national health service, in the interests of consensus I will be very happy to consider them in that open and constructive way. The fact of the matter is that Labour's figures do not add up. I do not know whether Kezia Dugdale was listening to the debate that we had on the budget bill yesterday. Jackie Baillie, who I do not know if she is in the chamber right now and I can understand why she might have chosen not to be, spent most of her speech calling for additional money for local government. When she was challenged to say where that money should come from, she said that that was too complicated a question for her to answer. Then, in the next breath, we had a call for more funding for the health service, again with figures that do not add up. I will tell Kezia Dugdale what, as First Minister, I will continue to do. I will continue to provide real money for the national health service. Real increases to the national health service from a real, balanced budget that this Government puts forward. We have increased the health budget in real terms since 2010 by 4.6 per cent. At territorial health boards next year, we will get above inflation increase of 3.4 per cent. We will continue to deliver for the health service, working with them to address the challenges. I say again that it is because we do that, because we stand with our health service to make sure that it is equipped to deliver that 42 per cent of people trust the health service more than double—trust the SNP to run the health service more than double the number that trusts Labour. Kezia Dugdale. The First Minister has £113 million worth of anallocated Barnett consequentials. We are asking for £100 million of it. That is real money to tackle a real problem, and it is about time that she took responsibility for it. SNP packed themselves on the back about the opinion polls, but over Christmas, a porter cabin was given a lick of pain and used as an integral part of our NHS. £30 million for bed blocking is welcome, but it will not make the Scottish Government's NHS crisis go away. Scottish Labour is putting the NHS first. When will the First Minister do the same? First Minister. We should provide money from unallocated consequentials to the health service. The only problem with that from Kezia Dugdale is that she is also asking us to make money available for local government, for a resilience fund, for a whole list of other things. If Kezia Dugdale is now saying that it is not Labour's position for us to use the consequentials to set up a resilience fund to help people in the north-east economy, that is a change in Labour's position, but I think that she should clarify it. Can I come back to the fundamentals here? This is about patients and staff in our national health service. Kezia Dugdale might want to talk about porter cabins, but I think that what the people across the country, and certainly in greater Glasgow and Clyde, will be interested to know is that a new hospital at a cost of £850 million is close to being finally constructed in the city of Glasgow, the finance secretary visited it yesterday. That is the investment that this Government is putting into our health service, so we will continue to invest real money from real budgets in our health service supporting those at the front line. Frankly, we will leave Labour to their own fantasy economics. I think that I may just know the answer to this question, but to ask the First Minister when she will next meet the Prime Minister. First Minister, in round about an hour's time, Ruth Davidson, yesterday John Swinney announced that he was tearing up his previous rates and bans on the new land and buildings transaction tax and replacing them with more generous rates. He was able to do this because the Conservative-led Government and Westminster had its own cut stamp duty, a cut that was reflected in Scotland's block grant. Can the First Minister tell me today, does she think that this tax cut, helping homeowners across the UK and in Scotland, would have happened if Ed Miliband had been Prime Minister? I think that this gives me such a massive opportunity here to, I suppose, reflect on what I think is a curiosity in Scotland, and Labour probably will not want to hear this. Yesterday there was a poll published in Scotland that showed that Ed Miliband, a Labour leader in Scotland, has managed to find himself in a position where he has even lower approval ratings than a deeply popular Tory Prime Minister. I do not know how they have managed to do that, but nevertheless, and I think that the answer to that question, for people who look at the Westminster establishment and do not fancy what they see from either side, the answer to that is to vote SNP and get strong voices standing up for Scotland. On the question of LBTT, I am very proud that John Swinney yesterday put forward tax proposals that take out of taxation altogether in terms of house transactions 50 per cent of people at the bottom end of the housing market. I think that that is a fantastic achievement. It will help first-time buyers, and I hope that Ruth Davidson will warmly welcome me on the next Conservative leaflet to pop-through doors. David Cameron is a deeply popular Prime Minister, so says the First Minister of Scotland, but it is strange that this is a First Minister who will happily pass on a Conservative tax cut and yet is the same Prime Minister who wants to help Ed Miliband get into Downing Street so that she can stop just such tax cuts taking place. Let me ask a point of detail about yesterday's stamp duty reforms. When John Swinney first announced his rates in October, he said, and I quote, I have decided that the taxes raised should be revenue neutral, raising no more or less than the taxes that they replace. He repeated that principle several times yesterday in this very chamber. Following the Chancellor's tax cut, the Deputy First Minister had an additional £64 million to pass on in yesterday's budget. His climb down, however, only amounts to £53 million, and those numbers were confirmed to us by the Scottish Parliament's own independent information service this morning, so that's an extra £11 million that will have to be paid by home buyers in Scotland. My question is, why has this First Minister not passed on the full £64 million to Scottish taxpayers as promised, and what is she planning to do with the other £11 million? The answer to that, of course, is very simple. I'm sure that John Swinney would be very happy to write in detail providing the answer, but I'll give it to her right now. The tax changes announced by John Swinney yesterday are revenue neutral, and we, of course, had to wait for the detail of the block grant adjustment. However, there are two other factors that John Swinney has been very open about taking into account—the effect of forestalling—and John Swinney's indication of what he made earlier, as well, that a contribution will be made to the reserve. That is the definition that he has always given of revenue neutrality, and I'm sure that the finance secretary will be very happy to set out the detail of that in writing to Ruth Davidson. Finally, two other points to Ruth Davidson. I'm glad that she's given me the opportunity today to say very clearly again that the SNP would not, in any circumstances, formally or informally prop up a Tory Government, because Scotland does not vote Tory, and I don't see that change in any time soon. However, the last point that the First Minister applies to Ruth Davidson and to Kezia Dugdale is that it is rather strange that, on the day that the UK Government is publishing its draft legislative clauses supposedly implementing the Smith proposals, we do not have Labour or the Tories with the gumption to stand up here and say that the vow is being delivered because they know it's not. Can the First Minister tell us that is it true that contractors working on the new women's prison project in Greenock will be told tomorrow that the project is not now going ahead? As Mordor Fraser is aware, Michael Matheson has said that he is considering this issue very carefully, and I think that it is absolutely correct that, as a new justice secretary, he takes the time to do that. It will not come as any surprise to anybody in this chamber to know that it is an issue that Michael Matheson and, indeed, myself as First Minister and the Government have been looking at carefully, because we want to make sure that the decision that is taken here is the right decision. I also want to make clear that my view is that all of us across this chamber should be determined to work to reduce not just the prison population generally but the female prison population in particular. I am sure that when Michael Matheson finally makes the announcement, after his consideration, Mordor Fraser will be interested in that matter, and I would hope that he will welcome whatever decision we finally arrive at. Question 3, Willie Rennie. To ask the First Minister what issues will be discussed at the next meeting of the Cabinet. First Minister. Matters of importance to the people of Scotland. Willie Rennie. We know the First Minister wants independence at all costs and at every opportunity, but that is not what the people voted for last September or for what her party agreed to with Smith. It is a pity this morning that she has gone on a hunt for reasons to be miserable. The vow has been made, delivered on time. This is a good day for the Scottish Parliament. First Minister. On the basis of recent opinion polls, there are certainly some people in this chamber who have good cause to be pretty miserable, but can I give them a clue? It is nobody on these benches, that is for sure. In all seriousness, let me engage in a very straight way with Willie Rennie on this issue. Of course it is no secret that I did not think that the Smith proposals went far enough, but nevertheless I do welcome the proposals as far as they go. It is really important now that both the spirit and the letter of those proposals are translated into legislation. I welcome the draft clauses today and as far as they go, but I think that in some key respects there has been a significant watering down of what the Smith commission proposed. I cannot believe that Willie Rennie is going to stand up here and argue that in any circumstances it can be right for Westminster to retain a veto on whether or not this Parliament can abolish the bedroom tax. I also do not believe that Willie Rennie will agree with the fact that, even though the Smith commission said that we should have a general power to create new benefits in any devolved area, that is not actually being delivered. Willie Rennie should stop swallowing the Tory line on this, instead get behind the Scottish Government and try to strengthen the proposals. Willie Rennie. Can I just gently say to the First Minister that, in Smith, she agreed to share the universal credit with the UK Government. Now she wants to exclude the people she agreed to share with. Does she not realise how ridiculous she sounds? All we have to agree is a stark date for the new Scottish system. That is not a veto, it is Government working together, it is basic common sense. So can I ask her when she will honour her part of the Smith agreement and extend devolution to local communities? Two months since Smith and there has been no action whatsoever. Last week, her most senior backbencher, John McAlpine, said that those who want to devolve power to local councils want to bring down this Parliament. Is that why she is dragging her feet? First Minister. I am very committed to devolving power away from this Parliament. That is why we have done the work that we have done with cities. It is why we have done the work that we have done and continue to do with our island communities. I do not think that it is reasonable for Willie Rennie to say that we should be devolving away powers proposed by the Smith commission before the UK Government has even got round to giving this Parliament the powers in the first place. Let me just quote the draft clause to Willie Rennie before this Parliament could make regulations to abolish the bedroom tax. We would have to consult with the UK Government about the practicability of those regulations, and the Secretary of State would have to give his or her agreement as to when that change should be made. I am sorry if Willie Rennie cannot understand this, but when he requires the agreement of another person to do something, that person tends to have a veto. I am prepared to make common cause with Willie Rennie on that. Let us go together to the UK Government and ask for that draft clause to be changed, and if it agrees to change it, it will have made real progress. To ask the First Minister what steps the Scottish Government is taking to reduce the incidence of type 2 diabetes among children and adolescents. First Minister, in order to reduce the incidence of type 2 diabetes in children and adolescents, it is essential that we address the underlying risk factors associated with the development of the condition. Our obesity strategy, which was published in 2010, sets out our long-term commitment to tackling overweight and obesity. In addition, in January 2011, we published our framework to improve maternal and infant nutrition. From a broader perspective, our diabetes improvement plan, which was published in November last year, contains actions designed to improve the early detection of people of all ages at risk of developing type 2 diabetes. Jim Eadie I thank the First Minister for that answer, but with one in seven children in Scotland now classed as being either obese or overweight, I welcome the priority being placed on measures to prevent more children being diagnosed with type 2 diabetes. What more can be done to encourage school pupils to become healthy and more active by promoting psycholescence, walking to and from school and providing greater emphasis within the curriculum on physical education and healthy eating, and what more can be done to provide a determined and concerted focus in our most deprived areas? The First Minister The Government is committed to doing all that we can for children and young people to stop more children being diagnosed with type 2 diabetes. Health and wellbeing is a core part of curriculum for excellence in Scottish schools, and across all learning stages it mandates that children and young people should enjoy daily opportunities to participate in physical activity and sport. The 2014 healthy living survey shows that 96 per cent of schools are delivering at least two hours physical education in primary schools and at least two periods in secondary schools, and that demonstrates remarkable progress since 2004-5, when less than 10 per cent of schools were meeting this target. David Stewart Thank you, Presiding Officer. The First Minister will be well aware that the issues about type 2 diabetes at a young age increase the chances of complications spiralling, including heart and kidney disease and even premature death, but up to 80 per cent of cases of type 2 can be delayed or preventive through lifestyle changes. Does the First Minister share the view of Diabetes Scotland of a future without diabetes by funding research into new treatments and teaching children the importance of a healthy diet on regular exercise? Surely our aim should be a country free of Scotland's silent killer. The First Minister Yes, I agree with that very strongly. I would also take the opportunity to commend the work of Diabetes Scotland and we look forward to continuing to work with it so that we can improve prevention, early diagnosis and in doing so enable us to limit some of the damaging effects later in life that David Stewart has spoken about. I look forward to working across this chamber on the actions that I have spoken about and, indeed, on other actions so that we can look forward to Scotland without diabetes. 5. Ken Macintosh To ask the First Minister what steps the Scottish Government has taken to reassure the Jewish community following recent terrorist attacks and the reported rise in antisemitism. Following the atrocities in Paris, I spoke with the director of the Scottish Council of Jewish Communities on 16 January to offer the condolences and support of this Government to the Jewish community in Scotland. Tackling antisemitism is a key priority for the Scottish Government and we continue to work closely with organisations representing the Jewish community. Most recently, we have provided funding to the Scottish Council to explore how attitudes to being Jewish in Scotland have changed in the last year and I hope that this work as part of our programme of support shows our clear commitment to countering intolerance. We will also continue to work through Interfaith Scotland, which works to promote dialogue and, through education, eliminate religious intolerance, as well as improve the lives of all our faith communities in Scotland. On 27 January, I will attend the National Scottish Holocaust Memorial event 2015 in Ayr to commemorate the 70th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz-Birkenau. I will also be signing the book of commitment in the Scottish Parliament, pledging the support of the Scottish Government to keep the memory alive of what can happen if we allow hatred, prejudice and intolerance to remain unchecked. I thank the First Minister for her comments and the commitment that she is showing on behalf of the Scottish Government. Can I ask her whether she would agree that our reaction should not be one of alarmism but one of reassurance? Could I also suggest one way of signalling that solidarity with the Jewish community that we wish to show? The First Minister issued a very welcome statement condemning the horrific attack on the kosher supermarket in Paris, just as she did condemning the Charlie Hebdo massacre. Unlike the statement condemning the Charlie Hebdo attack, which has been put on the Scottish Government's website, her statement to the Jewish community has not yet been put on the Scottish Government's website. It is quite important that, as well as offering reassurance directly to the Jewish community, there is a public display of that message. I would ask the First Minister to think on those comments. I am certainly more than happy to take that on board and to rectify that if that is indeed an omission. Can I take the opportunity to assure Ken Macintosh that if it is an omission it is not a deliberate one? It has obviously been an oversight, but I will ensure that it is rectified. On the first part of Ken Macintosh's question, I absolutely agree that it was something that I heard from the director of the Scottish Council of Jewish Communities. It is very much a case of uniting together in solidarity but resisting alarmism and instead taking every opportunity that we can to reassure those in our Jewish community. We are very lucky in the diversity of the country that we have. The Jewish community in Scotland plays a massive role in this country. It makes a massive contribution to our country. We are very proud of that and we should all stand shoulder to shoulder with them at this time. Stuart Maxwell. I very much welcome the comments that the First Minister has just provided and hopefully the reassurance to the Jewish community in Scotland. In light of the comments by the Home Secretary about security at both synagogues and schools down in England after the incident in France, can the First Minister provide reassurance about the additional security measures that will be provided to the Jewish community, particularly synagogues, social clubs and Calderwood's Lodge the Primary and the secondary school, where Jewish pupils go to any strengthenshire? First Minister. I thank Stuart Maxwell for that answer. Both the Justice Secretary and I have had briefing from the police on some of those specific matters. I can assure members across the chamber that Police Scotland is aware of the need to ensure that the reassurance and support that is given to local Jewish communities also encompasses our universities. We will be working with university chaplancies and other organisations to make sure that that is the case. Similarly, with schools, the safety of pupils attending schools of paramount importance to us and to local authorities and to the police. The police recognise the concern of some Jewish communities, and I can assure members across the chamber that they will be undertaking a range of measures, not just to provide reassurance but to provide tangible reassurance. I have no doubt that that will be a welcome message to everybody who, like me, wants to send out a very clear message that we will not tolerate in any way, shape or form, the intolerance and prejudice that, unfortunately, some people in our faith communities are subject to. Underpinning all of this, does the First Minister agree that whatever disagreements individuals may have with the day-to-day policy of the state of Israel that should not be conflagrated with the Jewish community here in Scotland and must never be allowed to justify the abuse or intolerance that, unfortunately, sometimes it appears it is used to do? Yes, I agree wholeheartedly. Just as the wider Muslim community are in no way, shape or form, responsible for the kind of atrocities that we saw in Paris, so, too, is it true that the wider Jewish community is not responsible for any of the actions of the Israeli Government. So whatever people's views are or are not about Israel, that is not something that is the responsibility of the Jewish community here in Scotland. I want to see us in Scotland, and I believe that everybody in Scotland wants to see this, all of our wonderfully diverse communities coming together and showing, demonstrating and how we behave and how we carry ourselves so that we are indeed, whatever differences there might be between us, we are one Scotland. Question number six, Bill Kidd. As me, yes. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. To ask the Scottish Government what impact the renewal of Trident would have on the delivery of public services in Scotland. First Minister. Well, the equivalent annual cost of Trident renewal is estimated by the Trident commission at £2.9 billion per annum. That is at 2012 prices. How Scotland's 8.3 population share of those costs, which equates to around £240 million per year across the lifetime of the proposed successor programme, could be better used would, of course, be a matter for the Government to determine at the time. But let me make it clear that rather than spending billions of pounds on weapons of mass destruction, this Scottish Government would want to use our proportion of that money to help Scotland continue its journey to becoming a fairer and more prosperous country. Bill Kidd. I thank the First Minister for that reply and would just ask if the First Minister is as shocked as me that just a week after voting with the Tories to impose £30 billion more austerity cuts, the great majority of Scottish Labour MPs backed another £100 billion in public resources for new nuclear weapons. The really sad thing is that I am actually no longer shocked when Scottish Labour decided to decide with the Tories instead of siding with the people of Scotland. We have seen it in the referendum campaign. We saw it last week when Labour voted with the Tories for an additional £30 billion of austerity cuts. Just this week, aside from a handful of honourable members of the Scottish Labour Party, most MPs from the Scottish Labour Party either did not bother to turn up and vote against Trident, or they voted with the Tories for the renewal of Trident, yet more evidence, Presiding Officer, if it were needed, that the only party that can be trusted to stand up for Scotland is the SNP. That ends First Minister's questions. I have a point of order from Mordell Fraser. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I wish to raise a point of order in relation to the answer given to me earlier by the First Minister in connection with the future of the proposed women's prison project in Greenock. Given your own statement to Parliament on Tuesday in relation to communications and announcements made by the Scottish Government being made first to the press and not as they should properly to Parliament, how can you assist members who wish to see further information in this area being announced as it should properly to Parliament and not in some other fashion? Thank you for that point of order. There are a number of ways that Government ministers can inform Parliament about their actions when it is a matter of significance. There are five different ways to do that. I am sure that Mr Fraser is well aware of them and I am quite sure that the Government is too. That ends First Minister's question. A point of order, Presiding Officer. The First Minister, earlier in her response to me, selectively quoted the draft clauses published by the UK Government today. She read the start but not the end of clause 24b. In full, it reads that the Secretary of State has given his or her agreement as to when any change made by the regulations is to start to have effect. Such agreement not reasonably and unreasonably withheld. This is a very serious matter. Can I seek your advice, Presiding Officer, on how the First Minister can correct the record and correct the selective misquoting? First Minister, would you like to— Again, the clause that Willie Rennie has done. The Secretary of State has given his or her agreement as to when any change made by the regulations is to start to have effect. Such agreement not to be unreasonably withheld. In other words, before a change such as the abolition of the bedroom tax can be introduced by this Government, the Secretary of State at Westminster has to give his or her agreement. That seems pretty clear to me. I am not sure what Willie Rennie does not understand. That does end First Minister's questions. We now move to the next item of business, which is members' business. Members who leave the chamber should do so quickly and quietly.