 a wneud unawr dedicio yw'r peth-gredaeth. Fi'r gynnaeth, adrw суд i'r busnes yw'r porfysgwn ni'n gallu'r y adrw ddoch i'r sefyllwch ac rwy'n cwrwch i'r cwrwch i'r Cymru, gyda Dunedig Peirfridg, o'r byw rzurdu i adrw ddoch, Dyma, oedd ein lefmit Belangodau ein gieitid hanfosiad bятноid Cymru. Felly, iddynt yn gwneud i den privately beth teachant iawn. Mae'r 같r UCено sy'n gennychiant plwyfyn am ei ddweud o gael i Gwendettwch Following a Gwendettwchunhic ystodини pan ddechrau i ddweud anchorau aig yng Nonnolawr Understanding F Produkt Cadwyr Felly trod Cadwyr Cymru rhoi ar ffrffau allanfaith yr matingelad Masd. I have just returned to Parliament from Dundee, where I was joined by my colleague Shona Robison at the local MSP. I have had a range of meetings with representatives of the workforce, trade unions and Dundee city council. Those discussions had to be cut short so that I could return to update Parliament today rather than tomorrow as proposed, but I will continue to engage with all those I mentioned and the UK Government as we explore all options for the site. Michelin's announcement that it intends to close its plant at Dundee is devastating, not just for those who work at the Michelin plant but their families in the whole of the city of Dundee in the wider area. The message from the Scottish Government is clear. Dundee is a hugely vibrant city and a great place for business to invest, to grow and to develop, and the Scottish Government will do all that we can to secure a future for the plant and the workforce. Let me be clear, we will leave no stone unturned in our efforts to keep this plant operational in Dundee. Our top priority is to pursue options for the site to continue with commercial production. Our thoughts are first and foremost with the 845 workers and their families who could be directly affected if those plans go ahead as they go through this period of huge uncertainty. We will work with the unions and the local management to provide the best possible support to the workforce at this difficult time. I would like to set out to Parliament what action this Government has and will take. The Scottish Government was informed at the end of last week that Michelin proposed to close the Dundee plant. I met John Reid, managing director of the Dundee plant and Alexander Law, corporate affairs, from Michelin Dundee last Thursday, 1 November. At that meeting, I saw engagement with senior Michelin management to test the status of the decision and to explore how open they would be to alternative proposals. On Sunday 4 November, I, along with the chief executive and strategy and sectors managing director of Scottish Enterprise, met members of Michelin's group executive and they have agreed to consider a proposition that we will bring forward to secure a sustainable future for the plant. I can confirm that I will be convening an action group to explore all options to develop that proposition and secure a future for the plant and its highly skilled workforce. I will chair an initial meeting of the group in Dundee next Monday, with the action plan being taken forward by Steve Dunlop, the chief executive of Scottish Enterprise, with council leader John Alexander. Having spoken to the council, the trade unions, local politicians and the UK Government, I am confident that there is a shared desire to work together to secure the best possible future for the site and its workforce. We are aware that this task is not an easy one and that there are significant challenges to be faced, but we are, as a Government, determined to do everything within our power to prevent this closure. Michelin Tires in Dundee was established well over 40 years ago in 1972 and has become a key part of the local community. The Dundee plant is a cutting-edge facility using the latest manufacturing techniques with a highly innovative and talented leadership team, as well as a highly skilled workforce. It has been working hard to deliver significant efficiencies and environmental improvements to extend the range of markets that it serves. I know that it is not a decision that Michelin has arrived at lightly. Although the market is clearly difficult for the products that Dundee makes, I know that the workforce and unions have gone to immense lengths to make the plant as competitive as possible to secure its future. The influence of Dundee's excellence in engineering and manufacturing extends well beyond those shores and is the complementarity and spirit of collaboration between the private and the public sectors that make it unique. Based on Michelin's existing strengths, as well as that of the broader manufacturing and engineering sectors, we will work in collaboration with all partners to retain the manufacturing facility in Dundee. Dundee has undergone a major transformation in recent years and is a great place to do business. The Scottish Government will work with everyone across Dundee and our efforts to ensure that it continues to be a vibrant future for manufacturing in Dundee. We have been working with TAY partners to complete the arrangements for the £300 million TAY cities deal and an additional £50 million investment package. The Scottish Government stands ready to move forward with the TAY city region deal as soon as possible and therefore calls upon the UK Government to bring forward additional measures and investment in light of Michelin's announcement. I thank the cabinet secretary for his response and for all the work that he has done on this over the past week. I am sure that it is appreciated by workers and their families in Dundee. On those benches, we are devastated for the workers and their families throughout the city who face grave uncertainty tonight about the future of their jobs and their livelihoods. As the cabinet secretary said, Michelin has been in Dundee for 46 years and its success is due entirely to the dedication of the loyal workforce and the constructive relationship that the trade union unite has fostered with management. That is why there was understandable upset at the mismanagement of the closure news, which I am sure everyone regrets. I pledge my support locally and of our party for the action team that the cabinet secretary plans to set up. Does the cabinet secretary agree with me that the total of £350 million pledged for the TAY cities deal will now not touch the sides, especially as investments will go to other parts of the region? Does he think that more money can be found for Dundee? Does he agree with me that this has been long promised? We have not moved fast enough on decommissioning jobs for Dundee. We cannot allow any further delay for future investment. The TAY cities deal was due to be signed tomorrow. Will he commit to signing it before the end of the month? I thank Jenny Marra for both the tone of the questions and the offer of support from the Labour Party. I will take that in the spirit that has been offered. If we have a cross-party approach on that, it will be very welcomed in Dundee. As I say, I was shoulder to shoulder with the trade unions in doing everything that we can to support the workforce at this very challenging time and finding a solution to take forward the future of the plan. In relation to the specific questions, we are offering immediate support to management to support the workforce at this point in time. I agree entirely with the good relations that the trade union has with management. That has been held up as an exemplar relationship on what the trade unions have done with the company. That goodwill in turn is part of the reason why Michelin is willing to listen to me and to the Scottish Government putting forward a proposition. Also, how we, as a Government, have conducted ourselves over the past few days has been positive. We will use that goodwill to try to get the best for the plant in Dundee. In relation to the communication, I agree that it was an appalling way for the staff and the workforce to find out about that announcement. It could have been better handled, but I simply say that, if there was a leak, it was not from the Scottish Government, and I do not believe that it was from Michelin either, which leaves one other substantial party to explain their behaviour. In relation to the city deal, it is important that we proceed with the city deal, because we do not want to see the other economic and industrial benefits slip away from us if others try to use that as an excuse not to sign up. I think that we should proceed with the city deal, but we must give all partners the opportunity to add additional resources in light of the announcement that Michelin has made. That is why I call upon the UK Government to step up to the plate and allocate additional resources to the city deal and look at the industrial strategy and look at sector deals in light of other negotiations currently on-going to make sure that we can deliver for the region. I have reached out to the UK Government. I had a call with Greg Clark, the business minister yesterday, and they have pledged to work with us. I will take that forward in the spirit of positive engagement. Next Monday, when we have the action group, we will clearly have a number of strands of work to take forward. In relation to other industrial interventions, we will have opportunities to work in other areas such as decommissioning. The chancellor has had a call for evidence on the decommissioning prospects. We will work on all that, but our primary objective right now is to protect the workforce and save the plant at Dundee. I agree with the cabinet secretary's initial response that the plan is to support the workforce and the plant. I also welcome his latter comments on options for the future, because we know from past experience that the ambition that we have at the start sets the path for recovery and what comes out of the process. Whatever the outcome for the plant and the workers, the cabinet secretary would not deny that today, especially, we need a laser-like focus on industry in Dundee. The cabinet secretary knows, as well as I do, that the unemployment figures for the city do not reflect the real joblessness there. Will he support an independently-chaired task force on industry for Dundee? I think that laser-like focus is absolutely necessary, given the news and the challenges, the delay on decommissioning and the unemployment figures in our city, which, in UK terms, are terrible and really need addressing. Will he back an independent task force on industry in Dundee today? I have been really helpful with Jenny Marra. The trade unions have asked me not to set up a separate task force. The unions have welcomed the decision around the action group and the language around that is really significant. There is a distinction here. The trade unions so far—and I hope to continue in that sense of partnership that we have established today—are content to be involved with the action group that I am establishing. I do not want an independent piece of work elsewhere. I think that there are opportunities to look at the wider industrial strategy for Dundee, but laser-like focus is on the art of the possible for the 850 jobs at Dundee now. We will be absolutely focused on that and align our enterprise agencies and all parts of Government to support that proposition. Incidentally, for the avoidance of doubt, we will consider all calls for additional resources as a Government ourselves in the support of Dundee and the strategy at Michelin. I ask that the UK Government match that step up to the plate on the additional resources that it may be required to assist with Dundee at this point in time, recognising that it is wider than just Dundee. Dundee is at the epicentre of this. It is an issue for the whole of Scotland and the region. We will calibrate all our efforts around industrial strategy, innovation, engineering, national manufacturing institutes, and so on and so forth to give Dundee a fighting chance to save the plant. It is really important that we showcase the positives of Dundee, because that is what will keep Michelin interested in a future at the plant. I can assure Jenny Marr that I will do everything that I can, and the Government is absolutely united on that—everything that we can to focus on a solution that gives them a fighting chance while exploring, of course, all the wider industrial employment issues in relation to the city in the wider region. There are five members who have indicated the wish to ask a question. First will be Shona Robison to be followed by Bill Bowman. Clearly, that has been devastating news for the workforce and the city in general, but does the cabinet secretary share my admiration for the workforce at Michelin? His tenacity, flexibility and determination, despite the challenge, was clearly demonstrated at the meetings that we held with him earlier today. Does he further agree that what matters now is a focus and action on Michelin? Can he tell me when he expects to next meet the Michelin senior management team? What does he hope and expect to have received at that point from the action group, the very welcome action group that he has announced today, very much welcomed by the workforce, to be able to put to Michelin at that meeting? Finally, will he confirm again how important it is for all parties, including the UK Government, to come forward with packages of support for Michelin, whether that is through the Tay cities deal or the industrial strategy on any other route? What matters is specific packages of support for Michelin, for the plant, for the workforce. I hope that he was left, as I am sure he was, with a clear impression from the workforce that he has been through ups and downs in the city over many years. Despite the current challenge, his determination and effort is really an example to all of us to get behind them, but it is also important to follow their lead in what they are asking us to do. Shona Robison is absolutely right that, even though the workforce and the shop steels are absolutely devastated at this news, they have a resolve to take forward a proposition to management that will allow the plant to continue. We will assist in every way that we can around our efforts on the economic interventions that we may be able to make or partnership with the local authority around non-domestic rates or partnership even with the UK Government around the industrial strategy in the city deal. We can unite, now is the time to unite to work in partnership with everyone interested to give the plant a dundee a future. For us, that is retention, first and foremost, repurposing if that can be achieved, in partnership with the staff, who are absolutely up for the task before us. For that reason, the constructive positive nature of the debate and discourse that I have seen over the course of the day is so helpful. Again, in the spirit of partnership, Greg Clark, the UK business minister, has offered his officials to be supportive here and his junior ministers. I hope that that allows for a constructive dialogue around the actions and interventions that lead to meaningful input by way of UK Government. However, we are all up for that and we need to work together in partnership to put the best possible proposition to management. The timescale for that at the moment is that they will meet me in the next few weeks. Of course, I will have to respect the confidence of that meeting, but it is significant that they are willing to hear from us, hear our proposition. What we need to do now is to unite to give the best possible proposition to Michelin in the way that Shona Robison has articulated and then take forward the best we can to retain the jobs as many as we can at the dundee. There are six more members who wish to get in now. Bill Bowman, to be followed by Patrick Harvie. I echo the comments of Jenny Marra, Shona Robison and the cabinet secretary in terms of our concerns and thoughts for the workforce, their families and their communities. We will work with whoever is involved in that to try to find a solution. Any Scottish Government agencies that will be involved, this is obviously a large potential redundancy number. Do you have the resources to do this and will you make sure that they do have the resources to do that? When you spoke to the Michelin management, was it the group management that made this decision to close the factory and the ones that would have the authority to amend such a decision? What did you say to them? I thank Bill Bowman for his question. He has asked me to press upon all those who are involved to come forward and help. I would gently remind the Conservatives that the UK Government is involved here and that any pressure that Conservative members can apply to the UK Government will be welcome. Does the Scottish Enterprise, the SDS and the PACE arrangements have the necessary resources to help? Yes, they do, but let me be clear that, before we even come to mitigation, we have a greater objective and that is retention. That is to save the plant. I have instructed the chief executive of the Scottish Enterprise to do everything possible to explore every avenue to give that plant a future. We look at the various strategies that we have across the economic action plan, industrialisation and internationalisation to pull all of that together with the business directorate and everyone else, the local authority, the local business community and the UK Government. We will all pull together with the workforce to make sure that the resources are there to put the best possible case to Michelin. Recognising the rationale for that decision is Asian imports into the market, the cost of production and some of those issues. It will take a monumental effort to get the outcome that we want but to make that effort that we will. On the group executives, I am senior decision makers. The decision was taken well in advance of course of last Wednesday when the Scottish Government first heard about it. Bear in mind, as soon as we heard, we asked to meet the local management and then I asked to meet the company executives. I fully expect that people will meet in a few weeks' time the decision makers who will have the authority to look again at the circumstances to see if we can work together to pull something from that situation. Finally, the most pressing point right now is that we will have a window of opportunity in which to act. I have resolved and committed to the Scottish Government to do everything that we can and I equally need that support from the UK Government so that we can put the best possible offer to Michelin international. The intelligence that has been passed to me in those circumstances never before has the company had such a positive and constructive engagement with the Scottish Government in light of those circumstances. I think that that gives us a bit of goodwill, a bit of flexibility to try to get the best possible outcome for the workforce at Dundee, and I will not squander that opportunity. The Parliament should be united in its concern for the workers who are directly affected in their families and in support of the action group that the Scottish Government has established. However, we should also be mindful that a proactive approach—when we see particular sectors or large employers that are facing changing circumstances that threaten their viability—should always be preferable that a reactive setting up of task forces and action groups as we hear very often. If additional funds are found for the Tay cities deal by one or both Governments preferably, what are the extra measures that can be put in there that ensure that the outcome will be the most sustainable possible economic activity so that we avoid what we would all, I hope, want to avoid the risk of being back here again by moaning something that was here today and risks being gone tomorrow? I am sure that Patrick Harvie is aware that we had been investing in the plant. There was Scottish Enterprise engagement, and there has been leadership, environmental support and transformation of the plant, so much so that it was going to be the first Michelin site heading for carbon neutrality. I am sure that we are all welcome. That is why I think that there is some hope in the environmental credentials of the Dundee site. We had been engaging on innovation and on interventions that would have given the plant a future. We thought that the plant had a future because the most recent briefings that we had suggested that it had with the necessary transformation already in place. We will continue to work where we can on innovation to ensure that it is the best possible chance of success around the kind of technologies and design and research and development for the future, and the manufacturing benefits would come along from that as well. Of course, we are looking at the Tay cities deal, but I think that it is really important that we allow that to progress as well, because there are other economic interventions contingent on it. However, we give the UK Government the opportunity to come to the table and match fund at the very least, the contribution that we have put on the table for that city deal. I have already spoken about the environmental credentials of the plant, heading for carbon neutrality. There is scope to have further environmental enhancements. It is a site that we have been working with and we will continue to be proactive as we take forward our ambitions to try to save the plant. Can I give support from the Liberal Democrats to the cabinet secretary's efforts over the last few days to find a solution to this? I am sure that everybody involved will appreciate that. Can I ask whether there has been any expressions of interest from any part of the private sector in the Michelin plant and what can be done by Skills Development Scotland to assist any retraining for the workforce that would be required to meet the challenges of the industry, so that the challenges of the industry can be more effectively met? First of all, I give a sense of appreciation again for the offer of support from the Liberal Democrats. I think that that is important. However, some of those specific issues are, of course, arrangements in place for mitigation, pace and support for the staff. Actually, the company is committed to a retraining programme, but before we even get to any of that, we must be laser focused, as has already been discussed, on trying to save the plant, save the jobs and see what can be done around that proposition, so that we are not having to look at other issues. I get the reason to move into that territory. That will be done, but the mission for today, this week and the short term, is to try and save the plant. That is not about skills shorted, that is about the Asian imports, that is about the supply, that is about the product at Dundee. Therefore, we need solutions that are appropriate to the challenges that we face. Of course, we will be standing ready to support the staff in the next phase if that is required, but we are united. Everyone in Dundee is united right now on the ambition, the mission to save the plant or as much of it as we possibly can. Of course, we will return to those matters as and when required. Liam Kerr is followed by Richard Leonard. Will the Scottish Government commit to publishing all information about any funding that Michelin has received from the Scottish Enterprise and or any other Scottish Government bodies? I will publish anything that is appropriate to do so, and I should say that if that is then going into the territory of clawback of Government grants, that is a fair question to ask. There are clawback conditions around Scottish Enterprise grants that will be fulfilled if that is required, but the objective here is not to scrape back a few million pounds from Government grants, but to save 850 jobs. That is our priority, that is our mission. Of course, I will make sure that we have the due diligence and compliance around any Government grants, but right now the mission surely has to be to save the plant, save the jobs, give Michelin a future in Dundee, and it is on that that I am 100 per cent focused. Richard Leonard is followed by Dean Lockhart. Can I refer members to my register of interests? I welcome the cabinet secretary's actions to save this factory and those workers' jobs, and it is important that we all work together constructively. Can the cabinet secretary tell us, has he or will he examine ways in which Scottish Government public procurement can be utilised to generate work to sustain those present and future high-quality jobs in Dundee, as part of a wider Scottish industrial strategy? In essence, yes, I am actively looking at our whole procurement approach. I was doing that in any event before I even knew of this announcement, so yes is the essence in answer to the question. I am not sure that in isolation is the answer, of course, to the wider challenges that the plant faces. Everything that I have said today and everything else will do, will go on with, and I have received a very helpful letter from Richard Leonard in relation to some of the other suggestions. I agree with much of it, so I am looking at procurement in any event. I do not think that it is the panacea to this issue, but we are looking at it in any event. Can I associate myself with the concerns raised by other members, further workers at the Michelin plant and their families? I would also acknowledge the work of the cabinet secretary in that area. What assurances will he be seeking from the management of Michelin to use its best endeavours to save the plant in Dundee and as many jobs as possible? I would like to say something about the local plant manager, John Reid. From the strength of support that I witness today from his fellow workforce and from the trade union shop stewards and the respect that he is regarded by management in Michelin, he is something of a local legend who has saved the plant in the past. I am going to work really closely with him and all other parties to try to ensure that we can save the plant, so of course we are working as hard as we possibly can. That will be a partnership between the workforce, the management, the council, the enterprise agency and hopefully the UK Government to get the outcome that we all wish to see. That concludes our urgent question, and I thank the cabinet secretary and the members for their contributions. The next item of business is consideration of a legislative consent motion. I ask Mary Gougeon to move motion 14625 on the ivory bill. Before we come to decision time, members may recall that the commission on parliamentary reform proposed that time be put aside in preliminary sessions to allow committees to make significant urgent announcements. We are trialling the new procedure up to Christmas and in that context, I am pleased to call Johann Lamont, convener of the Public Petitions Committee, to make an announcement on an inquiry into mental health support for young people in Scotland. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. On behalf of the Public Petitions Committee, I would like to draw the Parliament's attention to an inquiry that the committee will launch tomorrow into how young people access mental health support in Scotland. The inquiry stems from a petition raised by Annette MacKenzie, whose daughter, Brittany, tragically died after being prescribed medication when she sought help for her anxiety. During the committee's consideration of the petition, a recurring theme that has emerged is that significant improvements are required to signpost young people to the appropriate sources of support, as well as the importance of intervening early to prevent mental health issues occurring or escalating. As members will be all too aware, we have repeatedly heard concerns raised in this chamber about how young people can get help for their mental health. While it is encouraging that the Scottish Government and COSLA have established a task force to examine the whole approach to children's mental health services, it is hoped that the inquiry will help to inform the future policy direction of youth mental health services in Scotland. The inquiry will focus on the ways in which young people can get the help and support that they need, particularly for the first time if they are feeling low or anxious. The committee is keen to hear from a wide range of voices on the topic, but particularly from people under the age of 18, either with direct experience of seeking help for their mental health or for young people who want to share their views with us on the topic. The committee is also keen to gather the views of parents and carers, non-specialist mental health workers and any other relevant professional organisations. I encourage members to draw the inquiry to as many people and stakeholder groups as possible to help to inform the committee's inquiry work into the important issue for our young people in Scotland. I know that the committee clerks and committee members will be happy to provide more information on how members might be involved should they wish to do so. We will turn now to decision time. There are six questions. I would remind members on the first question that if the amendment in the name of Michelle Ballantyne is agreed, then all other amendments will fall. The first question is that amendment 1462, 1.1, in the name of Michelle Ballantyne, which seeks to amend motion 14621, in the name of Shirley-Anne Somerville, on the impact of UK Government welfare cuts and universal credit on poverty, be agreed? Are we all agreed? No. We are not agreed. We will move to the division. Members may cast their votes now. The result of the vote in amendment 1462, 1.1, in the name of Michelle Ballantyne, is yes, 27, no, 85, there were no abstentions, the amendment is therefore not agreed. The next question is that amendment 1462, 1.2, in the name of Mark Griffin, which seeks to amend motion in the name of Shirley-Anne Somerville, be agreed? Are we all agreed? No. We are not agreed. We will move to our vote. Members may cast their votes now. The result of the vote on amendment 1462, 1.2, in the name of Mark Griffin is yes, 85, no, 27, there were no abstentions, the amendment is therefore agreed. The next question is that amendment 1462, 1.3, in the name of Alison Johnstone, which seeks to amend motion in the name of Shirley-Anne Somerville, be agreed? Are we all agreed? No. We are not agreed. We will move to division again and members may cast their votes now. The result of the vote on amendment 1462, 1.3, in the name of Alison Johnstone is yes, 84, no, 28, there were no abstentions, the amendment is therefore agreed. The next question is that amendment 1462, 1.4, in the name of Alex Cole-Hamilton, which seeks to amend motion in the name of Shirley-Anne Somerville, be agreed? Are we all agreed? No. We are not agreed. We will move to division again and members may cast their votes now. The result of the vote on amendment 1462, 1.4, in the name of Alex Cole-Hamilton is yes, 84, no, 27, there were no abstentions, the amendment is therefore agreed. The next question is that motion 1462, 1, in the name of Shirley-Anne Somerville, as amended, on the impact of UK Government welfare cuts and universal credit on poverty, be agreed? Are we all agreed? No. We are not agreed. We will move to division again and members may cast their votes now. The result of the vote on motion 1462, 1, in the name of Shirley-Anne Somerville, as amended, is yes, 85, no, 27, there were no abstentions, the motion as amended is therefore agreed. The final question is that motion 1462, 5, in the name of Mary Gougeon, on the ivory bill, be agreed? Are we all agreed? Yes. We are agreed. That concludes decision time. We will move shortly to members business in the name of Emma Harper on the Maybowl bypass. We will just take a few moments for members and the minister to change seats.