 The next item of business is first minister's questions. Before I begin, I just like to say that I intend to take constituency and general supplementaries after question 2, so any member wishing to ask a question should press during question 2, but for any members wishing to ask a supplementary specifically on questions 3 to 6, they should press during the relevant question. It's been reported today that the average wait for an ambulance following a 999 call is six hours. First Minister, isn't this shocking and unacceptable? Absolutely. Anyone who waits longer than they should wait for an ambulance, I find that not acceptable. We know that the pressure on an ambulance service is under right now because of many of the other pressures in our national health service that have been caused and exacerbated in some respects by the pandemic. That is an issue that we are working very closely with the Scottish ambulance service on to resolve. The health secretary has spoken to the chief executive of the ambulance service just this morning. For example, 90 additional technicians will come into the employment of the service next month. We are obviously funding the health service. We bolstered investment by £10.5 million last year. An additional investment of £20 million has been invested this year. Although any individual wait is unacceptable and we need to work to resolve that, it is worth bearing in mind that despite all of the challenges and despite our ambulance service serving some of the most rural areas in the UK, over 2020-21, our crews responded to over 70 per cent of the highest priority calls in under 10 minutes and over 99 per cent in under 30 minutes. We will continue to support our ambulance service through this challenging period as we will continue to support the entirety of the national health service. Douglas Ross People are dialing 999. They are asking for an ambulance and on average they are waiting for six hours, not ten minutes. The First Minister tries to say that this is because of the pandemic. Our ambulance staff and technicians have done fantastic work during the pandemic and before. Problems started long before Covid-19. In 2018, a Government report found only 20 per cent of ambulance crews thought that there was enough staff. A 2019 staff survey showed that demand for ambulance services had increased far beyond available resources. Almost half of paramedics in 2019 said that they often thought about leaving the service. Just yesterday, the unique convener of the Scottish ambulance service said that serious adverse events have been on an upwards trajectory since the start of the year. They have gone through the roof, he said. This all adds up to a service crisis well before Covid hit. Does the First Minister agree? I agree that there were pressures before Covid, but I do not think that anybody can or should deny that those pressures have been significantly exacerbated by Covid. Not just here in Scotland, but we see similar pressures in health services right across the UK and further afield. Because we have been aware of those pressures, we have been doing work to seek to address them. Last year, we commissioned a working group to agree and implement a range of actions to improve turnaround times. As part of that, a total of 296 additional ambulance staff are being recruited as a result of investment that we have made available over the past two years. In the part of Scotland that Douglas Ross represents, the north of the country, an extra 67 front-line staff, which will be a mixture of experienced and newly qualified paramedics and technicians, along with nine patient transport service staff that will be located across that region. I do not, and I will not stand here and suggest in any way that people, anyone who is waiting too long for an ambulance, is in any way acceptable. If we look at the week for example up to 5 September, this is the most recent week. The Scottish Ambulance Service responded to 10,435 emergency incidents. That was up on the previous week. The median national response time for all of the immediately life-threatening calls for that week was nine minutes and three seconds. That is slightly higher than we want it to be. The target is seven minutes. The Ambulance Service is working hard under incredibly challenging circumstances. My job, the health secretary's job, is to support them through funding and other support to make sure that they can meet those challenges for the sake of all patients across Scotland who deserve a timely response from the Ambulance Service. People listening at home will be wondering about seven minutes. Seven minutes for an ambulance to come would be great for those people who are waiting hours, often in agony. All over Scotland, people are waiting for ambulances. Here are some examples. At Abbeyfield, assistant living complex in Baresden, a resident had symptoms of a stroke and phoned for an ambulance at 2.30pm. They were not picked up until 4.45am, over 14 hours later. A GP from Dumfries had called for an ambulance during a home visit and was advised of a four hour wait. The patient reached hospital nine hours later and the doctor told us that the whole service is in crisis. When cases are like threatening, ambulances are expected to arrive within seven minutes. That is not happening. Jim from Pitlockery told us that his 17-year-old son, who had collapsed by the side of the road, needed an ambulance when he fell unconscious. About 30 minutes later, with no ambulance in sight and with his son's lips turning blue, he drove him to the nearest hospital but even then he struggled to get medical attention. Thankfully, a nurse came to the rescue and his son is doing better, but Jim wanted me to ask the First Minister these questions. What would have happened if his son had taken a turn for the worse? If this was a more vulnerable person, would they still be alive? I do not know, Jim, if he is watching, I will address him directly. First of all, I am extremely sorry that the wait that you had happened. I do not think that that is acceptable. I am trying to address those issues genuinely because I do not think that the cases that Douglas Ross has cited are acceptable and nothing that I have said today suggests that they are. We know the reasons for the pressure on the ambulance service. There is a variety of pressures on our national health service and, of course, some of those pressures were there before Covid, but they have been significantly exacerbated. We know that our accident emergencies are under pressure. We know that there is a backlog of treatment. One of the issues that the ambulance service faces is longer turnaround times, which puts a lot of pressure on ambulance resources. I recognise all of that. We are working hard with the ambulance service to address that. Nothing that I have said or am saying is intended to suggest in any way that the kind of waits that we have heard about today are acceptable. I would also say, and the figure that I cited in my last answer, that the median response time for the most urgent calls in the most recent week was just over nine minutes. That is not good enough, because it should be within seven minutes. For amber calls, the median time was 21 minutes 26 seconds. Again, that is slightly above target. There is work to be done here, but that is exactly why we are making the investment. We are supporting the recruitment of additional paramedics, additional technicians to bring those waiting times down again, and perhaps even more importantly, because some of the pressure on the ambulance service comes from pressures elsewhere in the health service, which is why the NHS recovery plan and the investment that supports that recovery plan is so important. I agree with the First Minister that this is not good enough. This Government has allowed the long-term issues to spiral into a crisis. The knock-on problems are bringing our NHS to its knees and putting lies at risk, and it is only going to get worse this winter. People cannot see a GP in person. They call for an ambulance, but it is delayed for hours. When they reach A&E, waiting times are at their worst levels since records began. The United Nations said this week that ambulances were parked outside hospitals for seven hours, missing three other 999 calls while they waited. However, this week's programme for government set out nothing—no new money—for the Scottish Ambulance Service. Will the First Minister accept that this is a crisis, and will she tell us what she is going to do about it now, before lives are lost? The Ambulance Service is receiving additional money. We increased investment by more than £10 million last year. Additional investment of £20 million is being invested this year. The £1 billion recovery plan funding will include support for the Ambulance Service, as it will include support for health services across the country. I do not challenge any of what Douglas Ross is saying in terms of there are big issues facing our national health service, but it is because we know that we are making the investment and doing the work with the service to address those issues. Where I do take issue, and this does not make things any easier for patients across the country waiting too long, whether that is for elective treatment or A&E treatment or indeed for an ambulance, but those issues for Scotland, for other countries across the UK and indeed the world have been significantly deepened and exacerbated by a once-in-a-century global pandemic, and therefore we need to support our NHS to recover from that. You can find headlines just today, from other parts of the UK, about the longest waiting times on record. Some of the problems that our Ambulance Service is facing, Ambulance Services are facing elsewhere. That does not remove the responsibility. I would be grateful if we could hear the First Minister. The point that I am making is a serious one, Presiding Officer. That does not in any way take away the responsibility of the Scottish Government to address those problems in Scotland, but I think that most people do understand the exceptionally difficult circumstances that have prevailed over the past 18 months and the difficulties that all Governments and all health services are having as we try to recover. That is why we are making the investment, that is why we have the recovery plan and that is why we will continue every single day to support our service and everybody who works in it to recover and to get the NHS fully back on track. Today, the Parliament will vote on the introduction of vaccine passports. Scottish Labour will not support those proposals. We have supported the Government at key moments throughout the pandemic, but this is about what works and what will make a meaningful difference. The scientific advisory group SAGE, which the Scottish Government's chief medical officer sits on, says that any proposals should consider those three key points. One, isolate those that are infectious from the rest of the population. Vaccine passports won't do that. Two, reduce the likelihood that they enter high-risk settings or situations. Vaccine passports won't do that. Three, attempt to decrease the transmission risk from an infectious person in any given environment. Given the high transmissibility of the delta variant, vaccine passports won't do that. Can the First Minister tell us what evidence has led her and our ministers to change their minds, disagree with those scientists and now back vaccine passports? First Minister, I haven't changed my mind. I've said to this Parliament on 3 August most recently, before that in April and February, that we were considering the issue of vaccine certification. We hadn't ruled it out, but we wanted to properly consider all of the issues, and that is what we have done. We've also listened to and continue to listen to a range of evidence. I would recommend to all members of the Parliament ahead of the debate today to read on Twitter the comments of Stephen Riker, who is one of the members of the Scottish Government advisory group, but entirely independent, who very fairly, and I think very well, sets out both the benefits of vaccine passports, sets out the conditions that need to prevail in order to make their operation a success, but also very frankly sets out some of the limitations of them. That takes me to the knob, I suppose, of Anna Sarwar's question. Vaccine certification is not a 100 per cent solution in and of itself. All of these things that Anna Sarwar has rightly run through have to be done, but in addition, vaccine passports can provide an added layer of protection. If you have, for example, a nightclub where people come together where there is the potential for super-spreading events, then if you make sure that, in addition to all of those other protections, everybody in that nightclub has been fully vaccinated, what you do is you don't eradicate the risk of transmission, but you reduce the risk of transmission and significantly reduce the risk of illness. And also, crucially, you give an alternative to the possibility as we go into winter of further closures of these kind of events. Is that a complete solution? No, but in the face of this really challenging pandemic, there is no one single solution. We have to take all of the ways that we can to, as proportionately as possible, keep the country as safe as possible, and that's the responsible way in which this Government is going to continue to act. I think that some of what we've heard from the Opposition suggests that a bit more genuine grown-up politics on this issue would go a long way. Anna Sarwar. I mean, I had respect for all of the First Minister's answer apart from the end part of that. Is she saying that all those businesses worried out there are being disrespectful? Is she saying that all those thousands of people who have emailed us are being disrespectful? Those are serious questions that deserve serious answers. The First Minister has published a document this morning that contains no evidence that this will make a difference and no details of how it will work. She references nightclubs. That document suggests that we still don't even know what nightclubs means, and they will be expected to introduce those measures in three weeks' time. As she has expected businesses across the country, many of which have only just reopened and some which are still closed implement and enforce it in that short period of time. That will put immense pressure on them, but even greater pressure on the staff having to administer it. Earlier this year, the UK Government undertook a consultation on vaccine passports. It received 52,000 responses, including from major industry bodies that would be impacted by this change. So can the First Minister detail what engagement she has had with the relevant sectors? Can she confirm if there has been a public consultation in Scotland and if so, how many responses were received? Engagement is on-going. It will continue to be on-going. This Parliament is going to debate and vote on this afternoon. We engage with the public on a range of issues all of the time. I did make a comment about Anna Sarwar's position. It was not a comment about anybody else's position, because I think that, to have said categorically, as he did at the weekend, no matter what he was going to vote against, frankly, is opposition for opposition's sake. I think that that reflects rather poorly on him, but that is my opinion. People can agree or disagree with that. Of course businesses have concerns about any of the measures that we have to take to try to tackle and contain Covid. I wish we were in this position at all. I wish we weren't even having to consider any measures to try to constrain the spread of an infectious virus, but we are in this situation. It is a very difficult situation, particularly with the increased transmissibility of Delta, which is one of the other things that has changed since we first started talking about it. What I do know is that businesses in these higher-risk settings—I think that there will be a variety of opinions, I am sure—on balance, if there is a choice between being able to continue to operate over the next few months or finding themselves perhaps facing a period of closure again, is that the targeted proportionate measure is one that many would prefer to closure. Of course, Scotland is not alone in considering many. An increasing number of countries across Europe are already using vaccine certification, and they are already using it on a much more wide-ranging basis than we are. In some cases, France, for example, is pushing up rates of vaccination uptake and also helping to constrain and reduce transmission. We need to use every tool at our disposal to drive down infection rates to keep people safe at the same time as we keep our economy open. Anybody who, frankly, buries their head in the sand in the face of that is not doing the economy or any business any favours. Anas Sarwar, you wanted us to wait for the publication of this document. There are businesses that will be impacted by it that have longer cocktail menus than this document. I think that we need some real-life experience from the First Minister on this one. Rather than create a new system, we should be fixing the systems that we already have. That means that, after 18 months, we are finally giving test and protect the support that it needs. We know that the vaccine works. We know that it reduces hospitalisations and deaths, but even if you have had the vaccine, you can still get the virus and you can still spread the virus. So making sure that someone is negative going into a venue is more important. Under those proposals, someone who does not have a vaccine passport and does not have the virus will not be allowed to enter venues, but someone who does have a passport and does have the virus will be able to walk straight in. How does that make sense? There are no details published in the paper, no evidence to back those proposals, no meaningful engagement with the sectors involved, no public consultation. First Minister, is it not the case that you are rushing through this proposal in Parliament in an attempt to look in control of a virus that is clearly out of control? I think that most people watching this will probably breathe a sigh of relief that Anasawa is not standing here, because clever quips might sound good in a student union, but when you are actually trying to deal with a global pandemic, it is more important that you have the solutions that help to keep people safe. Let's take some of the points in turn. Anasawa appears to say that he thinks that negative test results should be used in place of proof of vaccine. We do suggest to people that they test themselves regularly, but one of the constraints—an LFD testing is a really important part of our overall response—is that it does not make sense to put too much reliance on them for the kind of thing that we are talking about. It is a point that I heard that the UK Vaccines Minister made yesterday in the House of Commons. We have to be careful that we do not introduce false security around a system like that. The other point is that you can still get the virus if you are vaccinated, while anybody looking at the statistics just now knows that. Vaccination reduces your risk of getting the virus. If you are saying to somebody, do you want to be in a nightclub where some people are unvaccinated, or do you want to be in a nightclub where everybody is vaccinated? In the latter, your risk of getting the virus is going to be significantly lower than in the former. Is it eradicated? No, but no single measure will eradicate risk. This is about having a basket of measures. It's about testing, it's about making sure that people isolate when they are required to, but it's also about making sure that we use vaccine to its fullest effect. Drive up the rates of vaccination and then make sure that we're using the protection of vaccination as effectively as possible. This is part of a solution. Anasarwar says that we're rushing this through in Scotland. Actually, in Scotland we're behind the curve in a European sense, because so many countries are already doing this and are actually finding in reality the benefits of this. Let's get on with it and discharge our responsibility to keep this country as safe as possible. The period from October to February can often be a challenging time of the year for CalMac. The company uses this period to dry dock and refit vessels as the tourist season comes to an end. However, with continued demand for staycations, it seems likely that Scotland's islands will continue to be busy beyond the normal shoulder months. With that in mind, can the First Minister outline what preparations are being made for this year's maintenance programme? We need to ensure that vessels are safe and well maintained. Every CalMac vessel requires essential maintenance annually over the winter months. Scheduling of the overhaul programme, including the relief vessels, is complex. That must take account of a range of factors. CalMac now has a long-term strategy in place for dry docking. We continue to encourage CalMac to do everything possible to minimise the impact caused by maintenance work over the winter period. We continue to support CalMac to deliver services in the face of the challenges that Covid continues to pose for all of us. In 2021, there have been more than 7,000 instances of girls between the ages of 10 and 16 being reported missing. We all agree that those are horrific statistics for everyone concerned. However, we also know that poor mental health is very often the root cause of those incidents. We also know that the proportion of young people waiting more than a year for specialist help has tribbled in the past 12 months. Let me ask what action will the First Minister take now to address the absolute shame that is young persons mental health waiting times in this country? As I set out on Tuesday when I outlined the programme for government, we are making an immediate investment of £120 million into mental health, with a particular focus on prevention and early intervention. We are already funding health boards to improve community children adolescent mental health services, the expansion of community services from age 18 to 25, and the funding that I announced will enable the clearing of historic waiting lists, which I accept are too high. We are high going into Covid but have been further exacerbated by the experience of Covid. The funding that we will make available is specifically targeted to dealing with the issue that Jamie Greene raises. We can argue about the impact of failed Tory austerity on public services, the impact of a failure in the Scottish Government to workforce plan and the impact of Covid. The one thing that is absolutely clear is that much of our public services across Scotland are in meltdown. Therefore, how can the First Minister possibly justify using government resources, taxpayers' money on working up proposals for an independence referendum, at a time when surely the whole of the Scottish Government, the whole of this Parliament should be focused on addressing the emergency that we have in our public services? I do not think that we can argue about the impact of UK Government austerity on services along the breadth of Scotland. It has been utterly devastating. The problem is, unless we do something about it to get ourselves out of the grip of Tory government after Tory government, people across Scotland are going to suffer more of it. Just this week, we have seen a national insurance increase that will punish the lowest paid in our society. We all want to see extra money for public services, but raising that money in a way that punishes the poor is the bit, frankly, we do not agree with and nobody should agree with if they care about these issues. We are also about to see from this UK Government the biggest overnight cut to social security since the 1930s, as they take away the £20 per week uplift to universal credit. This may be something that Alex Rowley and I just have to disagree on, and he can explain it to his own constituents. I think that it is right that people in Scotland get the opportunity to choose a different future, to choose a better future, where we take control over social security and how we raise our funds into this Parliament, so we do not have to stand here and use his phrase to argue about the impact of another Government on people the length and breadth of Scotland. Beatrice Wishart First Minister, can you tell Jason what is being done to keep our fishing vessels and those on board them safe at sea? First Minister I thank the member for that question. I do remember Jason and if the member can pass my best wishes to him. I am very happy, either through Beatrice Wishart or Jason himself, if he wants to email me directly, I am happy to engage with him to set out exactly what the Scottish Government and our agencies do to keep fishing in as safe as possible, of fishing protection vessels of a key park to play there. He clearly has some very real concerns there, and it certainly reflects my memory of him as a very engaged young man, so I would be very happy to have a further discussion with him directly. Maggie Chapman To ask the First Minister what discussions the Scottish Government has had with ScotRail and the trade unions regarding industrial action on the network. First Minister The Transport Minister meets regularly with ScotRail and trade unions. He met trade union representatives on 24 June, subsequently with Abellio. I met the Scottish Trade Union Congress on 12 August. On each occasion, we expressed our disappointment about the current dispute affecting ScotRail Sunday services and urged all parties to seek resolution. I also understand that the Transport Minister is meeting with Unite today and has also offered to meet with the other rail unions. Obviously, we want all parties to get round the table and identify solutions to the challenges that are facing our rail services. Maggie Chapman First Minister for her response. I also note the comments made on Tuesday by the Transport Minister in which he called for everyone to act responsibly. It has been six months since most people were able to get a train on a Sunday. It seems that Abellio has little interest in acting responsibly given that the ScotRail franchise is soon to be transferred into public ownership. It is clear that we need a long-term partnership between the workers, passengers and the Government to avoid the problems that have arisen with Abellio. Can the First Minister tell me how her Government will bring the situation to an end in the short term? Can she also give an assurance that when ScotRail is brought into public ownership, the governance structure will include representatives of workers and passengers as well as appointees on the board? I can certainly give an assurance that part of fair work in my good industrial relations and good engagement and discussion with trade unions, and I would expect that to be at the heart of the ScotRail services as they come into public ownership. I know that members are aware of the reasons behind the dispute arising out of an agreement during Covid for enhanced rest day working. Additional ticket examiners and conductors have been recruited. The issue of excessive rest day working has been resolved. The unions and workers, and I understand why that would be the case, want to keep the temporary allowance and make it permanent. ScotRail's view is that that is not sustainable for the future. I would call again on both parties to get round the table to find an agreement to that. It is in nobody's interests, not least the workers, to have this dispute continue any longer. We will continue to encourage that, and we will continue to do the work that we expect to conclude in the early part of next year to bring ScotRail into full public ownership. Thank you, Presiding Officer, to ask the First Minister what discussions the Scottish Government has had regarding the functioning of corporate travel management. The managed isolation service in Scotland is operated under a UK Government contract, which places the responsibility for setting the quality and levels of service on the UK Government. The Scottish Government's international passenger coordination team is in regular contact with corporate travel management, which is the UK Government's travel agent, and we continue to work with them to ensure a high quality service for travellers. I thank the First Minister for her response. As we are all aware, this is very distressful and costly for those students coming from a red-list country. I want to put on the record my thanks to the universities stepping in with practical help. I of course appreciate that CTM was tasked by Westminster for this, and I do understand the relationship with the Scottish Government's international travel coordination team, liaising with CTM the Westminster Arm. Can I ask if there has been any positive response? Are we any further forward for those students who are very anxious to start their courses? First, I very much agree with Christine Grahame's comments about international students. We always want to offer a warm welcome. They make a very significant cultural, economic and intellectual contribution to our universities and indeed to the whole country, and they are welcome here. Scottish Government officials have been engaging directly with universities on the issues that have been highlighted in this question. They have contacted CTM, who say that they are addressing those issues as a priority, and my officials will continue to work with the universities to improve processes, and of course students should contact their universities if they continue to experience issues with the booking system. In recognition of the difficult circumstances that have faced international students, the Scottish Government has also taken steps to put in place support. For example, international and EU students can apply for financial hardship support from the Scottish Government's higher education coronavirus discretionary fund. 5. Donald Cameron To ask the First Minister whether she will provide an update on Hyal's proposed centralisation of air traffic control services. That is a matter for Hyal. Clearly, the Scottish Government has a strong interest, and we are lazing and monitoring the process closely. The investment being made in air traffic control is essential to secure the long-term future of air services in the Highlands and Islands. The objective of the central surveillance centre in Inverness is to ensure safer, more sustainable and more reliable air services for the communities that rely on them. We know that this decision may affect where staff work in the future, and I understand that Hyal is engaging directly with Prospect Union on the detail of a commuting policy and other measures to mitigate that. We should not lose sight of what the investment and change is intended to deliver in the long-term, which is security for islands connectivity with related social and economic benefits. Donald Cameron Yesterday, the Union Prospect sent a letter signed by representatives of all five major political parties, as well as the three island local authority leaders calling for an urgent meeting with the transport minister in light of the impact that this proposed centralisation will have on local jobs on the islands. I understand that a ministerial meeting with stakeholders is proposed to happen in two months' time. Given the urgency, will the First Minister instruct the transport minister to bring this meeting forward? Can she explain how this centralisation can be justified, given her Government's stated intention to encourage people to move to our islands and reverse depopulation? There are some serious and perfectly valid issues, and they are complex issues. Of course, we want to see repopulation of our islands, but we also have to make sure that there are sustainable services that support the connectivity of our islands, and they are often complex issues that require very careful thought. In terms of the transport minister meeting with prospect, my understanding is that he is due to meet both STUC and prospect next month to discuss aviation generally, but I am sure that this issue will feature. We will certainly look to see whether diaries can enable that meeting to be brought forward. It is important that that engagement takes place. It is also important that Hial, as I said in my original answer, engages directly with prospect to address some of the issues that have been raised about how we can make or they can make the changes that improve the sustainability of the services. The kind of model that is being discussed here is one that already operates at, for example, London City Airport, which is very different from our islands, but this is about the sustainability of those services longer term. Important issues have been raised by the union here, and I would expect Hial to engage properly with them. As I said a moment ago, I will ask the transport minister to look to see whether the meeting can be accelerated. It is very challenging for island communities to value the air traffic provision being delivered locally because it gives them a sense of security and ensures that much-needed skilled jobs are based in our islands. For obvious reasons, people are nervous about the implications of Hial's new proposed centre in Inverness. What reassurance can the First Minister provide particularly regarding what might happen to those jobs in future? In terms of the jobs, the issues around relocation are important, and those were the ones that I was alluding to. I think that it is important that Hial engages with the unions and with workers to look at how there are policies in place that allow workers, if they are working under this new system, nevertheless to continue to live in and contribute to our islands. That will not always be easy, but that is the work that we are expecting Hial to engage in properly. Some of the other concerns, and I have had those issues raised with me directly in Shetland, for example, are around safety. Again, those issues have to be taken seriously. For example, Loganair, which is the main airline flying in the Highlands and Islands, and already operating under this system at London City, are supportive of the changes and the safety benefits that they say will be delivered. Also, new air traffic control procedures and the operation of a centre like this will only go live following a rigorous assessment by and approval by the Civil Aviation Authority. I understand the concerns that have been raised here. It is important to say that. Therefore, there is a responsibility on Hial and on the Scottish Government to seek to address those concerns as we move forward. I disagree with the First Minister in that the programme is essential to ensure the long-term viability or, indeed, safety of air traffic in the Highlands and Islands. Digital Scotland classed the project as an amber red risk. Added to that, the Sundra radar project, which is part of the scheme, is believed to be running six to twelve months behind you. Costs have already increased. I ask if the First Minister is still convinced that this is the right project to go forward with. What steps is she taking to avoid another Vanity transport project in the Highlands and Islands? I thank Rhoda Grant for a question, and I think that it is a perfectly reasonable question. I am not sure that anybody would describe it as a Vanity project. It is that there are sustainability issues in the services as are, and therefore this is about improving and securing the sustainability of the services in the future. In terms of some of Rhoda Grant's points, the project is still at an early stage, but it is proceeding in line with the approved business case. In Hial, I will obviously have the responsibility to ensure that that continues to be the case. On the points about safety, there can be no compromise on safety on any aviation matter, which is why the point that I made in my previous answer about the processes that have to be gone through, resulting in ultimately approval by the Civil Aviation Authority are so important. I recognise those concerns. A change like that is always going to result in worries and questions for people in Hial, and indeed the Scottish Government will address those in order to give the reassurance that people need. To ask the First Minister what steps the Scottish Government is taking ahead of COP26 regarding the future of oil and gas exploration and securing a just transition for workers. While oil and gas is reserved and issues of licence and exploration of offshore oil and gas are reserved to the UK Government, we have called for the UK Government to significantly enhance the climate conditionality associated with offshore exploration and production, and to reassess licences already issued where field development has not yet commenced. The programme for government includes a commitment to develop an energy just transition plan. We have committed to working with communities and those most impacted across Scotland, including, of course, our very highly skilled oil and gas workforce, to co-design that plan. We have also committed to take forward a 10-year £500 million just transition fund for the north-east and Moray. The Scottish Government cannot make the same mistakes as the Tories and leave whole communities facing unemployment. An offshore training passport would allow oil and gas workers to move freely between offshore and onshore energy sectors. The Government should really be supporting standardisation of skills across sectors. Will the First Minister commit today to developing an offshore training passport as supported by Friends of the Earth and the RMT? I am very happy to consider all constructive discussions. I am happy to ask the minister to engage directly with the member. Those are exactly the kind of constructive proposals that we need. Will every constructive proposal be able to be taken forward? No, that is rarely the case, but we will, because we are so serious about a just transition, engage properly in all of these issues. I suspect that I am a fair bit older than the member, but I have first-hand memories of the devastation in the community that I grew up in, of the mistakes that previous Governments made around de-industrialisation. We must not repeat these mistakes in the process of decarbonisation, and that is why the just transition process is so important. I thank Mercedes Valber for that question and I am happy to engage on the detail. Given the oil and gas authority report, endorsed by Sir Ian Wood, showing the carbon footprint from imported gases more than double that of domestically produced, does the First Minister agree that, although there remains a Scottish demand, currently the most environmentally friendly approach and one that recognises the climate emergency, is to ensure that we support the Scottish oil and gas sector? Where I do agree, and let me try and find the points of agreement here, is that we must make this transition not just in a way that is just for workers, and that is fundamentally important, but also in a way and at a pace that does not become counterproductive because it inadvertently increases reliance on imports. In principle, that point is important. It is one that I have made many times myself. Underneath that, there is greater complexity. Right now, we export a significant proportion of what is produced in the North Sea and we already import a lot of the oil and gas that is used. There is often greater complexity lying underneath that headline claim. We need to engage properly with those things. We are in a transition, whether we like it or not, from fossil fuels to renewable and low-carbon sources of energy. We owe that to the planet and none of us can escape that responsibility, or none of us should try to escape that responsibility. We need to do that in a way that is fair, just and has the intended effect. Those things require a lot of very careful consideration and a very careful amount of work, but we cannot escape the moral and economic responsibility that we have to make the transition and meet our net zero targets. That Government is incredibly serious about doing that, and on occasion, not just on this issue, but I am sure on a whole range of other issues facing up to the difficult challenges that that entails. I recently met with the quate and discussed the importance of putting an equality lens on the just transition for workers. What steps is the Scottish Government taking to ensure that women have equity within the just transition for workers, particularly as women have been disproportionately affected by the Covid-19 pandemic? That is an excellent and extremely important point. It is one that should run through all of the work that we do as Government. The programme for government recognises the point that Karen Adam has just made, the impacts of Covid have been. I will no doubt continue to be experienced disproportionately by different groups, and that includes women. I can assure Karen Adam that our engagement on the development of just transition plans will seek to amplify the voices of underrepresented groups and actively work to make sure that we are creating a better greener future for all. More generally, we have committed to taking forward a programme of work to embed equality, inclusion and human rights throughout Scotland. That is important work as part of that overall commitment to making sure that the transition happens, but it happens in a way that is just and fair. As I have a little time in hand, I call Rachel Hamilton for a supplementary. Thank you, Presiding Officer. Constituents are reporting errors in their vaccination records, which are held on NHS Scotland website. Wrongly, log dates and incorrect vaccine types are being flagged. First Minister, the only way to resolve this is by sitting in a very long telephone queue. One constituent reported she waited in a queue of 92 people. Is the First Minister aware of the extent of the problem? Does she trust the system and will she consider a vaccine data resolution system? Yes, I trust the system. As I have said in relation to Covid and the different systems and approaches that we have had to take over the past 18 months—not least the vaccine programme generally—in a system as big and complex, there will be individual cases of things going wrong. We should not shy away from that, but what is important is that we have processes in place to fix those things. Yesterday, during my Covid statement, I gave the number of the helpline that people can phone to have any mistakes that are rectified, and I would encourage them to do so. I know that the system is taking on a number of those cases and very quickly resolving them on a daily basis. That concludes First Minister's questions. We will now move on to members' business and ask members to please leave the chamber quietly.