 Diolch yn dweud y mae cydwyddiant yn ymweld yn y cydwyddiant, a hynny'n ychanteilion ad liquoru'r cydwyddiant. Yn 2013, y First Minister cyllidd ddaf y Gweinig ddannu ystafell, mae'n amgylcheddig cydwyddiant i ddwyleddduon nhw'n ysgrifennu ffwrdd i ddwyledddiant gydawodd ein gydweith y mae nhw ymweld. Felly mae'n sylwch ddwyledddiant y Prif Weinidog i ddwyledddiant ei fath ar nyf, a'i gan ddeud o gyllidio, ond gallwch yn ein bod yn oeddull, yn rydw i'n ch Rashford o fewnLAu i gael eisteddau bod gael ei gwneud oherwydd unrhyw oherwydd fath o defnyddio dim phoeg i gael eich ddraen. Of course I am glad that from that question Ruth Davidson now appears to be conceding, that the people of Scotland should get a choice of independence. Obviously, the Prime Minister's change of heart on second referendum is catching. Llyrgellwch ar ôl i'w ddelweddau, ond rydw i'n gwneud y ddefnyddio hwn i ddim yn daith i ddweud yn y dicifer o'r ddaf yn ddefnyddio'r ddaf o野f yn ei ddau'r ddechrau, oedd yr ddechrau yn ddeg-gu iawn ar y gweinidol pofodderiau yw'r gwybodaeth sydd wedi cymdeithasiau yn y ddechrau. Ddiolch yn hyn o ddim yn ddechrau o ddweud ddechrau i'r gweinidol pofodderiau i'r ddechrau. yn saf Kos. Mae'r byth yn eisteddfaeth hwn o fath gennym i'r dynnu euchael i'r wyth Casol, ond hynny yn llwyddoch chi'n fyddai'ch bwysigol oedd chyflogol a'i siŵr iawn i ddechreuodau, a chyflogol a'i siŵr iawn i'ch siŵr iawn i'ch Siŵr iawn i'ch siŵr iawn i'ch siŵr iawn. Mae'n rawn, Llywydd. Mae'n anon wrth gyrfa ceisgrwp, ac mae'n anon i ddechrau. Mae'n anon i ddechrau i Llywydd. Mae'n anon i ddechrau i Llywydd. Ruth Davidson? Ruth Davidson is not about respecting democracy or any other thing of the sort. This is about the First Minister using everything that she can lay her hands on to push for the only thing that she cares about. As she confirmed on the Andrew Marr programme at the weekend, even if the UK did vote to stay in the European Union, she would still insist on rerunning the independence referendum. This is about demanding more referendums until people are browbeaten into giving her the result that she wants. Isn't it the case that she is only interested in democracy when it goes her way? The difference perhaps between Ruth Davidson and I is this. I have got principles and I stick to my principles. I wouldn't recognise a principle. Ruth Davidson used to passionately oppose Brexit, but now Ruth Davidson supports Brexit. She used to demand that we stayed in the single market and now she wants us taken out of the single market. Ruth Davidson used to call Boris Johnson names that I cannot repeat in this chamber. Now she is cosying up to Boris Johnson. I cannot help thinking that it is just a pity that flip-flopping is not an Olympic sport, because Ruth Davidson would be a guaranteed gold medal winner. I have never had a problem standing up to the alpha males in my own party. I wonder if the First Minister is able always to have said the same. Despite campaigning in the Brexit referendum UK-wide, the First Minister now refuses to accept the result because she lost it. She talks about principle. Let's talk about a matter of principle. I believe that if you ask people to make a decision, if you say to people that we will enact whatever you decide, then democracy is fundamentally damaged if at the first opportunity you insist that that vote is held again. Doesn't she see that? Doesn't she see that you shouldn't change the rules after the event? If Ruth Davidson thinks that the views of the people of Scotland should always be respected, then why is it that she does not want the view of 62 per cent of people in Scotland who voted to remain in the European Union respected? It was Ruth Davidson who told the people of Scotland that we had to reject independence to stay in the European Union, and we now face being taken out against our will. People in Scotland tomorrow do have that opportunity to send a very clear message, to send a message that Scotland does not want Brexit, Scotland did not vote for Brexit, Scotland wants to remain in the European Union. Ruth Davidson. We have enough common sense to see the contradiction of an SNP seeking to end a UK union in which we can dismiss the Government over us while taking us into a far larger union in which we cannot dismiss anyone. No my words, the view of the former SNP deputy leader, Jim Sillars, writing at the weekend. Is any right that the SNP is a party that demands sovereignty for Scotland but who would trap us in a common fisheries policy and adopt the euro? It's a party that hasn't met a referendum that it doesn't want to overturn. A party that refuses to abide by the democratic decisions that we all agreed that we would respect. We have had enough of referendums. Scotland wants to move on. Why can't she see that? It's clear that the Prime Minister doesn't necessarily think that there's been enough referendums. We've had Ruth Davidson's groveling loyalty to the Prime Minister and her Westminster bosses. It must be heartbreaking for Ruth Davidson to see none of that repaid as the Prime Minister has just peedled her pitch in the European elections—a pitch where she didn't have anything positive to say at the outset. We see Ruth Davidson so desperate to cozy up to Boris Johnson today that her conversion to a hard Brexit here is complete. What people over the past three years have seen, of course, is the power of small independent countries in the European Union. Small independent countries such as Ireland. What a contrast to the way Westminster has treated Scotland. That's why, when people cast their vote tomorrow, I believe that they will cast a vote to say to Westminster loudly and clearly, we don't want a Tory Brexit. We want Scotland to remain in the European Union. Richard Leonard Can I refer members to my register of interests? Three weeks ago, I raced with the First Minister a new Scottish TUC report entitled, Broken Promises and Offshore Jobs. That report concluded that fewer than a third of the jobs promised in the renewable energy sector in Scotland have been delivered. Does the First Minister agree with me that, in light of that record, it is even more essential than ever that the fabrication contract for the EDF renewables, Niash Nagoya offshore wind installation, is awarded to yards and workers in Scotland? The First Minister Fully support the trade unions in the campaign to bring contracts and jobs to these yards. Clearly, it would not be appropriate for me to comment in detail on contracts that are not yet awarded. However, my support for BiFab and for the renewable industry in Scotland is very well known. I think that we have seen today one of the contrasts between this Government and our counterparts in the UK Government. It is because we intervened with BiFab that that company still exists today, able to compete for contracts. I want to see more of that work come to Scotland. That is why the Scottish Government convened a summit a couple of weeks ago attended by the trade unions. It was very positive and we will continue to work with them to make sure that, as Scotland leads the world in the transition to a carbon-zero future, people in Scotland benefit from the many jobs that will come with that. Richard Leonard Just last week, the EDF boasted that they were creating 60 new office jobs in Edinburgh, but that is a renewable energy contract worth £2 billion, just 10 miles off the coast of Fife that would generate over 1,000 green manufacturing jobs in Fife, instead of which it is reported today that the EDF may be placing those contracts in Indonesia. According to the Scottish TUC, the transportation alone of those structures from South East Asia would generate carbon emissions equivalent to an extra 35 million cars on the road, and we are in a climate emergency. So what will the First Minister do to send a clear message to EDF that, if it wishes to be part of Scotland's renewables future, it must stand by the promises made to those workers and to the communities of Fife? The First Minister The Scottish Government sends a very clear message to all companies, letting contracts like that, that we want to see Scotland treated fairly. That message is unequivocal, because I am sure that Richard Leonard will appreciate it. It would not be helpful to anybody for me to comment further on the detail of negotiations and decisions that are on-going. The Scottish Government is acting here. We are acting in partnership with the trade unions. The summit that I referred to a moment ago after that summit had taken place, Gary Smith from the GMB, Pat Rafferty from Unite, said that they left the summit confident that the Scottish Government shares our determination to make sure that we get a share of the renewables manufacturing bonanza, and that they will take all necessary measures within their powers to do that. We will continue to work with the unions and others, and with the UK Government, unfortunately not all of the levers over this lie within our hands. The Scottish Government took the action that we took to save Bifab, because we want to see it have a positive, prosperous future, and we are determined to do everything that we can to ensure that that is the case. Richard Leonard The time has come to act. When I raised this with the First Minister just 20 days ago, she responded by saying that, and I quote, meeting the targets of climate change will mean that we have to up our ambition and action across the whole range of Government responsibilities. That also puts a responsibility on the shoulders of opposition parties. This opposition party is shouldering our responsibility. Next Wednesday in Parliament, we will lead a debate on the future of Bifab and the award of renewable energy contracts. We want to win cross-party support so that this Parliament can send out a united message that offshore wind must not mean offshore jobs. Will the First Minister back the labour motion, support the trade union campaign, stand with the communities of Fife and stand up for those jobs? The First Minister I obviously have not seen the labour motion, but let me make an open offer to Richard Leonard today if he wants to talk to the Scottish Government about the terms of that motion so that we could come together and jointly back that, then I am more than happy for the Scottish Government to have those discussions. I think that we should come together. The Scottish Government should be judged on our actions over Bifab. Bifab would no longer exist right now, but for the action that the Scottish Government took. The Scottish Government, of course, has a financial stake on behalf of the taxpayer in Bifab. Not only do we want to see it succeed for all the reasons that Richard Leonard and others do, but we want to see it succeed on behalf of the return to the taxpayer as well. We will do everything within our power. We are already taking action in terms of the discussions at the summit, and we will work with anybody to make sure that Bifab and other businesses in the renewable sector in Scotland flourish in the way that I think they have every reason to expect to do. I look forward to the discussions between now and next Wednesday so that hopefully we can come together behind a motion that shows the support of this entire Parliament for Bifab and its workforce. A couple of consistency questions. The first is from Jamie Halcro Johnston. The First Minister will be aware that, a few nights ago, Elgin Mosque was daubed with the swastika and offensive language on the outside of the building. It is not the first time that an attack of this nature has been brought to the attention of this chamber, and I fear that it will not be the last. Will the First Minister join with me and with politicians from across all parties in Murray in condemning this attempt to intimidate the Muslim community in Elgin? Will she give a clear commitment that the Scottish Government will ensure that the resources are in place to protect Scotland's places of worship, and when they are targeted in this manner, that no stone will be left unturned in bringing those responsible to justice? The First Minister Can I wholeheartedly echo the comments that have been made by the member? I know Richard Lochhead as the local MSP for Elgin has already expressed similar sentiments. I unreservedly condemn any attack on a mosque or any other church or place of worship. I suspect that I have more mosques in my constituency than any other constituency in the country, and I know the impact on our Muslim community of any attack or threat against any of their mosques. That applies to anybody of any faith and any place of worship. I had the honour of addressing the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland this morning. All of Scotland's faith has a very proud record in coming together and standing against intolerance, prejudice and bigotry, and we should all stand shoulder to shoulder with them as they do so. Thank you, Presiding Officer. Does the First Minister share my grave concern at the deeply disturbing report in the Glasgow evening times, revealing Police Scotland figures that there has been a very significant increase in sexual crimes in the city since 2013? Indeed, in some areas, that has meant a doubling of sexual offences in five years, with all the suffering that that brings. What reassurance can the First Minister give to the people of Glasgow that the city will have the police resources to address this deeply worrying trend, and weekly that there will be sufficient support to those who are the survivors of those sexual offences? Any increase in sexual crime is of enormous concern, and I echo Johann Lamont's comments in that regard. I am not suggesting that this is the case in the figures that she cites, but some of the increase that we have seen in sexual crime in recent years has come from the reporting of historic sexual crime, and I think that that is something that we should all encourage. However, there are, of course, more police on our streets now than when this Government took office, and that is an important part of keeping the people of Glasgow and people right across Scotland safe, and the police and all of us should take tackling sexual crime extremely seriously. We also must do everything that we can to provide support for survivors of sexual crime, and through a whole range of different initiatives, the Scottish Government does that and will continue to do so. I am sure that the whole chamber will wish to join me in extending my sincere sympathies to the family and friends of the cyclists who tragically lost their life in Glasgow this morning. Sustrans research out today tells us that children on bike or on foot in the most deprived areas of Scotland are more than three times as likely to be injured or killed on the roads, simply as a result of their postcode. It is clear that, despite their very best efforts, a fragmented council by council approach to safer streets simply is not working. Given obvious concerns about road safety, the Government's own deadline for 10 per cent of journeys by bike by 2020 looks more unachievable than ever. When will the First Minister take action? I also take the opportunity to convey my deepest condolences to the family and friends of the cyclist who tragically lost her life in Glasgow this morning. The tragic incident took place in one of the busiest roads in my constituency. I know that it will have shocked people locally, but I am sure that all our thoughts are with the women's loved ones. On the wider question that Alison Johnstone has raised, of course, we have doubled the budget for active travel and that is something that we are committed to continuing. We set out the vision and the cycling action plan for Scotland that by 2020, 10 per cent of everyday journeys would be by bike. There are some signs of progress in 2017, for example for commutes of five miles or under, 4 per cent of people cycle to work, but the proportion of Edinburgh residents cycling is their main mode of travel to work increased from 6 per cent to just under 10 per cent. That increased being over the last 10 years, so we are determined to build in this progress to encourage cycling as part of a commute, which may also involve public transport. However, that is an important part of course in our ambitions around keeping the population healthier but also tackling climate change. Alison Johnstone, I thank the First Minister for her response, but let's bear in mind that that budget that was doubled has increased from 1.5 per cent to 3 per cent of the transport budget. It is tokenistic. Reducing speed limits is one of the cheapest ways to make our roads safer for everyone. They are not safe enough and that is why currently 3 per cent of journeys in Scotland take place on a bike. The First Minister of Wales has announced that 20 miles per hour will replace 30 miles per hour as the default speed limit, mirroring the member's bill that is currently before this Parliament. Meanwhile, the transport secretary has rejected calls from SNP-led councils, including Glasgow and Edinburgh, to follow suit. Dozens of organisations, including the British Heart Foundation, the Royal College of Pediatrics and Child Health and the Poverty Alliance back a default 20 mile per hour speed limit? Will Scotland lagging behind Wales, will the First Minister give the leadership needed to make our streets safer for everyone? I would say to Alison Johnstone that I do not think that investment of £80 million a year, which is the act of travel budget, is tokenistic. I understand that many people want to see that increase and we will continue to work hard to increase that in light of the other budgetary pressures that we face. In terms of speed limits, of course, Matt Ruskell's bill is currently before the relevant committee for stage 1 scrutiny. I will give a commitment today that we will consider the stage 1 report from the committee carefully when that is published. We have always been clear that 20 miles per hour speed limits are a good idea when implemented in the right environment. Obviously, the bill has two different issues, which I think it is important to ensure that they are not conflated. The first is whether 20 miles per hour speed limits are beneficial, and we certainly recognise that. The second point, of course, is whether a blanket approach is the best way of achieving those desired benefits, and we will pay close attention to the views of the committee when the stage 1 report is published. A number of supplementary questions. The first is from Shona Robison to be followed by Liam Kerr. Shona Robison. Today, for a damning report on UK Government policy, it was published by the UN's special rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights, which on welfare reforms stated that the DWP had been tasked with designing a digital and sanitised version of the 19th century workhouse that was made infamous by Charles Dickens. While just published, perhaps the First Minister could provide her initial reaction and set out what the Government is doing to tackle poverty. I thank Shona Robison for raising this important issue. The report that was published today from the UN rapporteur is shocking, and frankly it should shame every member of the UK Government. It says things like much of the glue that has held British society together since the Second World War has been deliberately removed and replaced with a harsh and uncaring ethos. British compassion has been replaced by a punitive mean spirited and often callous approach. I think that those comments should make every UK minister pause and reflect seriously on their welfare policies, on their austerity approach and decide to change course immediately. By contrast, the report talks about the work that has been done by devolved administrations. It says that Scotland is spending £125 million per year to protect people and has put in place ambitious schemes for addressing poverty. We will continue to work hard to mitigate the impact of Westminster cuts, but we will also build a system here in Scotland that protects people and is based on dignity and respect. Liam Kerr is filled by Liam McArthur. On Monday, Councillor Graham Campbell was woken up in the middle of the night. His car had been firebombed. The flames were spreading to his house and could easily have killed him and his family, or spread to nearby homes. I understand that the First Minister cannot comment on live police investigations, but will she condemn the attack in the strongest possible terms? Does she agree that any threat or direct action that is made to politicians for simply carrying out their duties at any level and of any party is an attack on our very democracy and must be met with robust and decisive action? I condemn that incident very strongly and unreserved. I take the opportunity to send my best wishes to Councillor Campbell and to his family. I am sure that they were deeply shocked at what occurred. As the member rightly says, I cannot and will not comment further on the specific incident because it is a matter for police investigation. I think that attacks on politicians of any nature are to be condemned. We live in a society where we should encourage and embrace robust debate, but we should try to conduct those robust debates in a civilised and respectful way. None of us in the chamber live up to that on all occasions, but all of us should try harder to do so because our democracy and the people that we serve deserve no less. In 2011, chaotic filing of documents relating to undercover police operations was followed by officers being sent to buy an incinerator in petrol, taking documents to wasteland, then setting them alight. After a separate civil action and reporting by the Sunday Post, the debacle is now considered serious enough to call in the Met for a further review. The chief constable says that that recognises the need for public confidence in the vital area of covert policing. Does the First Minister agree with me, therefore, that a pitchford-type inquiry into other alleged abuses relating to undercover policing in Scotland is also necessary to maintain that confidence? I think that Liam McArthur for raising the issue. As he said, an external police force has been asked to investigate the concerns that have been raised there. I think that the chief constable is absolutely right to recognise the seriousness of this and to take the action that has been taken. I think that it would be wrong in light of that for me to pre-empt the outcome of that investigation. However, when it has concluded, I am sure that both the chief constable and, if there are any lessons or questions that are raised in that for the Scottish Government, that those will be properly addressed at that time. Can I ask the First Minister whether she has read the report on the extensive delays to the replacement system for airway for the emergency services? It is currently said to be at least £3 billion over budget in many years past its due date. In addition to the delays and massive cost overruns of crossrail, is it not proved that we should never let the Tories near infrastructure projects in Scotland? The record of the Conservative Westminster Government in delivering infrastructure projects on time on budget—or indeed at all—is not a particularly strong one, by contrast to the record of the Scottish Government. Keith Brown is right to raise concerns particularly about airway. There have been and will continue to be discussions between the UK Government and the Scottish Government on the issue. However, the more responsibilities of course over the matters that we hold in this Parliament, I think, the better for all of us. Serious public concerns about Scotland's fish farming industry, as highlighted by the panorama programme the other night. Does the First Minister share the rural economy secretary's view that we must, and I quote here, must be better at recognising and celebrating the good environmental credentials of this industry? When it comes to fish farming, is it growth at any cost? I do not think that it should be growth at any cost in any sector of our economy. I do recognise the concerns that people have about the environmental sustainability of aquaculture, its impact on wild salmon in particular. We are committed to sustainable aquaculture and wild fisheries. Both are dependent on the environment. Aquaculture salmon farming is important economically, but all of us would agree that it must be delivered and developed sustainably with appropriate regulatory frameworks that minimise and address environmental impacts. I know that the industry shares that view. Monica Lennon, to be followed by Graham Simpson. On Sunday, all opposition parties supported a campaign to stop process meats containing nitrites from being served in schools and hospitals. Does the First Minister agree that nitro meats should be or should no longer be served in Scotland's schools and hospitals, and will she commit to a timetable to ending this? First Minister. There are, of course, international standards that we will fully comply with. We are absolutely committed to supporting the health and wellbeing of children and schools and have a key role to play to provide balance, nutritious food and drink every day. Our regulations help to ensure that that is the case. Following a review of the regulations, the Scottish Government consulted on proposed changes, which included a proposal to introduce a maximum level of red and red process meats served in schools, and we will publish a consultation report by the end of this school year. Graham Simpson, to be followed by Jenny Marra. Last week, the Scottish Land Commission gave ministers its initial advice on land value capture. Can the First Minister say how the Government plans to take forward this important work? We welcome the report by the Scottish Land Commission. We are interested in more effective ways to capture land value uplifts to pay for enabling infrastructure, but, as the commission notes, this is a very complex area and any attempts to capture land value uplifts must be done in a fair way, which does not impact on the availability of land for development or the supply of new homes. We will consider the recommendations in detail and we will then set out our proposals to take forward work in this area following the completion of the planning bill. The First Minister will have read the interim report on mental health in Tayside. My thoughts are with all the families affected by this report and its terrible findings. The mental health minister announced this afternoon another board of governance, but there are no actions to guarantee patient safety while we await the final report. Will the First Minister escalate NHS Tayside back to level 5 so that the board has the support and supervision that it needs to guarantee patient safety over the coming weeks? Will she also instruct NHS Tayside to halt mental health service redesign as David Strang recommended in his report, at least until his final report is published? In terms of patient safety, the health care improvement Scotland report also addressed those issues and NHS Tayside, of course, is undertaking work in light of that. I want to take the opportunity today to thank David Strang for his interim report. It is an interim report, but it highlights a number of areas where there are clearly issues that must be addressed. My thoughts, too, are with all the families that have been affected. NHS Tayside, which commissioned the inquiry, has committed to learning from the interim report, and we look forward to David Strang bringing forward his final recommendations. The mental health minister met the board chair and chief executive and the integrated joint board yesterday to seek assurances about progress in relation to improvement work that is required. She has been clear in her expectations that the board and the IGB work must be undertaken in Tayside to ensure the appropriate quality and standards of mental health services that the Government expects. I want to reiterate that expectation today. Just over a month ago, First Minister, you wrote to the Prime Minister to call for greater involvement of devolved administrations in article 15 negotiations. Can the First Minister confirm whether or not such a call has been reflected in the Prime Minister's new and improved Brexit deal? As far as I am aware, although I will be corrected if I am mistaken about this, there was no substantive response from the Prime Minister to that letter. Scotland has not been meaningfully consulted at any stage of the process. We certainly were not consulted in advance of the Prime Minister making her speech yesterday. The Scottish Government, the Scottish Parliament and the people of Scotland more generally have been completely ignored in this whole sorry saga. That is why I hope that people in Scotland do tomorrow take the opportunity to send Westminster the Prime Minister, whoever he or she may be, by next week a very strong message that Scotland does not want Brexit. Scotland wants to remain at the heart of Europe. Presiding Officer, having been privileged to visit our new aircraft carrier HMS Prince of Wales in Rosyth recently, I was very impressed with such a fine example of British ship building and assembly skills in Scotland. That is a project where many of our armed forces veterans are working. What will the First Minister do to keep our veteran skills employed in this sector? The Scottish Government is doing a great amount of work to support our veterans and I would take the opportunity to thank all those who serve in our armed forces and all those who have served in our armed forces. I am a strong supporter of shipbuilding in Scotland. In the days when Govern Shipyard was in my constituency, it is now, of course, represented by HMS, used to have learned a lot about that proud industry. Of course, one of the many things I regret about the independence referendum in 2014 is that the commitments made to the shipbuilding industry by the Conservatives have, like so many of their other commitments made back then, been reneged upon. 4. Gordon Macdonald To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government's position is on the creation of 500 highly skilled tech jobs in Edinburgh by Lloyd's banking group. I warmly welcome the announcement of this new tech hub. It is yet another vote of confidence in the quality of the Scottish workforce and in the strength of our financial sector. With this announcement, Edinburgh is fast becoming one of Europe's most competitive tech hubs. We see that through its growth in start-up offerings from its world-leading universities and new digital academies such as Code Clan, which provide greater choice for careers in the industry. That is a significant step forward in the Government's work to position Scotland as a vibrant and innovative digital economy. Gordon Macdonald I thank the First Minister for that answer. As an Edinburgh MSP, I am delighted that our capital is becoming one of the most competitive tech hubs in the EU. Those industries, especially, provide online financial services that benefit greatly from the access to the EU's single market. How will the First Minister seek to capitalise on growth in those sectors to create more jobs here in Edinburgh? The First Minister There is no doubt that Brexit is a real threat. It has been taken out of the single market. It is a grave threat to jobs in this sector, as it is a threat to jobs in many sectors across our economy. We are working in partnership with the financial services sector through, for example, the financial services advisory board, which I co-chair, to support its continued growth, not just here in Edinburgh but across Scotland. Our development and skills agencies are actively engaging with the sector and professional bodies to support that. Our support for Fintech Scotland is a good example of how the Scottish Government is working with the sector, our agencies and our universities to drive growth and innovation in financial services and to attract investment and talent here to Scotland. Jamie Halcro Johnston Thank you. The announcement of potential new tech jobs is obviously welcome. It is incredibly important that there is a pipeline of skilled employees entering the sector. Can the First Minister comment on why financial services, as a foundation apprenticeship, is still available in only five of Scotland's 13 college regions, excluding my constituents in the Highlands and Islands? Given that reskilling into a technology career can cost over £6,000 per course—a prohibitive amount for many people—can she advise on what additional support the Scottish Government can provide for those looking to move into this sector? The First Minister We continue to provide a range of support. I mentioned the financial services advisory board in my earlier answer. The last meeting of that, which took place just a couple of weeks ago, as has been the case at many of its meetings, was discussing skills and how we build the skills base in the sector. There is a lot of work between Government, our agencies and the sector to make sure that we are doing exactly that. I have to gently say to the member the biggest concern that is raised in this sector and in many other sectors about the recruitment and attraction of skills is the ending of freedom of movement that comes with Brexit and the Conservative Government's obsession with a hostile environment and cutting immigration. We need to make sure that we have an immigration system in Scotland that continues to allow us to attract the best people, not just from within Scotland, but from countries across Europe and further afield. To ask the First Minister what action the Scottish Government is taking to promote active travel. The Scottish Government doubled the active travel budget to £80 million in 2018-19. The majority of the funding is allocated to local authorities to deliver high-quality walking and cycling infrastructure. Funding also includes more than £10 million to support local authorities and communities to deliver behaviour change programmes, including cycle training and increased access to bikes and e-bikes to encourage more people to walk and cycle. Last year, we appointed Scotland's first active nation commissioner, Lee Craigie, as the national advocate for the benefits of walking and cycling, including for everyday short journeys. I thank the First Minister for that answer. She will be aware that this is walk to school week. However, less than half of Scottish children walk to school and one in four parents is concerned about the impact of pollution near schools. The Scottish National Party Government has fallen behind on reducing transport emissions, and its target for increasing cycle journeys will not be achieved for an astonishing 239 years. Will the First Minister agree with the Scottish Conservatives and consider investigating the use of air quality monitors to give parents reassurance that their children are breathing clean air when walking to school? The First Minister will continue to take action to improve air quality through supporting councils with low emissions zones, encouraging people to walk or to cycle instead of using their car, investing in cleaner vehicles, buses and cars, investing in the technology that supports that and investing in active travel in the way that I have set out. That is not helped by the opposition that we get from the Conservatives to some of the policies to try to give councils more powers to deal with those things. I hope that the member will be able to prevail upon her own party colleagues to work with the Scottish Government to make real progress here, which I think is now within our grasp. To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government's response is to report that around one in five of Scotland's three-to-use ETMs are expected to introduce charges to customers in the next 12 months. The ability to freely and easily access cash is essential, particularly for small businesses and those in our most vulnerable communities. That is why the Minister for Public Finance and the Digital Economy has repeatedly urged the economic secretary to the treasury to appoint a regulator with sole responsibility for cash infrastructure, and we will continue to urge link and ATM operators to protect the ATM network to ensure that cash remains accessible to all. I thank the First Minister for that answer. She will be aware that the ATM industry body has warned that one in five ATMs could charge for withdrawals in Scotland within the next year. 2.7 million people in the UK rely wholly on cash for their daily lives, with 78 per cent of consumers in the two lowest household income groups relying on cash two to three times a week, so that you can see the impact that this will have on the poorest communities. Does the First Minister agree that we should work cross-party? We should support our consumer guarantee for free access to cash, and we should also get behind the crucial work that MP Jed Killen is doing to legislate for this. I am very happy to work in co-operate cross-party on this issue. It is the case that cash payments remain an essential part of day-to-day life for many, but especially for vulnerable consumers, for smaller businesses and for those who live in rural communities. Many of the levers here do lie with the UK Government, which is why the Scottish Government Minister has pressed the economic secretary to the treasury, supporting the witch campaign to ensure that cash remains accessible to all. We will continue to press the UK Government and we look forward to having the support of parties across the chamber as we do so. John Mason Thank you very much. The First Minister would agree that, as well as charging for ATMs, it is even worse when the ATM is removed altogether. In fact, in my constituency, two of the eight branches are currently about to be closed by Santander and Clydesdale. The risk is that we also lose the ATMs completely from that area. Will she and the Government continue their pressure on the UK Government as far as possible to try and put pressure on the banks? The First Minister I am going dialogue with banks. They will say that the pattern of custom is changing, but we also point out that, in many communities, including the communities that John Mason represents, people rely on having access to banks and access to ATM machines. I know that John Mason and his MP colleague David Linden are campaigning on bank closures, and I wish them well with that. We will continue to have those conversations with banks, and we will continue to press the UK Government to use the powers and levers at their disposal to get the fairest possible deal for consumers. Dean Lockhart First Minister, you said that you are concerned about the declining free-to-use ATM network in Scotland. If that is the case, why is your Government the only one in the UK to charge business rates on post-office ATMs? That is forcing many of them to close or introduce charges. The First Minister First Minister, this is an issue that was raised by the post-office that was in Parliament last week. It is one that I have given an undertaking to them that we will look into. As anybody will point out, there is a whole multitude of reasons behind the closures, and it is important that we address that in its widest sense. Where there are responsibilities of the Scottish Government, we will not shy away from those, but we will continue to press the UK Government to take the action that it can take to ensure a fairer deal for those who rely on banks and ATM machines. Bob Doris Card Tronix has imposed charges in two previous free-to-use ATMs in my constituency. It appears the dispute between them and Link explains the charges, which disproportionately impacts those on the lowest incomes. Will the First Minister offer her support to myself and Patrick Grady MP as we seek to secure a meeting with the payment systems regulator and an attempt to eliminate those unfair charges? The Public Finance and Digital Economy Minister met the payment systems regulator in December last year to urge it to use its regulatory powers. I certainly wish Bob Doris and Patrick Grady well in seeking a meeting to press that case. The Scottish Government has asked the regulator to ensure that no ATM in a vulnerable community closes until a new operator is found and that communities are not left without free access to cash as a result of Link's changes to interchange fees. I welcome the support of members across the chamber in ensuring that the regulator is fully aware of the continued impact of ATM closures and charges on communities across Scotland. The next item of business is consideration of business motion 17371 in the name of Graham Day on behalf of the Parliamentary Bureau, setting out a business programme. Can I call on Graham Day to move the motion? Thank you very much and no one seems to wish to speak on this motion. So the question is that motion 17371 be agreed. Are we all agreed? We are agreed. The next item is consideration of Parliamentary Bureau motion 17402 on a variation to standing orders. Can I ask Graham Day on behalf of the Bureau to move this motion? Moved, Presiding Officer. Thank you very much and this question will be put at decision time. Now, if no member objects, I will turn to decision time a minute early in an object. No one objects this. So we turn to decision time. The first question is that motion 17360 in the name of Gordon Lindhurst on the business support inquiry be agreed. Are we all agreed? Yes. We are agreed. The final question is that motion 17402 in the name of Graham Day on a variation to standing orders be agreed. Are we all agreed? We are agreed and that concludes decision time. We will move shortly to members' business in the name of George Adam on concern for local radio content. We will just take a few moments for members and the minister to change seats.