 Rangom have started with anyway general questions. Question number one from Oliver Mundell. Cabinet Secretary keep brown. The second phase of the enterprise and skills review has been exploring options for the new south of Scotland vehicle. Those will be set out in the phase two report that I expect to be published shortly after the General Election. Oliver Mundell. I thank the cabinet secretary for that answer. Can he cast any more light on what representation the south of Scotland is likely to have on the implementation board? Of course, we are delighted to have the new vehicle where the First Government to actually do that. Many people have talked about it but we are doing that. We are equally determined that the south of Scotland should have its interests represented on the implementation board. As with the previous answer when I spoke about the south of Scotland vehicle, the nature of the implementation board will be announced very shortly and will fall on from the completion of phase 2 of the review and general election. Emma Harper I wonder if the cabinet secretary is aware that I am supporting efforts in the south of Scotland to create a national tourist route similar to that of the north coast 500. Early estimates suggest that the project may require between £10,000 and £15,000. Does he believe that the new south of Scotland enterprise vehicle will be a key potential source of funding for such a project? I welcome the initiative taken by Emma Harper. She is quite right to emphasise the success of the north coast 500. I look forward to seeing the work of the new agency in terms of this interesting initiative. It will be, of course, for that vehicle once established to have the role in helping to develop the visitor economy in the south, working with other organisations to ensure communities and businesses benefit, but decisions that she will know about project funding will be for the new vehicle to take forward. I am sure that the new vehicle will be very grateful to have interesting ideas such as the one put forward by Emma Harper. Daniel Johnson I cannot help to notice the prominence of the word vehicle in the minister's response to those questions. Can he reassure us that the south of Scotland vehicle will be a separately constituted organisation but its own administration of bureaucracy and ability to act independently from other bodies and organisations? I would not ask Daniel Johnson to read too much into the word vehicle. It is fairly understood what that means. We are talking about, as he describes, a separate agency. We have said that in previous statements. Of course, there are different ways to get to that endgame. It will take some time through primary legislation to establish an agency like that. There is an interesting series of options available to the Government in relation to how we get to that stage and how we make sure that the south of Scotland has its interests represented in the meantime. I have asked my officials to set up meetings with each of the Opposition parties so that I can have that discussion. There are a range of options and I am perfectly willing to listen to suggestions in relation to that, but I think that it is important to point out that this vehicle, this agency, is one that has been established by the Scottish Government and is long overdue. I noticed that the member is coming in the chamber at the back of the moment. Just to let the chamber understand, the bureau gave permission for the Petitions Committee to overrun because they were taking evidence from survivors of Transfigural Mesh. I believe that the member, as the chief of the health committee, was present at that meeting. We are now coming to question number two, if the member has— Okay. Question number two, Neil Findlay. Thanks very much for the indulgence, Presiding Officer. To ask the Scottish Government how it ensures that subcontractors who work on the Scottish Future Trust projects are paid in time by the contractor. Cabinet Secretary, Derek Mackay. This is a matter for the relevant public body to monitor. The standard contract forms used for NPD and hub projects include provisions about the payment of subcontractors by the main contractor, who is required to keep records of such payments for inspection by the public body from time to time. I have a contractor in my region who has been working on a big college project, but who has been having major problems getting paid by the subcontractor. It appears that this is common across a number of projects. Will the cabinet secretary agree to meet with me about the issue? I am happy to look at the individual circumstances that the member has raised and responded accordingly. It is not my belief that the issue is commonplace because there is monitoring in place, but I am happy to look at the specifics and then return to the member. Julian Martin. Is it fair to say that the Scottish Government has gone further than other administrations in terms of fair work? If we had full legislative authority in this area, that is all the more reason to press the UK Government for the full devolution of employment law, so we could go even further in terms of the agenda, but I could cite a number of good examples of what we have made progress, such as the fair work convention. Ross Thomson. What action is the Scottish Government taking to ensure that businesses pay their smaller suppliers faster? A recent report by the Federation of Small Businesses in Scotland showed that adopting the payment practices of Norway would see 2,075 fewer firms closing annually in Scotland. I think that the Scottish Government has got a good strong track record in paying those that we procure services from. We publish those statistics as well, and we are also taking forward project bank accounts that ensure that subcontractors are paid, and I would encourage their use as well and we will roll out further guidance on that. Thank you. Question 3 has not been lodged. Question 4, Mary Evans. To ask the Scottish Government whether it has sought students from the UK Government that Scotland's fishing industry will not be used as a bargaining chip in Brexit negotiations. Despite numerous and continuing attempts by the Scottish Government to secure such assurances, the UK Government has given no guarantee that it will not bargain away access to Scottish waters in its Brexit negotiations. That lack of assurance raises a very real concern that the UK Government is once again ready to treat the Scottish fishing industry as expendable. I can give our fishing industry assurances, however, that in every possible scenario for Scotland's future, this Government will always stand up for and champion Scotland's fishing interests. Mary Evans. I thank the minister for that answer. He will be aware that, in Theresa May's plans for Brexit, the Tories say that, given the heavy reliance on UK waters of the EU fishing industry and the importance of EU waters to the UK, it is in both our interests to reach a mutually beneficial deal that works for the UK and the EU's fishing communities. Does the minister agree that the UK Government's plans to allow EU boats access to Scotland's waters, as of right, is regrettable and would be detrimental to Scotland's fishing interests? I can hear the Conservatives chunkering away. They do not like to hear the truth when they are confronted with it because, for months leading up to the referendum, those in favour of Brexit talked about taking back control. The current UK fisheries, minister, promise hundreds of thousands of tonnes of extra fish for the UK fleet, and yet, now that the negotiations have started, we see the true colours of the UK Government. Once again, fisheries appear to be the first thing on the list of expendables. Scottish waters are some of the most valuable in Europe, and the Scottish fleet is one of the most successful. Protecting the interests of our fleet and international negotiations, whether in relation to exiting the EU or fishing quotas, is vital to our fishermen and coastal communities that rely on fishing industries. It is only this Scottish Government, this SNP-led Scottish Government, that will continue to stand up for Scottish fishing interests, as has been proved time and time again. Given that the latest correspondence from Westminster, namely the private letter from Andrea Ledson to Bertie Armstrong, which has been leaked by the First Minister and is quite specific in that we are leaving the CFP, taking control of our waters to 200 miles, is the minister like me very much clearer on the way forward for fishing post-Brexit, and it is certainly not expendable? I will take no lectures from a Tory party that has sold our fishermen down the river, not for years but for decades. Let's remind them about what was said by David Mundell before the EU referendum vote. I think that the fishermen are wrong in the sense that there is no way that we would just go back to Scotland or Britain controlling British waters. He said, I would say the idea that we would go back to a position where we are entirely in control of our own fishing industry is not one that is re-elistic. The fishing communities of Scotland will not want Tory poodles representing them on Westminster, who will simply roll over when the UK Government sells fishermen out. That is why it should elect SNP MPs so that Scotland's voice is heard in Westminster. To ask the Scottish Government where it will provide an update on progress with the Edinburgh Glasgow improvement programme. I have this week received a letter from Network Rail chief executive Mark Khan, which I have now placed into spice. In his letter, he advises, and I quote from his letter, regrettably it is now clear that a safety critical component is susceptible to failure and must be replaced. That will impact on the energisation start date. We are working extremely closely and collaboratively within the ScotRail Alliance to assess how the impact of this challenge can be minimised for passengers and we will keep officials informed. I have arranged to meet and speak to Mark Khan to ascertain the full detail of that component failure, which is safety critical. I will, of course, ensure that members are appropriately kept up to date. Any further delay to Egypt once again due to Network Rail would be extremely disappointing. We remain, of course, focused on the main objective, which is the Edinburgh Glasgow via Falkirk High route, being served by longer electric trains by December 2017. However, that potential further delay highlights the need for further devolution of governance of Network Rail's projects, which are ordinarily managed out with the ScotRail Alliance, so Network Rail is properly accountable to this Parliament and to this Government, which, of course, funds its work in Scotland. I thank the minister for his reply. Is the minister aware that the plan closure of Kerswood bridge to enable the electrification of the rail line in the stilling area is causing understandable concern because of the potential impact on individuals and businesses? Can the minister outline what mitigation measures are being considered and in an effort to minimise disruption? Will he provide me with full details on the benefit electrification of the rail line that will bring to the stilling area? I am sure that he is aware that I am standing behind him, so I hope that I get a nice reply. I will be very aware of that fact, of course. Can I just say to the member that the work of the Kerswood bridges, as he rightly says, has been delivered as part of the electrification of Stirling-Dumblay and Allawa line, which will enable a step change in passenger capacity, comfort and ambience, for passengers travelling on those new electric trains on this key route. The Kersbridge is owned by Stirling-Dumblay and requires significant work to achieve the necessary electrification clearances. However, he is right, of course. I recognise that any closures will cause disruption to the local community. However, Network Rail is working closely with Stirling-Dumblay and Public Utilities and other stakeholders to keep the length of the closure to an absolute minimum. It is worth reminding them, as well as the potential benefit to the local community of many workers being on site, that the SDA project itself involves the electrification of 100 single-kilometres of track from Dumblay and through Stirling. That means journey time improvements by up to 10 minutes on the Stirling line services, as well as greater capacity and greater comfort, which, of course, is a step change in our railways, and I think that we will be welcomed by passengers across that line. Question 6, Kate Forbes. To ask the Scottish Government how it is supporting the fish-catching industry on the west coast. Minister Humza Yousaf. The Scottish Government is firmly committed to the fish-catching industry on the west coast. This year, a quota for deep-water rock all had it increased by 45 per cent. Prone vessels up and down the west coast have benefited from the end of days at sea regime through the EMFF programme. The EU and the Government have supported diverse projects to develop the industry, including, for example, £600,000 for the provision of harbour facilities and net mending along the west coast at Crenin, Gailoch, Ullipull, Loch Inver and, indeed, the Western Isles. Our strategy for insurer fisheries, which is, of course, so important to the west coast, will also help to develop a more sustainable, profitable and well-managed sector. We are looking in particular to develop better data for fisheries management with a £1.5 million programme that will support research into the development of an integrated system for the collection, coalition analysis and interrogation of data. Kate Forbes. I thank the minister for that answer. The minister will be aware of the changes to the minimum landing sizes for lobsters on the west coast, resulting in differences between the west and east coasts. Despite the phased implementation, there are still some concerns for sky fishermen about competitive disadvantage. Would the minister agree to meet the fishermen who recently met me to discuss this further? I do understand—I know that the cabinet secretary also understands and recognises some of the concerns that were raised by the member. She will know, of course, that these changes in minimum landing sizes were a result of an extensive consultation process during 2016, when new management measures for Scotland's crab and lobster fisheries were announced in January. I know that the member also recognises that at the heart of that is conservation of our stock. The new measures, which, as she says, will include a phased increase from 87 millimetres to 90 millimetres, will be phased over two years. I think that that will hopefully help to give some element of comfort. I should say that those measures are supported by the vast majority of fishermen, although I do not want to at all downplay the concerns that have been raised by fishermen to her. I can tell the cabinet secretary that the rural economy and connectivity issue is meeting the Scottish Creel Fishermen's Federation on 25 May. Part of the delegation from the Federation includes a sky-based fisherman's leader. That will provide a timely opportunity to discuss this matter, and I will ensure that the member is fully informed of that conversation. Finlay Carson The SNP talks about supporting the fishing catching sector. Does the fishing expert believe that withholding 12 per cent of the macro quota is supporting the pelagic sector? If this Government had any regard for Scotland's processing and catching sector, it would work in collaboration with industry towards increasing landings. Instead, all we see is bully-boy tactics. Does the minister accept that, despite total devolution of inshore fisheries, the Scottish Government has continually neglected the static gear industry at substantial economic cost to Scotland? The brass neck of the Tory party when it comes to our fishing communities knows no bounds, so we will continue to stand with fishing communities right across Scotland. Let me just say this to the member. As a result of yesterday's vote, the majority of the Parliament decided that whatever happens in the Brexit process on the exiting EU, that we must have powers in this Parliament, full powers over fisheries, and that he has a choice and his party has a choice. Will they stand with this Parliament when the majority vote demanded control over those powers? Will they stand with Scotland's fishing communities or will they roll over when the UK Government once again sells Scotland's fishermen down the river? 7. Stewart Stevenson To ask the Scottish Government what infrastructure investment it has made in the north-east and what future investment it has planned to make the area better connected. Since 2007, the Scottish Government has invested in major projects in the north-east, including the Aberdeen Western peripheral routes, the Balmerdy tipper to your road scheme, the emergency care centre in Aberdeen and significant investment in school buildings, including the completion of 16 new schools across the region. A recent infrastructure investment plan progress update highlighted that major infrastructure projects within the north-east region total more than £1.3 billion are currently in construction or are estimated to be in construction during this year alone. Looking forward, we have infrastructure investment plan for the Aberdeen to Inverness rail improvements, the A96 dualling programme between Inverness and Aberdeen and the A98, A96 hodigan junction improvement. We also have digital Scotland's superfast broadband programmes to extend fibre broadband access to at least 95 per cent of premises in Scotland by the end of 2017, and 100 per cent superfast broadband coverage by 2021. Finally, we will also invest £125 million in the Aberdeen city region deal and a further £254 million in north-east infrastructure over the same five to 10-year period. I very much welcome the over £1 billion that is being invested in the north-east. In particular, upgrading the A96 will be a huge boost, but is the Cabinet Secretary of State aware of environmental concern about one of the proposed routes east of Inverrury? How does he intend to respond to those concerns in relation to Benachy? I am, as Stuart Stevenson says, very well aware of the concerns, not least from the representations received from Gillian Martin and from others. I have made it clear to Transport Scotland that I want to be able to demonstrate the utmost regard for the environment, including a particularly popular local site that he has mentioned at Benachy. That should be taken into account consistent with the process that he will know that we have to go through. As for all major road schemes, meaningful engagement with communities forms a key part of our work as we develop our plans and we expect the next stage of our design and assessment processes to start later this summer. Please be reassured that the concerns expressed by Save Benachy, the campaign, along with the concerns of others in the area, will be carefully considered and taken into account. Lewis MacDonald, at the very end of his first answer, the cabinet secretary mentioned an additional £254 million of investment in infrastructure in North East Scotland. Can he tell us today whether that will or will not include dualling of the east coast railway line at Montrose, which is something on which he commented at the time of the original announcement? The member will be aware that that £254 million, which I mentioned, does indeed relate to improvements on that line. It was part of the Aberdeen city deal, the extent to which we went much further than the UK Government in extending that city deal. Its design, though, is to make sure that we improve the journey times between Aberdeen and the central belt. Of course, that will be done. The exact nature of the development, whether it is dualling, particularly at the stress point that is well known to the member, is being considered by Transport Scotland. I am happy to provide a written update to the member if he would like that.