 Y First Item of Business is portfolio questions. We start with question number one from Annie Wells. To ask the Scottish Government how it measures economic performance. Cabinet Secretary, Keith Brown. The Scottish Government uses the national performance framework and Scotland performance to help monitor and assess Scotland's overall economic performance. Those contain indicators that assess Scotland's performance across a number of dimensions, ..economic growth, productivity and participation in the labour market. The Scottish Government is committed to improving Scotland's economic performance... ..and Scotland's economic strategy sets out our framework for doing so. It's based on the twin objectives of boosting competitiveness whilst tackling inequality. In its later ScotLand performance document published alongside the draft budget, the Scottish Government was found to be stagnating or actually getting worse in 46 out of the 67 key indicators... gyn diffnog o'r charnau aelod oedd y namag oedd dros alunol i gyrnoddau i bobl helaiannau i bedhau deuaith. It's nice to hear the Conservatives talking so positively about Scotland's economy as always. I know, I also could have pointed out that the employment rate of 73.6 per cent for quarter three 2016 is the second highest across all UK countries. I could have pointed out that the total income received by Scottish households increased over this period. The The ratio of income to the top 10 per cent, compared to the bottom 40 per cent increased from 112 to 115. I could have pointed out that the gender pay gap was 6.2 per cent, a decrease of 1.48 per cent, or even that the value of Scottish exports had increased by 3.6 per cent in 2014. That is an increase of 4.4 per cent in relation to exports to the rest of the UK, and also 4.4 per cent yma i unrhyw ychydig o'r yr eustafellogau neu 3.4 per cent yw ei ddigwyd hwn. Those are very positive measures. Power measures are another of course there are measures that I acknowledge are challenging but it is only fair to recognise two important facts. One that there are positive measures here and secondly there is another government active in the economy in Scotland. Owe, we have heard for a long time from the Conservatives, oh we are getting new power saying must Jesus, the UK government had those powers before, wrth gwrs, what did they do with them? Jackie June Lee I will focus on one target that the Scottish Government has adopted. One is that productivity should move from the third quartile to the first quartile by 2017 compared to other OECD countries. I understand that that target has been missed. We remain in the third quartile and have fallen from 18th to 19th place. Why has the Scottish Government failed to meet that target? That is perfectly true, as Jackie Baillie says, that we have remained in the third quarter, not gone into the first quarter. I have mentioned that a number of times in this chamber, not least in relation to the review that we are currently conducting in terms of our enterprise and skills organisations. However, it would have been useful had Jackie Baillie acknowledged that there has been a 4.4 per cent increase in productivity in Scotland. There has been none whatsoever in the rest of the UK. It is not good enough and what we have to do in that circumstance is look at what we are currently doing, which is exactly what we are doing in terms of the review of enterprise and skills agencies, but also in relation to the £500 million Scottish gross scheme, which will help to drive increased productivity, competitiveness and internationalisation. Question 2, Ben Macpherson. To ask the Scottish Government what action it is taking to assist marine energy developers. Mr Paul, we'll house. The Scottish Government and its enterprise agencies continue to offer significant support to the marine energy sector in Scotland. The Renewable Investment Fund and Wave Energy Scotland initiatives alone have so far provided £57 million to wave and tidal projects. The decision by the UK Government in November 2016 that it would not be providing ring fence support for wave and tidal technologies in the second contracts for difference allocation round came as a blow to many marine energy developers. Following the announcement, I convened a round table discussion with industry representatives and UK Government officials to understand industry priorities. I reiterated the Scottish Government's strong commitment to the development of a successful marine energy industry and to maintaining our current global lead. The Scottish ministers will continue to use the powers that we have to support the growth of the sector, and we are willing to work with the UK Government and industry to explore possible solutions. I proposed that Scotland hosts a new working group to replace the UK Government's defunct marine energy programme board in order to find a way forward. Work is currently under way to agree the remit membership in terms of reference of that new group. Ben Macpherson, I thank the minister for that answer and share his concerns about the UK Government's CFD allocations. The minister is aware of NOVA innovation in my constituency, and I wonder if the minister could update me on what assistance the Scottish Government is providing to find a site for the deployment of NOVA innovation's next phase of world-leading tidal energy devices, which will provide numerous employment opportunities as well as significantly contribute towards a low-carbon economy by 2050. I recognise that NOVA innovation is a very forward-thinking company that has done excellent work of late and has had a very successful year. I understand the technical parameters of the site that NOVA innovation is looking for, and I will go into detail on the commercial confidentiality. However, there is an enhanced account team approach that is being used to engage with NOVA innovation, pulling together SE company growth, Reef, Highlands Islands Enterprise and Waters team perspectives. There is a proposal by SE and HI to review all available sites in Scotland that can accommodate wave-entitled projects up to 2022, to include currently-owned sites and potential smaller-scale community sites. A meeting was arranged with officials to discuss us with the Crown Estate on 1 February, but due to illness to one of those who was due to attend, this is now going to take place next Monday, 13 February. Scottish Enterprise lost more than £30 million of public funding when two wave-power companies went into liquidation. What steps is the SNP Government taking to ensure that lessons are learned from this and that investment in wave-power delivers good value for money? I do think that it is somewhat rich of Morsegoal, and I recognise his genuine interest in his issues. I would say to him very gently that the UK Government is responsible for some of the parlous conditions that the wave energy sector has faced in Scotland. If he is sincere about his wishes—I believe that he is—he needs to make representations to the UK ministers, to Greg Clark, to follow up the Scottish Government's lead on this, in urging Mr Clark to provide a route to market and sincere support for a wave-entitled energy sector. It is only the Scottish Government that is stepping in to help this industry at the moment. The UK Government is doing next to nothing to support a vital industry for our islands. Liam McArthur I echo much of the sentiment that the minister expressed there. In relation to supporting innovation, there has been any progress in discussions with the UK Government about setting a CFD pot for innovation, including wave-entitled, but perhaps other storage technologies that I think could benefit from that sort of support at this critical time. I certainly thank Liam McArthur for his question. I know that he has a very strong and longstanding interest in this issue, which affects his constituency very severely. I would say that we are in continued dialogue with Bays and UK Government ministers on that issue. We are going to look to see if there are any opportunities arising out of the UK industrial strategy to see, given one of the challenge pots that relates to energy projects. We clearly see that the centres of excellence, such as EMEC, are world-leading, and therefore we would hope that UK Government ministers will support a strong bid from the Scottish industry for funding for innovation in the sector. We live in hope that we will see some form of support for wave-entitled technologies going forward, but that will depend, of course, on the decisions that are made by UK ministers. Bill Bowman, to ask the Scottish Government what support it can offer the employees of NCR and Dundee who are facing potential redundancy. I understand NCR as commenced consultation with its employees regarding the company's future restructuring plans. We have contacted NCR to offer support for any employees who may be facing redundancy through our partnership action for continuing employment or PACE initiative. The company has stated that it will make contact to discuss PACE support, depending on the outcome of the consultation. I would not want to prejudge, of course, that consultation. Through providing skills development and employability support, PACE aims to minimise the time individuals affected by redundancy are out of work. PACE has an excellent record in achieving positive outcomes for those affected by redundancy. Scottish Enterprise, as the member would expect, stands ready to work with NCR management to safeguard employment at the Dundee site. I thank the cabinet secretary for that answer. Over the last few weeks, news of other redundancies and relocations in Dundee have been reported. It is a worrying time for those concerned. What support can the Scottish Government offer the city of Dundee to help to boost job creation following yesterday's news that the city has the lowest employment rate of any city in the UK? Companies such as NCR and others such as Tokheim and Duddy and Michelin have been real success stories for the city. We have, of course, been providing funding support through the account management process that we have with Scottish Enterprise, with key employers in Dundee to make sure that we have targeted help for companies as they grow or try to take on new market challenges. I assure the member and others who have an interest in the economy of Dundee that the Scottish Government is very sincere about providing support to key employers in that area. Of course, whether it is skills support or support for export development of the kind that the cabinet secretary outlined in his earlier answer around the Scottish growth scheme, we are always looking to try and support companies in the local economy like Dundee to succeed and thrive. However, it takes these matters very seriously and, of course, if there are examples that do arise, pace and other wider Scottish government family of enterprise and skills agencies are there to intervene and help. 4. Graham Day Thank you. To ask the Scottish Government how Angus will benefit from the Taycities deal. First of all, I would like to say how delighted I am at the strategic partnership working across the four councils, which is clearly reflected in the Taycities region deal proposal. Just last week, I had the opportunity to meet the chief executive of Angus Council and others to hear first hand about their emerging city region deal proposals. I also had the pleasure of hearing how Angus sees their role in contributing to and benefiting from sustainable, inclusive economic growth through this collaborative approach. 5. Graham Day Thank the cabinet secretary for that answer. He will be aware of proposals within the city deal to establish an east of Scotland hub of the National Manufacturing Institute of Scotland in Arbroath. The aim of this is to increase investment and innovation, encourage greater internationalisation of Angus and Taycities engineering and advanced manufacturing sector, upscale the existing workforce, and create more apprenticeships. The cabinet secretary would agree with me that the potential to give the town and the wider region a significant economic boost that is worthy of pursuing. I think that there were some very interesting proposals, not least in terms of the life sciences relationship with Dundee University, the success that they have had there and other interests in Angus. In relation to the proposals generally, they are very much in harmony with the developing proposals for the National Manufacturing Institute for Scotland. It is a significant proposal in MIS with the potential to support step changes in the efficiency and productivity of Scotland's manufacturing sector. However, decisions on its establishment and location will depend on the business case, which will be published later this year, and wherever the constituent parts of the institute are located, we are determined that it will be for the benefit of the whole of Scotland. 6. Jenny Gilruth Thank you, Presiding Officer. To ask the Scottish Government how Midfaith and Glenrothes will benefit from the Tay and the Edinburgh city deals, respectively. Jenny Gilruth's question highlights a very unusual point in as far as Fife Council, of course, are partners in two different potential city deals. We have been very clear that they are welcome regional partners working together on long-term strategic proposals, which seek to deliver inclusive economic growth. For Midfaith and Glenrothes, it is natural that they should look both to Edinburgh and to Dundee as major centres of employment. We are very comfortable to see Fife working as part of both those city regions as proposals are developed. To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to the recently published report Export Statistics Scotland 2015. The Scottish Government very much welcomes the latest export figures for Scotland. They show that, despite challenging times for the global economy and excluding oil and gas, our total international exports increased by £1 billion in one year. We are working with our partners to deliver Scotland's trade and investment strategy in order to further improve our exporting performance and to ensure that we are seen to be an outward-facing nation that is open for business. Anas Sarwar, I think that the minister accepts and welcomes the findings of the Export Statistics Scotland, which also finds that 63 per cent of Scotland's exports go to the rest of the United Kingdom, and 16 per cent of Scotland's exports go to other parts of the European Union. Can the minister therefore explain his economic incoherence on why he believes that a reaction to leaving the EU single market is to have another referendum and attempt to leave the biggest and most important market for Scotland, which is the United Kingdom, which is four times the size? Does not this expose that it is not economic coherence that the minister is looking for, but is grudge, grievance and leaving the United Kingdom? I thank the applause from the Conservative benches for telling their own story. Yesterday, we saw political incoherence. As far as the Labour Party had three of its members voting for that withdrawal from the EU market, I do not know why Anas Sarwar wants to support that withdrawal from the EU market. We do not believe that we should withdraw from the EU market. We think that it is an extremely important market, eight times the size of the UK market, but we also believe that we should continue and expand our growth with the rest of the UK. Interestingly, for the rest of the UK, of course, the export more into Scotland than we do to the rest of the UK is an extremely important market. It is only a fool that we want to see that made as a choice. We think that we should continue to export to both. We should increase our exports. Our efforts are, as I mentioned in response to Jackie Baillie's question, designed towards achieving further exports. What the motivation is for somebody to promote or talk up a trade war between Scotland and the UK, I will leave to the economic incoherence of Anas Sarwar. We want to trade with everybody and do more of it. Ivan McKee I remind the chamber of my role as a parliamentary liaison officer to the cabinet secretary for the economy. For Scotland's economy to thrive and prosper, we need to grow exports to all our markets. Anyone who presents a false choice between exporting to the UK market is an alternative to the EU market fails to understand business or politics and does a great does service to Scottish business through the lack of ambition for our economy. Does the cabinet secretary agree with me that the proposals contained in Scottish Government's document, Scotland's place in Europe, enables Scotland to continue to trade with the UK and the EU single market on the same terms as today and offers businesses in the rest of the UK the opportunity to trade with the EU on favourable terms by basing themselves in Scotland? A win-win for all concerned. If the cabinet secretary heard the question. Can I say first of all that it is really refreshing to hear members diligently record their interests when they are speaking, a lesson that could be learned by others in this chamber as well? I would also reject any suggestion, as Ivan McKee's question does, any suggestion that Scotland should face a choice between trading with the rest of the UK. I mean the preposterous nature of the Conservative position, which is we want to trade more with everybody, but in certain circumstances we are not going to trade with Scotland. A nonsense that the Labour Party unfortunately has bought into, an absolute nonsense, there is no reason why Scotland should not increase its exports as it has been doing, a 4.4 per cent increase in relation to the rest of the UK, the same increase into the rest of the EU. You think that they would want to recommend and welcome that, but instead what we have got the same old thing talking Scotland down, we will continue to promote Scotland and to increase exports, and they can talk Scotland down. In yesterday's debate, the Scottish Government told us that there will be a hard Brexit resulting in a customs border between the UK and the EU. If that is true, what side of that customs border does Mr Brown want Scotland to be on? Does he want to be on the UK domestic market side, which accounts for two thirds of our domestic trade, or on the European side, which accounts for 16 per cent of our exports? He cannot have both, based on his own analysis of there being a customs border, he cannot have both, and based on the feedback from EU, senior officials of the EU, he cannot have both. Which one is it? Can I suggest that, if that is the message of the Conservative party, you cannot have both? Could you at least be honest with the people of Ireland and Northern Ireland? That is not what you are saying to them. You are saying explicitly, you are saying that you cannot have both. What is so different about the island of Ireland and Northern Ireland about Scotland? Of course, it is the case that we cannot have both. We would prefer, of course, and we have said this. We think that the UK should stay in a single market. If they do not want to do that, that has to be their decision. We want to stay in a single market. It is only the Tories that are talking about erecting borders. Theresa May herself has said, we want to buy your goods, we want to sell you ours, we want to trade with you as freely as possible and work with one another to make sure that we are all safer, more secure and more prosperous. The Scottish Government is looking after the interests of the people of Scotland in doing that, and I suggest that the Scottish Tories could learn a lesson and do the same thing as well. To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to the economy jobs and fair work committees report on the economic impact of leaving the EU. The Scottish Government welcomes the committee's report on the economic impact of leaving the EU. In particular, it notes its recommendations and conclusions. We have been clear about the risks that Brexit poses to the economy. That is why, in recent months, we have announced steps to invest an additional £100 million in capital projects in this financial year to help to stimulate growth. We are also establishing a new £500 million Scottish growth scheme to support in particular small and medium enterprises and taking forward a range of measures through the budget. The Scottish Government has always been clear that remaining in Europe is the best option for our future. In December, we published a detailed set of proposals in Scotland's place in Europe, our plan for dealing with the consequences of Brexit. That plan outlines our proposal that, first and foremost, the UK Government should negotiate for the UK as a whole to retain single market membership, but that if the UK Government will not do that, as indeed the Prime Minister has indicated, we urge the UK Government to put forward a differentiated approach so that Scotland can stay within the EU. John Mason, for that answer. I wonder if the cabinet secretary noticed in the report the concern of the committee reflecting a lot of witnesses that we had about the danger if EU workers are not any longer able to come and work. We, in fact, heard from a walker's shortbread, Angus soft fruits, denim seafoods, Scottish leather groups, Scottish engineering, Scottish care, all of whom were concerned about not having workers from the EU. Yes, I am very concerned about that. I would suggest that there are other sectors in addition to those that John Mason has mentioned. I had a meeting earlier on today with a number of substantial insurance companies very concerned about that. Of course, the higher education sector is very concerned. The 181,000 EU citizens who have chosen to make their home in Scotland enrich our culture but also strengthen our society and boost our economy. As the committee's report makes clear, those workers make a vital contribution across a range of sectors. That is why the Scottish Government is exploring all possible avenues for Scotland to retain the benefits of EU membership. For which Scotland voted, the Scottish Parliament's European and External Affairs Committee has also noted the important contribution of EU migrants to Scotland and has called for Scotland to be allowed its own separate immigration deal after Brexit. At the very least, can the UK Government, the Conservative Party in this place, not a least say that all EU citizens in Scotland should be given the guarantee that their place in Scotland is secure? When he gave evidence to the committee, the cabinet secretary said, we have responded to the situation but we have not changed the economic strategy. The committee's unanimous finding in Para 147 of the report is that, in light of the evidence heard on the changing economic landscape following the decision to leave the EU, we recommend that the Scottish Government's economic strategy should be reviewed, so will he now institute a review of his Government's economic strategy? What Richard Leonard neglects to mention, which I also said at the committee, is the actions that we take and the initiatives that we are involved in have to respond to the changing circumstance. An economic strategy that seeks to promote inclusive and sustainable growth is the right one for Scotland. Of course, that was examined during the course of the enterprise and skills review, so of course, as we are doing in terms of doubling the number of SDI representatives across the EU, increasing the number of offices that we have, increasing the trade promotion activity that we do, not least through the establishment of a border trade, of course we will respond differently to the circumstances, but the economic strategy is the right one. We move now to finance and constitution questions. To ask the Scottish Government what action it will take to support businesses that will see their non-domestic rates bills rise increase from April 2017. The Scottish Government has set out a highly competitive non-domestic rates package as part of the 2017-18 budget. That includes reducing the rates poundage by 3.7 per cent, 46.6 pence, expanding the small business bonus scheme so that it lifts 100,000 properties out of rates altogether, and raising the threshold for the large business supplement so that fewer than 10 per cent of properties pay it. We are not insisting on a revenue-neutral revaluation that would have meant setting a higher poundage. We are not proposing a nationwide transitional release scheme, as such a scheme would mean many smaller businesses funding reductions for a few large utility companies. However, councils can use the powers granted through the community empowerment act to apply further rates reductions locally, separate from the Government-funded release that I have just touched on. I thank the cabinet secretary for that answer. In other parts of the UK, Governments are putting in place transitional measures to support companies who are seeing their rates bills rise. However, the cabinet secretary will not do the same for Scotland and calling transitional arrangements a blunt instrument just in committee this morning. That will come as no help to the city nursery in my constituency, whose rates valuation will go from £38,000 to £64,000, with costs likely to be passed on to parents resulting in increasing childcare costs. Indeed, for nurseries across Edinburgh, bills are set to rise by 64 per cent, including 38 nurseries whose bills will more than double. Will he rethink his approach on transitional relief? I think that this is a very important issue, and I think that it is a fair question that is put raising individual circumstances. However, I do believe that it has to be put into context to understand why a transitional relief scheme is not appropriate. If I can cover the detail of this very important issue, the decisions by assessors are independent and such a rating of valuation will have been independent of government. Some values will have increased, some will have decreased and, of course, those who see an increase have that ability to appeal. It would be wrong to suggest that we are increasing business rates, but we are not. We are actually reducing business rates by some 3.7 per cent by not insisting on a revenue neutral revaluation. If I had insisted on an increase, it would have meant higher bills. However, taking together all the decisions around the changes to small business bonus, large business supplement and the poundage, that is the Government forgoing £155 million that we could have received if I did not take those decisions. Put further in context the national package of rates relief, that is £600 million. Specifically on transitional rates relief, I say again that if we had gone ahead with a transitional relief scheme that is automatic south of the border—it is a Government choice but it is automatic south of the border—what it would have meant is that many businesses across Scotland would be paying artificially higher business rates to compensate others—mainly big utility companies and some others. However, I felt that the balance is a fair and proportionate one to ensure that many businesses who are entitled to their rates relief and their rates going down actually see that happen. Over 70 per cent of Scottish properties will pay the same or less as a consequence of our decisions than they do currently. In addition to all those national reliefs that I have described, we also have the Ken Barkley review to look at all the issues in relation to business rates. I am very interested in the methodology of some of the determinations around that. However, the reason for identifying the community empowerment act is that it is right that, in local circumstances, councils feel empowered through the community empowerment act. Perthincan Ross has already used the power and they now have additional resources coming from the stage 1 budget to be able to apply local reliefs that might be right for local circumstances, but I will continue to engage with business. I apologise for the length of that answer, Presiding Officer, but I do believe that that is a very important and fair question to have been put. I think that businesses should hear of some of the support that is available to them to try to help them through. For some of them, what will be quite a difficult time, but when it is set in context, I think that all members can see why I have arrived at the decisions that I have. Julian Martin Thank you, Presiding Officer. Can the cabinet secretary tell me how many more businesses will benefit from different forms of rates relief this year compared to last year? As I touched upon in my detailed answer, more than half of all businesses will pay no rates whatsoever and more than 100,000 businesses for the first time will be exempt from business rates as a consequence of the small business bonus. Further on, the large business supplement, 8,000 businesses will be taken out of that rate as a consequence of our changing of the threshold to the figure of £51,000. Ross Thompson Thank you, Presiding Officer, and to declare an interest as a current and serving councillor at Aberdeen City Council. Given that the First Minister has refused to meet with council leaders and businesses in Aberdeen today, can the cabinet secretary update the chamber on the discussions that he has had with Aberdeen City Council, as well as a spotlight group that has raised the serious concerns of local businesses about the damage that will be caused to the regional economy by the rise in business rates? I hope that Ross Thompson's fairness reflects on the information that I have just given the chamber on the national situation. I am absolutely engaged with Aberdeen City and Shire and the Chamber of Commerce for what was described as a fiery meeting. It was a very constructive and helpful meeting. What businesses in the region asked us to do was for Scottish Government and local authorities to work together on this issue. That is absolutely what I have done. I have worked across party lines as well, engaged with the Administration of Aberdeen and Aberdeenshire councils, to explain the national situation, share information, as I have just covered, but also empower them and give them the support that they require to be able to design an appropriate local relief scheme as well. They have received that very positively. Let us set aside the political point scoring. There is a window of opportunity to work together to have an adequate scheme in place in advance of the financial year. I am quite confident that both councils are working on such a scheme, but my latest understanding is that Aberdeenshire may well be able to provide that before the city, but both councils that I am advised are working on it. The cabinet secretary may have seen the announcement from Scottish Renewables that a number of small renewables projects are set to see the rate rises of up to 650 per cent, putting into doubt the future investment in a number of smaller hydro, wind and solar projects. Can I get an assurance from the cabinet secretary that he is discussing with his minister, your colleague Paul Wheelhouse, that the rate rise is not cutting across the objectives that we all want to see in delivering on the climate change plan and on the energy strategy? I accept the point, and, although there has been an expansion of rural rate relief as well as small business bonus and there are also advantages around community ownership, absolutely the business minister and myself continue to discuss and engage on this specific issue. I am interested, again, on how local relief schemes may be able to be deployed to help individual projects, so absolutely all of that is still under active consideration. To ask the Scottish Government how much additional funding it will provide to North Ayrshire Council in 2017-18 to improve educational attainment. North Ayrshire is one of nine Scottish attainment challenge authorities and received over £3.5 million for 2016-17 to deliver an authority-wide plan focused on improving literacy, numeracy and health and wellbeing across our primary and secondary schools. Scottish attainment challenge authority plans for 2017-18 will be commissioned this month, and funding decisions will be made following a formal review process of those plans. Additionally, as the Deputy First Minister announced last week in 2017-18, schools in North Ayrshire will directly receive a total of £4,392,000 through the pupil equity fund. I thank the cabinet secretary for that answer. Does he agree that those additional resources will give headteachers greater flexibility to improve literacy, numeracy, health and wellbeing for pupils, particularly in some of our more deprived communities? Absolutely. Some people criticise the Government for our departure and giving resources direct to headteachers and to schools, but I think that it is a very welcome transformation and should help us to address the poverty-related attainment gap. To ask the Scottish Government what its position is on waving debt that is owed to it by public bodies in financial crisis. The Scottish Government sets out in the Scottish Public Finance Manual the conditions where lending money is appropriate and also the factors to be taken into account when considering the waving of debts. The key consideration for the Scottish Government is always the economic, efficient and effective stewardship of taxpayers' money. The cabinet secretary will know that NHS Tayside has said that its debt due to the Scottish Government this year will total £36 million. Can the cabinet secretary please tell Parliament if NHS Tayside is the only NHS board in debt to the Government, if this is the largest debt, what the implications are of waving the debt and if his Government might consider this? What I can say to Jenny Marra is that the NHS Tayside, like any public body, has an obligation to live within its means and we expect the board to take action to do so. Brokerage arrangements in place and repayment of brokerage will be agreed over the lifetime and a timeline that supports the stability for NHS Tayside and is fair and consistent across the NHS in Scotland. Murdo Fraser Thank you. NHS Tayside has omitted the need to find £214 million in savings over the next five years just to break even. What assurance can the cabinet secretary give my constituents that they will not see any diminishing in front-line services due to the desperate financial situation that has been allowed to develop in NHS Tayside? Murdo Fraser might want to tell his constituents that he voted against more money for the health services. He was trying to secure tax cuts for the rich, including reintroducing prescription charges, all at the same time as the Government is investing in the NHS front-line services, as well as enhancing the support for social care GPs and other professionals. However, we will engage with NHS Tayside, as you would expect, to ensure that they are in a strong position, and we can give them support to get through this period. To ask the Scottish Government when the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and the Constitution last spoke with the Scottish Fiscal Commission. I held a meeting with Lady Rice, the chair of the Scottish Fiscal Commission and Commissioner Campbell Leif on 9 December 2016, at which the commission presented the findings of its scrutiny of the forecast underpinning the Scottish Government's draft budget for 2017-18. In addition, I spoke to Lady Rice by telephone on Friday 27 January this year. This week, the Fraser of Allander Institute raised concerns about the way in which the so-called additional money that was announced in last week's budget was found in such a short period of time after the draft budget and raised some important issues about the overall budget process and options for reform. Following the regulations to expand the functions of the Scottish Fiscal Commission, which is due to come into force in April 2017, what assurances can the Cabinet Secretary give that Parliament will receive forecasts in sufficient time to ensure that members can provide proper scrutiny to future budget processes? I agree that we need to review the processes of the Parliament, and that is why I absolutely supported the budget review group. I think that there are a number of processes that are worthy of revision, partly because of how the functions of the Parliament have changed the new powers, the timescales coming from the Chancellor's statements as well. The budget process is undoubtedly complex. I think that all members recognise that, and we should all reflect on that together. However, the Scottish Fiscal Commission has certainly confirmed to me that the assessments that we have made are reasonable to inform our budget position, and they certainly have not complained to me about the lack of time to do their work. I look forward to moving into their statutory function this year. However, I say again that I am embracing the review with an open mind. I think that all members should do that as well, so that we can arrive at a better process for our budget, and I am happy to engage with political parties on that. To ask the Scottish Government how many businesses will receive support from the expansion of the small business bonus scheme. As I mentioned earlier, more than 100,000 properties will be lifted out of non-domestic rates for 2017-18, due to the expansion of the small business bonus scheme. Thank you, cabinet secretary, for that answer. Could you share with Parliament what other policies are in place to give SMEs a competitive advantage? The economy secretary has mentioned the Scottish growth scheme, but there is also further advice and support, improved access to finance, help for exports and support around innovation and entrepreneurship. There is also the prospect of the workforce development fund that Mr Hepburn is taking forward. Jackie Baillie For those who are not in the small business bonus scheme, times are indeed tough. England and Wales have transitional relief schemes. Scotland used to have a transitional relief scheme for every previous revaluation. Contrary to what the cabinet secretary said, it is not just utilities that are affected. We have heard of nurseries, tourism businesses who tell in my constituency that we will need to pay off staff. If we bring him examples where there is a real impact, can I urge the cabinet secretary to consider transitional relief? I really do hate to embarrass Jackie Baillie by pointing out her inaccuracies, but last time there was a revaluation there was not a transitional relief scheme either because of the assessment around who would be the winners and the losers. You are not actually correct, and you can keep heckling me if you like, Jackie Baillie, but your question is, if you bring me further information, will I look at options? Of course I will. I am a very engaging cabinet secretary. I like working with people to find solutions. My solutions nationally involve lowering the poundage, expanding small business bonus and taking more people out of the large business supplement, advising people how to appeal if that is the appropriate thing to do, reducing the tax take because of not insisting on a revenue and neutral revaluation and supporting local authorities to implement local rates relief schemes where that is appropriate, but I would say to Jackie Baillie and a number of Labour authorities around the country that you should look seriously at the extra resources that local authorities now have, the empowerment and the enablement that exists, and if it is appropriate to have a further local rates relief scheme that you implement rather than simply carping from the sidelines, you have a responsibility, you should take that responsibility, as I have done nationally, to support businesses. If we had just implemented a national transitional rates relief scheme, it would have meant that many people's bills that have been held are artificially high to pay for others, particularly the big utility firms. I really do think that the Opposition needs to know their facts on this very significant matter. The small business bonus scheme is particularly valuable in rural areas where there are more small and medium-sized businesses. Can the finance secretary explain what impact the rural rates relief could have on Dumfries and Galloway? As well as the range of relief that I have touched upon, what I wanted to do is make sure that we were able to match what was happening south of the border in terms of rural rates relief so that we can catch as many as possible to give maximum support. That was the intention of matching rural rates relief as it relates to the position south of the border. It really does put us in a position where, particularly for smaller businesses, we have the most competitive rates relief regime across the island. Can I ask the Scottish Government how rural deprivation is taking into account in its funding allocations? The Scottish Government recognises the importance of delivering services for rural areas, which is clearly reflected as a priority within the programme for government. In particular, indicators used for the allocation of funding to NHS boards and local authorities take account of rural deprivation. For example, morbidity and life circumstances is a component of the formula that I use for allocating funding to NHS boards. That component adjusts for deprivation. It is calculated for small-area populations of between 500 and 1,000 residents and is therefore able to identify pockets of deprivation in rural as well as urban areas. The formula also takes account of the higher costs of delivering services in rural and remote areas. Richard Lochhead. I commend the additional focus on tackling poverty and inequalities in Scotland issues, which have been exacerbated by Tory Government policy, according to the recent resolution foundation report just last week. However, he is aware that rural deprivation can be quite challenging to identify. I know that there is an increase in targeting by the Scottish Government on the data zones in the top 15 per cent of areas that are identified under the Scottish index of multiple deprivation. Areas such as Murray do not qualify in the top 15 per cent, as do other areas in Scotland. Therefore, can I have an assurance that there is a safety mechanism in place that identifies rural deprivation, which is difficult to measure at times, but must absolutely be supported in the same way that other communities are as well? Yes, I do believe that there are such mechanisms in safeguards such as through the local government finance methodology. Also, if you take the attainment fund on a school basis, the coverage of that fund to tackle inequality has reached every local authority in Scotland. Audit Scotland has reported in the past that many people living in Murray are classified as being deprived in terms of their ability to access services. What is the Scottish Government doing to address that issue? I think that eligibility is a very fair point. There was a time pre-administration when funds were targeted on an area-by-area basis on postcode and just areas of multiple deprivation. It could be poor and potentially eligible, but living in the wrong areas to get support and access for services. We changed that in many of our funding streams to target more support based on your eligibility. Are you less well off? Should you be entitled to services rather than living in a certain postcode? That is a good practical example of how Governments change policy to genuinely target need rather than just a data-zone approach. It has to be a balance of targeted interventions and universality, where eligibility is taken into account. Thank you, Presiding Officer. The cabinet secretary may consider himself engaging, but he failed miserably to engage with any of the four brief points in my supplementary question. I would like to ask your advice on what is the point of supplementary questions in Parliament if the minister simply answers again the question that was tabled. If I can remind Derek Mackay that my questions were, is NHS Tayside's debt to the Scottish Government the largest debt? What are the implications of waiving the debt? Will his Government consider doing this, and is it the only board in Scotland that has such a debt to the Scottish Government? If the cabinet secretary cannot answer this question in Parliament, maybe he will be kind enough to write to me and engage with the points then. Thank you, Ms Barrett. That is not a point of order. However, she has made her point, and I am sure that she is perfectly capable of putting down written questions or putting them in a letter to the minister who will consider them. We are now going to move on to the next item of business, which is a debate in the name of Jamie Hepburn on Job Center Plus. I will just take a few seconds to change seats.