 Y dyfodol ar gwybodaeth y bydd y bwysig iawn o'i ddim yn rhoi hyn arall, yn fwycfaint i ddod, o ddim yn gwneud â ddim yn gwybodaeth i'ch cyfnodau, ac yn wneud â cwestiwyr blo gynllunio yng Nghymru. Felly, yn ddod. Felly, ond rydw i'ch gêmethau o'r Sgolfyniad, ar y cyfrif icíchol fwrdd nifer o gwaith o'r fitnid gwrthog cyfrynddog ar y Grangemouth bwysig iawn. Mae'r cyfrif i'ch cyfrifiusio bwysig iawn ar gwrthog, energy resilience, skilled manufacturing and high value employment. As we would do with any business of such significant Scottish ministers and officials routinely engaged with GrangeMouth operators. As for the member's reference to the refinery business, it would not be at all appropriate for me to comment on any media speculation regarding the potential commercial matters of any one company specifically. However, the GrangeMouth cluster, with its world-leading engineering experience, expertise, assets and low-carbon manufacturing potential, should play an important role in our net zero economy, and we continue to work closely with the industry and key businesses there to help harness that potential. As you just mentioned, the GrangeMouth refinery is one of the most strategically important employers in Scotland with hundreds of staff across the site. They will understandably be alarmed by the prospect of restructuring at the refinery. What discussions has the Scottish Government had with INEOS about the retention of jobs at the site following those reports? Has the GrangeMouth future industry board convened to respond to that worrying development? I must thank the member for the question, but I reiterate that, which I stated in my previous answer, which is that it is not appropriate for me, Scottish ministers, to comment on what is media speculation regarding the commercial operations of a single organisation or company. However, the member is right that the GrangeMouth cluster, skills and workforce are exceptionally important. The refinery and surrounding businesses in the GrangeMouth cluster provide for a major source of highly-skilled manufacturing jobs and world-leading engineering expertise. Those jobs make for tremendous potential, supporting a just transition to our net zero economy. As I said, Scottish Government ministers and officials continue to engage with industry and businesses at the complex to foster that potential. The minister recognises that GrangeMouth is important. GrangeMouth accounts for 4 per cent of Scottish GDP and 8 per cent of Scotland's manufacturing. As a critical national infrastructure, it supplies two thirds of petrol and diesel in Scotland, as well as the jet fuels for airports. A change in outlook for the refinery's future has wide-ranging and wide-reaching repercussions. What assessment has the Scottish Government made of the economic impact of potential restructuring, as well as the impact on energy resilience and fuel supply? I thank the member for her question, except I have to point out once again that it is based on media speculation. It is not appropriate for Scottish ministers to comment on the terms of that or the implications of it. However, I am keen to stress to the member and to the chamber that future-proofing, the vital industrial hub, and working in partnership with industry is our objective and will help to support a long-term, sustainable and vibrant future for GrangeMouth for all those who live and work there and for all the reasons that the member set out in her question. I am aware of course, and it has been mentioned already, that the GrangeMouth Future Industry Board, and I think that we can all agree, the hub that is the skilled manager of facturing and high-value employment in GrangeMouth. However, can the minister outline a little more detail around the role that the GrangeMouth Future Industry Board will play in ensuring that GrangeMouth, regardless of any restructuring, continues to play to ensure a key part in the transition to net zero? The member raises an important question, which I have to say will hopefully answer the part that Tess White raised regarding the board, which I neglected to answer previously, so apologies for that. However, the Scottish Government established the GrangeMouth Future Industry Board in recognition of our continued commitment to the cluster, both today and in the future in our net zero economy. The board brings together key partners and decision makers to work with industry and to actively plan for that all-important just transition for the complex. In doing that, we are seeking to unlock investment that boosts the innovation longevity and competitiveness of the site. In terms of next steps, the board will initiate and lead on the design of a just transition plan for the GrangeMouth Industrial Cluster. In line with the principles of a just transition, the plan for the complex will be built up collectively and will be built in consultation with a wide range of invested stakeholders and that will include industry. I grew up in GrangeMouth and know how important a just transition will be for workers, the planet and the communities that surround the GrangeMouth refinery. The community needs the Scottish Government to do everything that it can to deliver a just transition. Does the minister agree that the future of GrangeMouth depends on a just transition away from fossil fuels, which is led by the local communities and trade unions, who must be involved in future decisions around the plant and should be represented on the GrangeMouth future industry board? I thank the member for the question and I know that her connections with the area will make her feelings here very acute. The Scottish Government's position on the need for the fastest possible just transition to net zero is clear. GrangeMouth, as I have said with its skills, engineering expertise, manufacturing potential and assets, could play a very key role in enabling Scotland's just transition to net zero. To help realise that, as I said, we recently established the GrangeMouth future industry board. As I have said to Michelle Thompson in terms of next steps, the board will lead on the design of a just transition plan for the cluster. That will be built in line with just transition principles. As for trades union dialogue, the Scottish Government will always engage closely with trade unions, as a matter of course where their interests are concerned. In advance of asking our questions, I draw members' attention to my register of interests as an owner of our rented property in North Lanarkshire. To ask the Scottish Government what preparations it is making to support people in Scotland, in light of the reported comments by the chief executive of Scottish Power, warning that 10 million UK homes could potentially be in fuel poverty this winter. Energy costs lie of course at the heart of the cost of living crisis, and this Government is committed to doing everything within our powers to support those who need it. That includes the £150 cost of living award to support households with higher fuel costs, but a further £10 million being provided to continue our fuel insecurity fund. We are also set to invest almost £770 million this year to tackle cost of living pressures through family benefits and other unique social security payments. Crucially, we are also committed to investment of at least £1.8 billion over the next five years on heat and insulation for Scotland's homes and buildings, with programmes already being enhanced and increased. More needs to be done, and powers relating to energy markets are set at UK level. We have repeatedly urged the UK Government to take urgent and decisive action to support households in the immediate and longer term, such as a one-off windfall tax on companies benefiting from significantly higher profits during the pandemic and the energy crisis and the temporary removal of that on energy bills. We are actively engaging with the sector and stakeholders such as the Scottish Energy Advisory Board, which the chief executive of Scottish Power is a member to explore what more can be done. We believe that all four nations should be involved in planning to address the crisis that affects people throughout the UK. Mark Griffin. I thank the minister for that answer. The first part of the solution to rocket and fuel costs is to put money in the pockets of the people who need it most. Scottish Labour had a plan to do that but was ignored by the Government in favour of mirror and the unfair UK scheme. The second part of that is to make people's homes as cheap to heat as soon as humanly possible. Last week, the existing homes alliance set out a framework of practical financial support to decarbonise our heating systems, but the energy cap will go up in just four and a half months. The underlying principle to reduce heat demand ahead of time is even more urgent this year. Will the Government come before Parliament, before recess, and set out how many homes it can insulate before this winter? I am sure that Mr Griffin knows that we already have a very active programme of work in that area. We have already announced in response to the cost of living crisis this year a significant expansion of the crisis. We have boosted support through our long-standing programmes that have already supported more than 150,000 households at risk of fuel poverty. We are widening the eligibility criteria of the £55 million warm home to Scotland fuel poverty programme, which will provide an offer of support to more than 7,500 households this year. We are increasing the level of funding for individual fuel-poor households through the £64 million local authority-led area-based schemes. We are expanding the Home Energy Scotland advice service to help households to keep their homes warmer and reducing bills. The capacity to support an extra 12,000 households a year is doubling the offer to vulnerable households. Mark Griffin is right that energy efficiency is one of the most urgent things that we need to do, so I hope that he will join me in calling on the UK to revise its woefully inadequate energy security strategy, which said nothing at all about energy efficiency. That was indeed a glaring omission in the UK Government's part that I hope it rectifies as soon as possible. However, the insulation loan equity scheme that has been reported has left homeowners out of pocket and left solicitors looking at those agreements absolutely shocked. The number of homes that are warmer homes in Scotland has helped with energy efficiency measures being installed has fallen every year since 2016. Just two weeks ago, the Government, in our response to a parliamentary question, has admitted that the Home Energy Scotland marketing scheme has wound up for now. Will the Government reboot its campaign, ramp up direct engagement with every single home owner and landlord in Scotland, so that householders can get the financial support to make improvements before this winter? As I said in my previous answer, I have given several examples of where we have and are continuing to do expanding not only the eligibility but the scale of what we are doing to support households who are facing fuel poverty and to support all of Scotland in the transition to renewable heat, as well as high levels of energy efficiency. Mark Griffin knows that we are committed to doing that on a faster scale and pace as we can, but to achieve that throughout the whole of Scotland is a multi-decade task and cannot be compressed into the space of a few months. I am quite happy to write to the member with any other information that he requires about the ambitious programme of work that we have in this area, but I hope that we will find that there are colleagues on the Scottish Labour benches who will work with us constructively, not demanding the impossible but pushing us to go as far and as fast as we can. That is what we are committed to doing, and I hope that we have the support of the whole chamber in doing that. Does the minister agree that, although the Scottish Government can use our devolved social security powers to put more money in people's pockets and mitigate the harms of escalating fuel poverty to a point, together with signposting assistance available through organisations such as Citrus Energy and Ayrshire, it is the UK Government that holds the levers for delivering meaningful support to citizens. If they fail to do just that, they send a strong message to all struggling families that they just do not get it or they just do not care. It is very clearly a matter of fact that the powers to regulate energy markets remain reserved. For example, the proposal for a £1,000 cut to energy bills that came forward from the Scottish Power Chief Executive in his recent interview is only deliverable with the powers that rest with the UK Government. We have repeatedly called on the UK Government to take other actions, including a temporary cut on energy bills through the VAT, reviewing the levy costs on bills, action on the warm home discounts and trying to create a four nations discussion to develop an effective response to the energy bill increases. I am disappointed, and the Scottish Government is disappointed that the UK Government has failed to support hard-pressed households and failed to engage with us on a multilateral basis to achieve more such as could be achieved with a one-off windfall tax on excessive profits, whether from the oil and gas industry or anywhere else. That is the scale of work that is needed, and I hope that the UK Government feels that it is not too late for them to change direction and listen to such proposals. Given the failure of the UK Government, even in today's Queen's speech, to support those unfixed incomes with the renders rising the cost of living and energy, and given that 40 per cent of pensioners entitled to pension credit do not claim it, that is currently £182.60 a week if you are single, £278.78 a year a couple, with the Treasury keeping over £300 million a year in unclaimed pension credit in Scotland alone, and UK-wide it rises to almost £1.8 billion in unclaimed benefits. Does the minister agree with me that the level of money retained by the Treasury in unclaimed benefits is a disgrace and that it should direct its energies into helping people to claim those benefits to which they are entitled? That would at least give them some help in meeting those living costs. I think that Christine Grahame is not the only one who was slightly surprised at the lack of action in the Queen's speech today on the cost of living crisis, but she is also right to point to unclaimed and underclaimed benefits as a very obvious thing that can be done to maximise household incomes of making sure that people are accessing the money that they are entitled to. It is a disgrace that the figure that I have here is £1.7 billion, but if it is £1.8 billion, I stand to be corrected, sitting in government coffers at UK level instead of in the pockets and purses of pensioners who need it so badly. That Government will continue to place an emphasis on income maximisation schemes, and there is a great deal that we can do to support people to have the information that they need about the benefits that they are entitled to, and I hope that the UK Government will take similar action. To ask the Scottish Government what action it will take to provide local support to new mothers who require a specialist mental health bed with their baby following recent reports that many are having to travel hundreds of miles in order to receive the treatment that they need. All women who require a specialist mental health bed with their baby are able to access mother and baby unit provision. Mother and baby units provide treatment and support to approximately 115 patients per year. The treatment provided by those units is highly specialist care to the small number of women and their infants who experience severe perinatal mental health difficulties and require more intensive support than can be provided in the community. Mother and baby units are open to all women across Scotland based on clinical need and not geography. We recognise that there are barriers associated with receiving treatment away from home, and that is why we opened the mother and baby unit family fund, which supports partners and families with the cost of travel, accommodation and other expenses whilst visiting a mother and baby at an MBU. We are currently undertaking an options appraisal, which will evaluate potential options for increasing mother and baby unit capacity. We have a live consultation open until 31 May to hear from parents, partners, families and practitioners from across Scotland, and that is on the Scottish Government website. We have been closely working with colleagues on health boards in the north of Scotland to support the development of community services in their areas so that the right support can be provided at the time that it is needed. In recent months, both Highland and Grampian launched their community perinatal mental health teams, which will improve access to specialist treatment. There are no dedicated inpatient mental health beds for new mothers north of Livingstone. Shetland and Livingstone have a contractual agreement for perinatal mental health services, and my constituents are expected to take a long journey by air or sea with their new bond. Does the minister agree with the Royal College of Psychiatrists in Scotland that there is a postcode lottery facing new mothers when it comes to perinatal services? As I pointed out to the chamber in my first answer, this is very specialist care, accessed by 115 mothers in their babies in the recent year. We are looking to see what expansion is required, but one of the things that we need to do and are doing is ensuring that the right community support is in place across the country so that we can provide that support in the community where that is what is required to ensure that services in the north of Scotland are as good as they can be. What I would say to Ms Wishart is to encourage her constituents in Shetland to respond to the current consultation, which is extremely important, and we will take cognisance of what people across the country have to say about those services. I thank the minister for that answer and I will encourage my constituents to do just that. The P&J has been campaigning to raise the issue of perinatal mental health services with one report highlighting the difficulty faced by partners travelling to support their loved one and to see their new born baby. It is easy to see how costs can rack up for families as grandparents and other children make visits. Each family is different and healthcare provision should strive for equitable support, where there are big distances for travel involved. The maximum claim-back costs for the family fund is £500. That is almost like one airfare from Shetland, and that money should cover travel subsistence and accommodation. Will the Scottish Government look to increase the criteria and financial provision provided to families engaged in perinatal mental health services, especially those who live furthest from services? Our first aim is to strengthen community services so that women do not have to access the mother and baby units unless that is entirely necessary. I hope that Beatrice Wishart will support us in our efforts in that regard. In terms of the costs for visiting mother and baby units, as I outlined in my first response, we have put in place the mother and baby unit family fund. I am more than willing to have further discussions with Ms Wishart about the experience of her constituents in accessing that fund and seeing and looking to see whether we can do anything else in that regard, so I am happy to correspond or to meet with Ms Wishart on that particular issue. The minister, of course, is aware of the reports that the Health, Social Care and Sport Committee did on perinatal mental health and my own personal interest in perinatal mental health in Grampian. Can the minister outline further how increased community support for new mothers perinatal mental health is improving outcomes from them and their babies, and outline any new measures that have been taken to identify and treat the symptoms of ill mental health early in new mums and mums to be particularly in those rural areas? I thank Ms Martin for her question and I recognise her interest in that, not only as the convener of the committee who had the inquiry but also as a north-east MSP. I know that she has been in contact with a Latin and mothers group, as have I. The Government is putting in additional funding for community specialist mental health services in every health board in Scotland and in patient services for women and families with the highest level of need. Also investment in the third sector across 33 organisations providing perinatal mental health support to women and families and funding to support the voices of lived experience. The voices of lived experience have been vital in helping us to formulate our current consultation on how we move forward with perinatal and infant mental health in this country. Once again, I encourage everyone out there who has an interest to respond to that consultation. I applaud the work of Latinam and other women's groups across Scotland for putting this issue to the fore.