 Ysgriffwyr yng Nghymru yn y gwaith o'r ob叔dd i chi'w arddangosig a hynny, a ddim gallu gyffredinol yn rhan o'u'r zaun o'r hyfforddau sy'n gallu gweithio. Ysgriffwyr yng Nghymru yn y gwaith o'r gwaith o'r cyffredinol gynationol, roeddwn yn ei dynne o'r ddaeth y ffordd a'u cadw o'r cychwyn iawn o'r ddeu! Can I thank the minister for his answer? Can I first of all ask him whether he agrees with me that it is entirely unfair that we should treat our veterans who were injured before 2005 in a different manner than those who were injured after 2005. Can I also ask him, what work the government is doing to explore how much it will cost to rectify this anomaly? I thank you, Emma Cotosh, for bringing this issue to the chamber. We all owe our veterans a additive gratitude, particularly those who have been injured in the line of duty. Taking the second part of his question, first, the Government is undertaking work to assess the financial impact on local authorities on a number of proposals around care charges, including this particular issue.フarongi a'u ddillusion ar ardillwyr yn dddillusion gyda'r ddillusion ac ar gael i'ch gael ei ddaeth o ddillusion, ac mae eich gael ei groes iawn i gynghoriwyr gymhysgol yr yna yn cyffredin o'r rhyddyg mento o gael ei ddaeth. A gael ei ddaeth i gael ei ddillusion a'u ddillusion ac mae eich gael ei ddillusion i'r ddillusion ac mae eich gael ei ddillusion i gynghoriwyr. John Scott. Mae ydych yn Barkam ni'i ddillusio edy-dillusio a'i schryfl yn gael eu ddoedd of the unfairness and the financial treatment of those wounded in the service of their country before 2005 and after 2005, which is clearly in breach of the armed forces government. What discussions has he had with the British Government, with COSLA, with the armed forces organisations such as the British Legion, and is he minded to, and if he is minded to address this situation, when will he be able to do so? I thank Mr Scott for the question. I'm going back to my initial answer to Mr Magnus. We are actively exploring this issue with COSLA. Would he be happy to speak to a range of stakeholders? I do recognise the concerns that have been raised by the British Legion and Poppy Scotland. I do go back to the point that I made earlier that this change was not as a consequence of a decision made by this Government. It was the UK Government that changed the terms of support for those who have been injured in the line of battle. To ask the Scottish Government what information it has on the average length of time taken to process applications for protecting vulnerable groups scheme membership for people seeking employment in the care sector. Minister, Fiona McLeod. Mr McDonald asked specifically about the care sector. Information about the sectors from which PVG applications are submitted is not gathered by Disclosure Scotland. PVG applications are processed as they arrive, and no application is given priority over any other. Disclosure Scotland's service level agreement is to produce 90 per cent of all types of disclosures for a correctly completed application with no further inquiries within 14 calendar days. That is measured from the day that the application is received to the day of dispatch. For the week ending 15 February 2015, Disclosure Scotland processed 99.9 per cent of applications within 14 calendar days. I am grateful to the minister for that answer. Some organisations in the care sector in Aberdeen, where I represent, have indicated that the length of time being taken to process PVGs can lead to individuals seeking alternative employment, perhaps in an area where a PVG is not required. Will the minister examine whether there are issues that are affecting the care sector specifically and whether some form of fast-tracking may be appropriate, particularly in areas such as Aberdeen, in which there are difficulties in recruitment and retention to the care sector? As I said in my earlier answer, in some instances it is necessary for Disclosure Scotland to contact other agencies to determine if there will be any inclusions on the individual's PVG scheme record from those sources. When that happens, the period of time to process a PVG disclosure can be longer. Disclosure Scotland closely monitors the performance of external information suppliers and works to ensure that such requests are fulfilled as quickly as possible in the interests of both the applicant and the prospective employer. If Mr MacDonald wants to get in touch with the numbers from particular organisations in his area, I will inquire further. To ask the Scottish Government when it last met the NHS Lanarkshire and what matters were discussed. Thank you, minister. Ministers and Government officials regularly meet with representatives from all health boards, including NHS Lanarkshire, to discuss matters of importance to local people. Bob Doris? Thank you, minister, for that answer. I am concerned about the proposals and the quality of current consultation that has been conducted by NHS Lanarkshire in relation to GP out-of-hours services that will see the end of the use of Victoria and Firmary in Glasgow. Can the minister confirm that new health board boundaries need not be a barrier to the continued use of the Victoria and Firmary, although I personally would urge NHS Lanarkshire to reconsider its current proposals? Does the minister agree with me that any final decision by NHS Lanarkshire should be delayed until the Scottish Government completes its national review of out-of-hours services? I thank Bob Doris for his question. I appreciate that there is concern locally around the boards review of out-of-hours services. All health boards keep their services under review to ensure that they are of the highest quality. I am aware that NHS Lanarkshire is carrying out a review of out-of-hours services that started on 6 January and is due to conclude on 6 April. I have been assured that all stakeholders will continue to be fully engaged and involved as this important work has taken forward. The Scottish Government is lazing with NHS Lanarkshire and is being kept up-to-date with the progress of their review, and I would expect that the outcomes of their review to be in line with any recommendations arising from the Scottish Government's recent national out-of-hours service review. To ask the Scottish Government how it assists farmers who wish to remove silt from riverbeds. The Scottish Government and the Scottish Environment Protection Agency and Association with the National Farmers Union of Scotland have been proactive in developing guidance to inform farmers what actions can be taken on removal of silt from riverbeds, and that guidance is available. I thank the cabinet secretary for his response. I have been contacted by a number of east pasture farmers. I noticed a view reflected in other parts of the region that I represent who have been affected by flooding, who are concerned that watercourses are silted up and they have great difficulty when it comes to removing the silt and other debris, and they feel that the approach from SIPA is still overly bureaucratic. I wonder what more the Scottish Government can do with SIPA to try and simplify this process. I would urge the farmers in Pershire to meet the local SIPA officials and discuss their concerns, because the guidance, which was issued early last year, was intended to address his very concerns and explain that action can be taken without applying for a licence, albeit that there are some rules that have to be adhered to, but that is clearly later in the guidance that was made available to all farmers and NFU members. If there are on-going issues, I am happy to listen to what they may be, and I would ask, as I said before, for the farmers to meet the local SIPA officials to take them forward. I can assure Murdo Fraser that I am very familiar with his issues, representing my constituency, which has had a number of flooding issues over the years, and the farmers, likewise, have welcomed that guidance that was issued. To ask the Scottish Government what its position is on the implementation of minimum staffing levels for all professions in hospitals, as recommended by the former chief nursing officer, Ann Derby, and Professor Derek Mellon. We are absolutely clear that quality of care for Scotland's people comes first, demonstrating our full commitment to achieving the best possible healthcare outcomes. Scotland's people benefit from an NHS workforce of the highest quality and the highest staffing levels across our NHS than ever before. To ensure enough professional staff at the right levels are available when and where they need to be, NHS boards in Scotland are required to have workforce planning arrangements in place. In doing so, they are required to use evidence-based workload and workforce planning tools, rather than fixed staffing ratios to assess numbers of nurses and where they should be deployed most effectively. I thank the minister for that answer, but will she consider seriously all the recommendations? I think that what was a very important editorial in the Journal of the Royal College of Physicians of Edinburgh and one of the central recommendations of that editorial was, of course, that there should be minimum staffing levels for all professions within hospital settings based upon best evidence. That should be staffing levels that cover all hours of the day and night. I think that there is a consensus among many health experts that that is the way forward, so will the Government give serious consideration to it? Of course, the Scottish Executive Nurses Director endorsed the views that are taken in Scotland as other healthcare professionals, including Sir Robert Francis, Sir Bruce Keog and Professor Berwick, who all believe that evidence-based tools are the best way. In Scotland, we do not talk about minimum staffing levels. We speak about safe staffing levels. We do not speak of nurse-to-bed ratios. Nurses do not nurse beds, they nurse patients. Numbers of staff are determined according to the clinical needs of patients, not according to ratio level or numbers. As I said, in Scotland, we used evidence-based tools to determine that, not a one-size-fits-all-fixed staffing ratio. Given the commitment to preventative measures, I wonder if the minister could say that, in the long term, the hope would be to move resources out less in hospital and more in the community. Of course, that is the policy of the Scottish Government, and with the implementation of the integrated health and social care, that is entirely the way in which we would want to move. With a near doubling of numbers of children being admitted to hospitals for self-harm in some parts of Scotland, compounded by the often-missed 18-week children and adolescent mental health treatment target, can the minister advise what action she is taking to effectively and efficiently administer NHS staffing resources for CAMH services? As the member knows, that is the responsibility of my colleague Jamie Hepburn, who has recently announced £15 million of extra resources for mental health issues. To ask the Scottish Government what its position is on the privacy concerns raised by the open rights group regarding the proposed amendments to the national health service central register Scotland regulations 2006. The Scottish Government has an unequivocal commitment to protecting and respecting the privacy of individuals. The Government is opposed to ID cards and does not propose to introduce any new national database. The measures on which we are consulting, which would result in limited additional verification and sharing of data from the NHS central register, will improve the accuracy of key statistics on Scotland's population and on migration, ensure that public sector organisations can verify who they are dealing with and to deliver the right services to the right people, support the tracing of missing persons, ensure that individuals who wish to can securely access online public services through the initiative of my account and accurately identify Scottish taxpayers, which is relevant to protecting Scottish tax revenues and so protecting the delivery of public services. We will consider the responses to the consultation to ensure that the measures that are implemented and which will be scrutinised by Parliament adhere to our commitment to protect the personal data and the privacy of individuals. Thank you. I welcome the tone of the Deputy First Minister's opening comments there. The SNP in opposition did quite rightly join with others in campaigning against the ID cards legislation, which would have seen every citizen given a unique reference number linked to a central database, linked to a card scheme, controlling access to public services and sharing data across Government. Why, then, are we now seeing a proposal for a system that will give every citizen a unique reference number, linked to a central database, linked to a card scheme, sharing information across Government and controlling access to public services? Why is this a subject of a low-profile consultation rather than a national debate? The proposal is the subject to a consultation, which will conclude in about a week's time, and the Government will consider the outcome of that consultation exercise. In relation to some, I am glad that Mr Harvie welcomed the tone of my remarks, because the tone of my remarks are designed to provide the reassurance to Parliament that the Government's position is absolutely crystal clear that we are opposed to ID cards and we do not propose to introduce any new national database. The national health service central register has existed in Scotland since the 1950s. Every citizen has an individual national health service number, a kind number, which internationally is viewed as one of the strengths and foundations of the management of clinical care within the national health service. What the Government is doing here is taking forward the consultation on a number of limited additional verification conditions. I can assure Patrick Harvie and Parliament, and any concerned members of the public, that the Government will be testing any reactions against its fundamental opposition to ID cards and its determination not to create any new national database. Neil Findlay. However, many people have real concerns about the civil liberties implications of these proposals to change the register. However, most people, including I suspect many in this chamber, including myself, do not know enough about it. Will the minister bring forward a debate in Government time so that we can discuss the proposals in full? Mr Findlay will forgive me if I do not prescribe reading material to him on a weekly basis, but the Scottish Government consultation has been available for members of the public and members of Parliament to contribute to. It closes on 25 February, so if Mr Findlay wishes to make a submission to that consultation, we will happily consider the issues. As for a debate, let us get the order of these things correct. We are having a consultation where we are inviting people's opinions. Any regulations that come forward will have to be scrutinised by Parliament, and Parliament will have its opportunity to consider all of those questions. If members have any concerns about those issues, I encourage members to engage with the issues that have been raised in the consultation, which are fundamentally about ensuring that we are able to support the direction of public services to those who require those public services and to ensure that an existing national health register, which has existed since the 1950s and which is the strength of our ability to deliver the administration of clinical care to individuals in the country, is enhanced in any way that we can. Those tests about protecting the privacy of individuals and respecting the privacy of individuals are at the heart of any decisions that the Government will take on that matter. The Scottish Government, when the Cabinet Secretary for Justice was first aware that Police Scotland intended to consult on a possible merger of A and B divisions. I was briefed on those proposals in early December. I will expect Police Scotland to fully take account of the views that were expressed during the consultation and reflect on the proposals in light of those views. The Secretary will be aware that A division of Police Scotland is responsible for policing not only Scotland's third city but also the entire offshore oil industry across the North Sea. Will he, as a responsible minister, reject any change proposed by Police Scotland that could leave Aberdeen as the only major city in Western Europe without a dedicated police division or without any responsible senior police officer of the rank of chief superintendent or above? As the member is aware, there has been an extensive consultation undertaken by Police Scotland on this issue. There has also been an element of consultation taken forward by the Scottish Police Authority, who is responsible for scrutinising the actions of Police Scotland on this issue. I have discussed this issue with the chief constable this week, who has assured me that he will consider the views that are being submitted to Police Scotland as part of that consultation process. Likewise, I would also expect the Scottish Police Authority to fully scrutinise the proposals that are being taken forward by Police Scotland and to consider how they then respond to the consultation results themselves. Thank you, Presiding Officer, to ask the Scottish Government where ministers last met representatives of NHS borders and what issues were discussed. The Scottish ministers meet regularly with representatives of the board to discuss matters of interest to the people of the borders. I thank the minister for that response. I very much welcome the Scottish Government's recent decision to increase NHS spending by £282 million. That was only made possible, of course, by spending decisions made by the Conservative-led UK Government, which resulted in the SNP having £300 million extra to spend in 2015-16. Whilst the average increase across Scotland is 3.4%, NHS borders are only getting 2.4%. Can the minister explain why NHS borders has been shortchanged by £1.7 million? Minister Lamont needs to get his figures correct. Of course, the increase that the Deputy First Minister has announced for the NHS was £383 million, not the figure that he quoted. I am very delighted to report that, in terms of its funding, NHS borders has already had parity by 2.7% of £4.8 million. This Government is delivering a fair funding deal for NHS borders. Christine Grahame I recently met NHS borders, and they are very satisfied with what is going on. Can I ask the minister if he will visit Hay Lodge community hospital in my constituency just to see the good work that it is doing, despite the scaremongering by my colleague over there who is seeking to leave here and go to Westminster? I will try any trick in the boot. I will leave the local fraca to Ms Grahame and Mr Lamont, but if she wants to invite me to visit her constituency, I will be delighted to consider it.