 Rosshae McHugh the First Ministerps ask a wanderingsyou to take forward the Government's programme for Scotland The First Minister was rightly congratulated for securing the Fiscal色. That protected the long-term feature of the Barnett formula for Scotland. central to the deal was the principle of no detriment That means the transfer of financial responsibilities to this Parliament should never leave Scotland worse off. Yesterday's GERS figures showed that Scotland's deficit would be twice the size of the United Kingdoms. So does the First Minister seriously still believe there would be no detriment to Scotland leaving the United Kingdom? It's interesting, isn't it, to recall that if we look back to the last year of the last Labour government, the United Kingdom's deficit was £153 billion. That amounted to 10.2 per cent of the UK's GDP. Now, I maybe just missed Kezia Dugdale telling Chancellor Allister Darling back then that the UK could no longer afford to be an independent country. The truth of the matter is, the world over has deficits, and let's remember this about Scotland's deficit. It wasn't created in an independent Scotland, it was created on Westminster's watch. It's a rather strange argument, I think, for any self-respecting politician to argue that we should stick with a system that created the deficit instead of taking more powers into our own hands to do something about it. Lastly, isn't it so typical of Labour that we hear nothing about the strong Scottish economy, the underlying strength of the Scottish economy? I will leave Labour to do what Labour loves best, which is knock Scotland. I'll go on with the job of building this country up. That was about as convincing as Brian Souter's tax return. The first complete denial, the day after her own figures devastated the case for independence. She wants to carry on as if nothing has happened. The economic case for independence has always been dubious, but even her own former adviser, Alec Bell, tells us today that it is now dead. Now, the GERS figures don't just raise constitutional questions, they also give us an insight into the SNP Government's spending priorities. Investing in education is fundamental to growing the economy, yet the GERS figures show that the SNP has cut education and training by 10 per cent since they took office in 2007. So, if education is her number one priority, why has our Government cut the budget by 10 per cent? First Minister? Before I come on to education, I will do in just a second. Isn't it worth noting that the better-together alliance came alive in that last question? It is the case, isn't it, that all we get from Labour is a miserable talking down of Scotland and Scotland's prospects? Let's not forget that in the years when Scotland's fiscal position is stronger than the UK's, Labour still criticised the case for independence because the truth of the matter is this, Labour prefer Scotland to be run by the Tories rather than having Scotland run by this Parliament. For as long as that remains the case, Kezia Dugdale's party will remain on political life support. On education, what the GERS figures yesterday showed is an increase in Scottish education spending of 1.7 per cent between 2013-14 and 2014-15. As we have outlined, our attainment fund, over and above core education budgets, doubled by the finance secretary in the budget, is going to make sure that we do even more to tackle the issues of attainment in our schools. As I said before, I will leave Labour to win from the sidelines, knocking Scotland, I'll go on with building this country up. She can't escape the facts. Those are her own figures. She's got education and training by 10 per cent. I can throw a number at the First Minister and she can throw another number back from that big book of excuses that she's got in front of her. Behind all of those numbers are people. People whose lives are currently being turned upside down because of SNP cuts to schools and other vital public services. Just this week, I spoke with three women who have been directly affected by SNP cuts. One uprooted her whole life to pursue a career in education, only now to be told that she will soon be out of a job. I met a school librarian just yesterday who was on the verge of tears and begged for my help to help her save her job. A classroom assistant in Clackmannanshire, the very place the First Minister told me job cuts were exaggerated, told me that she was at a loss to understand the denial of our First Minister in relation to the extent of job losses. She says that the figures on education cuts are wrong. Are those three women all wrong as well? Let me just point out some facts to Kezia Dugdale. The average spend per primary pupil has increased by 9 per cent, £411 since the SNP took office. Average spend per secondary school pupil has increased by 11 per cent, £670 since the SNP took office. Average spending per pupil in Scotland in both primary and secondary schools is higher than it is in England. That is the record of the SNP Government, but that is a record that we are determined to build on. That is why we have prioritised education, tackling attainment in education. It is why the finance secretary doubled the funding for attainment in the budget just two weeks ago. I speak to people across Scotland as I do day in and day out what they ask me is this. If Labour is sincere about its commitment to education, then why just two weeks ago did they vote against a budget that maintained teacher numbers and doubled the fund for attainment in our schools? That is the question that people across Scotland want to know the answer to. We voted against a budget that ripped £500 million out of our schools and vital public services. The reality is that we could not believe our figures in 2014 and we cannot believe our figures today. Why? Because we can see people losing their jobs and the staff that remain face even greater pressure. It is our young people who will lose out because of this Government's cuts to education. In years, the First Minister said that independence was the only way to stop the cuts, but that argument is now dead. Labour has set out a plan to use the powers of this Parliament to stop the cuts. On the 50p tax, on the higher-rate threshold and on the 1p plan, she has voted it down at each and every turn. If Geras has confirmed that independence is not the answer and she refuses to use the powers of this place to end austerity, what exactly will she do to stop the cuts? First Minister, let us hear the First Minister. It was Kezia Dugdale and her colleagues that said to people across Scotland that they had to vote no to avoid cuts. Now they go round Scotland telling ordinary people that their taxis have to go up to pay for the Tory cuts that Labour made us stay subject to. That, blinding officer, is the sheer and utter disgrace of the Scottish Labour Party. To add to that disgrace is the fact that two weeks ago they voted in this Parliament against a budget that maintained teacher numbers, a budget that doubled funding for attainment in schools, a budget that would deliver the living wage to social care workers across our country. There was apparently a vote-labour event in this city of Edinburgh last night. Kezia Dugdale should read the reports of it. Apparently her name was not mentioned once in three hours. However, speaker after speaker lined up to praise the SNP. If Kezia Dugdale cannot even enthuse her own side of the argument, is it any wonder that she has already resigned herself to coming second in the election in May? 2. Ruth Davidson To ask the First Minister when she will next meet the Prime Minister. First Minister, I have no immediate plans. Ruth Davidson? The SNP's line on gers and oil seems to be that everyone got it wrong and no one saw it coming. That is total rubbish. Almost two years ago to the day, standing here, I told the First Minister's predecessor that he was being wildly optimistic on future oil revenues. We knew then that the OBR had put oil revenues for this coming year at £3 billion. The SNP refused to listen and tried to con people in the referendum campaign by claiming that it would be up to £8 billion. Standing there, the then First Minister told me, with some level of indignation, that his figures were robust. Well, not surprisingly, nobody trusts her predecessor on this any more. But it was not just him. It was this First Minister who led that independence campaign. So why should people trust her on this either? First Minister. First Minister, you should have maybe tried giving some of that wisdom to the UK Government's Department of Energy and Climate Change because their projection about oil prices was higher than the Scottish Government's. But isn't it typical that we have a Tory Government that, just like their pals in the Labour Party, constantly want to talk down the prospects of this country? Let me tell you what the figures published yesterday show. Firstly, let me say this. £3,000 more revenue generated per head in Scotland in the last five years in the UK. Growth in onshore revenues, outstripping the fallen oil revenues, higher employment in Scotland in the UK, faster productivity growth in Scotland and the rest of the UK. But we won't hear any of that from the Better Together Tory Labour Alliance because that might mean talking Scotland up and that would never ever do. Ruth Davidson. The truth is a £15 billion black hole from a leader that told us we'd all be £500 better off if we'd voted for independence. But you know, Presiding Officer, I think it's a great pity. I think it's a great pity that this First Minister is still tied to the salmon playbook of bluster and baseless assertion because the truth is that the SNP's economic prospectus for independence is broken. It was broken when they made it, they knew it then and they know it now. And the SNP's discredited white paper will live on as a black spot on this First Minister's reputation. I'd like to quote again from the SNP's former chief adviser, Alex Bell, because he wrote that we must assume that these bright people here with their bluster know that the old model, once optimistic, is now dead. He is right, isn't he, First Minister? Let me also quote from somebody during the referendum campaign and this one's actually more relevant because you know, much to my regret, Scotland didn't vote yes. Scotland voted no. And in that campaign, this is what the Prime Minister, David Cameron, had to say. There will be a £200 billion oil boom if Scotland votes no. Why did David Cameron say that and why did he turn out to be wrong? We'll take no bluff and bluster for the Conservative Party. The fact of the matter is, Ruth Davidson is the leader of a party that has stripped billions of pounds out of Scotland's budget. The parties that told Scotland they had to vote no in order to avoid cuts are the same parties now imposing cuts. Given that Westminster has created the Scottish deficit, why on earth would we stay part of that system instead of taking power into our own hands to do something about it? Mr Couser Oeddon, who is a resident of the Broomhouse area of my constituency, was on pilgrimage to Mecca last month with his wife and three children. During the final prayer of the day, there was a surge in the crowd and Mr Oeddon tripped and grabbed hold of the nearest person for balance. Unfortunately, that person turned out to be a police officer and he was arrested for assault. Mr Oeddon was sentenced to 35 days in prison and there is concern that he may be subject to another trial that could result in a far longer sentence. Given that people who are on holy pilgrimage with their family do not travel with the intention to assault anyone, I ask if there is any way that the First Minister can intervene to assist my constituent. I am very concerned about Mr Oeddon's situation. Large numbers of my constituents go on pilgrimage to Mecca every single year. I understand the concerns that have been raised by this case. My officials have already been in contact with the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and they have advised that the British Embassy is now in touch with Mr Oeddon by phone and they have requested a prison visit via the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. They have also advised us that, at this stage, they have not had Mr Oeddon's sentence confirmed as the case appears to be still under investigation. We have asked to be kept updated and informed of any progress and I undertake today to provide the member with further updates as appropriate. Question 3, Willie Rennie. To ask the First Minister what issues will be discussed at the next meeting of the Cabinet. First Minister. Matters of importance to the people of Scotland. Willie Rennie. Let's examine the consequences of our massive economic misjudgment on the finances of an independent Scotland. Order, let's hear Mr Rennie. She says that it's only one year's figures but we all know the worst is yet to come. The £15 billion shortfall is twice the education budget, three times the European deficit limit and she'd need growth figures five times higher than China to get out of this hole. She was warned repeatedly about her claims. Can she look me in the eye today and say she really believed what she said then? Or is it worse? Is it worse? Is our economic judgment really that bad? First Minister. Massive economic misjudgment. I think that is a very, very apt description of a party that goes into coalition with the Tories and keeps David Cameron and George Osborne in government for five long years. Let's never forget that party was a Liberal Democrat and interestingly, right now or until now, Willie Rennie is not looking me in the eye when I remind him of his coalition with the Tories. Week after week Willie Rennie's hypocrisy gets ever more breathtaking because while Willie Rennie's party was propping up George Osborne and David Cameron in government, those politicians were ripping billions of pounds out of the Scottish budget. So I will take no lectures from a Liberal Democrat on the question of cuts and I bet the Scottish people cannot wait to yet again pass judgment on the Liberal Democrats on May 5. I noticed that our Deputy First Minister leaned over to give her a bit of advice on that last answer. That same tired old answer. It's a shame that she didn't listen to the finance secretary before because we all remember the secret dossier. The secret dossier happened to be right. He was right all along. Why didn't she listen to him back then? Now she spends all her time dismissing all the things that John Swinney warned about, the drop in oil revenues. She claims that £15 billion for Nigel Ho doesn't really matter. She supports independence no matter what the price. No fact or number will ever change her mind. But £15 billion, £15 billion is twice the education budget. Isn't it the case that the First Minister was ready to put independence before the education of our children? First Minister. Of course we didn't need a secret dossier to see the implications of the Liberal Democrats misjudgment because we saw that unfold in George Osborne's budget every year for the five years that Willie Rennie's party kept them in government. Billions of pounds taken out of this Government's budget by Tories kept in office by the Liberal Democrats. Willie Rennie has the nerve to stand here and talk to anybody about education and health and cuts in anybody's budgets. The fact of the matter is we are living with the implications of Willie Rennie's party's decisions in government. That's why I suspect he's already very small and rather pathetic band of MSPs will be even smaller after May 5. Question 4. Tristan Graham. To ask the First Minister whether the Scottish Government considers that the rehousing provisions for victims of domestic abuse are satisfactory. Tackling domestic abuse is a priority for me and for this Government and we are investing record levels of funding. This year alone we are committed to spending £17 million to tackle violence against women and girls. Current homelessness legislation supports women and children fleeing abuse to be supported into temporary accommodation and enables appropriate settled accommodation to be found. Under long-established laws women can also apply for an exclusion order from a court that suspends the right of the abuser to live in the family home. However, as I said when I spoke at Scottish Women's Aid conference Mor does need to be done in this area and that's why the Minister for Housing and Welfare has offered to meet with Scottish Women's Aid to discuss what further support is required. Tristan Graham. I thank the First Minister for that response and for the meeting and I do recognise that not only the legislation but the funding from the Government to address abusive behaviour and its aftermath. The First Minister will be aware of recent findings by the Women's Health Improvement Research project in Fife where the majority of women taking part felt that they were given no choice about losing their home when ending an abusive relationship. I would ask specifically what the Scottish Government's responses to Scottish Women's Aid call for a national strategy to address this issue because surely it's abundantly clear that women should not be twice abused and victims. I absolutely agree with that and I am hugely sympathetic to the call made by Scottish Women's Aid for a national strategy and that's one of the things that the housing minister will discuss in the meeting that I referred to. It is a very strong homelessness legislation in place that has been described as some of the most progressive in the world. All homeless people have the right to temporary accommodation immediately and if unintentionally homeless the right to settled accommodation and that does provide women with protection when they have to leave their home due to domestic abuse but I do understand and hugely sympathise with the notion that forcing an abused woman to leave their home instead of staying in their family home in that sense of injustice and abuse. I think that this is a hugely important issue and one that with our partners and with other stakeholders in Scottish Women's Aid and other organisations we are absolutely determined to do more to tackle. The Government has recently consulted on the introduction of a specific offence of domestic abuse. Does the First Minister agree with me that it should include provision for protection for women by placing conditions on perpetrators including removing offenders from households which would be similar, for example, to domestic violence protection orders in England? I'm happy to consider that. As the member knows, we are in the latter stages of the consultation and obviously what we're looking at is the specific wording of a new offence without ruling out what she's just said. What I think she might just have said may be more to do with the disposals in quotes rather than the specific wording of the offence but I'm very happy to look at it. Of course the key purpose of this consultation and the proposed specific offences is to deal with examples of abuse coercive and controlling behaviour that the current law doesn't deal with adequately and that's the motivation behind this consultation but these are important issues in terms of what happens to a woman who's trying to escape abuse and I'll certainly give serious consideration to the point that's been made. Thank you, Presiding Officer. Exclusion orders are helpful but often the abuser doesn't take any notice and breaches them. Therefore safe housing is what is crucially required. What work has been carried out into creating refuge rooms and panic buttons in a victim's own home to make sure that they can get the help they need if the abuser breaches an exclusion order? There's a whole range of work often carried out by organisations like Scottish Women's Aid on that kind of issue. I'm more than happy to provide more detailed information about exactly what the Scottish Government funding, range of funding supports in that respect but in terms of the key issue here I am absolutely in agreement there will be circumstances where a woman who has been the victim of abuse will want to leave and to move away and to start afresh without the influence of their abuser but wherever possible it's the abuser whose life should be turned upside down by the abuse not the victim of that abuse and that's what we should be working on. This issue, not just the specific issue that we're talking about today but the general issue of tackling violence against women and children is one of the most important that this Parliament and this society can deal with. We celebrated earlier this week International Women's Day and all of us did our own things to mark that but we must recognise that domestic abuse, violence against women, is both a cause and a symptom of gender inequality and until we tackle that and until we eradicate violence against women we will not have true gender equality in this country. Question 5 David Stewart To ask the First Minister what assessment the Scottish Government has made of the RMT commission report on the future of Scottish ferry services First Minister We are committed to providing the best possible ferry services and the announcements of a total fees and fares for the Clyde and Hebrides services for 2016-17 and the £100 million order of two new vessels for the network underline that commitment. We remain focused on ensuring a fair procurement process that leads to getting the best deal for all of the communities of the Clyde and Hebrides and it's important to say that no matter the outcome of that process, Scottish ministers will retain control of all important issues like fares and timetables because this will always be a public service contract. Those important infrastructure will also remain publicly owned as they are now. The law requires us to undertake a tender process, a position that we inherited from the previous Labour Liberal Democrat Administration. This was accepted by that Administration when it of course initiated the first tendering exercise for Clyde and Hebrides ferry services. David Stewart Is the First Minister aware that the UK Government banned circle from tendering following an electronic targeting contract for the reclaiming payments for prisoners who had already died? Even at this 11th hour, would the First Minister agree to meet the author's report, Jeanette Finlay, a respected economist from Glasgow University? Finally, would the First Minister share my view that Kalmaka is part of the DNA of the west coast and islands and if they lose the contract in May there will be no one to fly the banner for public ferry services in the future? I want to make sure that we have the best ferry services. I'm not for reasons that I hope every member across the chamber will understand. I'm not going to comment directly on the tender process that is under way. I will say though and I'll be corrected if I'm wrong on this but I am pretty sure that the ban on circle that the member referred to has since been lifted by the UK Government. We are required under EU law to put the service out to tendering. There was a motion passed in this chamber in September 2005 before the first tendering exercise that acknowledges that the tendering of the Clyde and Hebrides lifeline ferry services is required to protect those vital services. That was a motion supported by Jackie Baillie, by Sarah Boyack, by Malcolm Chisholm, Patricia Ferguson, Hugh Henry, Joanne Lamont, Lewis MacDonald, Ken Macintosh, Michael McMahon, Duncan McNeill, Elaine Murray. That was the position of the last Labour Administration. It is the position of this Administration but it is all intended to make sure that we get the very best services to the people who rely on what are after all lifeline services. Question 6. To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government's response is to figures from the Association of Leading Visitor Attractions which show a 5.5% increase in visitor numbers at attractions in Scotland in 2015. First Minister. I'm delighted at the latest figures from the Association of Leading Visitor Attractions. They show that Edinburgh Castle is the most visited attraction in Scotland and that the National Museum of Scotland is the most visited free attraction in Scotland. The latest official statistics show that if we combine overseas and domestic visitors there's been a 7% increase in total tourism visits to Scotland in the year to September 2015 and combined visitor spend increased by 18.8% between 2010 and 2014. I think this is testament to the hard work and the skills of everyone in our tourism and hospitality industry in Scotland and also to our public bodies who are working in partnership to support the Scottish Tourism Alliance and industry-led tourism strategy 2020. Lord Campbell. I thank the First Minister for that answer. I'm pleased to note that one of the leading attractions was Folkland Palace in my constituency. I'm sure that the First Minister will agree that it's important to consider how tourism can grow. One such way is to improve accessibility. We have in Fife an accessible 5 project. What support can the Scottish Government provide for initiatives such as this to improve disabled access to Scottish visitor attractions and to increase the number of tourists generally? I am absolutely in agreement that we need to support and to grow accessible tourism. Not just because it helps us to tap into a market that is potentially worth £1.5 billion to our economy but also because it's absolutely the right thing to do. The Scottish Government has provided Visit Scotland with a funding contribution to develop a guide to help boost the wider accessibility of events. The industry launch of the 2016 year of innovation, architecture and design. The Minister for Business announced additional funding to support a series of new partner projects. Each of those initiatives will contribute to that wider accessible tourism drive and I think it will be very important that that happens both in terms of the inclusivity of what Scotland has to offer as well as the economic benefit it will bring. We are now moving to members' business so members who are leaving the chamber should do so quickly and quietly.