 R кабwych. Can I remind members of the Covid-related measures that are in place, and that face coverings should be worn when moving around the chamber and across the Holyrood campus? The first item of business is general questions. In order to get in as many people as possible I would be grateful for short, and succinct questions and answers to match. At question number one I call Karen Adam. To ask the Scottish Government what support it can provide to older people Fel hyn o erbyniwch gweithio lleolwyrnod oedd, oedd mae'r llyfrgyrch yn기�wyr cós yng Ngheirwyr. Yr modd leolwyr yn ganweithio am ddiweddol iawn, fyddwn gwneud o gwaith ffordd yn gweithio achos oedd oedd, iawn, gwneud o ffordd bob chi i ymddorol, i ddybydd ffodol yn ymddorol iawn. Felly mae'r ffordd i gael fy ysgolion i'r roedd gallu bwysig, a pwyllfa'r effigynau yn llygau eu cyflwyllau. Felly, byddai'n gweithio, we have delivered a £130 pandemic support payment to around 500,000 low-income households, including those on pension credit. This week, we introduced a money support Scotland website and marketing campaign to raise awareness of the services available to people with financial worries. Karen Adam. I thank the cabinet secretary for that answer. I recently met with the Charity Age Scotland who stressed that the elderly are heading into a crisis, with pensions in the UK being significantly lower than our European neighbours. Are older people often being fixed on fixed incomes, they cannot afford the skyrocketing food and energy bills. Some are facing the unthinkable choice of either turning on the heating or feeding themselves. Does the cabinet secretary agree with me that by scrapping the triple lock, pensioners have been betrayed by this UK Tory Government? I absolutely do agree with Karen Adam. The triple lock is crucial to ensuring that the support offered by the basic state pension continues to rise to reflect the increase in cost of living and to support pensioners into their third age. We are disappointed and concerned that the UK Government decided to push ahead with breaking the triple lock before publishing information on how it will affect pensioners, despite a cost of living crisis that is set to hit everyone on low incomes, including pensioners. Therefore, I call on the UK Government to play their part by sticking to the commitments that they made to pensioners and actively encourage older people to take up pension credit. On Tuesday, the Scottish Government released the Outline Business Case for a Publicly Owned Energy Company two years after it was written. The business case highlights that a Publicly Owned Energy Company would produce annual savings for customers. Age Scotland recently revealed that eight in 10 older people were greatly concerned about paying their energy bills. With nearly 30 per cent of pensioner households in Scotland living in fuel poverty, does the minister not think that it is time for the Scottish Government to fulfil its promise to deliver a publicly owned energy company? I am certainly happy to ensure that the minister is responsible for taking forward that policy rights to the member on that specifically, but in terms of fuel poverty, as I said in my initial answer, the Government is investing £114 million to tackle fuel poverty and improve energy efficiency in people's homes. Isn't it just a shame, though, that the member does not support our calls to have full control over all those issues here in Scotland? Therefore, we could even tackle fuel poverty in an even more efficient manner and support our older people into their older age and support them during the winter months in a more effective manner than we can with our fixed budget. To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on progress towards cutting emissions by 75 per cent by 2030. Scotland continues to lead the UK in delivering long-term emission reductions, the most recently published data, which is for 2019, show that Scotland has reduced our emissions by 51.5 per cent from the 1998 baseline. However, we recognise that much more must be done in order to achieve our world-leading 75 per cent target for 2030 and meet our net zero target for 2045. The Scottish Government's updated climate change plan, finalised in March, includes more than 200 policies and proposals, and puts us on a clear and credible pathway to meeting our target up to 2032. Our focus is on delivering those measures. The Committee on Climate Change suggests that the 75 per cent target might be overcooked and urges deep co-operation with the UK if it is ever to be achieved. The chief executive, Chris Stark, noted that he has not seen the types of policies that the nationalist coalition needs to turn that target into reality. Will the cabinet secretary reassess his Government's policies against those criticisms? If so, when will the conclusions be made public? I suspect that this is the same chief executive of the Committee on Climate Change when the Committee on Climate Change stated that the Scottish economy is decarbonising quicker than the rest of the UK and faster than any G20 economy since 2008. Emissions have fallen rapidly while the economy has grown. It is the very same Committee on Climate Change that the member just made reference to and recognised the significant progress that we are making. When the member makes reference to the need to work closely with the UK Government, he might call on his colleagues at Westminster to reverse the ludicrous decision not to support the Scottish cluster in helping to deliver carbon capture utilisation and storage. The impact that that will have on the north-east of Scotland, in particular, given its decision not to go ahead with that particular project. A project that the Committee on Climate Change has stated is one of the key projects to help to support Scotland in delivering on its climate change ambitions. Fiona Hyslop. To what extent are Scottish targets and UK targets dependent on a well-developed carbon capture utilisation and storage project? Is the Scottish Government continuing to press the UK Government to get on with the funding of the ACON project rather than keeping it on the reserve list, particularly as the UK Climate Change Committee report published today challenges the UK on its ability to deliver on its targets? Michael Matheson. The member makes an important point, because the Committee on Climate Change was very clear that carbon capture utilisation and storage is critical to Scotland and the UK in delivering on its climate change targets. That is why the UK's decision not to support the Scottish cluster makes no sense, and I believe that it is a very serious mistake, not just in delivering on climate change targets but also to the north-east of Scotland, who have been happy to lean on for many decades in the oil and gas sector when it suited them. It comes to paying that back through investing in areas such as carbon capture that have let them down. It is very clear that this is an area that needs to be progressed. I can assure the member that we will continue to do everything we can to support the cluster and to press the UK Government to reverse that ridiculous decision. Question 3, Richard Leonard. Thank you, Presiding Officer, and I remind members of my register of interests. To ask the Scottish Government what steps it is taking to encourage a modal shift to increase train passenger numbers and journeys. Minister Graham Day. Presiding Officer, our national transport strategy is clear about the investment priority that we attached to public transport and modal shift, and the substantial financial support that we have provided throughout the pandemic has ensured the availability of rail as a mode of choice along with bus. We remain committed to growing the rail market and, accordingly, have charged ScotRail trains limited with producing a market growth strategy from April 2022 that develops and implements appropriate products and services to address post-Covid markets in order to try to deliver increased revenue and passenger growth against a backdrop of net zero carbon and modal shift. Richard Leonard. Can I thank the Minister for that response? As a low-carbon transport link between Scotland's two largest cities in London, the Caledonian sleeper route has a central role to playing, getting people on to public transport, and yet Circo, responsible for running the franchise, has managed to cause not one but two disputes with its workers and their union, the RMT, over both pay and now another over clear evidence of bullying and harassment. That is a shocking way to treat key workers. As the Scottish Government is fully funding the franchise, I am saying today, bring it back, bring it back into public ownership. Will the Minister now commit to doing this when the emergency measures agreement expires in March 2022? I am saying a bit tangential from the original question, but let's deal with it. The dispute between Caledonian sleeper operators and the RMT is one that we have encouraged both sides to try and resolve the initial dispute. It is a matter of regret that the trade union concerned, as I understand it, approached the operators with a proposal to resolve that dispute. The operators went back, matching that proposal, and they did not recommend it to their members when it was rejected. That is a matter of deep regret. In terms of the dispute about bullying and harassment, bullying and harassment allege that they are otherwise in a serious matter, and I encourage Circo to look into that in great detail. Thank you. You do not get people back on to trains by cutting services. The consultation on the controversial proposed new timetable closed on October 2. When are we going to be told the results? That is currently going through a process of review and will be conveyed to the public in due course. The UK Government to discuss infrastructure projects of importance to Scotland. Ministers meet with UK Government counterparts to discuss matters of importance to Scotland, including key infrastructure projects as required. We have stressed through engagement with the UK Government the importance of Scotland's capital budget being sufficient to deliver our infrastructure investment plan and that any UK Government spending in Scotland supports its delivery. It was therefore disappointing that the UK Government's October spending review did not provide significant scope for an infrastructure stimulus and that the levelling up fund was dispersed directly across the UK, despite previous commitments otherwise, which in turn reduced capital funding for Scotland. The UK Government has repeatedly promised upgrades to the A75 and A77, even before the ferries moved to Cairnryde. The UK Government has committed £40 million towards preparatory work between our two Governments. Why is the Scottish Government refusing to get involved with the union connectivity review as it is baffling to my constituents, particularly when 12 Scottish local authorities, the Welsh and the Northern Ireland Governments and, for that matter, the Republic of Ireland transport minister contributed to the view. The Scottish Government claims that the A75 will feature in its strategic policy review, but the people of the south of Scotland are growing tired of waiting and this Government failing to deliver. Will the minister commit to working with the UK Government to bring much-needed upgrades for the benefit of the people of Scotland and for every nation across the UK? We are always willing to work with the UK Government in a way that respects the devolved settlement, which was not the case in this instance and in many other instances. The unit connectivity review talks about offering funding to support the upgrade of the A75. We are quite prepared to discuss this with the UK Government, with two specific lines to be explored. First, would there be additional funding and not some top-slicing and repackaging of existing monies? Secondly, how would upgrading fit with the proposals for the route that is being considered as part of the STPR process? Specifically related to the issue that has just been raised, the union connectivity review made a recommendation that the UK Government should make funding available for the A75 upgrades and the minister is aware that I have lobbied for this as well since my election in May 2016. Can the minister outline specifically what the UK Government has promised regarding how much money it proposes to give and the timescales for any of that money to be delivered? There has been no dialogue taking place on this to date. However, there is now an offer of a meeting hopefully in the not-too-distant future. As I said, we will engage in that meeting on the basis that I outlined earlier. 5. Fulton MacGregor To ask the Scottish Government what support is in place for parents who experience stillbirth. All at NHS boards should provide tailored care and support to parents who experience stillbirth within best practice guidance. That should, where appropriate, include further investigation and counselling. We are committed to supporting families who have experienced stillbirth and other types of baby loss. That is why we have invested £578,000 over the past four years in a range of initiatives to improve care for families who experience baby loss. In addition, we have provided approximately £150,000 a year to support improvement activity, research and audit to drive further improvements of clinical care to reduce and to reduce the incidence of stillbirth. 5. Fulton MacGregor I thank the minister for that response. I have been working with a group in my constituency of baby loss retreats who support parents who experience baby loss at all stages. They have told me that the aftercare to parents is often inconsistent, in some cases inadvertently retraumatising, such as being treated close to newborn babies who may be heard crying. Can I ask the minister if the Government is considering reviewing the protocols that are in place to allow those who experience stillbirth to receive a more tailored and specialist support service as a required problem? Absolutely. I am aware of the work of that charity baby loss retreat and of your efforts to highlight their work. The Scottish Government is committed to supporting families who have experienced baby loss through high-quality, sensitive bereavement care. We have provided £178,000 of funding over four years to Sands UK to develop the national bereavement care pathways for pregnancy and baby loss in Scotland. Sands UK will work with bereaved parents, baby loss charities and royal colleges to develop those pathways, putting the voices of bereaved parents right at the heart of the vision. The pathways provide health professionals with evidence-based care pathways and describe best practice for bereavement care following a miscarriage, a termination of pregnancy for fetal anomaly, stillbirth, neonatal death or the sudden unexpected death of an infant. Those bereavement care pathways are currently being piloted in four early adopter health boards in Scotland. Full roll-out unfortunately had to be paused while health board resources were focused on dealing with the Covid pandemic, but we expect work to recommence early next year. Jeremy Balfour, we would not send someone home who has cancer or another illness without supporting the community, yet, still across a lot of Scotland, there is no long-term specialist baby care counselling. Would the Government carry out an audit of where the gaps are so that we can at least have a picture to know where those services need to be provided and would she again commit to work with particularly referred sector in providing me services where it has not been provided at present? Absolutely. We are very committed to improvements in this area. As I said, the work with Sands United Kingdom to develop the national bereavement care pathways does focus on this area. We have also provided £400,000 to baby loss charities to provide in Scotland to provide front-line support to parents. That includes SIMBA, Sands United Kingdom, baby loss retreat, bliss held in our hearts, Edinburgh Children's Hospital charity, miscarriage association and the Scottish care and information and miscarriage. We are absolutely determined to improve this area, although we have a lot of work going on it. I am more than happy to hear more details from Mr Balfour if there are areas that he thinks that we can work on together. To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on its discussions with NHS Fife and Fife Council about delayed discharges and winter pressures. Met with NHS Fife, Fife Council and Fife Health and Social Care partnership on 23 November and then again on 1 December to discuss delayed discharge performance. Those meetings of partnership outline their plans to reduce delays with a trajectory to reduce delays by at least 30 per cent by the end of the year. They have already achieved a 15 per cent reduction, which is promising. I expect to see this improvement continue well into 2021 and beyond, and we have a follow-up meeting scheduled for 15 December. I thank the cabinet secretary for his answer. Although it is clear to me that front-line health and social care workers in Fife are pulling out all the stops to tackle delayed discharges and to put in place and to implement timely social care packages, can the cabinet secretary provide reassurance to my Cowdenbeath constituents that he is satisfied that senior management teams at Fife Council and NHS Fife are straining every sinew and utilising all resources at their disposal to deal with winter pressures? Can he confirm that additional help will be made available if necessary? Cabinet secretary? Yes, I can give that reassurance to Ms Ewing's constituents. I am meeting with Fife Council, as I mentioned, and I have already met him on a number of occasions. We will meet him again on 15 December. Of course, we are providing £300 million as part of our winter package. I have said to Fife Council and to the health board and to the local partnership that if there is further resource that they require, I will look at that with an absolute open mind. I think that they are working collaboratively, I am reassured, but I will continue to push them to go even further, because she is right that there are significant winter pressures that we are already facing, and they may become even more significant, no doubt, in the weeks and months ahead. I will continue to keep her updated on those discussions.