 Rossiolwch yn g beaten up a dyfodol yn ti. 1. Ruth Davidson No representative or consultant, working for the Scottish Conservative Party has ever met the disgraced data harvesting company Cambridge Analytica or its parent company. Can the First Minister not like it but it was good enough for Ian Blackford to ask at PMQs, Gall cofn i fynd i List increasing Thank you? Can the First Minister say the same about the Scottish Government or the SNP? As we said earlier this week, a consultant working for the SNP did meet with Cambridge Analytica. That happened in February 2016. The SNP has never worked with Cambridge Analytica. We've never hired them. ond we have never paid the many money to do any work for us. That surely is the fundamental point. In spite of what Ruth Davidson has said, I am not sure that the Conservative party as a whole, or indeed the UK Government under the Conservative party, can say the same. We know that the links between Cambridge Analytica and SCL, their parent company, are many and legion. For example, a former chairman of Oxford Conservative Association used to run the SCL company. There are reports that he is now actually the CEO of Cambridge Analytica. SCL's founding chairman was a former Tory MP. A director of the company donated more than £700,000 to the Conservative party. We know that the UK Government has had reportedly a close working relationship with SCL. The MOD paid them £200,000 for carrying out two separate projects. According to the Guardian, SCL group was actually granted by the Ministry of Defence what is called List X Status. That means that it can access secret documents. The MOD also paid more than £40,000 to a branch of SCL for data analytics. It is being reported, and I can only say what it is being reported, that a Cambridge Analytica executive advised the Foreign Office on lessons gleaned from the Trump election campaign. We also know that Alexander Nix, who was the former CEO of Cambridge Analytica, in a letter to a foreign Government, claimed back in 2010 that he had worked with the UK Conservative Party. Two things categorically, the SNP has never worked with Cambridge Analytica and the Scottish Government has never worked with Cambridge Analytica. I am not sure that the Conservative Party or the UK Government can say the same thing. Ruth Davidson If the First Minister had bothered to listen to my first question, she would know that the party that I was charged with has never held any meetings, never had any emails, never had any contacts, nothing, but let's get back to the party that she's in charge of, shall we? Let's just review what we found out this week. A former Cambridge Analytica director revealed that the SNP had indeed met the form. I know that the SNP has raised sanctumony to an art form, but what stinks here is the reek of hypocrisy. When it comes to the dealings that others have had with Cambridge Analytica, the First Minister and her party have spent weeks demanding full transparency, yet when it comes to the SNP, it took a whistleblower, giving evidence in a parliamentary committee, before facts even began to be dragged out into the open. The First Minister has demanded full transparency of others. Can she really hand on heart and say that the SNP has shown it this week? Ruth Davidson has missed something because here is what Alexander Nick, the former CEO of Cambridge Analytica, said. Not this week in a Westminster committee, but actually in February at a Westminster committee in response to a question about companies pitching for work. He said, It's not uncommon for us to go and speak to political parties. Indeed, in this country, I think I've spoken with every political party, Labour, the Liberal Democrats, UKIP, the SNP and the Conservatives. So they have pitched to every political party, and the SNP is very clear. They tried to sell us their services. As I said, that was in the early part of 2016. A meeting took place, but back then, before any of the concerns that we are talking about right now had come to light, the SNP decided that this was not a company that we wanted to work with. We judged then that there were a bunch of cowboys. If only the UK Government had done that, then they might not have some of the likes that I've already read out. Ruth Davidson But, First Minister, the UK Conservative Party weren't the ones that were caught out spreading allegations about others. That was all on you. That was all on you. Let's put the First Minister's commitment to transparency to the test. Yesterday, she was asked directly when the meeting, or meetings, took place and who attended. Our party's leader in Westminster was asked likewise, and she failed to answer yesterday, and he claims that he never knew. Now we've got a little bit further today, so let's get on to answer these questions. Who was the SNP consultant who held a meeting with Cambridge Analytica? When in February did it take place? Where did it take place? Because these are very simple questions to someone who's committed to full transparency. First Minister, please get the order down. Ruth Davidson would have heard me say that the meeting took place in February 2016. I am not going to name somebody who was working for the SNP as a consultant, somebody who's done nothing wrong. There is no wrongdoing. I am here to answer questions on behalf of the Scottish Government, but I'm happy to answer questions on behalf of the SNP. I'm the leader of the party, and I'm not going to name somebody who's done nothing wrong, who was working on behalf of the SNP in order that a witch hunt can be carried out into that person. If we are talking about transparency, then perhaps Ruth Davidson can answer some of the points about the connection. She says that the Conservatives haven't done a range of things. The Conservatives, we know, or it certainly has been reported, has accepted donations from a director of the parent company of Cambridge Analytica. Does Ruth Davidson think that that's okay? We know that something else is perhaps closer to home for Ruth Davidson, because there's another company that's reported to have very close links with Cambridge Analytica. That's Aggregate IQ. Remember that a group constitutional research council, run by a former vice chairman of the Scottish Conservative Party, gave the donation to the DUP's Brexit campaign. We still don't know the source of that donation, but we know that some of that donation was spent on Aggregate IQ that has links with Cambridge Analytica. If Ruth Davidson wants to be so transparent, will she tell us today what was the source of the donation procured by a former chairman of the Scottish Tory Party? I think that it's the Conservative Party and the UK Government that's mired in links to Cambridge Analytica and its various associates. The SNP's never done any work with them, because, unlike the Conservatives, unlike the UK Government, when we met them, we realised that there were a bunch of cowboys if only Ruth Davidson's colleagues had done the same. Presiding Officer, let's get back to First Minister's questions. Questions to the First Minister, because here is transparency SNP style. Transparency SNP style is fling out allegations at opponents. It's failed to set out your own record. It's denied you know anything about it, and then, when you're caught out, it's giving half answers to legitimate questions. The First Minister says that she's been upfront and transparent, but with everything that the SNP's done over the last month, including keeping their Westminster leader in the dark, I wonder if, to the rest of us, it just looks pretty shifty. Ruth Davidson has said that all the links that I've read out between these companies and the Conservative Party or UK Government are allegations, so when she has the opportunity to review the official report, I'll challenge her today to come back and tell me which ones are untrue. Which of the links that I have set out between her colleagues and these companies are untrue? In terms of the SNP, let's cut to the chase and get to the nub of the matter. Yes, two years ago, before the concerns that we're talking about now had come to light, somebody, on behalf of the SNP, had a meeting with Cambridge Analytica. We decided that we didn't want to do any work with them, and as a result, we've never hired them, we've never paid them any money, they have never done any work for the SNP and they have never done any work for the Scottish Government. The same cannot be said, in my view, for the UK Government, and I don't know for sure whether the same can be said for the Conservative Party either. Ruth Davidson started that last question by saying, let's get back to First Minister's questions. Let's get back to the responsibility of the First Minister and the Scottish Government. Here are some of the things that Ruth Davidson could have come to this chamber and asked me about today. She could have come and asked me about the work to save BiFab. She could have come and asked me about the extra money that was announced yesterday for farmers to help them with the impact of recent weather. She could have come and asked me about the extra money for the initiative to combat domestic abuse that was announced this week. She could have come and asked me about the update report on getting broadband to households across the country. She could have come and asked me about the major expansion of childcare training places that has been announced in the past few days. However, because Ruth Davidson does not have a leg to stand on any of those things, all that she can do is come to this chamber and spread about baseless smears. It is the Conservative Party and the UK Government that I have questions to answer. I look forward to her response to which of the links that I set out is not true. I recognise the level of political interest in the subject, but I will let it go in this case. Can we stick to the First Minister's responsibilities and the First Minister's questions from both sides? Thank you, First Minister. This morning, the Auditor General told the Audit Committee of this Parliament that repeated warnings about the finances of NHS Tayside were not taken seriously. Is the Auditor General wrong? I do not think that it is the case that the Scottish Government has not worked hard to support NHS Tayside. As I heard the Auditor General and I think perhaps the comment that Richard Leonard is referring to is the Auditor General referred to a statement in one of the previous reports about the use of endowment funds and certainly there was a line in one of the previous reports recording the fact of the transfer of endowment funds. The point that the health secretary has made and I will make again today is that at no point was that flagged up as a concern to the Scottish Government if it had been at that time then action would have been taken. The health secretary has exercised her ministerial power. She has done that I think for the right reasons and in the right way to make sure that the leadership of NHS Tayside is strengthened so that it can go on delivering high-quality patient care but also undertake the transformation in the services that it needs to do. I would hope that notwithstanding all of the legitimate issues and I would say to Richard Leonard at least that he has come to this chamber with a genuine serious legitimate issue that is within the responsibilities of the First Minister. However, there are differences of opinion around this, I hope that Richard Leonard will support the action that the health secretary has rightly taken. Richard Leonard First Minister, the situation at NHS Tayside did not come as a surprise to anyone who was paying attention. Year after year the health board saw a bailout, year after year Audit Scotland warned that this was not sustainable and year after year your Government has been in denial about the scale of the problem. Between repaying loans, repaying the endowment fund and finding other efficiency savings, NHS Tayside now needs to make more than £200 million worth of cuts over the next five years. First Minister, do you agree with me that this will mean even longer waiting times and even more cancelled operations for the people of Tayside? No, I do not. The purpose of the Scottish Government providing brokerage is in order to ensure that patient services are not affected as the board undertakes its transformation plans. I also do not agree with Richard Leonard's characterisation of the role of the Scottish Government. Yes, there have been issues in Tayside for some time, but let me just run through the steps that the Scottish Government and the health secretary have taken. When the five-year transformation plan was launched in 2015-16, at that time the Scottish Government put in place specific support arrangements. In March 2017, the Scottish Government appointed Professor Lewis Ritchie to chair an assurance and advisory group. In June 2017, when Lewis Ritchie produced his first report, the Scottish Government established a transformation support team, providing intensive support for the board between July and December 2017. We then had the second report of the assurance and advisory group in February of this year. It was shortly after that that the issue of e-health funding came to light. At that point, Grant Thornton was appointed by the health secretary to look into that in detail. That report has been published to Parliament. Of course, since the issue of the endowment fund has come to light, the health secretary has taken the action that she has taken. At every stage, there has been support for NHS Tayside, but when the culmination of issues reached the point that it did, the health secretary rightly decided that the leadership of the board required to be strengthened. That is why the steps have been taken in the last two weeks. Richard Leonard First Minister, none of the steps that you took worked. Here, we have a health board raiding charity funds to pay the bills, and that is after fiddling the accounts. What makes this even worse is that this is all happening in Tayside under the nose of the health secretary, who is a member of Parliament for Dundee. First Minister, it is too late for Shona Robison to be an honest broker in the NHS Tayside affair. Will the First Minister reflect on that, and will she face up to the fact that the time has come for her health secretary to go? I will continue to give my support as First Minister to the job that the health secretary is doing to strengthen the leadership of the NHS Tayside board with the new chief executive and chair arrangements that have been put in place and to make sure that that board has the support to undertake the transformation that it needs to do. That is what we will continue to focus on. In the final analysis here, what is important are the services to patients? NHS Tayside provides a very high level of patient service in our job. The health secretary's mind is to make sure that they continue to do that. With the greatest respect to Richard Leonard, that is what I will continue to focus on, and that is what the health secretary will continue to focus on. I have a number of supplementaries. The first is from Jenny Gilruth. Thank you, Presiding Officer. Monday 9 April marked the first time in Glynothys' 70-year history that there was no GP on duty at night caring for the town. The words of locally retired GP, Dr Bob Grant. Fife's health and social care partnership's decision to close out of our provision means that people from Glynothys, Dunfermline and St Andrews are now being made to travel to Cercodi. Does the First Minister share my concerns about the complete absence of any public consultation, the costs that will place on individuals who do not have access to a vehicle, and the resource burden that this move directly forces upon staff at the Victoria hospital in Cercodi? I thank Jenny Gilruth for raising what is an important local issue for her. Recent changes to the out-of-hours primary care services in Fife are a short-term measure to ensure that appropriate levels of patient safety are maintained. I understand that a public consultation and a full range of longer-term options, including maintaining services at the existing four out-of-hours centres, will begin in June. Of course, overnight primary care emergency services will still be available at Victoria hospital in Cercodi. I encourage not just Jenny Gilruth and other local members but the local population in Fife when that public consultation starts to make sure that they make their views known to that. Last night, CEPA issued a final warning to the operators of the Mossmorran ethylene plant. Almost a year after surrounding communities were kept awake for days by noise and light pollution caused by flaring. There have been even more incidents of illegal flaring in recent months. What is her definition of a final warning? CEPA is an independent regulatory body. It is for them to set out what actions they will take if warnings that they issue are not complied with. We discussed this issue in the chamber before. I absolutely understand the concerns of local people around Mossmorran and the issues that have caused those concerns, but it is absolutely right and proper that CEPA is the organisation that takes this forward. I will happily ask CEPA to write directly to the member to set out clearly what its further actions will be should it deem that Mossmorran has not complied with any conditions that it has set out. The First Minister will be aware of the case of Ola Meri from Coatbridge, who was ordered to leave the UK by the Home Office despite being married to a Scottish citizen and having a Scottish daughter. Ola Meri and her family, who are in the gallery today, were delighted that the intervention of the cabinet secretary and local politicians led to the decision being paused for review. Will the First Minister confirm that the Scottish Government will continue to put pressure on the UK Government to ensure that Ola is permitted to permanently remain at her home in Coatbridge with her husband and daughter? Further, to continue to demand the devolution of immigration law so Scottish citizens are not affected like that in the future. First, can I welcome the Meri family to the public gallery today? I am sure that the whole chamber will want to welcome them. Fiona Hyslop raised this case with the Home Secretary last week, and we will continue to make appropriate representations to give the Meri family the peace of mind that they require around the right of Mrs Meri to remain permanently in Coatbridge with her husband and her daughter. I think that this case and the appalling treatment of the children of the Windrush generation that we have seen come to light this week demonstrate, perhaps more clearly than anything has previously, that we urgently need across the whole UK a humane immigration system, not the hostile environment that Theresa May has been so keen to put in place. We need a system that respects human dignity, that recognises individual circumstances and a system that is not focused on arbitrarily cutting numbers and forcing people unjustly to leave the country that they have come to call home. That is the kind of humane immigration policy that I want to see in place, and we will continue to argue very loudly and very clearly for that. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. First minister, this morning, I received a press release here, which I believe goes out to the press this afternoon, informing that the Minor Indigenous Unit at Yorkhill will close tomorrow and return to the Southern General Hospital. That came as a great surprise to me, and it will be to my constituents also who took part in the consultation, and we are absolutely sure that the Minor Indigenous Unit was not to go to the Southern General Hospital. Will the First Minister agree with me that a PR, a press release, is not the way to inform elected members or their constituents? Will the First Minister contact Greater Glasgow Health Board to conven a meeting regarding where the MIU is to go in the west of the city of Glasgow? First minister. I am happy to look into how the public information has been communicated. If what Sandra White has outlined today is correct and I have no reason, of course, to believe that it is not, that would strike me as being an unacceptable way for the health board to have done that. I am very happy to ask the health board to communicate directly with Sandra White. If I can turn to the substantive issue, which is an important one in the city of Glasgow, NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde reopened the West Glasgow Minor Injury Unit at Yorkhill from early January as part of its plan to manage winter pressures. That was then extended to help cover the Easter holiday period. The health secretary has been clear that she expects the board to ensure that the west of the city has appropriate unscheduled care provision, and I know that the board will soon be considering proposals as to how it plans to take forward the provision of those local services. The health secretary will continue to monitor the progress of that work and provide updates, but I will make sure that a message goes to Greater Glasgow and Clyde health board asking them to contact Sandra White directly. A report this morning has found that new mothers in half of Scotland cannot access specialist life-saving mental health services. The maternal mental health alliance says that there is no specialist provision in Tayside, in Fife, in Dumfries and Galloway, in the Western Isles, in Orkney or in Shetland. Only Glasgow meets the required standard in the whole of the country. The First Minister was warned about this three years ago. Why is the Government failing mothers and their children? That is an extremely important issue, but it is why we have taken the step of funding a national managed clinical network on perinatal mental health. As I am sure Willie Rennie is aware, the MCN brings together specialist on perinatal mental health, nursing, maternity and infant mental health, and it is designed to improve the treatment of perinatal mental health care. The network is currently delivering on a work plan that is in place, which includes assessing current provision across all levels of service delivery in Scotland. The report that Willie Rennie has referred to should be taken into account. The network is also looking at how it ensures that all women, their children and families have equity of access to the perinatal mental health services that they need. That is work that is on-going. I would be very happy to provide Willie Rennie with more detail of that and answer any further questions from him as a result of that. The managed clinical network is a good thing, but it is far from enough. The institutes, the Alliance here have identified where the gaps in services are. The Government is not doing enough and they are not doing enough quickly. The Royal College of Midwives is scathing of the Government's record. They say that the consequences of poor services can be fatal. We should not forget that the tragedy of suicide is the leading cause of maternal death. Where is the six-week check? Where are the community networks? Why does Scotland lag behind England? I asked the First Minister about mental health almost every single week in this Parliament. This week is yet another week when we hear of a new report on failures of this Government's mental health policy. One week is young people waiting in age for treatment. The next is adults. Now it is mothers. Is it not the case that mental health is fast becoming this Government's record of shame? The First Minister regularly asks about mental health. I give him great credit for doing that because it is an extremely serious issue. Every week when he asks me, I outline the work that the Scottish Government is doing to address the issues and concerns that have been raised. It is easy for Willie Rennie to dismiss that the managed clinical network is important but not enough, but it is the work that the managed clinical network is doing that will enable us to address the specific concerns. The report that has been published today provides further evidence and information that will be very helpful in the work that the MCN is doing. I know, for example, that one of the things that the report calls for, perhaps not surprisingly, is more prioritised funding, and that is something that we will consider very seriously. In that respect, it is looking particularly at community services. I have set out in summary the work that the network is doing around its work plan, and that is the work that will take forward the actions that address the concerns that it has been raising. I have absolutely no issue with raising those issues. I encourage members to continue to raise those issues, but I also hope that members will appreciate the range of work, whether it is a bit young people or this area or the other aspects of mental health provision under the auspices of our mental health strategy, which has recently been praised by the World Health Organization on a recent visit to Scotland. That work is specifically about addressing those important concerns. Just weeks after Gordon Aitman's death with his grieving family in the gallery, the cabinet secretary for health promised a fast-tracked benefit system. She said that she would end the injustice of terminally ill people waiting months for their benefits, and I believed her. Yesterday, the Scottish Government tabled amendment 111 to the social security bill, the intent of which is to keep the failing system just as it is, reversing changes agreed at stage 2. Given that Marie Curie has described it as very disappointing and that more than 50 leading doctors have expressed their deep concern in today's times, will the First Minister please intervene to ensure that people with less than two years to live get the benefits that they so desperately need? If I may, can I just take a bit of time to address this issue properly? I have spent much of this morning in advance of stage 3 of the social security bill next week, discussing this very issue with the social security minister. It is a difficult and it is a sensitive issue, and I am sure that Kezia Dugdale would recognise it. It is also a complex issue, and all MSPs who have been scrutinising this on the committee, I am sure, would recognise it. I want to make very clear today that the Government, the social security minister, will continue to listen and discuss the best way forward on this right up to the stage 3 votes next week. On the time limits, the change from two years, which was amended in at stage 2 of the bill to six months, relates to the difficulties that, according to some clinicians, there are of accurately diagnosing life expectancy over a period as long as two years. However, that is not the fundamental point. The more fundamental point that I want to make is this one, which I think is alluded to in the open letter that is published today. If you have a time limit that is the only basis for determining eligibility, then whether that time limit is six months or two years or whatever, you always have the risk of excluding people who should be included, because time limits by their nature are arbitrary. That is why it is the second part of the Scottish Government's amendment that is the most important. The second part of the amendment says that it effectively means that there will be no hard or rigidly applied time frame. Even for somebody who would not fulfil the six months time frame requirement, eligibility will still be able to be certified by a medical practitioner. Clinicians will still be able to use their judgment on a case-by-case basis. That, for me, is the important thing here. In the discussions that I was having with Jeane Freeman this morning, we were talking about how we get away from time limits and focus much more on the clinical judgment. We will continue to have discussions with anybody who is interested in this right up until the final stage of the bill. However, it is difficult, it is a sensitive issue and it is a complex issue. I would hope that all members would recognise that it is not a party political issue. It is one that all of us desperately want to get right. I certainly give a commitment today that we will do our best to get it right, because that is what all of us want. Edward Mountain Thank you, Presiding Officer. First Minister, given the Audit Scotland's report on contracts in NHS Highland being informal, long running, without review, unaudited and not documented, and given the sums of public money involved, can she confirm if the Scottish Government has complete confidence in the management of NHS Highland, or does she believe that given NHS Highland's annual overspend, that this might be yet another example of incompetent governance? The First Minister I understand that the report that is being referred to relates to the provision of two contracts in NHS Highland, one relating to healthcare, the Nairn medical practice, and another for the carrying out of vasectomies across the Highlands. The report states that those contracts date from 1998. The raise issues of procurement in NHS Highland has already said that they are taking the required action to implement the recommendations and will monitor that via their own audit committee. I would expect all health boards to follow relevant procurement regulations to ensure the best use of resources, and we have been clear that we expect NHS Highland to address the issues raised in this audit report and to fully implement its recommendations, as NHS Highland has already said that it is going to do. Bill Kidd In 2013, the unionist parties warned us that Scottish shipyards would lose out on contracts to build royal navy ships if Scotland were outside the UK. However, now, the Westminster Tory Government is encouraging overseas shipyards to compete for the latest billion-pound order. Work from those would create and secure up to 6,500 jobs. Were the First Minister back calls for this work to come to the Clyde? The First Minister Yes, I will. It should be in the Clyde, I would argue, that this is work that was promised to the Clyde, and it is work that very definitely should go to the Clyde. We should be very clear what we are now seeing develop around this work and the future of the shipyards is nothing short of a blatant betrayal of Scottish shipyards. Promises were made to those yards by the Tories, indeed by all of the unionist parties during the referendum. They were told that they were promises of work for years to come. They specifically said that Scotland, if it became independent, would not be able to secure that work for the Clyde because contracts could not go to, quote, foreign countries. That is an absolute betrayal, and I hope that we will hear all parties across the chamber stand up for shipbuilding on the Clyde. Ben Macpherson Thank you, Presiding Officer. I am required to remind the chamber that I am a parliamentary liaison officer to the First Minister. To ask the First Minister how many Syrian refugees have been resettled in Scotland. First Minister Scotland has welcomed around 2,150 people under the Syrian resettlement programme since October 2015. We remain committed to welcoming refugees seeking sanctuary from the conflict in Syria, and because of that, refugees continue to arrive. I hope that all of them get a warm welcome in Scotland. Obviously, at this time, the Syrian community in Scotland will be worried about the current situation in Syria and particularly about their family and friends who remain there, and my thoughts are with them. However, I want to emphasise that Scotland will continue to offer a home to people fleeing war and persecution, and we are committed to welcoming as many as we can of those who arrive in the UK during 2018. Ben Macpherson I thank the First Minister for that answer. As well as warmly welcoming those from Syria who have made Scotland their home, I would also like to take this opportunity to pay tribute to all of the organisations that have supported those resettling into communities across Scotland, including the services provided by Multicultural Family Base in Leith in my constituency. Like many others, we should all celebrate the positive impact of the resettlement programme in Scotland. However, I am also concerned about the welfare of asylum seekers from Syria who are living out with the resettlement programme and who are therefore not receiving adequate support from the Home Office in terms of funding and assistance to settle into communities. Does the First Minister agree that the Home Office must look again at what support it provides to asylum seekers, improve the support provided and treat everyone equally? The First Minister Yes, I agree very strongly with that. First, I thank local authorities and all organisations who have played their part in welcoming those who have come under the Syrian resettlement programme. I attended an event at COSLA just before Christmas, I think, where we were celebrating the work that had been done to make sure that that welcome was as warm as it has been. However, that should apply not just to those coming through the resettlement programme but to everybody who seeks asylum in our country. We believe very strongly that integration begins from day 1 of arrival, not just when people have been granted refugee status. The support that the UK Government provides under the Syrian resettlement programme is very good and very welcome, but it also serves to highlight the gulf with the minimal support that is provided for asylum seekers. Indeed, it creates a two-tier system, so I encourage the UK Government to extend the model of holistic support that we see as part of the resettlement programme and fund the integration of asylum seekers to give them an equal chance to rebuild their lives here and fulfil the potential they and their families have. Ivan McKee Last week, in a feeble and misguided attempt to look strong and stable, the UK Government engaged in military action in Syria on the basis of flimsy evidence without waiting for the findings of an independent inquiry and at the behest of a presidential tweet. That action risks increasing the flow of refugees from that warm-torn country. Does the First Minister agree with me that the UK Government needs to do far more to facilitate the arrival of refugees in this country than it has done so far? The First Minister I think that that is important because, regardless of anybody's views on the airstrikes that took place last weekend, there will be differing views in the community at large in Scotland. Indeed, there will be differing views within the Syrian community in Scotland about the efficacy and rights and wrongs of airstrikes, but it does underline the importance of making sure that we are welcoming those who are fleeing the conflict in Syria. I have said before and I will say again that the UK Government, for all that it does some good work here, could do much more. All of us are appalled at the actions of the Assad regime and, if it was the case, I have got no difficulty in believing his capability of launching chemical weapons attacks against his own population. All of us are appalled at that. The question is how best to deal with that, my view, and I think that this has been borne out by past experiences that isolated airstrikes do not help to resolve the underlying situation in Syria. We need to get back. Is the UN Secretary General has said that there is no military solution to this situation? We need to get back to finding a political solution, and I hope that that is now the priority of all of the countries involved. Ross Greer Thank you. Recent escalations in the Syrian conflict have displaced more people from their homes and only compounded the refugee crisis. Could the First Minister confirm whether the Scottish Government-owned Presswick airport was used by the US military in their recent air campaign, which will only serve to compound the conflict? The First Minister We have discussed the issue of the commercial nature of what it does and the fact that what it does in terms of military flights is no different from what it has done all along. The issue in terms of the Syrian conflict is two-fold. I will not repeat what I have said about my views of airstrikes, but all of us need to get back to a situation where the Geneva political process in Syria is given priority. Fundamentally, we need to see a long-term, sustainable political settlement to the situation in Syria, and I think that all of us have a part to play many greater than those of us in this chamber, but all of us have a part to play in encouraging that process. Brian Whittle To ask the First Minister in light of Scotland's success at the Commonwealth Games what the Scottish Government is doing to ensure that there is opportunity for all to participate in sport and physical activity from grass-roots to elite sport. The First Minister Firstly, I am sure that, perhaps rarely, everybody will join in agreement when I take this opportunity to congratulate everyone involved with Team Scotland on achieving their best ever away games by winning an amazing 44 medals, which beats the previous medal tally at an overseas Games of 29 in Melbourne in 2006. The efforts of not just our athletes, but everybody in Team Scotland, their support teams and families have been absolutely incredible, and I want to place on record my congratulations to each and every one of them. This obviously demonstrates that Scottish sport is growing in strength and depth with sport Scotland and our governing bodies, developing talent in our athletes, coaching and support staff. That success does not happen by accident. It comes through sustained investment and commitment in our whole sporting system. We have created opportunities through active schools, community sports hubs and a comprehensive range of performance in national performance centres. All of that is enabling more people of all ages and backgrounds to regularly take part in sport and physical activity from grass-roots to high performance level. Brian Whittle I thank the First Minister for her answer and associate myself with the amazing efforts of our athletes across here. I also take the opportunity to recognise governing bodies, clubs, coaches and volunteers across the country who relentlessly hard work has been instrumental in delivering that success. If she agrees with me that that success at elite level helps to drive participation, that can only happen if there is accessible opportunity. Would you also agree with me that opening up the school estate for extracurricular activities and out-of-school activities and aligning those activities with local sports clubs is an initiative that would help to deliver sustainable participation? The First Minister Yes, I agree with that and much of that is already happening. Of course, we have seen with some previous PFI schools, some of them under previous Tory Governments, that there are restrictions in terms of opening up sports facilities in that way. However, we are doing a number of things. We are protecting sports Scotland's budget. We have exceeded our aim of creating 150 community sports hubs as part of the Commonwealth Games and Glasgow legacy. Of course, we are investing or have been investing in a range of national performance centres—Oreum here in Edinburgh being one of the shining examples of that. However, I agree with the thrust of the question that high performance success helps to drive and inspire performance generally. That is why we will continue to make sure that our funding and our support spans mass participation, as well as the more targeted support for our most talented athletes. Christine Grahame Thank you, Presiding Officer. I, too, associate myself with the remarks regarding the success of medallist and all who represented Scotland, but there is a but. The Government's final evaluation report published this month in the Glasgow Commonwealth Games 2014 states that, hosting a major event is not in and of itself likely to have an automatic positive impact on population levels of sports participation and physical activity, so not even hosting makes a mark. Given the increase in obesity, even in preschool children, is the First Minister satisfied that the appropriate balance is being struck between elite funding and the humble, but I would suggest more pressing provision of funding to encourage exercise, and I stress exercise, at a very basic level? The First Minister I think that Christine Grahame raises an important issue. That balance is always going to be important, and inevitably that balance will not always be easy to strike. I agree that we have never argued that simply hosting a major event will deliver benefits. You have got to work hard to get those benefits, which is what we have been doing since Glasgow 2014, and that is what we will continue to do through and after the European Championships that will take place in Glasgow this summer. However, we also invest heavily in community activity in sports. For example, PE in schools through our active schools programme between 2012 and 2016, we invested nearly £12 million in supporting schools to meet our PE commitment, and we have seen massive improvement in that. We are also doubling investment in active travel. We are actually seeing an increase in the numbers of people taking part in sport, and many of our governing bodies are seeing rises in participation. For example, Scottish Athletics has experienced a 49 per cent increase in athletics club members since 2011. For Scottish swimming, it has been an increase of 25 per cent, Scottish Cycling, and an increase of 12 per cent. The number of children meeting the guidelines on physical activity has increased from 71 per cent in 2008 to 76 per cent in 2016. There is more work to do, and we will always need to take care to get that balance right. However, it is important that we invest in community activity, but it is also important that we invest to give our most talented athletes the best chance possible of going to major competitions such as the Commonwealth Games and coming home with medals. To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government's response is to the recent Accounts Commission report, Local Government in Scotland, Challenges and Performance 2018. We welcome the report. It makes a number of recommendations to help councils to meet the challenges that they face and emphasises the need for councils to develop new ways of working. For example, it says that councils should work with communities to understand their needs and to actively involve them in decision making, which are objectives that the Scottish Government has been promoting through our community empowerment agenda. I encourage all councils, as I am sure they are doing, to consider the report carefully and to take any necessary actions to implement its recommendations. I thank the First Minister for her reply. She must be worried, as I am, about what the report says about the critical state of local government finances and the warning that councils are struggling to provide care for our older people. That is really serious. With a mandate to govern Scotland for the next three years, I ask the First Minister, does she have the courage to fix this funding and care crisis so that all older people in Scotland receive the care that they need and deserve? The First Minister. That is what we are doing. We have just passed a budget. I appreciate that Labour voted against the budget that delivers a real-terms increase in the revenue budgets for local authorities. Of course, we are transferring resources from the NHS into social care so that we can not only build up social care services to help local authorities with what they do, but also help to relieve the pressure on the NHS. We are taking forward the extension of free personal care to the under-65s. We have taken forward plans already to pay the living wage to those working in our social care services, so we are getting on with doing that work day in and day out. It might be better if, instead of coming forward with constant requests for us to do more, but then voting against budgets that we bring forward to do exactly that, if Labour would bring forward something more constructive occasionally to this chamber. The First Minister will be aware that the Account Commission report raises a number of concerns, not least the threat posed by leaving the European Union to Scotland's working-age population. With Scotland's projected population growth being entirely due to inward migration, does she share the report's concerns that leaving the EU could have an impact on the number of working-age people in Scotland, meaning less money for public spending through taxation? Yes, I do share that concern. I think that everybody across Scotland should share that concern. Our population continues to increase. It is now at a record high, but that growth has been driven by migration. The Fraser of Allander Institute has highlighted concerns about the impact of Brexit on migration and our long-term growth prospects. It is clear that the UK policy on immigration is not only inhumane, but it is harming Scotland's economic interests, which is why this Parliament has already backed our call for new powers so that Scottish ministers can offer migration routes to those people who want to make Scotland their home. Thank you very much. That concludes First Minister's questions. We now turn to members' business in the name of Alexander Stewart on RAF 100, the centenary of the RAF. We will just take a few moments for members and the ministers to change seats.