 Thank you minister, Before we move to the next side of business, members will wish to join me and welcome to the gallery his Excellency stock managerотаeth Llyn, the ambassador of the republic of Korea to the United Kingdom. First Minister's question 1, Ke ML deform,鍐ad zedag dill. To ask the first minster what engagements she has planned for the rest of the day? First minister, engagement is to take forward the Government's programme for Scotland. Kección dill. Fy godid, dyna gwaith y Cymru o'r gwaith i gefnogaeth, a ddim yn gwneud am ystod y sgol, disagre o'r fyddeg Dŵr, i fynt ei bod ei ddymaibol o ringh Cymru, ac i ddim yn gwneud i gyddiadau fel y fywd. Rydyn ni'n gallu ddodr yn ei ôl yn niad ar gyfer y SMP, oherwydd ein gwneud i gyddiadau fel ei ddylch yn gyffredinol, ac mae wedi cael ei gyd yw, mae'n ddigwydd i'n gwybod bod have been no reduction in bursaries. So just for the record, can the First Minister confirm whether the amount of money spent on student bursaries and grants in Scotland has gone up or down since the SNP took office in 2007? First minister? First Minister, I say firstly to Kezia Dugdale, no issue is more important to me and no issue is more important to this government than our education system. me, and I will gyda ni'n ei ddweud i mewn eich dynwydau yn eich wir aen nhw'n ei ddweud i mi費io mewn hunainledd a'w'r unrhyw pwysig o'r edrych o'r gyflau eu lleeradau. Gweld Dygdale-durhan yn y ffordd y courtesy o'r gyfryng llyfen a'r gyllideg llwyddiadau gyllideg llwyddiadau yn gweithio gyda ni'n gwirionedd ac yn y bwysig o'i ddweud mawr, rydyn ni'n fawr, dhawn i'w ddrygu'r golyniadau? Mae fan hynny'r anodd ddaf, i fawr, sydd wedi cael ei ddod i'w ddrygu'r anodd aieud yn 2007. Mae anodd aieud yn ddrygu'r anodd yn gwybod, dwi ych chi twfau o phwys, ddwy'n fawr o'r hoffi o'r hoffi o'r hoffi oes. Mae anodd aieud yn dwy o rydym ni i gynnig, i ddrygu'r roi hynny ddo ddod i ddiwethaf ddiwethaf I think that there is work to do in our education system, and I don't make any bones about that, but I'm not going to allow any politician in any party to deduce the achievements of our pupils. Now, coming to the specific question about bursaries, I think that it was the national union of students some time ago who described the support package for students in Scotland as being the best in the UK. That support package is a mixture of loans and bursaries, but that support package stands comparison with that of other parts of the UK. As in this area of policy, as in all other areas of education policy, I will stand on the achievements of this Government, but I will also openly and honestly say where there is more work needed, this Government will not shy away from doing it. I asked the First Minister very specifically about bursaries and grants, and the reality is that since the SNP took office in 2007, bursaries and grants for students have been slashed by £40 million. That's £40 million less for students who have the talent to get on in life but don't have the financial resources of their better off peers. It's thousands of working-class kids who have the grades to be nurses, engineers and doctors that can't get the extra support that they need unless they borrow more. How does that compare to the situation elsewhere? Can the First Minister tell the chamber which country in the UK provides the lowest level of bursaries for low-income students? Kezia Dugdale last week at First Minister's question, I assume inadvertently misrepresented the position that she was trying to put forward in terms of qualifications. I fear that she is doing the same today because what matters to students is the support package that is provided. The reality is that the Government has exceeded the manifesto commitment that we made to support the poorest students by ensuring a minimum income of £7,500 in maintenance support for students. There was a 24 per cent increase in the value of the average support package between 2012-13, 2013-14, up from £4,320 in 2012-13. Also, the average student loan debt for Scottish students is lower than the average debt of students in England, in Wales and in Northern Ireland. On all of those measures, we are delivering on the commitments that we made to the poorest students in our society. Perhaps that is why we are able to stand here and say that we have not just met, as I said last week, but exceeded our commitment to maintain full-time equivalent numbers in our colleges. It is why we are starting to see an increase in the number of students from the most deprived communities in Scotland go to university. That is not good enough, which is why we have set up our widening access commission. That is a Government, unashamedly, that will defend the achievements not just of the Government but of students, pupils and teachers across our country, but will also be open to where we need to do better. One of the issues that I am sure the widening access commission will look at is how we further and better support students, particularly those from our most deprived areas, so that they can take full advantage of the excellent education services that we provide. That might have been a speech, but it certainly was not an answer. I have never heard the First Minister be so reluctant to say the word Scotland, because that is the answer. Under the SNP, it is Scotland that has the lowest level of bursaries and grants across the whole of the United Kingdom. The SNP knows that, because it was embarrassed into making an announcement about it last week. That extra announcement was £2.40 a week. The idea that that is going to transform things is laughable. It is not enough money to get from here to Heriot-Watt in back. It is a disgrace. In 2007, the SNP campaigned on a manifesto to wipe out student debt. I have got the leaflet here, and on the back of it it says that student debt will lurk around your home like a bad smell on the landing, while it is clearly lurking around the SNP Government. Can the First Minister confirm whether student debt has gone up or down under the SNP? I appreciate that Kezia Dugdale did not like the detailed answer that I gave her, but that is no for me to continue to fulfil the duty that I have in this chamber to give detailed answers, even if they do not suit the political purposes of the Scottish Labour Party. In my last answer, I address specifically the issue of student loan debt. Average student loan debt for Scottish students in 2014 is £7,600, compared to in England £20,100, in Northern Ireland £16,820, and perhaps more significant of all in Wales. Where there is a Labour Government, average student loan debt in Wales was £17,310. If I was a Scottish student, of course I would look to the Government I lead to continue to make improvements and to do better. I would expect nothing less, but I think that if I was a student in Scotland I would prefer to be in Scotland with average student loan debt so much lower than it is anywhere else in the United Kingdom. I can also finally say this to Kezia Dugdale. For the party that introduced tuition fees in Scotland, for the party that broke a manifesto commitment to introduce tuition fees in England, for a party that broke a manifesto commitment not to introduce top-up tuition fees to do precisely that, I think that it is sheer and utter hypocrisy for Labour to come to this chamber and talk about student debt. The only people that were clapping at the end of Kezia Dugdale's last contribution were the Tories. I am reminded of Michael Dugger, the senior UK Labour figure, the comments he made last week about Labour. We should not have been in bed with the Tories. It was a complete disaster. It killed us. I think that it is about time that Kezia Dugdale and Labour learned a few lessons. Kezia Dugdale? Presiding Officer, it was the Labour Party that abolished tuition fees in 2001. It was the Labour Party that abolished tuition fees in 2001 and I say that to the First Minister in the most sincere way, because I was at university, but the reality is that I was at university when this Labour Party abolished fees in 2001. I am camping the debt. I have got the figures in front of me here. It has doubled under the SNP. According to her own Government figures, the average debt per student has doubled under the SNP. A leading education expert says that a student from a low-income background in Scotland now faces debts up to £27,000. That is the SNP's record when it comes to student loan debt, and that is more than the average annual salary in Scotland. In truth, the SNP's time in office has been a mixture of ups and downs. Student debt is up and student bursaries are down. In light of the SNP's new transparent approach in education, when will the First Minister just admit that she is letting down Scotland's students? First Minister, just because she says something in a sincere way does not make it true. Tuition fees from the front end of education and put them on the back end of education. That lives in a parallel universe these days. Who can blame them? The real universe for Scottish Labour is a pretty miserable place to be, but trying to pretend that the abolished tuition fees really take the biscuit. Perhaps it is insulting the intelligence of the Scottish people in that way that has resulted in Labour being in the dire position that it is in today. I will continue to do the job that I have to do in making improvements where we need to make those improvements. That is precisely why we have established the widening access commission to look at how we make it possible for more students from our most deprived areas to go to university. We will reflect on and implement the recommendations of that commission so that we can build on our achievements and make sure that we are serving the students and the potential students of this country even better in future. I make that commitment most sincerely. I say finally to Kezia Dugdale that she might want to describe the SNP's term in office as being one of ups and downs, if only she could describe Labour's term in opposition that way, because it has not been one of ups and downs, it has been one of downs. If they keep up the performance that we are seeing week after week, they will be going down even further. Ruth Davidson Thank you, Presiding Officer, to ask the First Minister when she will next meet the Prime Minister. No current plans. Ruth Davidson Thank you. It seems that we all now agree, the education secretary, that we concluded that our school system is failing too many of our children. We have declining standards in literacy and numeracy and a persistent gap between better and worse off children, and these are simply facts, First Minister. We know that the education secretary wants to tackle this, but the truth is that we have no idea what she wants to do. So I would like to ask a very specific question. In her speech earlier this week, the education secretary said that she was studying Denmark and Ontario to see what lessons could be learned from their education systems. Both have a rigorous system of testing primary school and younger secondary school children, so does the Scottish Government now support reintroducing standardised testing? Let me deal with that question in a very serious way, because it is a serious question. Can I just correct Ruth Davidson on one point? I agree with her that there are improvements required to be made in our education system. I have said that consistently every time this issue has been raised with me, but it is simply not true. If you look for example at qualifications gained to say that standards in our education system are falling, I have got details here of exam passes going back to 2007 covering every desile of the Scottish population. Fewer pupils today are leaving school with no qualifications and was the case in 2007. If you look at hires, more people, as I said to Kezia Dugdale, are leaving school, not just with one, two or three hires, but with four hires, five hires, six or more hires. In 2007, just 20 per cent from our most deprived desile left school with at least one higher. It is now 33 per cent. That is nowhere near good enough, but it is not true to say that things are not going in the right direction. However, there are improvements that are required to be made, and that is why we have a serious and substantial programme of work under way, one that I, with the education secretary, am overseeing personally. We have established the attainment challenge, the £100 million attainment fund. That is initially going to work with primary schools in seven local authority areas, focused on literacy, numeracy, health and wellbeing. The Scottish Government is currently working with these local authorities to finalise their improvement plans and the detail of how those improvement plans will be monitored and measured. We are in the process of appointing attainment advisers in every local authority area, we are investing in the Read, Write, Count campaign, and we are, and this comes substantially to the point that Ruth Davidson made to me, we are also working on a new national performance framework. I do not mind admitting a frustration that I can stand here and give detail on the performance of secondary school pupils in terms of exam passes. It is much more difficult to do that in terms of the performance of primary school pupils because of a lack of data. That is something that I want to address. I want to address that in a serious, proportionate and well-thought-out way. That is the work that is under way within the Scottish Government and Parliament, of course, will be kept fully updated. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. In among that literary litany of exam results, what we have not had is the acknowledgement that the biannual literacy testing this year shows that standards in literacy are down. The biannual literacy testing last year shows that standards are down. Since the First Minister came to post, we have heard a lot about how much she is listening, how nothing is off the table, that people can bring forward ideas that they will look at things. It is wearing a bit thin because we actually need some decisions and we need a plan. Audit Scotland told us last year that there is no rigorous method in Scotland for assessing children's standards, because some councils do it and some councils don't. It's report states, and if I could quote, Presiding Officer. At the council level, there is no consistent approach to tracking and monitoring the progress of pupils from primary 1 to S3. That means that, after eight years of this Government, until your child is 14 years old, you have no clear idea how good their education is in comparison to the rest of the country. It's no wonder that the Scottish Government doesn't know what to do because it doesn't know what's going on. We need that new system of primary testing exactly like Denmark and exactly like Ontario, so that we can all see which schools need help and which schools are leading the way. Frameworks are fine, but enough is enough when you get on and introduce primary testing or not. First Minister? Firstly, much of what Ruth Davidson said in that question is simply repeated what I already said in my first answer to her. I openly acknowledge that, while we have, through exam passes, a wealth of data about the performance of secondary school pupils, we do not have that same data on primary school pupils. I think that she then went on to overstate it by saying that parents have no idea how their children are doing in primary schools. However, she is also wrong to say that there has been no acknowledgement of the fact that in the recent SSLN survey standards on literacy and numeracy had shown a decline. I have openly acknowledged that and said very clearly that that is not acceptable, and that is what we are now working to improve. There is a serious and substantial programme of work under way. I am not, though, simply going to give Ruth Davidson a yes or a no answer to the decisions before we have properly considered what the right thing to do is. We need a new national performance framework, but we need to make sure that the data that we are collecting and the way in which we are doing that is right, proportionate and sensible. We are considering those issues at the moment, and I look forward to updating Parliament very soon on the direction in which we want to go. I have said repeatedly in this chamber and I am going to say again today that I appreciate that the Opposition parties will want to be political about this issue. I accept that. I am determined that we make the improvements in our education system that require to be made. I, with Angela Constance and the entire Government, are going to roll up our sleeves and do the hard work that needs to be done to do right by the young people of Scotland, and I make no apology to anyone for that. 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 no doubt including some of the issues that we have just been discussing. I am pleased that the First Minister accepts that attainment in literacy and numeracy is falling in Scotland on her watch. It is therefore the responsibility of everyone in this chamber to bring forward ideas for change. We argued for an expansion in early learning and childcare. The Government opposed our proposals, but we eventually won them round. Yet our proposals on the pupil premium have been repeatedly dismissed as unnecessary by successive education ministers. I am happy to argue that everything was fine. Now that it is clear that everything is not fine, will she finally agree to introduce the pupil premium in Scotland? First Minister, if Willie Rennie or any other member of this chamber puts forward ideas for how we improve our education system, of course we will consider those. I would say to Willie Rennie though that per pupil spending in Scotland in both our primary schools and in our secondary schools is higher already than it is in England where the pupil premium was introduced and has increased under this SNP Government. I think that there are a number of things that we need to do. As I said, both to Kezia Dugdale and to Ruth Davidson, I really do think that it is incumbent on opposition politicians in seeking rightly to hold the Government to account that they do not in the process deny the achievements of our education system because it is simply not true to try to paint a picture of a system that is universally failing. As I have demonstrated through reference to the exam statistics, the opposite is the case. On literacy and numeracy, we recognise the improvements that are required to be made. Willie Rennie talks about pupil premium and what that means is increased funding. I have already announced an additional £100 million focused on seven local authority areas and on the pupils who live in our most deprived communities. That is putting money where our mouth is, making the investment available but then making sure that that investment is used to deliver the things that will make a difference in our schools and then finally that we can measure and monitor the difference that has been made so that we know what works and what does not work. That is the kind of systematic, robust, rigorous way that we will go about it. I hope that we can persuade others to come on side with us here. We will, of course, continue to listen to any ideas that are put forward. I am disappointed that she will not accept this, because in England the pupil premium has closed the gap in attainment for primary school children. It allows for one-to-one tuition, books, equipment and targeted support that children from disadvantaged backgrounds need. She talks about the Scottish Government attainment fund, but it is limited to seven out of 32 council areas. The pupil premium would be for the whole country. Will the First Minister finally just agree, accept the case, that the pupil premium closes the gap in attainment and it should be introduced in Scotland? Look, £100 million attainment fund focused on the local authorities, where I think everybody accepts the biggest concentrations of people living in our most deprived communities. It may be that some of this is something that we are actively looking at just now, that some of that money goes to other local authorities where there are clusters of deprivation in particular areas, but surely it is right, having set aside that substantial financial investment, to make sure that that investment is being focused exactly where it is needed most, so that we can drill down on where the issues are and make sure that we have that rigorous approach in place to making improvements and monitoring improvements. I am absolutely determined that we focus on that. We will not close our minds to ideas that are brought forward, of course we will consider ideas, but we have put in place a serious and substantial programme of work, and we are determined to get on with implementing that, because that is what parents and teachers across the country expect, and that is what they will get from this Government. To ask the First Minister what discussions the Scottish Government has had with the UK Government regarding the safety of trident nuclear submarines. The Scottish Government has made clear its opposition to trident nuclear weapons and our concern about the risks that it poses. However, the MOD does not discuss the operation of its vanguard-class submarines with the Scottish Government. Recent allegations from a whistleblower highlighting a catalogue of safety breaches and security lapses are gravely concerning. The UK Government, I think, must fully investigate these allegations without delay, explain any failings that have been highlighted and set out as far as they can precisely what has been done to address each one. People across Scotland and indeed across the UK, and not least those who live and work at or around the naval base on the Clyde, must have answers to the very serious allegations that have been raised. Kenneth Gibson I thank the First Minister for that answer. Whilst many people are indeed concerned following revelations in nuclear engineer William McNeill's 18-page report, The Nuclear Secrets, which came to light last Sunday, does she agree that, whilst the Royal Navy is denying a host of allegations ranging from fire risks to near sinking and collision with another submarine, a fully incomprehensive safety review is indeed merited and should take place with immediate effect. Do such concerns not make clear that ensuring public safety is yet another reason why it would be folly to squander billions on renewing Trident? The First Minister Public safety must always be the top priority. As I have already said, I think that we do need a top-level inquiry into the allegations that have been made. Any potential safety or security failings of the Trident nuclear weapons system are an extremely grave matter. The Government has long opposed the existence of these weapons, but we have also raised operational and safety concerns in the past as well. However, the allegations that were raised over the past few days are all the more troubling because they have been raised by a member of defence personnel, and therefore they have to be treated with the seriousness that they deserve. Only the fullest possible assurance from the UK Government of the safety of its arrangements is now acceptable. However, we should also be very clear that the only certain way to remove the risk of an incident involving Trident nuclear weapons system is through the withdrawal of Trident nuclear weapons system. The UK Government should, in my view, cancel its irresponsible plans to spend £100 billion on renewing these weapons of mass destruction, and should begin now to plan for their removal. Neil Findlay To ask the First Minister what progress the Scottish Government is making on increasing the number of companies and organisations paying the living wage. The Scottish Government has provided funding to the poverty alliance to promote the living wage and increase the number of accredited employers in Scotland. Their work resulted in the achievement of the original target of 150 living wage accredited employers eight months early, and now they are working towards a new target of 500 accredited employers by the end of March next year. Neil Findlay This week's BBC Scotland investigates documentaries showed the heartbreaking impact of low pay on people's lives. The responsibility for setting the national minimum wage is reserved to the UK Government, but this Government can do much more now to address low pay. With only 10 out of 50 of Scotland's largest employers paying the living wage, will the First Minister now publish an action plan setting out how her Government intends using the powers that it has to raise the incomes and living standards of Scottish workers? The First Minister I am not going to set out an action plan. I am going to continue to ensure that we take the actions that we have already agreed to be taken. I think that let's talk more action on things like this are what we need. We have funded the poverty alliance. That campaign has already delivered 200 living wage accredited employers. Monday, this week, Broodog was confirmed as a 200. That is a significant increase since this time last year. It shows that employers from every sector of the economy recognise the importance of ensuring that working people are receiving a fair level of pay. We will now support the poverty alliance to reach that new target of 500 accredited employers. We will also continue to lead by example as a living wage employer, making sure that we take that action with our subcontractors as well and encourage other public authorities to do so. I agree with Neil Findlay about how upsetting watching the documentary he refers to was. I passionately believe that people deserve to earn a living wage when they do a decent day's work, and we in this Government will continue to do everything that we possibly can to make sure that that's the case. To ask the First Minister what action the Scottish Government is taking to allow more disabled people to access modern apprenticeships. I think that this is an important issue. Right now, the number of disabled people accessing modern apprenticeships is disproportionately low, so addressing what is an underrepresentation is a key priority for the Government. Through funding that we provided last year, Skills Development Scotland is working with Barnardo's and Remploy on specific early targeted pathway projects to help disabled young people enter into a modern apprenticeship and we are undertaking research to better understand the issues that prevent disabled people from participating in this programme. This work will be used to develop an equality action plan by autumn 2015, supported by funding of £500,000 that was announced last week to address equality issues in the modern apprenticeship programme. I welcome that answer. I know that many public bodies and companies benefit greatly from employing disabled people. What can the Government do to persuade more employers that taking on young people with learning and physical disabilities as apprenticeships could be positive not only for the employees but highly advantage for their companies? Firstly, we should seek to encourage employers, as many already do, to see the enormous contribution that people with disabilities can make to the workplace, to society, to our wider economy. More particularly, we are currently developing a new employer recruitment incentive, which will support vulnerable young people, including young people with a disability. That incentive is aimed at supporting young people into sustainable employment and encouraging and equipping small businesses to recruit young modern apprentices into their workforce. We are also going to identify a lead body to support recruitment of young disabled people to develop a new work experience model for young disabled people and to introduce an improved approach to career services for young disabled people. All that is detailed in the developing our young workforce implementation plan. I think that Kevin Stewart raises a serious issue and one that we are determined to continue to address. I raise a point of order on the basis that, in the session that we have just seen, the party leader exchanges took 25 minutes. Therefore, there was not an appropriate opportunity for backbenchers to participate in FMQs and to hold the Government properly to account. Therefore, I ask the Presiding Officer that he uses his offices to ensure that the party leader exchanges take up an appropriate length of time. I encourage the First Minister to restrict her exchanges to answers as opposed to speeches. Thank you for your point of order, Mr Kelly. I always have the interest of the backbenchers at heart. I will look very carefully at the exchanges today. It has certainly seen that the party leader exchanges were quite long. Once I review that, I will do as I usually do, Mr Kelly, and I will speak to you as a business manager. I will speak to all the other business managers about how we can manage First Minister's questions better next week. We now move to members' business. Members who leave the chamber should do so quickly and quietly.