 I will now turn to the next item of business, a statement by John Swinney on the response to recommendations on financial redress for survivors of child abuse in care. The cabinet secretary will take questions at the end of his statement and I encourage members who wish to ask a question to press their request to speak buttons as soon as possible. I will set out the Government's response to the recommendations on the free and o gael i mi wrth gwrddfodol, o hakkau cydnogau cynllun o ricweiniu cysyllt… … o bwysigwyr cydnogau cysylltu ac arlethoedd, sydd flower itoedd. Rwy'n ffledd i ddweud o sut rwyf werth ofnol o ffrifwyr iawn. Rwy'n ffreid i chi'r cydnogau cydnogau cydnogau cydnogau cydnogau cydnogau cysyllt today. Rwy'n ffledd i chi'n ddiwylliant gwybod gyfryd wedi'r cyfrinio siŵr ac yn fwyllt ymddangos i ddwyllte i'r cyfrinio ar gyfer gwir. a'r pryddechrau gweld iawn i gynnwys. Rydw i'n rhani fyddai aethau, mae'r campaign ffyrd i Gwysigiaeth wedi gynllun gynhwys yn y gyfnod aethau ar gyfer ymddangos i gyd. Felly, rydw i'n gweld i'n gweld i'n gweld i'n gweld i gyd, ac rydw i'n gweld i'n gweld i gyd yn ystod yn y ddweud. yn y faint 2016, rydw i'n gweld i'n gweld i'r pryddechrau ffyrdd aethau ymddangos i'r of consultation and engagement on the matter of financial redress. I asked the review group to take this forward in partnership with the Centre for Excellence for looked after children in Scotland, Celsus. The review group oversees the implementation of the Action Plan for Justice for victims of historic abuse and care, which was published in 2014. Members of the group include survivors, some representing groups and others independent, a care provider representative, Social Work Scotland, the Scottish Human Rights Commission, Celsus and the Scottish Government. The review group reported to me on 5 September. I commend the review group for the substantial work that is carried out in arriving at its recommendations. Together, they have designed and carried out a national consultation with survivors, researched redress schemes in other countries and had engaged with providers of care services to gather their initial high-level views. They have drawn on the findings of each of those to agree recommendations, taking the time to work through difficult issues in a collaborative and constructive way. There has been a strong survivor voice and presence throughout the whole process. In addressing the group's recommendations, we wholeheartedly accept the need to acknowledge and provide tangible recognition of the terrible harm that was done to children who were abused in care by those who were entrusted to look after them. The main recommendation is to establish a financial redress scheme and to pass legislation before the end of this parliamentary term. The Scottish Government accepts this recommendation and commits to do so, subject to parliamentary approval. The review group also recommends that advanced payments are made as soon as possible to survivors who may not live long enough to apply to a statutory scheme due to either ill health or age. Further information from the review group indicates that, for ill health, a definition of approaching end of life should be used based on advice from medical professionals and that, for age, the threshold should be set at age 70 and over and subject to review. We accept those recommendations for an advanced payments scheme. The other recommendations were about important aspects of the design of the statutory redress scheme, which the review group has asked to consider in the next steps. Those were issues that were important to survivors who took part in the consultation and we agree that they will be given further consideration in the detailed and complex work that lies ahead. As part of the work, the review group has given very careful and specific consideration, with advice from the Scottish Human Rights Commission, to the position of survivors whose abuse occurred before 26 September 1964. Despite the introduction of the Limitation Childhood Abuse Scotland Act 2017, survivors whose rights to compensation were extinguished through the law of prescription are unable to pursue their case to the civil court. The review group's letter states that the recommendation to establish a financial redress scheme would provide an alternative compensation mechanism to the civil courts. It also states that it is important that a redress compensation mechanism is open to all survivors of in-care abuse, as there are many reasons that a survivor may not be able to access civil justice. The letter recognises that the implementation of a statutory redress scheme will take some time. It is in that context that the review group recommends advanced payments for survivors who may not live long enough to apply to a statutory scheme, many of whom will be pre-64 survivors. Scotland will establish a financial redress scheme for survivors of abuse and care, and it will be open to all in-care survivors, regardless of when that abuse took place. We will progress without delay to detailed design of a redress scheme, ensuring that we learn lessons from other countries and subject to parliamentary approval, the legislation will be passed by the end of this parliamentary term. We will also begin discussions with providers of care services to consider ways in which we can respect the recommendation that all those responsible should contribute to a redress scheme. We will move to advance payments as soon as we possibly can. While some months will be required to develop and set up the scheme, we will do so with urgency. I will update Parliament with progress on our implementation of the review group's recommendations in January. We set up the Scottish Child Abuse Inquiry in 2015 to investigate the nature and extent of the abuse of children, although in care in Scotland, and the failures that allowed it to happen. The inquiry is making significant progress. It has published its first findings, and opening statements for its third case study began this morning. We have heard harrowing evidence of the appalling mistreatment and abuse of children in care settings all across Scotland. In due course, the inquiry will publish its final report and will make recommendations to improve legislation, policy and practice. We do not need to wait until then to recognise that we failed victims and survivors. It is clear that we did. We must acknowledge that and respond with compassion and humility. In 2004, the then First Minister, Jack McConnell, offered a sincere apology on behalf of the people of Scotland to those who were subject to abuse and neglect whilst in care in Scotland. Today, on behalf of the Scottish Government, I offer an unreserved and heartfelt apology to everyone who suffered abuse and care in Scotland. We are deeply ashamed of what happened. I know that nothing can ever make up for the suffering that survivors have endured. Nonetheless, they have told us that redress is an important element of justice and that it would provide some degree of recognition and acknowledgement. That is why we will have a redress scheme in Scotland, one that treats survivors with sensitivity and respect. As the inquiry progresses, the detailed nature of failings on the part of institutions, both public and private, will become clearer. We as a Government, indeed we as a Parliament, will be listening and learning. We will want to apologise again to survivors and their families when the full extent and nature of those failings are known, as the Australian Prime Minister did so powerfully yesterday. The courage and determination of survivors to speak out for justice and to protect children today and in the future from experiencing the abuse that they suffered is inspiring and has been unwavering. I want to address survivors directly and to say to them today, we believe you and we are sorry. I thank the cabinet secretary for prior sight of his statement and restate the Scottish Conservatives wholehearted commitment to ensure that we are fully supportive of all the victims who have suffered appalling abuse whilst in care and supportive of the Scottish Government as it seeks ways to find appropriate financial redress. I wonder if I may ask for clarification on three points. First, in establishing the financial redress scheme for survivors in care, could the cabinet secretary confirm exactly who it will be who decides on the amount of compensation that will be paid to the victims? Secondly, will those families of deceased victims be able to apply for support? Finally, in the context of the cabinet secretary's comment on page 2, when he states that there has been a very strong survivor voice and presence throughout the process, he will be aware that there remain some victims who feel that they have been hitherto excluded in the consultation process, so he could he update Parliament on what measures he is taking to address those concerns. I thank Liz Smith for her expression of support from the Conservative Party to the direction that the Government has chosen to take on the issue. In relation to her three questions, I would respond as follows. First of all, Parliament will decide the level of compensation that is paid in relation to the redress schemes. We will obviously take forward dialogue in relation to the advanced payment scheme, which will be underpinned by provisions within the Budget Scotland Act for 2019-20, but the legislative detail of the statutory scheme will be determined and fooled by parliamentary scrutiny and consent. Secondly, in relation to the families of deceased victims, yes, families of deceased victims will be able to apply for provision within the scheme, and the detail of the scheme will make provision for all of that. Thirdly, on the question of survivor voice, one of my absolute priorities since I took office was to ensure that survivors were at the heart of the discussions of how we take this forward. Of course, there are a range of different views that exist in the survivor community on those questions, and I want to be as inclusive as I possibly can be. The action plan review group undertook a very comprehensive and engaged process of survivor dialogue, and I was deeply grateful to them for doing so. I think that one of the reasons why they were so effective in doing that was that the review group involved survivors very directly in the work that it undertakes. I have given the survivors—and the First Minister has given the survivors that we met today—the very clear assurance that we want to ensure their continued participation in dialogue in how we take the next steps going forward, because they have produced for us today—and I told them that today—a very clear piece of policy advice to the Government, which is well considered and well researched, and we want to build on that in the stages to come. Iain Gray is followed by John Finnie. My thanks to the cabinet secretary for early sight of his statement. Let me begin by simply and sincerely associating those benches with the cabinet secretary's apology to everyone who suffered abuse and neglect while in care in Scotland. We all share the shame of which he spoke. However, we cannot hide from the fact that apology was first made in 2004, 14 years ago. It is important, though the inquiry is, that it took us too long to initiate it, and it is welcome, though the promise of redress is welcome indeed, that it has taken us too long to get to that commitment, too. Given that, even in the knowledge of the complexity of legislation, it is not the end of this Parliament two and a half years away, not still too long for all of those who have waited so long already. As well as the advance payment scheme, will the cabinet secretary not bring the deadline for the full redress scheme forward, and we will do all that we can to help him to accelerate that legislation through this Parliament? I thank the cabinet secretary for his association with the Labour Party with my remarks and the direction to travel. In looking at the time period, since the public apology was given by Jack McConlon in 2004, a whole range of different steps have been taken to advance that agenda, which culminated, certainly for me, with the establishment of the abuse inquiry, which, as I said in my statement, we do not need to wait until the conclusion of the inquiry to realise the gravity of the findings that are going to emerge from the evidence that is being considered forensically by Lady Smith. That will cause the country to have to face up to some very difficult parts of our past, and it is right that we do so and that we do so properly and comprehensively. In relation to the timescale for legislation, I want to assure the Parliament that the Government will move as quickly as we possibly can do. My commitment is that this will be completed during this parliamentary session. That is what the review group asked me to commit to, and that is what I commit to. However, we will act swiftly to introduce legislation as quickly as we possibly can do. We have to ensure that we get this right and ensure that we take survivors with us in the process. Even in the period since November 2016, when I commissioned the review group to undertake the work that I am now formally responding to in Parliament almost two years later, I think that the review group would accept that the complexity and detail that they had to look at was essential in utilising that amount of time. I hope that we can move as swiftly as possible. The advance payment scheme will be in place in the financial year 2019-20, so it will be available from next April. I want to make sure that we move to a statutory basis as quickly as we possibly can do. Obviously, the co-operation of Opposition parties in making sure that effective scrutiny is undertaken in a timidest fashion will be advantageous in that process. John Freed to be full by Tavish Scott. I thank the cabinet secretary for early sight of his statement and the content of his statement and the Scottish Green Party's support to progressing those very important matters. I also thank the review group and survivors. With regard to the portion of your speech where you talked about beginning discussion with providers of care services to consider ways in which you can respect the recommendation that all those responses would contribute to a redress scheme, those could be very sensitive discussions. I hope that you will not require to be, but can the cabinet secretary assure the chamber that, if required, those will be robust discussions to ensure that necessary justice is delivered, please? I am grateful to Mr Finnie for his expressive support from the Green Party to our approach here. I intend to pursue discussions carefully with providers of care, where there is responsibility. I think that the review group makes a very fair recommendation that those organisations should contribute to a financial compensation and redress scheme. The Government will pursue that with vigor to ensure that we are able to be true to the recommendation that the review group has put in front of us. Tavish Scott to be full by Angela Constance. Can I also reflect the Deputy First Minister's tone and substance of his remarks today and associate my party with the recognition of the factors that have led to where we are today and the shame that we all feel, as he and Gray rightly recognise, and the way in which the Deputy Minister expressed those remarks are ones that I entirely hold to as well. Two very brief questions. The first is to relate to John Finnie's question about those responsible contributing. Does the Deputy First Minister envisage the Government playing an intermediary role in brokering how that structure will work, given the range of parties involved? The other recommendation that he may not have touched on in his opening remarks about any potential and negative consequences that are considered during the scheme design, how does he best plan to oversee those so as to ensure that what we achieve out of this set of circumstances is one that reaches the right level of tone and understanding if a concern is expressed? I am grateful to Mr Scott for the express support of the Scottish Liberal Democrats to our position as we take it forward. On his first point, I think that the Government will be involved in those discussions and we will be very actively involved in pursuing all of the dialogue that is required to advance those issues, and that I am sure will involve us in discussion with providers of care that carry responsibility. On his second point, I think that it is important that we maintain—I think that the best way for me to address his second point is to say that we will be keeping survivors very, very closely involved in the dialogue of the next steps that we take forward, because that close proximity of survivor involvement has helped us enormously to get to where we are today, and I want to make sure that we maintain that for the foreseeable future. Angela Constance to be followed by Alison Harris. Thank you, Presiding Officer. Following on from the earlier two questions, I wonder if the cabinet secretary agrees that it is only right that religious bodies and institutions and organisations who are meant to be providing care, that they also take the opportunity to step forward, to work constructively with the Government and to contribute to a Government-led scheme, not to replace, but to enhance our overall collective effort. Can he give any indication when he thinks that survivors will be able to apply to a statutory redress scheme? First of all, I pay tribute to the work that Angela Constance undertook as my predecessor in establishing the abuse inquiry. She ensured that the inquiry is now able to undertake the very important role that it is performing within our society, and I know that the country is profoundly grateful to her for doing that. In relation to the first of our two questions, I expect that there will be dialogue timuously with care providers, and I would expect that to be taken forward as we develop the detailed design of the approaches that we take. Secondly, I would imagine that the timescale for individuals who are able to apply to a statutory scheme will be dependent on the passage of the legislation within Parliament. As I said to Ian Gray in my earlier answer, I want to do that as quickly but as robustly as we possibly can do. For part of that, I am in the hands of Parliament for the handling of that matter, and I will also have to undertake extensive dialogue to make sure that we get the details correct. Alison Harris will be filled by Rona Mackay. May I please double check, cabinet secretary? Just for clarification, is the Scottish Government going to adopt a dual payment system involving a flat rate standard payment to all survivors and a payment based on individual experiences? I have not set out any detail on those questions. Those are very material points for there to be further consideration, but the review group did not make recommendations of that nature. They established some criteria for advance payments, which I am grateful to them. The review committee wrote to me, first of all, in early September on the general details of their recommendations, and then gave me more specific points in a letter on 2 October, which suggested eligible criteria for an advance payment scheme. All of the detail that Alison Harris raised is that we will have to work our way through and agree in due course. Rona Mackay, to be followed by Johann Lamont. The cabinet secretary will be aware that a small number of other countries are facing up to the failings that meant that children were abused in care and that some of them have established a redress scheme. Can he confirm that the Scottish Government will learn from those schemes? The review group has already undertaken a lot of work that has looked at the existence of schemes in other jurisdictions. We will, of course, have the advantage of learning from that and ensuring that we take the correct and effective approach to make sure that our financial redress scheme addresses the circumstances and the experiences if that is possible of the experience of individuals who were abused in care. Johann Lamont, to be followed by Fulton MacGregor. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. I would wish to acknowledge the work of survivors who have fought long and hard for recognition, often at huge personal cost. I would also reflect that the Parliament has proven itself in recent times by very fleet of foot in taking legislation forward when it is necessary, and I am sure that this Parliament would want to do whatever it could to make sure that the legislation gets on the statute book as soon as possible. May I ask the cabinet secretary specifically about the scheme for advanced payments, which has plans currently to focus on the needs of older people and those who are sadly terminally ill? I wonder if the cabinet secretary would acknowledge that many survivors who fall into neither of the above categories have lived for a very long time with their suffering, and there will be those whose need is such that tragically their lives may be cut short. Will the cabinet secretary commit to an advanced payment scheme that addresses the needs of all those who are suffering right now as a consequence of the abuse perpetrated upon them? On the question of timescale for legislation, let me reiterate that I want to move as quickly as we possibly can, but we have to go through the necessary dialogue with survivors to make sure that we get the details correct. We have built up a very strong and positive relationship with survivors in advancing many of those issues, and I am profoundly grateful to survivors for what they contribute to that discussion. As I indicated in my response to Iain Gray, I am in the hands of Parliament. If Parliament is willing to move in an expedited fashion in relation to legislation, then the Government will be happy to co-operate with exactly that aspiration. On the question of the payment timescale for survivors, the interaction group wrote to me on 2 October, as I said to my answer to Alison Smith, setting out the criteria that they consider to be relevant in relation to approaching the end of life and also an age recommendation of 70, but they did ask me to maintain that under review, which I will do as we design the advance payment scheme. I would also point out to Johann Lamont that there are other forms of support that are available to individuals at this present time, which can be accessed that are not in the form of financial redress, but they are in the form of support to assist individuals in trying to deal with the circumstances that they face. I would encourage any survivor who feels the need to access some to give support to take steps to do so, because the experience that I have heard from individual survivors has proved to be very beneficial. Fulton MacGregor, to be followed by Maurice Corry. The cabinet secretary earlier confirmed that there will be an option for the next of kin of deceased victims and survivors to make applications for redress. Can the cabinet secretary advise how the Scottish Government will make those applications available? That was one of the points that we will discuss in the detailed design that we take forward. It is important that, given the length of time that some survivors have waited and may not have actually seen any form of redress because they have not lived long enough, it is important that we support their families who will have endured a great deal of pain and suffering along with their loved ones. Maurice Corry, to be followed by Daniel Johnson. Thank you, Presiding Officer. Survivors have been waiting decades for compensation. The cabinet secretary will be aware that many of the elderly victims are waiting for this compensation. When can they expect to receive a first payment and not just as soon as possible? I would encourage Mr Corry to reflect on the fact that, if the Government is going to make excretia payments of this type, we have to have parliamentary authority to enable us to do so. There has to be some form of underpinning to that, and the earliest I can do that is through a budget Scotland in 2019-20. It is the very earliest that I can possibly do that. That is where provision for the advanced payment scheme will come from, and there will be detailed work undertaken to ensure that we can put in place the statutory underpinning of a financial redress scheme. As I have answered a number of questions, we will do that as quickly as the consultation with survivors and the development work is undertaken and as quickly as Parliament will pass the legislation to enable us to do so. Daniel Johnson, to be followed by John Mason. Following on from the questions about the contributions to be made by responsible third party organisations, can the cabinet secretary confirm that compensation payments will not be contingent on those contributions being made by those organisations? Will there be consideration of a mechanism to compel those organisations to contribute, especially in the light of international experience? No payment will be contingent on contributions from third parties. We will design a scheme and we will deliver that scheme, and ideally it will benefit from contributions made by other organisations who will have a responsibility. The question of compulsion is, of course, a question that could be considered within the legislative process on the issue. I would not want to commit any further beyond that. Obviously, we will take forward discussion directly with individual care providers that we believe are relevant to the discussion, but the issue of compulsion is one that Parliament could consider as part of the legislative process. John Mason. Thank you. Clearly most of the questions in the statement has been around the question of financial redress, but I wonder if the cabinet secretary can say anything about other kinds of support that might be available, for example emotional support, and would that also be included in the legislation? In relation to my response to Johann Lamont, there are some points of relevance that I would have drawn in answering Mr Mason. The Government has put in place financial support through future pathways, which is a fund for people who were abused in care in Scotland. Its purpose is not to provide financial redress but to provide support to individuals who will be affected. We want to make sure that that support meets the needs of individuals, that they are accessing the type of emotional or physical support that would be beneficial for them, and I would encourage individuals who feel that they would benefit from such an intervention to contact future pathways. It is an important source of support in advance of us providing detailed consideration to the wider question of financial redress. Thank you very much. That concludes our statement. I thank members and cabinet secretary for the contributions. We will move on to the next item of business, which is a statement by Jeane Freeman on NHS performance. We will just take a second or two for ministers and members to