 The first item of business this morning is general questions, and we start with question number one from Colin Smith. Premier Synt golden, my ambition is to appeal to a Japan government what discussions such as abertynoedd haes cyfliwyd versus the Scottish Government's plans on rebuilding the Edinburgh Cancer Centre. Cabinet secretary, Shona Robison. Llyr Gruff bordercast Lithuongol landscape senator Sehewn stairs Dou기�救 seconds agreed filln today by^^ The Scottish Government and NHS L wrthwynt has been in regular contact to discuss NHS Llyr thighny innus plans to rebuild the Edinburgh Cancer Centre. A site visit has been arranged for Scottish Government officials in September 2016 Lothian recently submitted the strategic assessment of the proposed development to the NHS capital investment group. NHS Lothian is in the process of developing the initial agreement, the main purpose of which is to confirm the need for the investment. Colin Smyth. I thank the cabinet secretary for that answer. The cabinet secretary will be aware that patients from my own region, in particular Dumfries and Galloway, often have to travel to the western general for cancer treatment and are provided with outpatient accommodation at Peitlen Lodge next to the cancer unit, accommodation currently under review by the health board. This accommodation means that patients do not have the gruel and journey back and forth from Dumfries and Galloway and they get invaluable peer support that they simply would not receive staying in a nearby hotel. Can the cabinet secretary therefore give assurances that in any service changes at the hospital, an outpatient's residential facility will be retained and that current and past patients, including those from Dumfries and Galloway, will be fully involved in any discussions around any service changes? First of all, I very much appreciate, given the circumstances of the treatment that patients are undergoing, the need for appropriate accommodation. The decisions on that level of detail have not been finalised at this point, as the member will be aware. I can assure the member that the needs of patients travelling from across Scotland, including Dumfries and Galloway, will be considered as the business case develops. I have asked specifically to be kept informed around the issue of Peitlen Lodge. I do believe that it is important that appropriate accommodation is provided and I am happy to laze with the member as the issue is taken forward. We should bear in mind that the potential here is for a fit for purpose oncology assessment unit, a state-of-the-art facility, but it is important that patients who are travelling from outwith the Edinburgh area get appropriate accommodation. I am happy to keep in contact with the member about that. Miles Briggs It is my understanding that NHS Lothian has submitted an initial agreement proposal to make the case for some interim bridging capital to upgrade the existing accommodation before a new centre is built. Has the cabinet secretary decided to support this appeal for bridging capital? Will she meet me, NHS Lothian and other MSPs whose constituents use the centre to discuss how we are taking forward proposals for a new centre? Fiona Hyslop The member will be aware of the various stages involved in a decision on the funding. I am happy to meet the member and NHS Lothian to talk about the specifics that Miles Briggs raises. Obviously, the business case that I was referring to is at an early stage and it would not be appropriate for me to make any decision before the review of the business case is completed. Obviously, any other investments in and around this decision would need to be seen in the context of that bigger project, but I am happy to meet Miles Briggs and NHS Lothian to discuss that further. Angus MacDonald To ask the Scottish Government what action it is taking to tackle Islamophobia. Cabinet Secretary, Angela Constance We have invested over £0.5 million in 2016-17 to promote interfaith relations and engagement between civic Scotland and different faith communities. We are also developing an ambitious programme of work following the report of the independent advisory group on hate crime, prejudice and community cohesion, including running a hate crime awareness raising campaign this year. In January, the Minister for Community Safety and Legal Affairs announced an independent review of hate crime legislation. Angus MacDonald I am pleased to hear the progress that has been made, but the fact remains that Islamophobia continues in my Falkirk East constituency and beyond. It has been suggested to me by groups who have been at the receiving end of Islamophobia in Falkirk district that a relaunch of the One Scotland Many Cultures campaign would help to show Scotland as a diverse, multi-faith and multicultural society that it is committed to promoting One Scotland where many cultures can thrive side by side. Will the cabinet secretary give that some consideration? Angus MacDonald Yes, absolutely. As I alluded to in my original answer, we are currently developing an awareness raising campaign around the impact of hate crime as part of our One Scotland campaign. The One Scotland campaign continues just now to have an online presence, but we will look at how we can develop that further. That was one of the very important recommendations coming from the independent advisory group on hate crime, prejudice and community cohesion recommendations around public education and how we can promote a clearer understanding of what hate crime is, the impact of it and to get across that strong message that it must not be tolerated and that it must be reported at every opportunity. I hope that that gives some reassurance to the member and to the chamber. Anas Sarwar Despite the Government's efforts to Islamophobic hate crimes that were doubled in the last year in Scotland, can the cabinet secretary outline what specific measures will be taken to help support Muslim communities to better report Islamophobic hate crime, how we can set examples of people being convicted for Islamophobic hate crime and, thirdly, if the Government shares any data about Islamophobic hate crime with any organisations that monitor the trends in Islamophobia? I thank Mr Sarwar for his question. He is absolutely right to point to an increase in Islamophobia in terms of crimes reported. If we look at the most recent hate crime statistics published by the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service, we will see an increase in the number of charges where conduct was derogatory to Islam, rising from 71 to 134. We know that this is not attributable to a single event or pattern but is due to a general rise in reporting. It is important that, while any crime is regrettable, it is important that crime is reported so that a firm stance can be taken. In terms of third party reporting, there was a review that has been undertaken in terms of the effectiveness of that. That was one of the very important recommendations from the independent advisory report. There were also recommendations that we are currently working through in terms of data—good, robust data that gives a more granular detail to the causes and conditions in which crime flourishes is very important. I hope that my final point is that there may be some reassurance to Mr Sarwar that we will come forward with a plan of action in the very near future. However, as part of our determination to tackle prejudice in all its forms, we have introduced three-year funding for the equality budget. That will support the very important work that is undertaken by diverse groups and groups that are working in our communities to tackle hate crime and prejudice in all its forms. To ask the Scottish Government what discussions it has had with Dumfries and Galloway Council regarding engagement with local communities on proposed regeneration plans for the white sands in Dumfries. We have had no discussion with the council on this issue. Councils are independent organisations accountable to their own electorate, and it is for them to determine how to conduct appropriate consultation and engagement for particular projects. I thank the minister for that answer, but with the projected costs for the combined flood defence and regeneration scheme spiralling upwards, local businesses in the town are growing increasingly angry at the arrogance of Dumfries and Galloway council, who they believe have failed to properly engage with the wider community on the regeneration aspects of the scheme, ignoring legitimate concerns in order to railroad through their own deeply unpopular proposals under the guise of flood defences. Given the widespread concern that the minister commit to meeting with worried businesses in the town and can he clarify that all Scottish Government funding for the project will be going towards flood prevention, not ill-thought-out landscape gardening and streetscaping? I appreciate that there is opposition to the flood protection scheme being proposed by Dumfries and Galloway. I am aware that Mr Mundell has talked about this previously, and Joan McAlpine has written to me on this issue also. However, the key thing in all of this is the responsibility of Dumfries and Galloway council in this regard. There is a statutory process that must be undertaken before a proposed flood protection scheme can be confirmed. That provides an opportunity for objections to the proposed scheme to be lodged, and the local authority is obliged to seek to address those objections. I understand that the council started the statutory process on 1 February, and the consultation period closes on 1 March. I urge those folks who are unhappy with the scheme to respond to that consultation. If there are still objections that cannot be resolved, then the scheme has to be referred to ministers who will decide whether to call in the proposals for their consideration. That is the only stage of the process where the Scottish Government actually plays a direct role. I urge Mr Mundell to continue to engage with Dumfries and Galloway council on the issue. Dean Lockhart To ask the Scottish Government what progress it is making with the Scottish growth scheme. The Scottish Government has continued to progress its work with partners on the development and delivery of the new Scottish growth scheme that will provide up to £500 million over three years of investment guarantees and some loans. The work is progressing to deliver the most effective scheme possible. Dean Lockhart I thank the cabinet secretary for his response. The £500 million growth scheme was described in the SNP's programme for government as a scheme to provide up to £500 million of investment guarantees and loans, as the cabinet secretary has confirmed. I understand that funding for this scheme will be demand-led, but if there is any likelihood of any loans being made in the next financial year, there should be funding allocated in the budget. Given this, can I ask the cabinet secretary where in the budget can we find the additional funding for any loans to be made under the growth scheme? Is the funding within the enterprise budget or is there no funding at all available for this scheme? I am sorry that I was not able to hear all that the member said, because some of the noise in the chamber. I think that he was asking the question about whether some of the funding that might be available through the growth scheme will also be available or should be instead be available in the budget. However, the budget, as has been set out by my colleague Derek Mackay, has within it, including the allocations to enterprise agencies, the ability to make grants and funds and loans available, if necessary, to businesses. That is additional £500 million. It is demand-led, as the member has said, and some of the work that we are currently doing is trying to make sure that we have an exact fix on where the demand is most likely to come from and that we can meet that demand. However, that is a response to the situation that we find ourselves in when we have had Brexit coming through. We have a UK Government that is refusing to attach a high priority to some of the most important sectors in Scotland, and that is a positive response to that. I thought that for that reason you would get some mention of support or welcome from the Conservative benches for a very important measure to help businesses across Scotland. Jackie Baillie With Scotland lagging behind the rest of the UK on a number of economic indicators, can the cabinet secretary tell the chamber how many jobs he expects the scheme to create and the level of growth that will add to our currently fragile economy? Of course, that will entirely depend on the nature of the applications that come forward and the loans that we are able to make, including the investment guarantees that we can make. Jackie Baillie mentions that we are lagging the UK behind some measures. We are also in advance of the UK in many measures, which he does not mention at all in this chamber, but it is well to acknowledge that fact in terms of females and employment, for example, or in youth employment. It is the case that the growth scheme is designed to ensure that we do increase job opportunities, allow companies that are struggling for finance to grow to provide more employment opportunities and to add growth in the Scottish economy. That is the purpose of the scheme and, once again, it would be useful to say, at least in relation to the principle of the scheme, that the Labour Party supports it. Donald Cameron To ask the Scottish Government what action it has taken to ensure that there is access to local specialist care services across the Highlands and Islands. NHS boards are responsible for planning and delivering healthcare services to meet the assessed needs of their resident populations, taking into account strategic frameworks and guidance within the allocations provided. Donald Cameron The Cabinet Secretary for Health and Sport may be aware of the plight of Ockenlea care home in Campbelltown, which is under threat of closure. She may also know that, last week, the local IJB and the operator agreed to ensure that Ockenlea stays open for one more year. However, local people remain concerned that their loved ones may have to seek alternative support outwith our garland butte if a long-term solution cannot be identified. What assurances can she give people in the remote parts of the Highlands and Islands that this type of care provision will continue to exist, given that suitable local alternatives are often not available? The Cabinet Secretary for Health and Sport I am aware that many members, including Mike Russell and others, have been involved in trying to ensure that the capacity of local care facilities is maintained. Obviously, a lot of work has been done with the local health and care partnership to ensure that that is the case. I am aware of some of the challenges in remote and rural Scotland in ensuring that the right care provision is provided. Some of that may well be within care home establishments, but that has to obviously be fit for purpose. There are also some community-based facilities, as well. I am aware that, within Highland, there have been some very innovative solutions brought into local communities that have involved building capacity in the community for those who require care support. I am happy to keep in contact with Donald Cameron about that issue. Clearly, we would expect the local health and care partnerships to take those matters forward. However, my officials have been very involved in the local matter, as I am sure that Donald Cameron is aware of. I am very content for them to continue to be so to make sure that we get the best solution for local people. To ask the Scottish Government when it last met groups representing survivors of child sexual abuse and what issues were discussed. I met with a number of survivors and their representatives on 9 November 2016. Discussions included the remit of the Scottish Child Abuse Inquiry, the inquiry panel membership, redress and the limitation bill. Scottish Government officials also attended the quarterly meeting of the interaction plan review group on 19 December 2016. That group reviews progress against the action plan and topics included in the in-care survivor support fund, the forthcoming consultation and engagement on financial redress, the survivor representation on the group and future governance arrangements for the group. A meeting has been requested with me by Wellbeing Scotland, which was formerly known as Open Secret, and other survivors. Scottish Government officials have been in contact with Wellbeing Scotland with suggested dates, and I hope to meet them at some point next month. I thank the Deputy First Minister for that answer, and I welcome his commitment to meet with Wellbeing Scotland. The Deputy First Minister will be aware of the on-going concerns of survivors of child sexual abuse about the progress of the inquiry into the abuse of children and young people in care. There are concerns that none of the original panel now remains in position, and that the support for survivors in the process is excluding those with proven expertise and understanding of the experience of survivors. How will the cabinet, the Deputy First Minister, address those concerns, sustain confidence in the inquiry and ensure that, while the inquiry is independent of government, it acts in the context of an approach shaped by the survivors who understand best the impact of abuse and understand best what support they need? First of all, I acknowledge the long-standing interest of Joanne Lamont on the issues and the seriousness with which she raises the important questions with me today. In connection with the membership of the child abuse inquiry panel, I understand that survivors find this unsettling that there has been a further change this week, and I have explained that that has arisen because one of the members of the panel, the last remaining member of the original panel, has had a change of employment circumstances, and in discussion with Lady Smith has resolved that some of the implications of his new employment may give rise to potential conflicts of interest and has acted to resolve those at this stage. I assured Joanne Lamont, Parliament and survivors, that the appointment of Lady Smith to lead the inquiry was a decision taken by me after consultation with survivors to try to build that confidence that I acknowledge to be so essential to the duration of the inquiry. I can also reassure Parliament that the inquiry is gathering a significant amount of evidence, and on 8 February Lady Smith made clear that there were now 69 institutions that were the subject of her inquiries as a consequence of evidence coming to her from survivors. I can encourage survivors to come forward with that evidence to the inquiry. There are, of course, other mechanisms of survivor support that are available through the mechanisms that I announced already, and I am pursuing discussions about redress with survivors groups to make sure that that, as the other principle outstanding issue, is addressed satisfactorily. I give Joanne Lamont and Parliament the assurance that the Government is absolutely committed to ensuring that the inquiry has the resources and the capacity to address the remit that has been designed for it and to bring justice and accountability in an area where justice and accountability should have been delivered.