 I want the first item of business today is general questions and our first question is number one from Ivan McKee To ask the Scottish Government how it calculates the level of homelessness Minister Kevin Stewart Presiding Officer the Scottish Government collect homelessness data from local authorities this data collection provides detailed information on homeless applications by individual households information on the number of applications under the homeless persons legislation ymgaredd dweud o adeiladau sydd yn cyfrifoligol i maes ganddechrau i ddweud agynnal cyflawni. Arddwn MacKeen i'r尔od caen sydd wedi cael llawer o wirionedd yn dewis oedol. Yn 750 o wneud o gyflogu i Glasgow last year, rhaid i ymgyrch yn bwynt i bwysigol i ddydd yr oeddwn ni i ysgoldoedd o woriodau hynny, ac roeddwn ni wedi meddwl i Glasgow City L schedules with City Council that were refused accommodation. Threatened with legal action, the council then found accommodation for 98 per cent of those individuals. What is the Scottish Government doing to ensure that local authorities meet their statutory obligation to find accommodation for rough sleepers without them being threatened with legal action? Mr Meckay pointed out that local authorities have a statutory duty to provide a minimum of temporary accommodation advice and assistance to all applicants assessed as homeless. Glasgow City Council has the duty to provide housing and homelessness services in their area. I know that the Scottish Housing Regulator has been working with Glasgow City Council to help to improve the delivery of homelessness services in the city. As a Government, we are working to increase housing supply in Glasgow and across Scotland to improve the housing options that are available. Thank you. Figures for the number of households in temporary homeless accommodation, however, show an increase between March 2015-16 by 1 per cent. March's figures showing 10,555 households in temporary accommodation is an increase of almost 2000 since 2007. Although I recognise that there will always be a need for temporary accommodation, how does the minister intend to make sure that that is not used as a long-term solution for homelessness? There has been a continuing fall in homelessness applications to 34,662 in 2015-16. That is down 1,287 on the previous year, a decrease of 4 per cent. Of those applications, there were 28,226 households assessed as homeless or potentially homeless. That is down 1,589 on the previous year, a decrease of 5 per cent. Obviously, our key action in this Parliament is to increase housing supply. We intend to deliver 50,000 affordable homes, including 35,000 for social rent during the course of this Parliament, which will help the situation greatly. As I said earlier, we have the housing options hubs that are working across Scotland to try to alleviate homelessness throughout the country. I hope that their success continues and that we continue to see decreases as we have done in the last year. To ask the Scottish Government, in light of the review of the Police Scotland estate, what impact the potential closure of police stations will have on public confidence in the police? The Scottish Crime and Justice Survey suggests that the majority of people feel that the police are doing a good or excellent job in their local area. The Police Scotland estate strategy, which was approved by the Scottish Police Authority on 24 June 2015, seeks to remodel the police estate to make it fit for the policing needs of the future. The Scottish Police Authority has made clear that local policing commanders will play a leading role in deciding whether any changes to the police estate are compatible with maintaining an effective local police presence. Engagement will be undertaken by local policing teams to ensure that future decisions are built upon local consultation with communities and partners. In many cases, the approach that has been taken is to seek alternative shared accommodation with partners in the same locality. There are already a number of positive examples of that in locations such as Livingston and Ballistan. Richard Leonard I thank the cabinet secretary for that answer. I reflect that the cabinet secretary wishes to decentralise the power to cut police services but not the power to control police services. Shots police office serves the communities of Shots, Allenton, Hart Hill and Salisbury. When the public county was closed in Shots police station in February 2014, a promise was made to the community that for reasons of public safety, as long as the prison was there, the police office would be there. Will the cabinet secretary remove Shots police station from the hit list? Cabinet secretary. Well, I think that the member should engage with Police Scotland on this matter. If he did so, he would find that there has been no decision made on any of the police stations that have been set out at the present stage of the estate review. Local commanders will consult locally on what the best approach is. With relation to Shots, the reason that they are looking at Shots is because the existing facility is too large for Police Scotland. They are presently looking for alternative accommodation in the Shots area. They intend to continue to have a presence within Shots. If that is not feasible, they will be looking to try and draw other partners into sharing the facility with them in Shots itself. If the member is keen to make sure that the views of a local community and local elected members are heard in his process, the way in which to do that is to engage with local commanders through their consultation exercise to allow local decisions to be made on what the best approach is for the matter. However, it is also worth keeping in mind that the purpose of the estate review is to make sure that it is an estate that is effective and reflects the demands on the police service. That is why, in the vast majority of cases, they are looking to relocate to shared premises. Does the cabinet secretary agree with Assistant Chief Constable Andy Cowie, who told the local government and communities committee yesterday that, and I quote, "...services are delivered by people, not buildings. The public want to see officers on the street and that, following the review, service provision will be enhanced through investment in better-located accommodation." I agree with ACC Howey in this matter, who is leading the estate review for Police Scotland. Police Scotland is very clear that this is not about removing police officers from communities, but about making sure that they have a police estate that has evolved over 100 years that it reflects the changing nature of the demand on the police service. For example, the vast majority of contact with the police service is now through the 101 call system. That reflects a changing nature in the way in which people engage with the police service. We need to make sure that we have a police estate that reflects that change, while at the same time it is able to support police officers in undertaking their role effectively. As Andy Cowie has highlighted, it is not about seeking to remove police officers from local communities. It is about making sure that we have an estate that is effective and reflects the needs of local communities. The decision-making process on that will be driven by local needs, based on the views of local commanders once they have consulted local communities. To ask the Scottish Government what impact leaving the EU will have on local government. Local government shares the same ambitions as us for stronger communities, a fairer society, a thriving economy, and we will work in partnership with them to respond to the implications of the EU referendum outcome. The Scottish Government is exploring all options to protect Scotland from a hard Brexit that economists say will cost 80,000 Scottish jobs. Our five key interests are democracy, economic prosperity, social protection, solidarity and influence. European funding is important to local government. The 2007 to 2013 programmes of the European regional development fund and the European social fund awarded £158.3 million to Scotland's local authorities, which were spent in the years 2007 to 2016. We know that the EU plays an integral part at all levels of government in helping to deliver important projects. Can the minister provide an update on the position with regard to payment of EU structural funds if the UK wants to leave the EU? Since the outcome of the referendum, we have urged the UK Government to provide clarity and certainty on the vital European funds. The UK Government guarantees offered to date for European structural funds that all contracts entered into before the point that the UK leaves the EU will be guaranteed even when those payments continue beyond the EU exit point. However, the UK Government has provided absolutely no certainty or clarity on what the replacement funding arrangements for those schemes will be once the UK has left the EU. On 2 November, my colleague finance secretary Derek Mackay announced that the Scottish Government will be passing on in full to Scottish stakeholders the EU funding guarantees that have been offered by the UK Government. That will protect all spending commitments from those schemes that are entered into in the period between now and the point that the UK proposes to leave the EU. That provides certainty for over £700 million of EU funding for Scotland. To ask the Scottish Government what assessment has made of the impact of the autumn statement on the oil and gas sector in Scotland? I was bitterly disappointed to learn that the chancellor has provided no substantive measures to support the oil and gas sector, a sentiment that I am sure is shared by the hundreds of thousands of people supported by the industry, and in particular those in the north-east of Scotland who have been hardest hit during the downturn. The cabinet secretary for finance and the constitution wrote to the chancellor outlining urgent measures that should be considered for inclusion in the autumn statement. Those proposals were focused around increasing activity in late-life assets, protecting critical pieces of infrastructure and increasing exploration. Without greater investment and activity, we risk losing vital capacity and skills that will support production and ensure that we maximise economic recovery from the North Sea. The Scottish Government will continue to do everything with the next powers to support the industry and its workforce through those challenging times. Gillian Martin Oil and gas UK have made specific requests to the UK Government on measures to allow the industry to continue with exploration in these difficult times. What impact could the lack of action in facilitating the exploration having the future supply of oil and gas and the industry as a whole? One of the major impacts will of course be the fewer number of people supporting the infrastructure that is already there. That brings into question the viability of that infrastructure, so you might have the situation in which fields are left redundant before the time when they should be. That is a vitally important thing. On that particular issue, I met the chief secretary to the Treasury some months ago who assured me that back in June that the UK Government realised that it had not acted quickly enough on this and would now do so. We have had no action whatsoever in relation to loan guarantees for those vital pieces of infrastructure. Above that, of course, the UK Government holds the tools in terms of tax and tax concessions in relation to exploration. That was their chance yesterday to pay back an industry that should put billions into the UK Treasury, which, according to the Treasury's forecast, will put more billions back into the Treasury and yet they did nothing. The Scottish Government will continue to support this industry wherever we can, unlike the UK Government. Jackie Baillie I shared the disappointment of the cabinet secretary at the autumn statement yesterday, because the industry is of huge importance to the north-east and to the economy of Scotland as a whole. Does the cabinet secretary therefore agree with Labour's proposals for a UK offshore investment limited to look at the assets to be supported with public investment, and will he make common cause with us in taking on the UK Government to try and have the proposal agreed to? We have undertaken a vast range of support measures, so the transition training fund, the money that we announced this week as part of the Aberdeen city deal for the oil and gas technology centre, the energy jobs task force, was a range of support that the Scottish Government has provided. If there was to be further investment, and of course we asked for that investment to take the form of tax concessions in relation to exploration, if there was to be further investment, the UK Government has the tools to do that. Were they to show any willingness, we would have looked to see what we could do in order to support that. However, it is quite evident from the way that things are just now, that we are not seeing that support from the UK Government. We will continue to support the ways that I have said, and we will continue to look at other ways in which we can provide that support. Tavish Scott Given the cabinet secretary's points about the importance of the UK Government changing its position from the one that he announced yesterday in the autumn statement, will the cabinet secretary seek an early meeting with either the chief secretary or the relevant UK Government minister to press the points that many of us right across the chamber want to see happening, both on decommissioning and on the late-life asset transfer that is so important for the future of the industry? Yes, we will be seeking a meeting of that type, either myself or also the cabinet secretary for finance. It will centre on those points. I know that Tavish Scott has raised the issue around tax before, and having the right tax regime to encourage exploration and the full exploitation of remaining fields. Those are the main asks, but the one that we have asked for before, which the UK Government admitted that it had not taken action on sufficiently quickly, which was the ask of the industry for loan guarantees for infrastructure, will form the centrepiece of what we ask, but we will continue with that dialogue and I am happy that we will have the support of the Liberal Democrats in doing so. 5. Murdo Fraser Thank you. To ask the Scottish Government when it last met industry and consumer stakeholders to discuss the regulation of private car parks. Minister Humza Yousaf. I am most recently met with Citizens Advice Bureau to discuss private parking practices just last month. Transport Scotland met with representatives of the parking industry, Citizens Advice Scotland and Trading Standards Scotland on 31 August to discuss how we can deliver improvements to private parking practices across the country. A further meeting with the industry and consumer stakeholders is scheduled to take place next week. Murdo Fraser I thank the minister for his response. On Monday, I was contacted by a 90-year-old lady from Cymru who has been hit with a £100 penalty notice from the inappropriately named company, Smart Parking, because when she parked in the Canillos Street car park in Perth and she keyed her number plate into the ticket machine, she inadvertently entered a capital letter 0 instead of a capital letter O instead of a zero and got a £100 fine. In such a case, it is all too typical of the hundreds of live constituency cases that I have in relation to this one car park. Does the minister agree that not only are such actions by this company an utter disgrace, but given that he has the powers to act in this matter, because it is a devolved matter under the competence of the Scottish Government, does he agree to meet with me and discuss how we can work together to try to clean up practices in this industry? Murdo Fraser Of course I would agree to meet with the member that I have written to and we have had an exchange of parliamentary questions. He probably knows the process, but I will reiterate it once again that there is a working group that is looking at this. There are some complexities, he knows that depending on which route we choose down to go, is it keep a liability, is it charters, is it education, what route is it and he knows that there is a working group established examining these issues. I should say that we are also keen to hear what the UK Government approach is on this and there is a meeting taking place today between my officials and the UK Government. Once the meeting takes place next week with the stakeholders, I will ensure that he is informed by Transport Scotland officials about that and, of course, by me on the back of that, but I will be happy to take this issue on. I know that it is one that has affected his constituents on many occasions. Christina McKelvie To ask the Scottish Government what its position is on the recent UN report on the impact of welfare reforms on disabled people in the UK. Minister Jean Freeman The UN report, published at the beginning of November, concludes that there is reliable evidence that the UK Government's treatment of disabled people has led to grave or systematic violations of the UN convention on the rights of persons with disabilities. The evidence that rests on is drawn from a variety of policies that the UK Government has pursued, including abolishing the independent living fund, the introduction of the bedroom tax, the work capability assessment and changes to personal independence payment. The Scottish Government has been consistent in our opposition to those policies, and we agree with the UN's conclusions and are pleased that the UN report acknowledged the very different approach that we are taking. Perhaps more importantly, I am pleased that the UN, in its conclusions, gives disabled people the recognition that they deserve for the considerable suffering that they have endured for so many years. It is indeed a great pity that the UK Government continues to refuse and to see and hear the real damage that it is doing to our fellow citizens. I thank the minister for that answer. Given that, as she states as well, the UN report states that the UK Government welfare reforms have evidence of grave and systematic violations. Violations are the rights of persons with disabilities. Which violation in the UN code does the minister think is worse? Imposing the bedroom tax on poor people or taking away the independent living fund for disabled people? I think that the member knows that I cannot possibly choose between two such appalling policies, which have negatively impacted on so many disabled people. Last night, I had the privilege of attending the disability agenda Scotland reception hosted by my colleague Neil Bibby on equals still not, why not? Where they point out is that we found in our own social security consultation the severe mental distress as well as real damage that is done to individuals because of the policies of the UK Government and how they are pursuing them. I am particularly disappointed, in addition to the policies that Ms McElvie mentions, that the UK Government's continued refusal to step back from their cuts to employment support allowance when they trump it so loudly to us about the benefit of helping people into work. That is a real disappointment that I would hope that they would reconsider. Thank you. Before we come to First Minister's questions, members may wish to join me in welcoming to the gallery his excellency, Mr Torbjorn Solstrom, ambassador of Sweden to the United Kingdom.