 Fel fawr, rwy'n dechrau i ddiwedd y gêmio cyflau sydd y bydd y gollid ddissig o gyflau cyd-gwrch해야u chi, ac rwy'n dechrau i gêmio'r gêmio. Mae'r ddodol ni'n meddwl i fferm ac i gwyn fawr i gêmio i gêmio. Gweithio eich cynllun y bydd y ddweud yn y pwyndol, Douglas Ross. As schools across Scotland prepare to break up for the summer, I would like to take this opportunity to thank them for all they have done to support young people in extremely challenging circumstances over the last year, often with little or no help from this Government. Three weeks ago, the First Minister told this Parliament that she had full confidence in the SQA. It is now being scrapped. What happened in that time to change your mind? First, as I did on Tuesday in this chamber, I reiterate that, with no equivocation, with no snark attached to it, I say straight forwardly a big thank you to teachers, to all support staff in our schools, to parents and to young people. This has been the most difficult year any of them will ever remember, both professionally for those who work in our education system and for those who are learning in our education system. I can never find the words to thank them enough, but I hope that everyone knows how deeply appreciative everyone in the Scottish Government is, and I am sure that everyone across Scotland is for everything that they have done. Sometimes, and it is one of the things that, the longer I am in politics—I am going to be a candidate here, Presiding Officer—the more frustrated I often get at the inability of our political discourse, and we are all responsible for our political discourse, to engage in nuanced arguments, arguments that are not just binary, black or white. It is perfectly consistent to say that, in terms of what the SQA is doing, it is also the inability to take serious issues seriously in our parliamentary chamber. I do have confidence in the work that the SQA is doing around the certification of national qualifications. I think that that is important not just for me to say, for my assurance as First Minister, but it is really important for me to say that for the benefit of young people and their parents right across this country. I say that again today. It is also the case that the time has come, and we have accepted the recommendation of the OECD in this respect. The Education Secretary made a statement in this chamber earlier this week to say that it is time for reform, and therefore we have given a commitment that we will consider carefully the nature and the detail of this, but we will replace the SQA and we will also remove the inspection function from Education Scotland. I think that all of that, taken in the round, is how people, whether they agree or disagree with every decision that this Government takes, is how they would expect a grown-up, responsible Government to behave, and that is how this Government will always conduct itself. Thankless Ross, there is absolutely nothing grown-up or responsible to claim that you have changed your mind on the equality of the SQA because of an OECD report that you haven't just had for the last three weeks. This Government has had it for months. They had it before the election that we've just been through. Of course, that damning OECD report criticised the confusing and unhelpful communication given to schools. Is it really any wonder? Nicola Sturgeon said that she had full confidence in the SQA, so she scrapped it. It is just another example of a Government that has lost its way in education that says one thing and does another, with no real vision of where they are going or how they get there. This is the final chance in Parliament, before courses start next term, for the First Minister to give young people and teachers who have faced so much uncertainty over the past year a clear answer. Will there be traditional exams next year? I am sorry if the complexities of those arguments are sometimes a bit challenging for Douglas Ross in this chamber. Most people listening to this will realise that, for the First Minister to say, as I have done and as I will repeat again today, that I have confidence in the SQA's work around the certification of qualifications this year. That is a really important message for every young person waiting on their grades. Of course, young people will be getting their grades over the course of this weekend into tomorrow. However, it is time for reform more generally, and we are reflecting on the arguments that have been made across this chamber and, of course, on the report of the OECD. We have come to a decision that it is right now to move ahead to replace the SQA, but to do that carefully with proper consideration of the detail of what that replacement is. I think that that is an argument that most people will understand. On the question of what will happen in terms of exams next year, if I was to stand here right now and give, while we are still in the grip of Covid, while we have rising cases, although increasing vaccination that we hope will keep that under control, if I was to stand here in a knee-jerk, ill-considered way, decide now what is to happen for exams next year, I think that people across the country would be right to criticise me for doing that. That would not be the responsible considered thing to do instead. The education secretary set that out in Parliament. We will consider that as Covid develops over the summer and we will set that out in August so that schools of the return know what the situation is going to be again. I think that that is the responsible way to proceed. Finally, the OECD report is an important publication, and I think that every member of this Parliament will continue to pay close attention to it. Let me just provide some balance and some context so that, if we were only to listen to Mr Ross, we would be completely and utterly lacking. Everything that I am about to say now is quoting from the OECD report. Curriculum for excellence continues to be a bold and widely supported initiative. It is an inspiring example equated with good curriculum practice. Scotland is ranked among the higher than average country performance on international assessments, usually scoring at or above OECD average in mathematics, reading and science. Education is a source of pride in Scotland. Yes, there are challenges to be addressed. There are reforms that are needed, and this Government will take them forward. Opposition leaders should occasionally recognise the strengths in the Scottish education system for the benefit of young people across our country. Douglas Ross, the OECD report is so important and crucial that Nicola Sturgeon kept it in her drawer over the election period to make sure that there could be no challenge on her Government's shambolic record in education. Of course, in all the quotes that she read out there, she did not read out the one from the OECD report that said that confusing and unhelpful communication had been given to schools. That one slipped the briefing from the First Minister. She also said that she cannot stand up and give a definitive answer to young people whether they will face exams or not next year. That would be irresponsible, yet the First Minister stood up at that desk earlier this week to give us as a country a route map out of restrictions. On one hand, we know how we get out of the restrictions of Covid-19, but young people are left in limbo with no answers as to whether they will sit traditional exams or not next year. Let us have a look at what Scotland's experts on education are saying about that. Keir Bloomer, who helped to write the curriculum for excellence, said that, if the Government go too far, we will see a fall in standards. Edinburgh University Professor Lindsay Patterson said that, I am really sorry that the Deputy First Minister of Scotland and a Scottish Government Minister are criticising an independent expert in education before I am even able to say—John Swinney has the gall to nod his head. Perhaps, if he had listened to Lindsay Patterson, he would not have been sacked as education secretary. Because Lindsay Patterson said, it is unlikely that a system that relied wholly on coursework would ever command public confidence. Scottish Conservatives firmly believe that traditional exams are the best and fairest way for young people to show what they know and what they can do. Does the First Minister agree? I agree that we have to get all of this right and traditional exams absolutely. We have to consider their place in the future of qualifications very carefully. No decisions have been taken around that. One of the reasons no decisions have been taken around that is that we are waiting a further report from the OECD in August, which will help to inform those decisions going forward. I do not know whether Douglas Ross was just unaware of that, but there we go. On the many questions there, I am going to quickly run through all of them. I am not shying away from the tough messages in the OECD report and we have accepted all of the recommendations of the OECD report. I think that that is evidence of that. The timing of the report—I know that Douglas Ross was not a member of this Parliament before the election, but it was canvassed fairly extensively before the election. The timing of the publication of the OECD report was entirely a matter for the independent OECD. Before the election, some of the correspondence was put into spice so that members could see what the OECD was saying about that. Had we against the wishes—I will put it a bit more strongly than that—against the instruction of the OECD, published in the report anyway, I am sure that the Conservatives would have been among the first to get to their feet to criticise us for going against an independent organisation. In terms of exams next year, this is a really important decision. What I set out on Tuesday was a contingent route map. I very much hope that we can meet those deadlines and get the country back to normal, but decisions around things like exams next year will be dependent on whether or not we can meet those milestones. It is right and proper and essential that we take those decisions in proper order. There have been many young people having to self-isolate over the past few weeks. We want to, hopefully, reduce that as we go into the new academic term, but we have to take account of the wider Covid situation and take those decisions properly. That is what we will continue to do. I think that, whether people agree or disagree with the ultimate decisions, that is the way in which people would want us to approach it. Finally, I do not ignore the comments of Lindsay Paterson or Keir Bloomer. We take account of those views and comments as we do a range of views and comments. Let me offer some others. The parents group connect pleased that the OECD team could see that education is a source of pride in Scotland and that there is a huge commitment to improving children's lives through education. The NASUWT is looking forward to working with the Government to build on the many strengths that OECD has rightly identified. The Scottish Youth Parliament is saying that it offers Scottish education an opportunity going forward. There are a variety of views. The OECD had many good things to say about the strengths of Scottish education. It is possible to recognise that, while it is also saying that there are real challenges to address and to overcome, and that this Government is going to do both. It is that prospectus that we put before the Scottish people just a few weeks ago and we are roundly re-elected to deliver on. On the specific question of the future of exams in Scotland, the First Minister said, and I wrote this down to quote her correctly, that she will consider their place in education going forward. After being in government for 14 years, the First Minister for seven, and having pledged education would be her number one priority, I think that people across Scotland will expect the First Minister to be able to quite clearly say if she is for or against exams, but she absolutely did not in that answer. Her Government no longer seems to value traditions that have served us well, that helped the First Minister and I to get from a great local school to this Parliament. Our education system has always been distinct. It is uniquely our own, a cornerstone of what makes us Scottish. If the SNP removed the focus on fundamentals, if they stop valuing core knowledge, if they ditch exams, isn't her Government abandoning the very things that made Scotland schools great? First Minister, I am glad that we finally got an admission from Douglas Ross that Scotland schools are great, so at least we are making some progress. I will try to say this most straight forwardly. I think that exams are important, but firstly I have been with my colleagues, I have been in Government for 14 years. The only reason why I am still in Government standing here as First Minister is because, a matter of weeks ago, the Scottish people re-elected me in a landslide election victory, so they have taken account of all of this and decided that they trust this Government to take Scotland forward in all of these matters. On the issue of exams, the most important principle is that we, like any country, have a robust and respected system for awarding qualifications to young people, but it is the case whether I like it or not, that there is a debate in Scotland right now about what the correct balance between traditional exams and continuous assessment is in ensuring that we have that robust system. We have asked the OECD to do further work, they will report to us in August, we will take account of all of that and this Parliament then will have the opportunity to debate that. The core principle here is the quality of the system that gives young people qualifications. That is the outcome that we should all be focused on and we should not fear a real debate about the best way of doing that. That is what we will take forward and we look forward to views right across this Parliament. Thank you. Before we move to question 2, I would ask members wherever possible to ask succinct questions and for shorter responses that will enable us to include more members in proceedings. The Government has previously communicated well during this pandemic, but that has started to slip, risking public trust and confidence. In recent weeks, we have allowed 3,000 football fans to attend a fan zone but said that parents cannot attend an outdoor sports day. Trampoline centres can open but soft plays cannot. Hospitality venues can open late for penalties but the Government says that it is not safe on other days. We have had an avoidable public argument between the Scottish Government and the mayor of Greater Manchester. If we are to navigate the coming months, communications have to be clear and decisions consistent. The Government's own polling says that one in five people do not know what is expected of them. That is before those decisions. We now have the hospitality sector, the aviation sector, the wedding industry, retailers, children's play centres and more, all speaking out and expressing frustration. Will the First Minister change her approach, engage and listen to them and have a can-do approach to the new stage of our pandemic response? What I will do is avoid easy slogans such as can-do approach. It is important that we continue to move forward cautiously. We all want to get back to normal. We have a greater degree of normality than we have had almost at any time in the past 15 months, but there is a further distance to travel. We have to do that carefully. We can see case numbers today, which will be published this afternoon, show another just short of 3,000 cases reported over the course of yesterday's positivity rate of 7.7 per cent. Those are rising case numbers and we have to be cautious. Communication is really important. Communication, as we come out of restrictions and things get, hopefully, easier in many ways but more complicated, communication is more challenging. Nobody knows that better than I do. I will continue to do my level best to communicate clearly with people the reasons why certain decisions have been taken and why some things can happen and other things can, even though that appears to be inconsistent. As I make use of the media briefings over the summer recess that I think have stood the country in good stead over the past 15 months, I hope that I will not hear any further criticism for that from Anna Sarwar's deputy, as I have at many points over the past few months, because I agree that communication to the public is important. Many of the things that Anna Sarwar has talked about are decisions that we reach for pragmatic reasons. The issue of opening times during football matches that might go to penalties is to avoid people crowding out of pubs at the same time while they are still wanting to watch football. It is actually about trying to avert a risk in a pragmatic way. Similarly with the fan zone, it is about trying to make sure that there is an environment that is relatively safe because of the regulations, recognising that, no matter what I say, people want to watch the football. Those things can be really difficult for people to accept. I understand that, but that is possibly one of the most difficult phases of the pandemic, as we try to navigate away from here, back to normality, but knowing that there are still a lot of risks that we have to try to avoid and get around. The last thing that I would say is that every single decision we take, although the decisions are the Governments and I take responsibility for them, but they are all informed by clinical advice so that we try to get them as right as we possibly can. I think that the First Minister misses the point. The can-do approach is not about some kind of slogan. It is to speak to individual businesses. Every single member will have walked down the royal mile to come into the Parliament and they will have seen businesses how frustrated they are. That is what I mean by having a can-do approach because behind every business there are people trying their best to get by. People like Cammie Hudson. Cammie has built a successful wedding photography business. Last year, he was meant to have 49 weddings. Instead, he had just six. He says that the Government does not understand his industry, are following a one-size-fits-all approach and are refusing to listen. He is not alone. This year's bookings are all but gone and, because of the uncertainty, people are choosing to book as far as 2023. Cammie cannot afford to turn down a job. That is why, two weeks ago, he found himself driving from Brighton to Inverness overnight in order to accommodate two bookings. That meant 39 hours straight awake, working two 10-hour shifts and being forced to drive 600 miles through the night. That is an unacceptable situation for anyone to be in, having to risk his own health in order to put food on the table and pay the bills. Does the First Minister think that that is acceptable? If you are asking me do I think that any of this is acceptable, no, I do not. I do not think that it is acceptable that any of us are having to live through a global pandemic. Every single impact of this is horrendously difficult for the people who are having to bear it, so I am not going to stand here and try to defend the horrible situations that people find themselves in. I will say that nobody is doing this to people deliberately or for any reason other than to try in a really difficult situation to keep the country as safe as possible. As we go, we are in a much greater degree of normality now. The shops in the Royal Mile just a matter of weeks ago were completely closed, now open. Of course trading is not completely normal because people, apart from anything else, still have a degree of nervousness and we have to encourage the whole country back to normality but give them a sense of safety as that happens. On weddings, the wedding sector, and we talk about the sector economically, that is really important, but for many couples having to postpone and repasspone weddings, that has been one of the most difficult impacts. We listen. For example, just yesterday, our request has been made by the representative body in the wedding sector to say that if we go to level 0 on 19 July, can we bring that forward to the 16 so that the weddings that we can can go forward? We are actively considering things like that so that we are trying to be as flexible but, on the other hand, we know that some outbreaks have originated understandably in life event-type settings when families are coming together and hugging and doing these kinds of things. They therefore, unfortunately—this is the painful thing about Covid—it is these kinds of things that pose the greatest risk. Like everybody else, I hate every aspect of this. I hate every decision that we have to make that restricts people's ability to live their lives. No part of me wants to do it for a second longer than necessary. I do not think that these decisions are not easy. I do not pretend that we get every single one of them right. I know that we do not because of the nature of what we are trying to do here, but we try to get them right, we listen and we rectify when we are clear that we have got something wrong. That is what we will continue to try to do. If all of us continue to pull together, that day when we can lift all restrictions, I do believe that it is now within sight, but getting from here to there still involves us being cautious and careful. I know how difficult that is, but I also know how necessary it is. I accept that we have to be cautious and careful. I am not saying that the Scottish Government needs to defend the decision. I am not saying that the decisions are deliberate, but the First Minister can say that she is listening, but the businesses do not believe that she is listening. They think that she is telling them what they need to do rather than engaging with them. She gave the example of the Scottish Wedding Industry Alliance. They themselves said that the decisions do not go far enough, and the Government is still not communicating effectively with them, because this is about more than financial support. Those are businesses and individuals who have spent 15 months working out how to operate safely. It is different if it is just one sector. It is more than just one sector. Sector after sector is now speaking out publicly about the Government's poor communication and inconsistent decision making. The Government's current approach is not working for this stage of the pandemic, and it needs to change. We all started this Parliament saying that we would focus on recovery. That work has to start now. The vaccine is working and we have spent the last year building up our testing and our tracing capacity. Will the Government change its approach, have a can-do attitude that is demanded by people across the country, stop the inconsistency, get round the table, engage with those businesses and individuals and start the important work of rebuilding our country? John Swinney was round the table with those stakeholders this morning. We do that regularly and we will continue to do that. We listen. I readily concede that there will be many things that business asks us to do that we consider and cannot do. The reason for that is not because we are not listening. The reason for that is down to the one thing, no matter how much I wish I could, I cannot do. That is simply magic away this virus. If I could do that, I would do it in an instant. We have to continue to take careful decisions. Anna Sarwar says that the vaccines are working. All of the evidence says that the vaccines are working. We are vaccinating as fast as supplies allowed, but we continue to have, although it is reducing every day, a significant proportion of the population that is not yet fully vaccinated. That is why cases are going up again. I have just said that 2,999 cases from yesterday will be reported today. We hope that that will not translate into hospital admissions in the way that kind of case number would have earlier in the year because of the vaccine. I reported to the Parliament earlier this week that 10 per cent of cases that were translated into hospital admissions earlier this year is now down to 5 per cent. That is really positive news. 5 per cent of a daily case rate of 3,000 is still a massive number heading into our hospitals. That is a lot for people. That is pain and suffering as well as pressure on the NHS. That phase is the most difficult phase because we are on the route back to normality. We can see the finishing line in August, but getting from here to there demands care and caution. What will be determined by how we behave in the short term is not whether we get to that finishing line. The vaccines are going to get us there. I am confident of that, but what will be determined is how many more lives are lost between now and then, how much pressure we put on our national health service and how many more families have to suffer the pain that too many have suffered already. My heart breaks for every business, every individual, every sector of our society that is still suffering from Covid, but I do not do my job properly by rushing decisions that will make the situation worse. I do my job properly, no matter how difficult those decisions are, by trying to get us safely to that end point. That is what I am going to dedicate every day to doing until we are at it. This week, the ITN revealed that the Amazon warehouse in Dunfermline is destroying millions of new, unsold items, including televisions, laptops and face covering. That level of waste is obscene. In 2020 alone, Amazon's net profits were over $20 billion. It is a company that has refused to pay the living wage, uses zero-hour contracts and keeps its workers in such a state of desperation that some of them are reduced to sleeping intents. It is a company that has resisted trade unions and avoids paying corporation tax. The Scottish Greens have previously challenged the millions of pounds of public money given to Amazon through Scottish Enterprise. In the last financial year, the Scottish Government gave them £4.7 million for web services. Can the First Minister tell us when her Government will stop giving Amazon money? We attach, as Launas later knows, and as many rightly across the chamber have called for. We increasingly attach fair work conditions to all the grant support that Scottish Enterprise or any of our enterprise agencies give. I do not have in front of me. I am happy to look into the details of the particular support that Launas later has referenced and look at what conditions are attached to that. We will continue to make sure that any taxpayer money that is going to businesses is about creating not just jobs but fair jobs and that companies are being challenged as well as supported. On the broader point about Amazon, clearly I am not responsible for the practices of Amazon, but we had a report just yesterday from Zero Waste about consumption and about the need to become much more sustainable as a country and as a society. We all have a duty to do that, but companies certainly do and destroy things in the way that has been reported this week. I raise the real questions about the acceptability of that. Yesterday, the minister told me that he wants to see public money going to companies that treat their employees well. Public money should be going to small companies and those who need it to recover from the pandemic. At the heart of the obscene level of waste is an economy that puts a disposable throw-away culture ahead of the needs of people and planet. It is shocking that a company of this size would rather destroy new items than give them away to people in need. The shocking revelation underlines that Governments must do more to force companies to reduce waste with regulation and fines, where they are failing to act. Will the First Minister commit to enshrining the circular economy in robust laws that will prevent such needless volumes of waste in the future? I think that our commitments to a circular economy and legislating for a circular economy are known and I look forward to taking that forward with co-operation across the Parliament. I agree with the comments on what has been reported about Amazon. I think that Governments have to do more to persuade everybody to lead by example, to persuade individuals and certainly to persuade companies to cut down on waste and to become much more responsible environmentally more generally. However, I do not think that any company the size and scale of Amazon should need a Government to tell it that it should not be destroying large amounts of things that could actually be, and honestly, right, given to people in need. I would hope that Amazon will reflect very carefully on that. There is a big challenge for all Governments right across the world on this and Scotland, I hope, will lead by example. Similarly, I am not sure the detail of the financial support, whether it is a grant or perhaps procurement for services or something like that. I will look into that, but it is really important that we attach fair work conditions to any support that Government is giving companies. To ask the First Minister what discussions the Scottish Government has had with the UK Government, the Post Office and CJ Lang regarding the proposed closure of 31 post office branches across Scotland. To roll out a programme of post office closures up until February next year is a commercial one made by CJ Lang and Sun. As postal services, of course, are a reserve matter. The Scottish Government was not involved in the decision-making process, but the Minister for Public Finance, Planning and Community Wealth recently met with Post Office Limited to seek assurances around continuity of services to any community affected by closure. He also met representatives from CJ Lang and Sun to seek assurances around the remaining post office branches within their sparse stores and confirmed that no job losses will be suffered as a result of those closures. Neil Gray I thank the First Minister for her answer. Yesterday, I wrote to the Post Office on behalf of a cross-party group of MSPs and MPs asking the Post Office to do all that it can to engage quickly with CJ Lang to see if any of those 31 sparse-based branches can be saved. That is especially important for communities such as Allenton and Myadrin Shots constituency, where the sparse store is the only realistic option for a post office branch. Will the First Minister therefore agree to continue doing what she can to quickly bring both players and the UK Government's responsibility to the table and look at all options to save those crucial post offices across Scotland? The First Minister Yes, I am happy to agree to do that. I certainly agree that those proposed closures will have a big impact on their local communities and I certainly would urge all parties involved, including the UK Government, to look at the matter again. As I mentioned in my previous answer, there has already been ministerial contact with senior representatives both from CJ Lang and the Post Office, but we will make sure that those contacts continue and bring people together to explore what is possible. Scottish Government officials also continue to have regular dialogue with officials in the UK Government and the Post Office limited around the issue more generally and I have asked to be kept fully updated on them. 5. Rachael Hamilton To ask the First Minister what action the Scottish Government is taking to curb the decline of iconic woodland bird species in Scotland. Addressing the twin challenges of biodiversity loss and climate change is a central priority for the Government. Although the index of abundance for Scottish terrestrial breeding birds shows that the long-term trend for woodland birds in Scotland is increasing and it is likely that that will continue as we deliver our targets to expand forest cover and create new native woodland, population numbers for some woodland bird species continue to be a concern. We have been taking action to address this, for example, by providing specific support for Capercaly from the forestry grant scheme between 2016 and 2025 and also funding through the previous rural priority schemes Capercaly package. 6. Rachael Hamilton I thank the First Minister for that answer. First Minister, nature is under threat. It is not just the Capercaly, it is our waders, our plovers, our curlews and your Government has failed to meet 11 of the 20 achy biodiversity targets. Farmers have told me that they can be a part of the solution to this climate change crisis and your Government has sat on the hands for too long. There is a climate emergency. The custodians of our land are key to protect and meet these biodiversity targets so today will she commit to give clarity on agricultural policy? Will she ensure that biodiversity targets are improved by extending the agri environment climate scheme beyond 2024 to protect these iconic bird species? That is a really important issue. It is the case that, for some species, there is real cause for concern and I recognise that. It is also the case, just as a matter of fact, that for other species we are seeing an increase for some increases of over 400 per cent, but it is important that, where there are declines and the biggest long-term increase, which is more than 50 per cent, is for Capercaly. On the specifics, obviously we consider funding both in the short term and the long term to make sure that we are supporting these objectives. We face right now a climate and a biodiversity crisis. They are obviously very closely linked and this Government is very serious about addressing what we need to do here and setting an example for the rest of the world. I hope that the question and the tone of the question that I welcome is a signal that, when it comes to the detail of what is needed to meet those things, we will have perhaps more than we have had in the past support from the Scottish Conservatives instead of what we have seen recently, which is scaremongering around talks with the Greens about what that might mean. I know that the Conservatives do not like it when we talk about the detail of some of this stuff, but instead of willing the end, we have to be prepared to do the means. That is harder, it is often controversial, but I hope that the question and the tone of the question that I welcome signals a change of heart from the Scottish Conservatives. Question 6, Jackie Baillie. To ask the First Minister how the Scottish Government is supporting the NHS in light of reports of wards being full and an increase in patients with serious and complex conditions. Remobilising and supporting the NHS is one of the top priorities for this and I am sure for Governments across the UK and indeed in terms of health services for Governments across the world. We will shortly publish our NHS recovery plan, which will set out how we will continue to support patients to receive the highest quality of care and expand NHS capacity. The pandemic has had a significant impact on the ability of the NHS to operate normally for the past 15 months and that has consequences, but I want to thank our NHS staff for the work that they continue to do to make sure that people in need of urgent care get that and they are also working flat out to get care and treatment to people who saw it delayed due to Covid. To help staff, a range of wellbeing and mental health resources has been put in place locally, which staff tell us the value of those services are supplemented by national resources such as the national wellbeing hub, which has more than 100,000 users and we will continue to put in place the support that staff require. Jackie Baillie. I welcome the NHS recovery plan being on its way, but those problems are happening now. Consultants in A&E are seeing more people with more chronic and undiagnosed conditions presenting as emergencies. They warned that medical beds are at 120 to 130 per cent capacity and that has an impact on elective surgery and the number of people waiting over a year for operations has almost doubled. Activity is below pre-pandemic levels, which is understandable, but in some areas there are simply not enough hospital beds to cope with even those admissions. What is the First Minister's response to staff who are worried that they do not have the capacity to treat all the patients coming through the door? The NHS generally is getting much closer now to pre-pandemic capacity. Many parts of the NHS are beyond that. Jackie Baillie cited one. Attendances at A&E, for example, have gone beyond that above what they were going into the pandemic. Cancer referrals, for example, urgent suspicion of cancer referrals are now 120 per cent compared to April last year, so we are supporting the NHS. That is a difficult task, particularly for those on the front line, to make sure that the balance between Covid and non-Covid treatment is where it needs to be. The one thing that I would say—I say that genuinely because it relates back to my exchanges with Anas Sarwar earlier on—is that one of the big challenges that we have right now is to make sure that we continue to manage Covid in a way that does not distract from the efforts of the NHS to deal with the backlog and get back to normal. Last year, when we talked about not overwhelming our NHS, we had pretty much set aside the whole capacity of the NHS. Right now, that is different. The NHS is getting back to normal, so the margins around that are much tighter. That is why, in answer to Anas Sarwar's question, why do we not just get back to normal in more areas more quickly is because we have to take great care not to allow cases to rise in a way that generates more hospital admissions from Covid and sets back the recovery plan. That is all really important stuff, but it is also really complex stuff. That balance right now is very sensitive, which is one of the main reasons why we continue difficult though it is and difficult though it is for many sectors that we have to continue to be cautious as we navigate our way through these next few weeks. Can I ask the First Minister what action the Scottish Government is taking in response to high numbers of do not attend at Covid-19 vaccination clinics and whether the Government are exploring innovative ways for vaccination team staff to contact those who have been vaccinated, such as text messaging, which could help to ensure vaccine attendance? I remind members that I am a member of the NHS of Friesen Galloway's vaccination team. Can I take the opportunity, first of all, to thank everybody in our vaccination teams across the country? I am taking that opportunity generally, but also because Emma Harper is a member of our vaccination team and as well as the responsibilities in this Parliament has been vaccinating people, so thank you to her as well as the many others across the country. That is obviously one of the key priorities around the vaccination programme given the stage that it is at. The health secretary and I were engaged in a meeting earlier this morning about this very issue. The first thing to say is that uptake rates are very high, exceptionally high, and that is a really positive thing. They are slightly lower, the further down the age spectrum we come, but still much higher than previous vaccination programmes. We are looking now, given that we are at an advanced stage, at the different ways in which we can get people who, for whatever reason, have not attended an appointment to now attend. We are looking at more drop-in facilities to look at more use of text and technology. Young people who registered on the portal will be getting their appointment by text already, but we need to go back and do a sweep to try and get to the people who have not attended. To reassure Emma Harper in the chamber, there is a lot of work over the next few weeks that we will go into getting as many people vaccinated as possible. If we look at case numbers right now, one of the factors that Scotland is dealing with right now, and you see that in the ONS survey that is published weekly, is because we have generally, over the past 15 months, had lower infection rates. We have also got lower population immunity, so there is more of our population that is still susceptible. What does that mean? It means that it is even more important for us to get as many people as possible vaccinated. That is a key priority that all of us in the Scottish Government are absolutely focused on. Jamie Greene, to be followed by Daniel Johnson. Figures were released this week to tell a horrendous story of domestic abuse in Scotland, which has risen for the fourth year in a row, with some 63,000 incidents last year. Second to our drug crisis in Scotland, this, too, is our national shame. Education and prevention, of course, are important, but, First Minister, so is punishment. How many perpetrators, who would have historically received a custodial sentence, did not, under the Government's presumption against short sentences? If the answer is more than one person, we really have to ask ourselves what message does that send to the tens of thousands of victims of abuse, mostly women, about whose side justice is really on? First, and I think that every single one of us would agree with this. One case of domestic abuse is one too many. We should have a zero-tolerance approach, and that is the approach that the Scottish Government brings. There is an important point of context here that I think is really important for all of us to understand. If we look at the figures that were reported last month, more than half of the rise in convictions were accounted for by the new Offences under the new Domestic Abuse Act. In actual fact, it is because we have legislated to make more domestic abuse behaviour a criminal offence that we are seeing those numbers go up. Nobody should ever celebrate the rise in cases of domestic abuse, but underlying those statistics is a sign that, as a country, as a Parliament, we have taken it even more seriously. Masha Scott from Scottish Women's Aid, although it is very early data that our new domestic abuse law shows signs of living up to its global gold standard label. In terms of punishments, as Jamie Greene knows, and we have had debates in other contexts over the past few months about whether the separation of powers between Parliament and the judiciary and the criminal justice system are as robust as they should be—I think they are—but every member of this Parliament should know that I do not decide what punishment somebody gets once they are convicted of an offence. Yes, we set the statutory framework for that, but in terms of short sentences—actually, that was in the question that was posed to me—it is a presumption against short sentences. The decision about whether or not any perpetrator goes to jail is not a decision for me or any member of the Government. It is a decision for the judge presiding over that case, and that is the way it should always be. Daniel Johnson, to be followed by John Mason. I would like to ask the First Minister for her reaction to the outcome of the court case taken to the court of session by survivors of people who suffered abuse at the hands of the Society of Sailors. The case failed because the court determined that a defence could not be mounted because those who allegedly perpetrated that abuse have since died. That would seem to set a new and, frankly, impossible threshold for many survivors of child abuse. What impact does that have on the considerations for the Government as it sets up Redress Scotland, given that it may increase the scope of those who will need to seek compensation through the scheme? Does she agree with me that those organisations should understand that the moral threshold may be considerably lower than the legal threshold for them to meet and agree with survivors and agree compensation for those who suffered abuse when those organisations should have been caring for them? I hope that my answer will be helpful, but for reasons that I am sure Daniel Johnson will understand, I will not rush to give too detailed an answer to this, because, obviously, with a judgment from a court, the Government wants to take time to consider that and to consider the implications properly. I say two things in response to his question. First, I absolutely agree—this is not me trying to second-guess decisions, of course—that would be wrong for me to do that. However, in terms of how he phrased it about the moral threshold, I absolutely agree with the sentiments lying behind that question. The instances of systemic child abuse that the inquiry is currently looking at should shame all of us as a country. The redress, not just in a financial sense but in a wider sense, that we owe to people is a serious obligation. I think that the phraseology of moral threshold to stand aside any legal or financial threshold is one that is important for all of us to recognise. The second point is that the threshold for the redress scheme is already low, but one of the things that we will have to consider in terms of considering the judgment is whether there are any implications for that. On that more detailed point, I am happy to ask the Deputy First Minister to write to the member once we have had the opportunity to look in detail at it. John Mason, to be followed by Russell Findlay. Thank you. We understand that UK food and drink exports are down 47 per cent to the EU in the first quarter, and that Scotland's GDP could fall by £9 billion by 2030. After Covid can ask the First Minister should the people of Scotland have the choice between a disastrous Tory Brexit and friendly relations with all European nations? Yes, of course they should, not just because I think that they should, but because that is what people in Scotland voted for in an election a few weeks ago. Not only do I think that they should, I am determined that they will. That is an important choice for people in Scotland to make. The impact of Brexit is only now starting to hit home for people. The evidence that John Mason has cited about the fallen exports is serious and damaging to businesses across much of our country. There are many other impacts. I visited some EU nationals yesterday who are having to go through the indignity of applying to stay in their own country. I spoke to one young woman in this, for me, in some ways sums up the deep injustice of Brexit. A young woman who came to this country at three years old from Germany has spent periods of her life in the care system here. You listened to her, you would not think that she was anything other than Scottish. She is Scottish, as Scottish as I am, but because at three years old she came from Germany, she is now having to go through the process of applying to stay in her own country. I cannot find the words to say how offended and angry that makes me on behalf of every EU national living in our country. I do not think that that is who we are as a country in Scotland. After we are through this Covid crisis, I think that we should have the opportunity to decide whether we want to be governed by Brexit Tories or whether we want to be governed as a country by Governments we elect based on the values that most of us in Scotland hold dear. Russell Findlay, to be followed by Ross Greer. Thank you. The family home of Councillor Graham Campbell has been targeted on three occasions. The most recent attack came last weekend when his cars in home were torched. Graham and his wife count themselves lucky to have survived. He believes that those cowardly attacks are linked to organised crime, and he tells me that he now has no option but to quit politics. Will the First Minister condemn organised crime mob rule in Scotland and tell Parliament what the Scottish Government is doing about this attack on democracy? First Minister, I do not just unreservedly condemn organised crime. I unreservedly and unequivocally condemn the attacks on Councillor Campbell and his wife. I cannot imagine what they have been through facing these attacks, and I am sure that the thoughts of everybody across not just the chamber but across the country are with them. I want to send him and his wife a message of solidarity from me and from my party today. Those matters have to be treated with the utmost seriousness. Nobody, for whatever reason, should feel that they have no choice but to leave politics or to abandon any part of their life because of threats or attacks from organised crime or anywhere else. It is, of course, not for me or the Government, but for the police to investigate and hopefully bring to justice those who have perpetrated those attacks. I offer my full support to the police and the actions that they will be taking to do that. For the purposes of today, I want to reiterate that message of solidarity to Councillor Campbell and his family. Ross Greer, to be followed by Pauline McNeill. Next month, the BBC will make a final decision on the proposal to transfer ownership of its Glasgow Pacific East Studios to a subsidiary company. Staff have been warned that this could result in dozens of redundancies and no-to-pay transfer. There are wider concerns across the Scottish production sector that it will restrict access to the studios as decisions over that access will be made from London. Can I ask the First Minister what representation the Government has made to the BBC about this proposal? If a Government minister will meet with the Bechtou staff union to discuss how the jobs can be saved? We make representations to the BBC on matters like this regularly, which of course are nothing to do with the editorial decisions of the BBC, but, for example, I personally have made representations in the past about the need to build up production capacity in Scotland for the BBC to spend more of the licence pay that Scottish viewers pay in Scotland supporting the economy and production opportunities here. I absolutely share the concerns that Ross Greer has indicated. I hope that this move doesn't go ahead. I can't see and I haven't seen anything that would suggest to me would be in the interests of Scotland as a whole or the production sector in particular. Of course, yes, the Government would be happy to meet with the representative of Bechtou if that hasn't already been arranged. I'm sure that it can be quickly. Pauline McNeill, to be followed by Beatrice Wishart. Thank you. I declare my interests as a member of GMB Scotland. The First Minister is aware that Plads is the owners of McVitie's factory in Glasgow. It has, sadly, issued a notice to 500 workers. Some of them were here today with the union of GMB to present a petition to you, First Minister, of almost 75,000 petitioners. I hope that the First Minister would be happy to take that petition from me on her behalf. I would like to put on record and commend the work of the Cabinet Secretary, Kate Forbes, and the working group along with the trade unions, GMB and G9. I know that the First Minister is fully behind us. Will the First Minister use her international recognition and skills that she has to eyeball directly the owners of McVitie's and put everything on the table that is possible to make sure that they are presented with an offer that they cannot refuse? First Minister, I believe that you need to lead this charge, and we will all be behind you in doing so. McVitie's factory in Glasgow cannot be allowed to close. As Pauline McNeill is aware, the finance secretary with the leader of Glasgow City Council co-chairs an action group to try to save the McVitie's plant in the East End, which I am 100 per cent behind. The finance secretary has also communicated this week, or has communicated this week, with Pladys senior management to make very clear our disappointment at the lack of constructive engagement about the options with Scottish Government support for saving that site. We will not give up. We will do everything we possibly can. I will certainly do everything I can to make sure that any option that there is to save that plant, to save that site, to save those jobs, is taken forward by the Government. We cannot force a company to accept offers of help that we give, but we will do everything we can to make sure that those offers are credible and do everything to make sure that they are accepted. That is what we have done in the past, over other industrial plants. Often we then, later on, get criticised for it when the opportunistic reasons arise to allow that to happen, but that will not stop us doing everything we can to save this plant and to save others that end up in a similar position. One thing I would say is that the workers do not have to petition me and the Scottish Government. We are on their side and we will do everything we can to save their jobs. I will ensure that I, just to explain why I cannot do it myself, I am leaving First Minister's questions to travel to our broth to attend the funeral of one of our former members, Andrew Welch. I want to take the opportunity today to say in response to the passing of somebody widely respected across the political spectrum how much my thoughts are with his family, but I will arrange for another member of the Government to accept the petition on my behalf. With many choosing to staycation this summer, the First Minister will be aware of reports that rural and island communities will see a significant number of domestic visitors. Many in the isles will be worried about rising Covid infections across the country, including in Orkney and Shetland, and are concerned that testing is not being undertaken by those travelling. What can the Scottish Government do to ensure safe and sustainable domestic travel to all our islands and rural areas? That is an important point. Our islands, like the rest of the country, want to get back to normal. Tourism is a big part of normality for Scotland and we want that for our islands, but it is really important that it is safe. That is why we have given very strong advice. We reiterate that regularly and I will do so again today to anybody travelling to our islands to test before they go. Lateral flow tests are available to allow them to do that. Beatrice Wishart is right to point that out. I can say that in today's figures there are cases reported in both Orkney and Shetland, very small numbers, but it is a reminder that this virus has not gone away. If you are travelling to our islands, travelling to any part of our beautiful country over the summer, please do so safely, test yourself, respect all the advice that is in place in any particular area and help to keep yourself and the local population safe. That concludes First Minister's questions. I suspend this meeting until 2 pm.