 Thanks for the question. Question number one. Kezia Ducdale. To ask the First Minister what engagement she has planned for the rest of the day. Engagement is to take forward the governments programme for Scotland. Kezia Ducdale. After yesterday's budget, we can start today on a consensual note. Both the First Minister and I agree that George Osborne spending plans are bad for Scotland. In fact, it was a typical Tory budget. tax cuts for the top 15% of earners but spending cuts for everyone else. When our schools are facing cuts and thousands of people are losing their jobs, a tax cut for high earners cannot be the priority. When the powers are evolved next year, Scottish Labour would reverse this tax cut for the top 15%. Can the First Minister confirm whether the SNP would do the same? Maen nhw'r gwaith bwysig o'r ddechrau cymdeithasol wedi gwneud y tafnodau. Mae genneddiaeth, eu cyfeyllfa ar gysgau hwnnw i ddod yn ein hunain o'r hanfoddi Caerdaidd i Sglutffordd, yn â, yn dweud i gael, ondo? Mae'n dechrau osant yn gweld eich gwaith cyflosfa ar ôl 10% a dyma'n ei gyfeyddio ei wneud, yn ddechrau cymoeitau oedd aeth yn ddweud i gael, a yn y cwylwyr yw'r gwybodaeth ar y prifysgol牙on, oedd nid oes o'ch cwylwyr arferio. Mae hynny fod yn ddysgu o gwybodaeth ar y cwylwyr, a ddysgu o'ch naddw i ddweudiaethu gyda'n fwrnrag. Felly, mae gwybodaeth ar un o'ch gwylwyr y taith, jeilen, yn gweithio i hynny mae'r oliad yng Nghymru. John MacDonaldaines, i gael, rydw i ddim yn llawer i ei fod yn eich gwaith, sy'n sylwedd i ddim yn hefyd. doledo'r wo описio e масch-durwr. 뒤에ch gyda pubbwyno ond fel y Yongwyr Wrath ei b外g queisio ar fynd mwyosiad tenants i'n rheidd i ni i online. Dwy ydych yn Masch-durwr i ni i. Nicola Sturgeon wedi ydy rhoi ei ddahb neu gallwn ni wedi'i echам yn ei ddy enduring conflicting roi i darwm pwynydd ar holl llwythio. The order was to do so. Order! Let's hear Ms Lugdale. The order was to do so about our priorities. Scottish Labour has been absolutely resolute and we have been so since October. We would reverse George Osborne's tax cut for the top 15 percent. When classroom assistants are being cut and teachers are having to buy their own materiali wedyn ei ddylch i ddweud y hebwyr i'r chreadiau a'r dreidwch chi'n gweithio, i ddweud y gael o ddafod hwn o'r fagorolio y mae'n gobl yn defnyddio ei gwasun hwn i'r Gweithblog, ac mae'r llei'r mwyaf ei hyn wedi'i gwneud y pryd hynny. Gweithblog hynny mae'n gwneud â'r bobl yn treidwyd o Tori Asteru. M reu i ddafodhaith ystyried y panfod solve. M reu i ddafod hwn syddig yn gweithio i ddafod hwn, i ddweud pwyfawr. iawn, a anghywethaf y dylau. Felly, iawn prevention yn mynd i. Felly, rwy'n coli chi'n i'n gweithio'r cyffredinol gan anghywethaf y rhan i'w chyrwoddau o'r fflogau Cyffredinol a'r rhan o'r barchau cyffredinol. Felly, rydw i, rydw i, rydw i, rydw i, rydw i, rydw i, rydw i, rydw i, rydw i, rydw i, rydw i, rydw i, rydw i, rygwio eich gweithio i'r llwy ffyrdd wedi ddim yn digwyd. Nid oedd eraill erinog wrth gwrs. I said that the choice of giving a fairly hefty tax cut to 10 per cent of the population, the highest income earners in our country, was the wrong choice. I think that's fairly clear. I then said that we would set out our plans for income tax early next week. I've always said that we would set them out pryd na yw y Ysgoledig y Unedd Argymell, ac rydw i'r cyffredinol. Felly, rydw i addysg y fawr hefyd— Felly, rydw i'n ddigonwc i gydig i gael ei wneud ei wneud sefydig yn syfr mumau arall i'w ddych chi i gael ei wneud ei fawr hefyd. Felly, rydw i'n ddigonwc i gael ei wneud ei wneud ei wneud ei wneud ei wneud ei wneud ei fawr hefyd. Mae nid oherwydd y mae yna yna yna ddawn â hynny yn dweud. I think that they will find that a very clear answer indeed. That is why I would say to Kezia Dugdale that, given that I am answering this question very, very clearly, perhaps she should not waste her energy on trying to persuade me of this argument. Instead she should use her energy trying to persuade Labour's shadow chancellor who said yesterday that Labour would support the increase in the £40 threshold. Kezia Dugdale? Twice I have asked the First Minister if she will reverse George Osborne's tax cut for the top 15%. Both times she has told me that she does not support the plan, but she hasn't yet said if she would reverse it. The new tax powers that are coming to Scotland give us a real opportunity to stop George Osborne's cuts. I have said already that this Parliament is not a place that surely should pass on Tory austerity, it should stop it. Faced with a choice between using the powers of this Parliament to invest or carrying on with the cuts, we can choose to use the powers. If we cannot get a clear answer on the top 15%, let's see if we can get one for the very richest few. I believe that the top 1% earning more than £150,000 a year should pay more tax so that we can invest in education. Page 5 of last year's SNP manifesto said this. We will also vote for the reintroduction of the 50p top rate of tax. Will this year's SNP manifesto make the same commitment? The problem for Kezia Dugdale is that people watching this are starting to laugh not with her but at her, as she pointedly refuses to hear what I am saying. Let us hear the First Minister, Mr Bibby. Let me make it as simple as possible. The Scottish Government will set out our detailed income tax proposals early next week, before the dissolution of Parliament, as we committed to do. Secondly, I have said, and I will say again now for the third time, that the decision taken by the Chancellor yesterday in the same budget that he cut support for the disabled confirmed that the Scottish Government's budget between now and 2020 will reduce by £1 billion in real terms. At a time when he piled more pressure on our public services, I think that the decision to give a large tax cut to 10% of the population at the highest end of the income spectrum is the wrong choice. Clearly, if I think that it is the wrong choice, it is not a choice that I am going to make myself. Perhaps that is simply enough for Kezia Dugdale. At a time when our services are under pressure, it is important that we protect our public services and protect those things that taxpayers in Scotland enjoy, that taxpayers in England do not enjoy protecting free education for young people going to university, protecting free personal care for our older people, protecting free medicines for people who are sick. I will continue to take decisions that are fair and balanced and in the interests of people across our country, in the interests of our public services and in the interests of our economy. I will leave Labour in its increasingly desperate battle to hang on to second place. The people watching this at home are wondering why the First Minister of Scotland cannot answer a question with a simple yes or no answer. That answer was a bit like the First Minister's answer on fracking, because she says that she is highly sceptical, but she will not spell out how she would do it any differently. The First Minister tells us that she is against the cuts and opposes the Westminster's austerity agenda, yet, when faced with a choice between using the powers of this Parliament to invest or canning on with the cuts, the First Minister chooses cuts and refuses to use the powers. She has just stripped £500 million out of school budgets and the services of vital public services. She will not confirm that she will reverse Osborne's tax cut for the top 15 per cent, and she will not even commit to our manifesto pledge from last year on the 50p tax, because the powers of this place mean that we can choose a different path from the Tories. We have a choice. We can either wring our hands and wave the cuts through like the SNP chose to, or we can use the new tax powers to end austerity like Labour argued. Can I ask the First Minister? Is there any power that she has prepared to use to stop the cuts? This line of questioning from Kezia Dugdale reminds me a bit of the Labour Party in Scotland generally, going absolutely nowhere. When Kezia Dugdale was scripting these questions, you would have thought that she would have factored in the possibility that I would actually answer the question at the first time of asking, and then have the ability to amend the questions that come later. For the fourth time, George Osborne's decision to cut taxes for 10 per cent of the population at the highest end of the income spectrum is the wrong choice, and I will not take that same choice. Four times, surely somebody on the Labour benches must have understood it. Let me also say this. I'm like Labour. I've also set out what I'm going to do with local taxation. We've not heard that from Labour yet, so I've set out plans on local taxation. Within a few days, I'll set out plans on income tax. Those plans taken together will be fair, they will be reasonable, they will be balanced, they will protect our public services and they will protect our economy. That's the position that I will continue to argue, and that's perhaps why we see today that trust in this Scottish Government is at an all-time high. Perhaps that's something Kezia Dugdale might want to reflect on when she is continuing in opposition in whatever side of the chamber that might be. Ruth Davidson to ask the First Minister when she will next meet the Secretary of State for Scotland. Many of the income tax decisions taken yesterday in the budget will not apply to Scotland's workers. Those decisions will be for this Parliament to make, and they require serious analysis and proper thought. Last year, the Scottish Conservatives brought together an independent commission of experts to study the issue in detail, and their recommendations were published in January. The First Minister has her own team of economic advisers as well as an army of civil servants at her disposal. We've all known that those powers were coming. What detailed analysis has she published on how we use those new tax powers to strengthen Scotland's economy? As I've just said to Kezia Dugdale, we will set out our proposals on income tax early next week. That's just in a few days' time, and we will set out when we do that the analysis that backs up the decisions that we have taken on income tax. It's interesting, isn't it? Ruth Davidson has just said that she appointed a commission to look into how we use new income tax powers in the way that is best for Scotland, and it seems to me, from what Ruth Davidson is saying, that she doesn't propose to use them at all. She's simply going to mimic George Osborne. That's the wrong choice for Scotland. It's quite obvious to see that there has been no analysis or evidence-based put forwards already. You can run through the minutes. The First Minister's Council of Economic Advisers at any point in the last year, and incredibly, the new tax powers don't even merit discussion amongst them. I think that we did see that yesterday when we saw the Deputy First Minister on television like a rabbit in headlights about how those powers are going to be used. I am clear, First Minister. I want a sign at the border. I don't want to see a sign that says, higher tax is here, because I think that's the wrong choice for Scotland, and I'm not the only one. In this morning's press, Jack Perry, the former chief executive of Scottish Enterprise, wrote this, and I'll quote it directly, a further tax grab will only weaken our tax base and depress the economy. That will do nothing to help support schools, hospitals and the ageing population. Mr Perry ran Scotland's main enterprise body for five and a half years. He's not a politician, so can I ask the First Minister why he's wrong? I'll set out my proposals and income tax, as I've said repeatedly today, but it's interesting that Ruth Davidson is not proposing to use the income tax powers. How many times has Ruth Davidson, over the past year, stood over there and said to me, the time is soon when you're going to have to decide, we're all going to have to decide, how we're going to use those income tax proposals, and yet she is not proposing a single iota of difference from the tax proposals of George Osborne, as she confirmed at our conference. She led the troops up to the top of the hill, promised in a 30-pence tax band and then said when she got them there that she was going to march them straight back down again, so she's going to mimic George Osborne. I'm going to take decisions that are right for Scotland. If Ruth Davidson wants to talk about differences between Scotland and England, well, here's some differences between Scotland and England. Unlike in England, if you're a taxpayer in Scotland, your children don't pay for a university education. If you're a taxpayer in Scotland, unlike in England, you don't pay for free personal care for your elderly parents. If you're a taxpayer in Scotland, unlike in England, you get medicines free when you're sick. Of course, those are some of the benefits that taxpayers in Scotland get, unlike in England, that Ruth Davidson wants to take away. Perhaps she will answer how much do the Tories think people should pay for a university education and how much would she have the prescription charge returned to? Let us have some answers from Ruth Davidson before she's got the nerve to stand here and lecture anybody else. I have some constituent questions, Kenneth Gibson. Thank you, Presiding Officer. First Minister, earlier today I received notification that Zed Hinchcliff, a textile company with a factory in Dorine, my constituency, has begun issuing 90-day redundancy notices this morning to its 86 employees. That is despite the factory being in full operation throughout an initial 30-day consultation period. The company claims to be in negotiation with potential buyer, but has refused to name that buyer or allow Scottish Enterprise to help to find another. Management, based in Huddersfield, has also refused to let the partnership action for continuing employment team into the factory to speak to the workers. Given those circumstances, what pressure can we put on Zed Hinchcliff to ensure that the workforce is given the assistance that they need and deserve at this difficult time? I thank Kenneth Gibson for that question. Obviously, I am aware of this developing situation and I am very concerned indeed to learn of the situation at Zed Hinchcliff and Sons Ltd in Dalrai. That will be a very anxious time for the company's employees, for their families and indeed for the local community. Fegish Ewing will be engaging directly with the business, and I can give Kenneth Gibson an assurance that we will do everything we can to ensure that the workforce is given the assistance that they need and deserve at this difficult time. I undertake today that Fegish Ewing will keep the member fully updated about those discussions. The First Minister will be aware that the long-anit power station in my constituency will close at the end of the month, with the loss of 236 jobs locally and over 1,000 jobs across Central Scotland in the supply chain. A £9 million economic recovery plan has been drawn up by Fife Clackmannanshire and Falkirk councils. The plan is vital to the long-term economic regeneration of the area, enabling recovery from what is going to be a devastating blow to Concardin and surrounding communities. I was disappointed to hear this week from Fife Council leader David Ross that the plan is not going to be funded by the Scottish Government. Will the First Minister please reconsider this position before the long-anit closes on 31 March to ensure that the communities that I represent have a fighting chance of recovery? Of course, we established the task force to look at the multi-agency, multi-partner task force when the decision was announced about the future of the long-anit. We continue to engage with the council about proposals to support economic regeneration and recovery in the area. Of course, we have also been working through the task force and through our PACE organisation to help individuals into alternative employment. I understand that many of the individuals employed in the long-anit have been able to move into alternative employment. We will continue to engage with the local council through the task force and with members who represent the area to ensure that we are doing everything possible and appropriate to help individuals but to help the local economy as well. First Minister, you will be aware of the announcement by Clyde Pumps, part of the SFX group, when, based on my constituency, the consultations have already begun with unions over the prospect of the company making 114 workers redundant. If that comes to pass, that will mean that over one third of the workforce will have gone in the last 12 months after a loss of 90 jobs last year. Given the importance of the company to my constituency—for example, both my brother and mother have worked on it—and it is weird that it has been on Y Llywans Road since 1886, can the First Minister tell me what the Scottish Government can do to help the workers threatened with redundancy and the company to help them through this temporary downturn in the oil and gas industry? I am acutely aware of the situation but also of the impact that it will have on those who work at their families in the local area. Indeed, as the MSP for the neighbouring constituency, I know the impact of the employer and how long-standing it is in the south side of Glasgow. I can tell James Dornan that Scottish Enterprise met yesterday with the company to explore all possible options for supporting the business and for retaining its highly skilled employees. Our partnership action for continuing employment pace team has also been in contact with the company and is offering support for affected employees. PACE will remain in contact with employees and the company throughout the consultation period. Again, we will do everything possible to make sure that all options are explored and that the workforce is given all the support that they need and deserve at this time. What is the Scottish Government's response to the final report of the commission on widening access? I warmly welcome the report from the commission on widening access that was published on Monday. Let me take the opportunity to thank Dame Ruth Silver, the chair of the commission and all the members of the commission for the very good work that I think they have done. I have repeatedly made clear my personal commitment and ambition, indeed the commitment and ambition of this Government, that every young person, no matter their background, will have an equal chance of going to university if that is what they choose to do. That is why we immediately accepted the commission's recommended targets to maintain the urgency and focus that is needed so that by 2030, students from the 20 per cent most deprived backgrounds should represent 20 per cent of entrance to higher education. We will now consider the other findings and recommendations carefully, and if we are re-elected, we will bring forward a full response very early in the next Parliament. Our widening access must be tackled right from the start of schooling, having seemingly abandoned the area-based approach to raising attainment in schools, which ignored the needs of too many children in too many parts of the country. Will the First Minister now accept that our idea of a pupil premium is the best approach for the whole of Scotland? Given how important colleges are as a gateway to learning, having rejected our penny for education proposal, how will the First Minister prevent her damaging cuts to council education budgets and colleges' undermining efforts to meet her new university targets? First, Lea MacArthur is right to say that dealing with the issue of access to university requires not just the efforts and the input of universities, it requires all of us right across the system to play our part, and that is why the commission was right to call it a whole system problem that needs a whole system solution. In terms of the rest of Lea MacArthur's question, we have not abandoned anything. Our attainment fund, which was doubled by the Deputy First Minister in the budget, will continue to provide dedicated support to primary schools in our most deprived communities. It is already providing support to more than 300 primary schools across the country. In addition to that, we will extend the reach of our attainment fund using the £100 million that is going to be raised every year through reforms that we have announced to local taxation, and that money will be allocated to schools on the basis of eligibility for free school meals. It will go direct to schools, direct to headteachers on the basis of greatest need and taking together both with what the Deputy First Minister announced in the budget and what I announced at the weekend. That means that, over the life of the next Parliament, if we are re-elected, there will be an additional £3 quarters of £1 billion spent specifically on tackling attainment in our schools. One of the commission's recommendations was that care experienced young people who find their way to university should be supported by a full grant while they are at university. That will certainly be part of Scottish Labour's manifesto. Will the First Minister commit to that recommendation, too? It is a good recommendation, and I will set out our response to that over the next few weeks of the election campaign. Iain Gray is not being as full as he could have been in talking about the recommendation, because it did not just say what it said about grants versus loans for students with care experience. It also said that where students leave in care or with an experience of care, where they meet minimum access requirements, they should be guaranteed a place in university. I think that those are sensible recommendations and can have an impact on our goal of making sure that there is equal access to university by one of the recommendations that we consider very carefully. One of the concerns that was expressed in the report was the fact that, in some schools, for some advanced hires, there are not sufficient number of teachers to be able to offer those courses. Can I ask what the Scottish Government is doing about that situation? There are many suggestions that have been made by many different people about how we make sure that, as part of ensuring equal access to university, we make sure that all young people have access to the subjects when they are at school. One of the suggestions that I think has particular merit is the idea of schools working much more in clusters so that, where a particular subject might not be offered in one school, it can be accessed in another school. There is a lot of serious work being done here by the commission and by others who have an interest. The output of all that work will certainly be reflected in my party's manifesto. As I say, if we are re-elected, we will bring forward a full, comprehensive response to the commission's report very early in the next parliamentary session. First Minister, one of the recommendations in the report is that those who compile key university rankings should ensure greater priorities given to socio-economic diversity within the rankings and that those institutions that take those actions should not be penalised. What is the Government's view about that? How can we allay the concerns of universities about the ranking implications? I strongly agree with what the report has to say. It is absolutely essential that university rankings are not compiled in such a way that universities find themselves penalised for doing the right things in terms of widening access to students from our more deprived areas. Our world-class higher education system is rightly a source of great pride to us, and rankings are understandably important to institutions in terms of both their reputation and their income. However, as the report makes us clear, there is a strong and growing body of evidence to suggest that socio-economic diversity improves standards and improves the educational experience of all students. Therefore, universities should be credited not penalised if they make their student body more diverse in that respect. That is a strong recommendation backed by strong analysis. Of course, it will form part of our response to this report early in the next parliamentary session, should we be re-elected. As a result of yesterday's budget, between now and 2020, Scotland will see £1 billion in real terms cut from the day-to-day budget that pays for our public services. Of course, that is before the impact of the hidden £3.5 billion in the budget is fully understood. The budget statement delivers very little for Scotland. The modest consequentials that we receive are almost certainly wiped out by the increase in public sector employer pension contribution costs from 2019. As you have heard me say, in earlier stages of the exchanges, we will continue to do everything within our powers to protect the most vulnerable from austerity measures, to protect our public services and to protect our economy. I thank the First Minister for that reply. Does the First Minister agree that this is a budget that will hammer the poorest in disabled society, whilst at the same time helping higher earners and that cutting employment and support allowance for £30 and changing eligibility to personal independence payments, which will slash £130 million worth of support to disabled people in Scotland, will have a hugely damaging effect to those affected and is a typical Tory action by a savage Tory chancellor? Those changes to personal independent payments are cruel on some of the most vulnerable people in our society. They are going to result in Scotland in around 40,000 disabled people being made worse off. Of that 40,000, two thirds could be worse off by almost £3,000 a year, and the remainder could be worse off by almost £1,500 a year. When those changes were first proposed in January, the Scottish Government, alongside disabled people and a range of disabled charities, made clear to the UK Government that we were fundamentally opposed to those changes. It would narrow the eligibility for benefits that support disabled people in their daily lives and will continue to press that case. As power over disability benefits comes to this Parliament, we will make sure that we build a social security system that treats people, particularly disabled people, with the dignity and the respect that they deserve. To ask the First Minister what steps the Scottish Government is taking to ensure that all cancer patients have timely access to diagnostic tests. Our new £100 million cancer strategy was published by the health secretary on Tuesday. That aims to improve the prevention, detection, diagnosis, treatment and after care of those affected by this devastating disease. £15 million of that funding will be used to deliver an additional 2,000 diagnostic scopes each year and to fund additional diagnostic capacity to ensure that people who are suspected of having cancer receive swift access to the diagnostic tests that they urgently need. I believe that this might be Malcolm Chisholm's last appearance at First Minister's questions, unless he has questions planned for me next week, but just in case he hasn't, if he will allow me, I would like to recognise his service, not just to this Parliament, but to the national health service. When Malcolm Chisholm was health minister amongst his other achievements, he abolished trusts in Scotland and he brought the golden jubilee back into public ownership. I think that these are landmark achievements, so I thank him for his service and take the opportunity to wish him well for the future. Malcolm Chisholm I thank the First Minister for her very kind words. I was going to say as a preamble that I think there has been great progress in cancer care during the years of the Scottish Parliament under this and the previous administration, but I wanted to highlight today the Cancer Research UK campaign, Scotland versus Cancer. I wonder if she agrees that they have been right to highlight the issue of the long waits that some people have for diagnostic tests. I certainly welcome the measures that she has referred to in the cancer strategy this week, but can she give us a bit more detail about the timescale for the proposed changes and what effect she thinks they will have? The First Minister I agree with Cancer Research UK. We need to make sure that we have world-class care and treatment for people who are diagnosed with cancer, but what we need to do most is to make sure that we maximise our efforts to prevent it and to diagnose it as quickly as possible so that people get access to the best care as quickly as possible. That is why our detect cancer early programme is so vitally important. Waiting times at all stages of the cancer journey are much shorter than they were in previous years, but particularly around diagnosis we are determined to go further. That is why the actions that I outlined in my earlier answer are so important. In terms of timescales, this is a cancer strategy that we will start to implement immediately, as well as the additional diagnostic capacity that I spoke about. We will also invest to increase the capacity for radiotherapy treatment, because, as technology developments, that becomes more and more important in the treatment of cancer. Whether it is prevention, diagnosis or world-class treatment, we have to make sure that we are doing everything possible to continue to reduce death from cancer. There can be a few things more important to any Parliament anywhere. To ask the First Minister when the Scottish Government expects a new film studio for Scotland to be delivered. The Scottish Government, with Scottish Enterprise and Creative Scotland, are firmly committed to supporting the growth of the screen sector in Scotland. That is underlined by the record £24.1 million awarded to support the sector in 2014-15 and the extra £4.75 million that we announced last year across three new funds. I am pleased to say that proposals for a permanent film studio in Cumbernauld by Ward Park Studios Ltd are now progressing well. A planning application for extensive development facilities was submitted to North Lanarkshire Council on 11 March. We hope and expect that the new studio will be operational no later than the end of 2017. I thank the First Minister for her response. She will be aware that the film industry in Scotland has made it very clear that it is dismay at the non-delivery of a long-awaited film studio. Last week, the culture secretary told us that the Scottish Government would be supporting an extension to the Ward Park facility in Cumbernauld by 30,000 square feet. However, we do not know when or indeed if that will actually be delivered. In the meantime, the Scottish Government is sitting on a planning application for a 230,000 square foot facility at Straton. What confidence can we have from the Scottish Government that something will actually and eventually be delivered that meets the industry's needs? It is certainly true that Murdo Fraser did not know when it would be delivered before I answered his first question, but he should know now, no later than the end of 2017. Now, should everybody else hear me? Everybody else is hearing me today, aren't they? Because Kezia Dugdale certainly did not appear to be, and now Murdo Fraser does not appear to be hearing me either. This is important and seriously important. I represent the south side of Glasgow, which is home to places like Film City. I understand absolutely—I have plenty people who rightly remind me of the importance of the film industry and the screen sector in Scotland. I am not going to comment on Pentland Studios for the reason that Murdo Fraser cited. It is subject at the moment to a planning application, and it would be wrong for me to comment on that. However, we think that the progress around Cumbernauld is very, very, very positive progress, and I hope that we continue to see that move forward so that we have a fully operational film studio—let me say this again—no later than the end of 2017.