 Felly, we now turn to topical questions and we start with question number one from Rachel Hamilton. To ask the Scottish Government what action it is taking to protect children involved in football from sexual abuse. Minister Mark McDonald. Ensuring the safety and wellbeing of children in Scotland, including when they take part in sport, is of paramount importance to us all. Through sport Scotland, children first has been funded to provide training, information and support to Scottish governing The work includes putting in place minimum operating requirements for child protection to safeguard children and ensuring that sport governing bodies take a consistent approach. The Scottish FA has implemented those requirements to ensure that all qualified coaches involved in youth football are registered with them and have undertaken the necessary disclosure checks. With regard to the horrific allegations of non-recent abuse that was made over the vindw without any claim on any application of abuse should be directed to the police to investigate. The Scottish sonra is encouraging anyone who has concerns about child abuse in Scottish football to contact the dedicated NSPCC hotline on 0800 023 2642. The hotline will be available 24 hours a day and people who call in will receive professional assistance and support in strict confidence. I thank the minister for that answer. Clearly this is a distressing issue and one that should be approached with care and consideration. Does the Scottish Government support calls from the likes of Gordon Smith, former SFA chief executive, to launch a wider inquiry into other areas such as sport? As I have mentioned, the hotline that was recently launched by NSPCC is available to receive calls only launched on Friday. At this stage, it is too early to give an indication as to how many calls have been received, but the Scottish Government will continue to liaise with NSPCC and governing bodies in relation to the volume of calls received and whether any further steps are required later on in the process. I appreciate the work that you have done by setting up the hotline. However, I am disappointed that the Scottish Government is not going forward with an investigation into the abuse in sports clubs. When asked about the current inquiry, Break the Silence said, where we stand, it makes no difference where the abuse occurred. All survivors should be able to access recovery services. The current inquiry risks not going far enough and helping victims of child abuse. Will the Scottish Government listen and reconsider an instigator-focused investigation into abuse in sports clubs? In relation to the remit of the inquiry into historic child abuse, Rachel Hamilton will be aware that the Deputy First Minister made a statement to Parliament where he made clear the parameters that that review would cover. It was very clear as to the reasons that lay behind that. That said, we take seriously any indications or reports of sexual abuse in sporting bodies. That is why we will continue to monitor the number of calls that are made to the hotline and determine, alongside other bodies, whether any further action is required in this specific area. That does not affect the remit of the historic abuse inquiry, which has been set by the Deputy First Minister. I note the minister in his answer to Rachel Hamilton that any allegations of sexual abuse of young people in Scotland, young players in Scotland, should be referred immediately to Police Scotland. Does he agree with me that the Scottish Football Association should not take up any investigatory role in those matters, as there may very well be a conflict of interest? Any referrals to them should immediately be referred to Police Scotland? Anyone who believes that they were abused as a child involved in football or has a concern about someone that they think was abused should contact Police Scotland to investigate. That would also apply to anyone currently being abused or concerned about a child being abused, whether at football or any other sporting environment or, indeed, in any other circumstance. Police Scotland are the right people to investigate criminal offences of abuse, whether current or non-recent, and I would concur with Christine Grahame in that respect. Monica Lennon To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to the Scottish Children's Services Coalition warning that Scotland faces a lost generation of children with additional support needs. The Additional Support for Learning Act places duties on education authorities to identify, provide for and review the additional support needs of their pupils. Since it was first passed in 2004, the act has been amended in both 2009 and again last year to ensure that children's rights sit at the heart of the legislation, the framework and the approach taken. The act and other actions taken by this Government and partner agencies, including education authorities, which in 2015 increased their spending on additional support needs by £24 million, are helping to provide better outcomes for children and young people with additional support needs. Achievement and entaimment is continuing to improve. In 2015, 86.2 per cent of pupils with additional support needs had a positive destination compared with 82.3 per cent in 2011-12, and 60.7 per cent of 2014-15 school leavers with additional support needs left school with one or more qualification at SCQF level 5 or better, an increase of 11.2 per cent since 2011-12. Clarely, we need to do more and stay focused on ensuring that children and young people are supported to fulfil their potential. I thank the minister for his answer, and I should refer to my register of interests as I am a local councillor in South Lanarkshire Council. Official figures for 2015 show that 22.5 per cent of pupils were recorded as having additional support needs. That is an increase of 16 per cent since 2013. Meanwhile, the number of learning support teachers fell by 13 per cent between 2010 and 2015, a decrease of 427. The number of support staff in schools such as additional support needs, auxiliaries and behaviour support staff dropped by more than 9 per cent between 2010 and 2015. That is a reduction in just over 1,800. Will the minister act to protect the most vulnerable pupils by ruling out cuts to local authority budgets? It is worth noting that, in relation to the figures that Monica Lennon cites, she cites the figures relating to pupils' additional support needs. It is worth reflecting on what those figures capture, because they capture pupils with any requirement for additional support throughout a school year. That does not necessarily mean that an identified additional support need that is concurrent throughout that year could be, for example, a result of a family bereavement, which requires additional support to be provided to the pupil. That was a change that was made to the statistics that were collected, and that reflects perhaps some of those figures that are captured by Monica Lennon. It is also worth noting that around 95 per cent of children are educated within mainstream settings and support is provided in terms of classroom support, where we have seen an increase in the number of classroom assistants in Scotland, but also in terms of teacher professional development, to enable teachers to better understand and support the needs of children with additional support needs. Monica Lennon, I thank the minister for his answer. The figures that I read out previously are concerning, but it is not just me who is concerned. I know that the Scottish Children's Services Coalition has written to the Scottish Government, alongside local authorities, to say that those cuts are affecting vulnerable children and families in Scotland. We read today in a new report from the Accounts Commission that local authorities face a predicted funding gap of £553 million by 2018-19. Scottish Labour would use the new powers of this Parliament to invest in vital services. The minister has not ruled out further cuts today, but will he think again and begin to listen to the Scottish Children's Services Coalition and parents across Scotland to seriously address the need to increase resources for services for children and young people with additional support needs? I repeat the point that was made in my initial answer to Monica Lennon in 2015, which is the last year that we have audited figures for. The spend on additional support needs across local authorities increased by £24 million. However, I have read the Scottish Children's Services Coalition press release. It makes clear that the genesis of their concern comes as a result of Philip Hammond's autumn statement, which is the reality in which we operate in fiscal terms. However, it also goes on to state in its press release that what we need to look at is greater public sector reform and collaboration. That is an agenda that we should all be signed up to. It follows clearly on in the spirit of the Christie commission, and it is something that I will be more than happy to discuss with the Scottish Children's Services Coalition in response to the letter that it has sent to the Scottish Government. I recently visited CMAB school in Perthshire, which cares for and educates vulnerable children with complex needs aged between 5 and 13. One member staff informed me that one of the children attending that school had had 17 different care placements before they arrived at the school. Another member told me that one child was about to be removed from the school because the local authority was no longer willing to pay the amount to that school. Will the minister agree with me that any child being placed in 17 different sets of foster parents, or any child being removed from the school because of a financial measure, has been failed by us all? Will he write to each local authority to confirm this Government's position that each child needs to be met according to their need, not any other reason? The principle that lies behind GERFEC is, of course, getting it right for every child. The points that Jeremy Balfour makes I think tie in quite succinctly to the points that were raised during the recent debate last well the debate last week that we had in relation to adoption and permanence, and we'll also I'm sure feed into the work that is being undertaken in relation to the care review in relation to those children who perhaps find themselves moving from place to place rather than being able to achieve early permanence, which, as a consequence, derives better outcomes for that child. So I take on board the points that he's making that they would perhaps be better addressed as part of that wider review, and I'm sure Jeremy Balfour and other members will take the opportunity to feed their views into that review of how best they see it going forward. Thank you, thank you members. That concludes topical questions.