 Roedd indicateun y chyfe hwyl i ni'r dim ond yn yr Skellin F natur i Llyfr capitolig ac droseg complex momentau unig, rydyn ni argyn يad yn dasbwynt. Felly, annastysg kim y l comida ddany hyn mae yn fawr i brif друзьяu gılıch. Mae薫reid y mynd i'i dd遠 Berasyn, ein y attackerson y stylus heddiw. Y fferwyr Iagwerth m 하지만 wyth o'r rhaglen maen nhw, â tractorig ferwyr i Feirgyll yn Ffergison Marine. mae Llyfrorestol y bydd wedi fidei i am y brofiwr hyny heddiw finding neu llunu i'r trofiwr Erg discrこの newydd. I still believe that the Scottish Government was right to do everything to save Ferguson's shipyard, but for those decisions, Ferguson's shipyard would not still be open, not still employing significant numbers of people as it is today. Douglas Ross and I may well take different views on that, but I do think that it was right for the Scottish Government to protect and save jobs and protect that shipyard. As I set out in questions last week, the delays to the timetable for the construction of those ferries and the cost overruns is a matter of deep regret. The Audit Scotland report published last week set out much of the detail of that, and the Scottish Government, CMAL, is certainly intent on learning all lessons. I do not regret the fact that Ferguson's shipyard is still operational and still employing lots of people. It is good that people continue to be employed. We welcome that, but not a single mention in the First Minister's answer about the island communities that have been waiting for years for lifeline services. That is where the regret should be from this First Minister, but they do not even merit a mention. The deal that she is so proud of has become a disaster, because we now know that the Government waived a crucial safeguard that would have protected taxpayers' money. International guidelines say that the refund guarantee is the financial cornerstone of a shipbuilding project. The guidelines state, and this is a direct quote, that it is unlikely that any shipbuilding contract would be signed if there was no such guarantee. That is exactly what this First Minister did, knowing the risks. Last week, when I asked about the guarantee, she said, and I quote, that decision was clearly taken based on a balance of risks. In other words, she dropped a vital safeguard standard for these types of contracts in order to cut a deal. Five years on, does the First Minister accept that the risks were far too high, and that was a bad deal? First Minister? Firstly, in my initial answer, I expressed deep regret. I think that those were my actual words about the delay in the construction of the ferries and the cost overrun. Clearly, those most impacted by the delay in the construction of the ferries are those who live in our islands. That is where the deep regret rightly lies. My deep regret rightly lies. In terms of the wider question, obviously in terms of the refund guarantee, I set this out in full last week. There, of course, was a failure on the part of FML to offer the full refund guarantee. There were a number of steps taken, as I set out in detail last week, to mitigate the risk that was caused by that. I set out the three key steps in mitigation that were taken. Firstly, changes to the final payment that was to be made to FML for delivery of the vessels was increased from 15 per cent to 25 per cent of the contract price. Effectively, FML therefore withholding more of the payment until the later stage. Secondly, FML to take ownership of all equipment, machinery and materials as they arrived at the shipyard. Thirdly, FML would require all major suppliers to offer the full refund guarantee with FML as the payee. Those were the steps in mitigation that were taken. Then there was a requirement for ministers to take a decision on a balance of judgment. As the paperwork that has been in the public domain now for some time makes clear, the view of FML—FML, of course, did articulate concerns about this, and that is all laid out in the paperwork and in the Audit Scotland report. However, there was also a view that the negotiations with FML had led to the best deal that was capable of being struck with FML. Had that decision not been taken, I express again my deep regret at the delays and the cost overrun in the construction of those ferries. Lessons have been learned and will be learned, but I do not regret the fact that that shipyard still exists and that that shipyard is now employing more than 400 people. As well as learning lessons from this experience, we are also determined to ensure that that shipyard has a bright future. The First Minister stands there and says that lessons have been learned, yet the Audit Scotland report from last week said that there is no evidence that the Scottish Government, Transport Scotland or CML, conducted a formal project review exercise after the original contract failed. That is how you learn lessons, yet her Government did not do it. She could not, despite a very long answer there, accept that that was a bad deal. However, she mentioned CML and its public statements both in the public domain and in the Audit Scotland report. Well, they know that this is a bad deal because they have said, and let's remember, this is a company owned by the Scottish Government. They have said that they would not agree another contract with those conditions. A Government-owned company is saying that. Do you know what else they said in the Audit Scotland report? Regardless of what Scottish Government ministers tell them, they are so opposed to this deal that they can see the pitfalls, even if her Government and her ministers told them that they would not do that. They get how bad this deal is, the First Minister doesn't. It is important to islanders and island communities. Those ferries are vital for their way of life and work, so let's look at what happened here. Nicola Sturgeon signed off a contract against the advice of experts. She started building ferries without agreeing a design. She threw good money after bad, and a quarter of a billion pounds has been spent with nothing to show for it, and worst of all, the person with the ultimate responsibility, the First Minister, removed the essential safeguards that would have protected Scottish taxpayers. A former Scottish Government shipbuilding adviser says that the final cost could rise to between £350 million and £400 million. First Minister, can you guarantee to Scottish taxpayers that that will not be the final bill? First Minister, the chief executive of the shipyard and CML, as I understand it, and this is significant, because this is, I think, the first time that this has happened, have endorsed the latest cost estimates that the finance secretary set out to the chamber last week and the latest updated timescale. These are the cost estimates, and all of the efforts of those in the yard are now ensuring that those ferries are delivered. Douglas Ross says—firstly, I am not standing here and saying that there is not a great deal to deeply regret about the conduct of this contract. That is clearly the case that this has not gone the way anybody would have wanted. Douglas Ross says that there is nothing to show for it. There are, as of this year's middle of March, 462 people in Ferguson's shipyard that have employment. I think that that is something to show for the actions of this Government. We will now get on with learning the lessons. Douglas Ross says that no lessons have been learned. Then, of course, he narrates the lessons that CML has already learned and are putting into practice. We will continue to learn the lessons. Most importantly, we will continue to focus on completing the ferries, which is the most important thing for our island communities. We will also focus on making sure that Ferguson's shipyard and all those who work there now and in the future have that bright future that I think people across Scotland want. I know that the First Minister does not like First Minister's questions because people hold her to account and seek answers, but not even an attempt to give a guarantee that a former Scottish Government adviser says that this will go to £350 million to £400 million, nothing from the First Minister to say in her answer that she would guarantee Scottish taxpayers that that will not happen. What should have been, in the First Minister's own words, a proud achievement has become a sign of this Government's incompetence. The Deputy First Minister, John Swinney, said in 2014 that the SNP would replace 12 ferries with £250 million. They have not even built one for that amount of money. They have ignored the experts and islanders remain stuck with a rotten ferry service with no sign of improvements. Her Government struck a deal on the balance of risks that has been catastrophic for Scottish taxpayers. Any evidence as to why this call was made has mysteriously vanished. Audit Scotland could not find a shred of evidence. It is in their report. Nicola Sturgeon's whole claim here, even after she has lost £250 million without building a single ferry, is that the deal was the best option available. First Minister, are you seriously saying that you would sign the same deal all over again? That was the view at the time that the contract was signed. Obviously, we would not repeat what has happened. I think that that is self-evident. On the issue of the costs, Douglas Ross has quoted, and I know that he is quoting somebody else, costs of between £350 million and £400 million. I simply do not recognise those numbers. The cost estimates are set out by the finance secretary, and those are the cost estimates that we stand behind. I have been very clear about that. Our focus now is on ensuring that those ferries are completed in the interests of our island communities, and on ensuring that Ferguson shipyard and all those who work in it have a bright future. We will learn the lessons from this. I have said several times today that I deeply regret the experience of this, and I am standing here and taking, as I did last week, full responsibility for that. My focus, and the Government's focus, is on learning the lessons and securing the future of that shipyard. The waste of public money, £1.5 billion so far by the Government of Ferguson, does not end with the award of the ferry contract. In August 2019, Tim Hare was appointed as turn-around director at the Yard. Those emails obtained through the freedom information show that the appointment was rushed through without the usual competition in just a few days. Mr Hare was selected from a short list of only three people, all recommended by corporate advisers PricewaterhouseCoopers. In the process of negotiating his salary, he started by offering a rate of £2,000 a day but ended up being paid just under £3,000 per day and expenses, and those emails also show that the First Minister was informed about all of this and did not raise a single objection. As people across Scotland tighten their belts, can the First Minister explain why she thought it was right to pay Tim Hare over £2 million, meaning that he earned in just 11 days what the average Scot earns in a year? Those decisions were taken at the time in line with proper processes and procedures, and people paying the market rates—I do not set the market rates for what people are paid—but we will continue to focus. There is a new chief executive now in place at Ferguson's. He has updated this Parliament on the revised timescales and the revised costs for the ferries, and we will continue to update Parliament and Parliament will continue to hold the Government and the company, which of course is now in Government ownership to account. We will concentrate on learning the lessons, but more than anything, we will concentrate on completing the ferries and on securing a good future for that shipyard, which is something that the STUC has already said is of huge significance and that the Government was right to intervene to secure the future of the shipyard. Anna Sarwar Market rate—£3,000 a day. Were you signing Lionel Messi? Who is the First Minister kidding? I do not hear any apology or any regret for paying this man £2 million. Let us not forget that £2 million was to turn around the yard, but the ferries still are not delivered, are costing more and are delayed again. This email, also found from freedom of information requests, shows that Government advisers suggested that Tim Hare needed a decent pay package so that his life was not, and I quote, unnecessarily painful for him while he swapped Hampshire for Port Glasgow, shocking and out of touch. Families right now are having to count every penny. At the same time, Tim Hare says, and it seems that the First Minister is suggesting that he was value for money. Does the First Minister honestly think that he has been value for money? If not, what is he going to do to recover £2 million of taxpayers' money? I do not think that the experience of this contract has been acceptable in any way, shape or form, but the focus now under the new chief executive of the shipyard is to get the ferries completed in the interests of island communities and to secure the future of the shipyard. That is what the Government is going to focus on. We continue to focus on, and that is in the interests not just of island communities, but in the interests of those who work in that shipyard. We should not lose sight of the fact that, but for Government intervention, this shipyard would no longer be operational, it would no longer be open and there would be nobody employed. Right now, we have more than 400 people employed in that shipyard, and we intend to do everything that we can to ensure that it has a bright future, which I think is what people in Port Glasgow and across Scotland will want to see. We are all for protecting the jobs, but let us be clear that this was a PR stunt to protect Nicola Sturgeon's job, Derek Mackay's job and SNP MP's jobs, because while people see their bills going up, they see a Government paying a quarter of £1 billion and still no ferries. Contracts and jobs going abroad and £2 million paid to one person. This Government and this First Minister is all about spin and PR while the public pay the bill. Nicola Sturgeon is normal and done by the book, but Audit Scotland says the opposite. She says that she is open and transparent, but Audit Scotland does not agree. Nicola Sturgeon says that the delays are unacceptable, but then accepts the delays. She says that she wants to learn lessons, but does not want a public inquiry. She says that the Government takes responsibility, but not a single person has. Why does she think that it is acceptable that, while people need help with the cost of living, they are instead paying the cost of her Government's failure? I do not think that Anna Sarwar really does support the protection and the retention of employment, because if we had followed what he has just set out, there would be no Ferguson shipyard and there would be nobody employed in that shipyard. From the point of public ownership to November 2020, the number of permanent jobs at Ferguson Marine more than doubled has been sustained at a level over 350 permanent staff since then. There are currently around 400 permanent employees and additional agency workers. There have been 42 apprentices learning a trade in that yard since August 2021, and the yard has plans to take on more apprentices later this year. More than 70 per cent of all the people employed live in Inverclyde. Those are people employed right now that would be finding the cost of living crisis much harder had the Government not saved the shipyard. That is the reality. The contract and the experience of that is deeply regrettable. What is not regrettable is saving the shipyard and those who work in it—the jobs of those who work in it. We will now move to supplementary questions, and I call Gordon MacDonald. Thank you, Presiding Officer. In my constituency around the Dreadcor and Redford barracks, there are many MOD family homes that have been left empty for many years. I wrote recently to the Tory Defence Secretary to highlight this issue again. Will the First Minister support my calls for the UK Government to consider the use of hundreds of empty MOD homes in Edinburgh and across Scotland to be used to house people being displaced as a result of Russia's war on Ukraine? The humanitarian crisis in the scale of it means that it is important that all housing options are fully explored. Yes, I think that MOD housing should be considered as part of the process. I would therefore welcome the UK Government, which of course has sole responsibility for MOD property making empty homes available to support displaced people from Ukraine. The Scottish Government is already bringing together key partners to ensure effective co-ordination of plans to address the accommodation needs of people who are settling in Scotland. We are committed to working with all partners to ensure all arrangements in place are safe, sustainable and offer true sanctuary for those fleeing the war. The First Minister will be aware that the war in Ukraine is having an impact on agricultural commodities closely linked to global gas prices. Borders farmers are facing rising costs for inputs, including manufactured fertiliser. The UK Government has announced steps to assist farmers to help to address that uncertainty amongst growers and keep the costs down for farmers. We have not heard anything yet from the SNP Government, so what action is your Government taking to support farmers at this very challenging time? I continue to work with farmers to give whatever support we can, but it is important to point out that, while the impact of the war in Ukraine is obviously being felt on our farming community, that is a community that is also and was already suffering the impacts of Brexit. In many respects, the real responsibility actually does lie with the UK Government. To ask the First Minister what steps the Scottish Government is taking to ensure that international students are not subject to racial profiling when trying to access accommodation in Scotland. Nobody, students nor anybody else should be subject to racial profiling. We would take a very dim view of any evidence that that was happening. I would be very happy to hear more of the information that lies behind the question and look into it if that is necessary, and to consider what action may be necessary as a result of that. The First Minister is aware of the extreme impact of fuel poverty in the western Isles, where 88 per cent of households are not connected to the gas grid. While electricity prices will rise sharply across the whole of Scotland from tomorrow, the price of heating oil has already more than doubled since this time last year, and there is little to no competition within my constituency, leaving consumers without any choice of supplier. Can the First Minister give an assurance that the Scottish Government will continue to make representations to the UK Government to urge them to introduce proper regulation and price caps for the heating oil industry? Yes, I assure Alasdair Allan that we will continue to make representations to the UK Government on what is a very important matter. This is an unregulated market, and the powers to introduce regulation remain with the UK Government. However, the Scottish Government recognises the impact of price increases on off-gas-grid energy consumers, and I am very aware of the severe impacts that fuel poverty has in rural and island communities. We have confirmed that we will continue our fuel insecurity funding to support those struggling with bills, regardless of what fuel they use. We will also continue to provide assistance for households to move away from dependence on heating oil, where a low-carbon alternative is available. This week, we saw the publication of another deeply troubling set of cancer statistics. It revealed that less than 80 per cent of urgent referrals are being treated within the two-month target, shamefully short of the target that is set by the SNP Government. Yet, this is not something for which the SNP Government can use the pandemic as justification. The target has now not been met for almost a decade and is the worst performance since 2008. For all the time, the target remains unmet. Patients and their families are left in limbo. First Minister, what steps will you urgently take to restore 10 years of missed targets? On the issue of cancer waiting times, which is extremely important, there are, as the member will be aware, two key targets. The 31-day target, we actually exceed that target on the 62-day urgent suspicion of cancer referral to treatment target. While, in percentage terms, that target is not being met at the moment—we are working hard to do that—there are actually more people being seen within that target than was the case a year ago and two years ago. We have announced additional funding—£10 million of additional funding—in this year, a further £10 million in the coming financial year, which has a particularly strong focus on colorectal and urology, which are two of the pathways that are having most challenges in terms of waiting times. The initiatives that that funding is supporting include upskilling nurses, investing in diagnostic tests, for example. We have also established three pilot early cancer diagnostic centres and continue to invest in our detect cancer early programme. There is a range of initiatives backed by funding under way, as we seek to ensure that we shorten in particular the waiting time under the 62-day target. It is important to point out that the median weight under that target is 46 days, so the median is obviously well within that. Pam Duncan-Glancy Thank you, Presiding Officer. This week, the RCN reported record vacancies in nursing in Glasgow, and that spending on bank and agency nurses has risen to £76.5 million. This is unsustainable and unacceptable. It means delays and a lack of continuity of care for patients, increased pressure on existing staff and more strain on an already extremely tight budget. Can the First Minister say what new actions the Government will take to address the crisis urgently, because current plans are working? I know that the health secretary also met the RCN yesterday. We have a range of initiatives in place. I have spoken about those in the chamber, as has the health secretary in recent weeks to support recruitment in our national health service, which is very, very challenged at the moment for a variety of reasons that members are well aware of. Overall, though, in Scotland right now, and this excludes vacancies, nursing and midwifery staffing is at a record high. It has increased by 14.5 per cent since this Government took office, NHS staffing overall has increased by more than 20 per cent to a record high since this Government took office. We have record numbers working in our national health service right now, but we want to recruit more. We have targets to recruit more, and that is why we are investing heavily with NHS boards on targeted initiatives to make sure that that recruitment is successful. To ask the First Minister what changes the recent shifts in fossil fuel prices and the need for energy security have made to its plans for decarbonisation. The Scottish Government takes a comprehensive approach to meeting our net zero targets. Our draft energy strategy and just transition plan will consider technologies to transform Scotland's energy system through our heat in buildings programmes. We are driving decarbonisation of homes and buildings and have enhanced support and advice schemes as part of the £1.8 billion investment in this Parliament. The cabinet secretary for net zero and energy recently wrote to the UK Government outlining Scotland's proposals for decarbonisation, including accelerating the electricity network, increasing financial resources for renewables and resolving unfair network charges that are not aligned with net zero. I thank the First Minister for that response. There is urgent need for action. People are facing a cost of living crisis now. Energy bills are going up from tomorrow. All this, while the UK Government seems determined to abandon climate commitments and increase the growing profits of oil and gas companies, a crisis of this nature needs a concerted holistic response. We must deliver at scale measures to help those most in need. We must insulate Scotland, retrofit buildings, invest in low-carbon heating and grow our renewables potential. Can the First Minister outline what the Scottish Government is doing now to supercharge renewables and energy efficiency programmes? What plans are in place to ensure the necessary workforce and skills are in place? Finally, does she agree that the oil and gas companies should not be profiting from the cost of living crisis? We believe and have set out ways in which the UK Government should be doing more to help people right now with the cost of living crisis. We have taken a number of actions ourselves, but the levers and resources in the main lie with the UK Government. We also believe that this is a time to try to accelerate the transition to net zero, not in any way to move off that ambition. As I said in my earlier answer, we have extensive plans in place across the energy sector to meet those targets. That includes, for example, investing £100 million in the hydrogen sector, boosting support for households to improve their own energy efficiency and to transition away from fossil fuel heating. We have our green jobs workforce academy supporting existing employees to undertake necessary upskilling and re-skilling to secure green jobs opportunities. We have also called on the UK Government for an extended windfall tax on organisations, including oil and gas companies, that are making significant profits right now. Of course, our most recent budget sets out record levels of investment to address the climate emergency and deliver a just transition to net zero. Will the First Minister welcome the 11 per cent reduction in emissions from North Sea operations achieved? Does she agree that more gas produced here in the UKCS means less imported LNG, cutting emissions by nearly 300 per cent? Should we in Scotland not be in the lead on decarbonising opportunities offshore wind to power platforms, hydrogen technology and carbon capture storage, which the climate change panel says is vital to get to net zero? Does she recognise in conclusion that, without a thriving oil and gas sector, Scotland may simply lose these major opportunities to lead on net zero because it is their skills, their technical expertise and their operational experience that are essential to deliver them? I certainly welcome the efforts of the oil and gas sector to decarbonise their own activities. I think that is something that we should all welcome. Of course, we have to also think about the impact on the environment of the use of oil and gas. That is an important part of getting to net zero as well. I do agree and have made clear my agreement that the skills, the expertise and indeed the infrastructure of the oil and gas sector will be extremely important in making sure that we make that transition to renewable and low-carbon sources of energy. We need to make that transition as quickly as possible for a variety of reasons. The importance of that has been underlined in recent weeks, but we need to do that fairly and justly as well. When he was a minister with those responsibilities, Fergus Ewing played a really important role in helping to ensure that the Government is on the right track. Nobody wants to increase dependence on imports of oil and gas, but we must therefore ensure that we are investing properly in the transition to renewables, and that is what this Government is seeking to do. First Minister, you just said that nobody wants to increase dependency on imports, but reports this week suggest that, without political backing, the UK could be wholly dependent on imports of oil and gas within 15 years due to a lack of confidence to invest. Given that the cambo field is priced in to the climate change committee's next zero projections for decarbonisation, could it help to reduce the cost of energy bills and create around 4,000 jobs, and would significantly help the UK's energy security, will the First Minister consider giving her political backing to production from cambo? I have made clear my views on cambo. I think that they are well-known and well-reported. I am not the decision maker on cambo, but I have made my views clear on that. I think that everybody accepts, even the member's colleagues in the UK Government accepts the importance of moving away from reliance on fossil fuels as quickly as possible, but that we need to do that justly. The question is how we best do that, and of course a significant proportion of what is produced in the North Sea right now is exported right now. We need to invest more in renewables and low-carbon sources of energy. As Fergus Ewing rightly has said, we need to invest in carbon capture and storage, and it is again regrettable that the UK Government has not prioritised the Scottish cluster, the ACORN project there. That is inescapable, and the war in Ukraine has just reminded us of how important it is to transition away from fossil fuels. There will be differences of opinion about how we best do that, but it is inescapable that we do that, and for this Government the investment in and support of renewables is a crucial part of it. To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government anticipates, the impact will be of the register of persons holding a controlled interest in land, which will launch on 1 April. This new public register will increase transparency around land management and ownership. It will be held by registers of Scotland and free to access. It will provide information about those who ultimately make decisions about the management or use of land, even if they are not registered as the owner. In short, it will mean those who are in control of the land, who are taking the decisions about the use of the land, are not able to effectively hide their identities because they are not the registered owner. It will include overseas entities and trusts irrespective of when the land was acquired, and the information will enable individuals and communities to identify and engage with those who make decisions about land that affect them. It marks a significant milestone in making land ownership in Scotland more transparent, which is a key objective for the Scottish Government's land reform ambitions. I thank the First Minister for her answer and welcome this legislation. To put this in practical terms, the First Minister will be aware that in many small towns such as Galashales, in my constituency, the town centres are blighted by many long-term, vacant large retail outlets, but the actual owners of land wars cannot be traced, preventing organisations such as Energised Galashales and indeed the local authority redeveloping the town centre, either through voluntary or indeed compulsory purchase. Is this the type of difficulty that the legislation will at long last help resolve? One of the issues that the register will help to resolve is, as I said earlier on, the main purpose of it is to improve transparency so that the public have information about people who are actually making the decisions about use of land, wherever that land is, regardless of who owns or who is the registered owner of it. Anyone, including local authorities, who wants to contact the person who controls or influences those decisions, will be able to use the register to find the contact details where they are on the register. That will make it easier for communities to find and contact those who control land and property and then influence the decisions about the land and property that impact on them or their communities. Question 5, Graham Simpson. To ask the First Minister what immediate improvements the Scottish Government plans to deliver for passengers when it takes control of ScotRail on 1 April. The transition of ScotRail passenger services into public ownership tomorrow will be a very significant milestone. It will also fulfil a manifesto commitment of this Government and mark a new beginning for ScotRail. It provides an opportunity to modernise and deliver passenger services that are efficient, sustainable, safe, fit for the future and reflect the changing world that we live in. Obviously, from tomorrow, services will continue as normal. It is important that we provide reassurance and familiarity to passengers in the immediate term as we recover from the disruption and impact of the pandemic. Later this spring, we will launch a national conversation offering rail, staff, passengers and communities an opportunity to contribute to the future vision for Scotland railway and help shape this new beginning for ScotRail. Thank you. We know that the SNP is no good at running things. You just have to look at the ferries for that. Given that fiasco, rail passengers should be worried that that rail will turn out to be CalMac on wheels. On Sunday, Transport Minister Jenny Gilruth was quoted as saying, from day one, you might not necessarily see anything that looks different, but the major difference is accountability. Ms Gilruth obviously did not get the memo that this Government does not do accountability. So far, what we do know is that we are going to have rising fares, service cuts and ticket office closures. What part of that is an improvement? The Government has already delivered significant improvements on our railways. That is even before the railway comes into public ownership, as it will tomorrow. I know that the Conservatives like being reminded of that, so I am going to deliver again on that. Since 2009, under this Government, the communities of Allawa, Lawrence Kirk, Armadale, Black Ridge, Calder Croats, Conningbridge, Shoffair, Eskbank, Newton-Grange, Gorebridge, Stowe, Gallashale, Tweedbank and Cintor, all reconnected to the rail network through the reversal of cuts. In the next three years, Reston, East Linton, Dahlcros, Cameronbridge and Leven will follow. Railway workers in England, under the Tories, faced a pay freeze. Fair pay deal was delivered in October last year for ScotRail staff. Lastly, we have taken action to keep rail fares down. ScotRail fares are on average 20 per cent cheaper than in those areas of the UK that are governed by the Conservatives. The public ownership of ScotRail is very welcome to all reasonable members in this place and to the public at large. Does the First Minister think that that will increase opportunities for the railway and it will better serve Scotland's people and economy? Yes, I do. Bringing ScotRail into public ownership and control is a historic moment, and I am delighted that it is happening under this Government. Many others, including the rail unions campaign for this to happen, and I think that it is important to pay tribute to them as well. Our commitment is clear. We have invested £9 billion in the railway since 2007. I have just listed the stations that have been reconnected since 2009, with five more to follow. Of course, we have delivered a pay deal for staff in contrast a pay freeze south of the border. We will continue to press for full devolution of rail powers, including full devolution of network rail in Scotland, so that we can then truly deliver the railway that Scotland wants and deserves. To ask the First Minister whether the Scottish Government will provide an update on what the £10 million long Covid support fund has been allocated for and how much has been spent. First Minister, services and support are already being provided across Scotland for those with long Covid. We know more is needed, not just now, but also for the long term to support people in the most appropriate way. Our long Covid strategic network brings together clinical experts, NHS boards and those with lived experience and will determine how we target the support fund at the areas where additional resource is needed and can make the biggest difference in the long term. The first tranche of funding will be allocated over the coming weeks, the next few weeks. That will be used by boards to strengthen the co-ordination of services across supported self-management primary care, rehabilitation support and secondary care investigation and support. Jackie Baillie Can I thank the First Minister for her response, but long Covid sufferers describe there being very few services in place? This funding was announced in September 2021. No indication was given at that stage that it would be six months later and not one penny of money has been allocated to health boards to develop services. Instead, as we have heard, the money is going to be spread over the next three years, with numbers of those suffering from long Covid estimated by the UNS to be 119,000 and rising. Why has the pace been so slow? Can the First Minister indicate that when every health board in Scotland will have dedicated long Covid services to help patients and their GPs? We set up, as I indicated in my initial answer, the long Covid strategic network. That was deliberately so that the targeting of that funding would be driven and determined by clinical experts on the front line and by those with lived experience of long Covid. In addition to that, we have already launched a long Covid information platform to help people to manage symptoms. We have done work to raise awareness of long Covid and signpost people to appropriate support. NHS Scotland is already delivering care in line with the recommendations of the clinical guidelines that are developed by NICE, for example. Of course, that is underpinned in Scotland already by the full range of NHS services, including primary care teams, community-based rehab services and referrals to secondary care where necessary. Long Covid clinics are one model that NHS boards may consider already, but no one single approach is going to fit all the areas and circumstances, so we will continue to support the development of multidisciplinary support services, because that is something that will be required for the long term. Long Covid is becoming the biggest mass disabling event since World War I. Nearly 120,000 sufferers need clinics, care pathways and long Covid nurses, but we are still nowhere. I have asked the First Minister about this every month since the funding was announced in September, and she said that an action plan was being implemented. Six months on, and we have just learned that not one penny has left the Scottish Government bank account of that £10 million. I ask the First Minister if she will now apologise to Scotland's long Covid sufferers, if she will wake up her ministers on this issue and get help to sufferers fast. No, I won't, because we continue to support the development of services that are appropriate for those who will need this support, not just now, but in the long term. This has already been underpinned by the full range of NHS support services. I have outlined the work that has already been done, and I have outlined why we took the decision to allow clinical experts and those who are living with long Covid to direct the nature of the funding that is being made available. I have been encouraged in this chamber to follow the example allegedly that is being taken south of the border. There was a report published just last week, I think, by the all-party parliamentary group on Covid there, stating that the pathways established by the UK Government, including long Covid clinics, do not meet the demand and that some of these clinics may be experienced in temporary or even permanent closures. The reason we are doing it in the way that we are is so that we are not somehow suggesting that there is one single model. This is support that needs to be delivered across the entirety of the NHS. Of course, we still need to understand more about the nature of long Covid, which is why the chief scientist's office is also funding right now nine Scottish-led research projects in order that we can continue to develop our understanding and ensure that services develop alongside that. To ask the First Minister what immediate safeguarding measures will be in place to ensure that arrivals from Ukraine are protected from organised criminal activity, human trafficking and exploitation? Any form of human trafficking or exploitation is abhorrent. People must be protected from it. Police Scotland's national human trafficking unit continues to engage with internal and external partners and enforcement agencies to maintain a very high visibility of human trafficking and exploitation risks at points of entry around Scotland. Anyone with concerns about human trafficking should contact Police Scotland. In terms of safeguarding, where people are opening their homes to displace people from Ukraine, hosts can apply for expedited disclosure checks of the same level of scrutiny as the initial checks carried out for those working with children and vulnerable adults. That is under the new regulations introduced last week to ensure that we have in place a safe, speedy and free vetting system. I thank the First Minister. I think that we all thank the huge number of Scottish families who have come forward to open their homes to the Ukrainians who are coming here through the UK-wide scheme, but we also have to be realistic that, sadly, not everyone who offers help will be well-intentioned. In fact, organised criminal gangs may see what is happening in Ukraine as more of an opportunity than a tragedy. A number of very important organisations, including Tara, survivors of human trafficking in Scotland and Scotland Against Modern Slavery, have always quite valid concerns about the vulnerability and desperation of those arriving, and the real potential for harm posed by luring arrivals into low-paid, illegally or sexually exploitative activities. They are even worse than simply being abused in private homes. I can ask the First Minister what work will be undertaken by the Government and its public agencies to adequately vet, prepare and educate host families before the arrival of those who are coming to Scotland. After they have arrived and settled, what on-going safeguards will be in place in the medium to long-term to ensure that we are tracking, tracing and monitoring both the wellbeing and the safety of those who have resettled in Scotland to make sure that none of them, absolutely none of them, are being exploited in any way whatsoever? This is a really important issue and we are designing and have been designing support services that make sure appropriate safeguarding is in place, but also that we take account and the partners we are working with can take account of the on-going wellbeing needs of those who come to Scotland. Disclosure checks are an important part of that, but having that multi-agency approach to make sure that people get the support that they need not just on arrival and when they are first being accommodated, but throughout the time that they may be in Scotland. One of the reasons for us agreeing the super-sponsor route with the UK Government is so that we could have an approach that gets people to Scotland quickly, then temporarily accommodates them while in a slightly slower time we put in place all of the wider support and do all of the appropriate checks. We have support arrangements already in place, starting with the welcome hubs that have been established. The big hold-up at the moment, and I say this, we are working constructively with the UK Government to try to resolve this. I met Michael Gove earlier this week on this particular issue. We have the super-sponsor route and we have the support in place. We are being held up at the moment by the slow pace of the granting of visas. That is what I know the UK Government is seeking to speed up. I hope that that happens quickly so that we can start to welcome significant numbers of people to Scotland with all of the support that Jamie Greene rightly identifies as being vital for them. That concludes First Minister's questions. There will be a brief pause before we move on to members' business.