 Thank you very much indeed. The next item of business is topical questions. As, ever, a member wishing to ask a supplementary question, she pressed the request to speak button during the relevant question and I call question number one Graham Simpson. Thank you very much to ask the Scottish Government what its response is to reports that the chief executive of Ferguson Marine is still entitled to a bonus. ddespid yr ysgol, sydd wedi bod yn sicr yn gyfweld ddim yn cael ei ddylch ar gyfer. Ddespid y ffordd yw ddwych arall, i ddwylo'r bofnysau sydd yn gweithio'r Fferguson ac Porth Glasgow sydd yn gyfweld gan 22-23. Mae'r bofnysau yn ymddir, ac mae'n gweithio'r bofnysau, ond mae'n ddigidio'r cyffredinol yn hanfodol. Rwy'n ddwylo'r cofnysau o'r bofnysau oherwydd i'r ddiolch yn cael ei ddwylo'r bofnysau, only if stringent key performance indicators are met. Scottish Government has been clear that those should not involve a bonus being paid directly for vessels 801 and 802. Contracts for new FMPG employees do not include bonus elements. Parliament will be updated with full details of a revised remuneration scheme once it is finalised. What this shows is that no one pays any attention to what the First Minister wants. On today, which is the sixth anniversary of the launch, the fake launch of the Glen Sanex, which should be clear that nobody at the Yard should be getting a bonus, Humza Yousaf said in April that, quote, there should be no bonuses paid, but there were. Audit Scotland said, quote, while Scottish Government approval was sought, FMPG did not have explicit approval prior to payment. So who sanctioned the latest bonuses and why is David Timon in line for any more? The member will be aware of the bonus that was in the accounts related to 2022-23. As the First Minister said, because of the cost overruns and delays, any bonuses would be unacceptable and should not be paid. That is currently what the Scottish Government is working on. Now there is an arrangement where the Ferguson Marine Board has to consult the Scottish Government and these discussions are on going over the future remuneration packages. As I said before, the Cabinet Secretary will bring final details of that package to Parliament in due course. However, the Scottish Government has made its views clear. There should be no bonus elements in relation to the two vessels. That is what we can expect, and I think that is in line with public expectations. I am not sure that we found out anything from that. You could possibly argue at a stretch that Mr Tideman should get some credit if he turns the yard into a viable business. However, we have learned this week that they have stopped work on a project for the Royal Navy because the Scottish Government, Neil Gray, refused his request for £25 million of investment for a new plating line, burning tables and better computer software. How much extra is the Government prepared to invest in the yard in order to turn it round? The Cabinet Secretary laid out in Parliament an oral statement just last week, the current position. The member was present in the chamber for that statement, so he should be up to date with the current situation. In that statement, the Cabinet Secretary said that those discussions with the yard were on going and discussing their business proposition. However, any proposition has to be in line with subsidy control regulations and also value for money. However, those discussions are on going. As I said before, Neil Gray, the cabinet secretary, wants to be open and transparent and will be keeping the Parliament up to date as soon as there are any steps forward. I have a number of supplementaries that I will try to get in as many as possible, but they will need to be briefed as well as the responses for Stuart McMillan. I certainly am led to believe that contracts for new employees do not include bonus elements. Although I agree with Mr Simpson that the bonuses should not have been paid, the minister agrees with me that the people who should be most angry here are the workforce on the tools that have been attempting to build those vessels for some time, taking the political flak and being used as the political football house management, which has changed regularly, have received unwarranted bonuses. From the First Minister downwards in the Scottish Government, we agree with the sentiments that are outlined by Stuart McMillan in terms of his support for the employees at the Yard. As the cabinet secretary reiterated to the chamber just last week, there should be no doubt that the Government remains committed to shipbuilding on the Clyde and to the dedicated men and women at Ferguson Marine, whom we know are doing their utmost to deliver those vessels. We continue to stand behind the workforce and we are working with Ferguson Marine's management and board to try to secure a prosperous future for the business. Katie Clark Has been paid without Scottish Government approval. At Scottish Water, it is reported that three executives have received nearly £1 million in bonuses in the last five years. Will any review extend to executive bonuses at all publicly owned bodies? We expect all such payments to be in line with Scottish Government pay policy in terms of conditions that significantly deviate from that. Of course, cost ministers are a great deal of concern. I cannot comment directly on the situation at Scottish Water. I am happy for the relevant minister to follow up and I note to the member about that. What that reveals is that the Government is completely impotent when it comes to dealing with bonuses at this company but also at Scottish Water. Just today, the unions have said that the workers deserve certainty. The only thing that seems certain is that the bosses at this company are going to get the bonuses that they do not deserve. Why is the Government incapable of providing any leadership for the future of this yard? As Willie Rennie quite rightly points out, this is an extremely tough time for workforces, be they in Scottish Water or at Ferguson Marine or anywhere in the public or private sectors. We urge all management to take into account and first and foremost the needs of their workforces. We pay close attention, of course, to the pain conditions and bonus regimes of these sectors. At the same time, we have to have regard for contractual obligations and also market conditions at the same time to attract staff into our public bodies. However, we will pay close attention to all those issues. Thank you. Obscene amounts of money over the years have been paid to well-paid executives, directors and management consultancy firms, yet what the workers in the yard want to know is what the future of the yard might look like. Is the minister or anyone in the Scottish Government aware of any other future contracts that the yard has secured beyond hulls 801 and 802? If so, what do those contracts look like? First, I am not going to take any lectures from Conservative members, given that the UK Government lifted the cap on bankers' bonuses when it comes to awarding undue financial reward to certain people in our society. However, the member mentioned Fergus Maureen, and I just want to assure him that the Scottish Government is working with the yard to examine options to deliver its initial investment proposals so that it is compliant with substantive control rules and aligned with current potential future commercial opportunities for the yard. Those discussions and those intense discussions are on-going between the Scottish Government and Fergus Maureen. To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to reports that stagnating workforce numbers, among other factors, contribute to increased pressure on midwifery services. We hugely value our midwifery workforce and the high-quality care that it offers across Scotland. Balancing our declining birth rate in Scotland with increased training and recruitment means that we now have a significantly increasing qualified midwife-to-birth ratio. We are constantly looking at ways to enhance staffing levels and support workforce wellbeing for all parts of our NHS, including our midwifery and our nursing and midwifery task force, is a key part of that. The task force will recommend action supporting longer-term workforce sustainability, improving workplace culture, practice flexibility, recruitment and retention, and diversification of training pathways. I thank the minister for that answer. An article in the Scotland on Sunday news paper highlighted key extracts from the RCN Scotland state of maternity report released recently. We do not see the ever-larger surges in midwifes coming out of universities making a difference to overall numbers. The big risk is that, rather than being sustainable, building a strong workforce, the effect of the new midwifes seems to fizzle out as staff leave. Why does the minister think that workforce numbers in midwifery continue to stagnate, and when will the profession see a truly comprehensive and really important measurable plan from the Government that highlights how those challenges will be overcome? In June 2023, this year, we had 2,509 whole-time equivalent qualified midwives. That is 8.3 qualified nurses in midwives per 1,000 of the population compared to 6.3 in England. That means that nursing and midwifery levels are 32 per cent higher per head of population in Scotland than in England. However, we recognise that we need to work harder with regard to that, and the nursing and midwifery workforce plan will be out in 2024. I have met midwives from my own region and across the country, and the stories are consistent. They love the job and they are very passionate about the services, but they know that they are overworked. In my own local health board, midwives are currently handling caseloads almost 30 per cent bigger than was set out in the best start. The reality is that the Scottish Government has not delivered a successful plan to support our midwives. It has not implemented safe staffing legislation passed in the Parliament in 2018, and it has not ensured that all health boards are signed up to equally safe at work. Do midwives have the right to feel badly let down by this Government? I think that what we have to remember is that the midwives in Scotland do a fantastic job, and yes, I accept that there is pressure in the circumstances that they are working in. However, we are working very closely with midwives and the Centre for Workforce Supply to develop resources and strategy that ensure that we give them the best conditions that they can work in in Scotland. It is clear that ensuring that we have a strong pipeline of students will play an important role in work to increase the workforce, especially as I am thinking about the need to recruit midwives in recent Galloway. Can the minister provide any further information about what the Scottish Government is doing to support midwifery students to train? We are taking a range of actions to support midwifery students. In 2020, we increased the non-means tested non-repayable student bursary to £10,000. That is the highest in the UK. Free tuition is provided for eligible undergraduate students in addition to help with expenses. However, I do understand the financial challenges that are faced by all students, which is why we have established a short-life working group to review the placement expenses guidance to consider what more can be done.