 The first item of business today is portfolio questions, and the first portfolio is rural economy. I remind members that questions 2 and 4 will be grouped together today and come to question number 1, John Scott. I declare an interest to ask the Scottish Government what its position is on encouraging behavioural change with regard to food production in the light of evidence received by the Environment, Climate Change and Land Reform Committee from the Committee on Climate Change. Scotland is a world renowned for the quality and the provenance of its food, and we want farmers and food producers to work with us to produce more of it sustainably. We are supporting behavioural change and shifts to low-carbon farming practices through a range of activity, including the Farm Advisory Service, the beef efficiency scheme and QMS's monitor farm programme. I thank the minister for her answer, and she will be aware of the Climate Change Committee advice on the need to reduce red meat consumption significantly to meet future targets. Is the Scottish Government of the view that that is necessary, or does the Scottish Government and the Minister support my view that the access to a balanced diet should include sufficient red meat consumption and that there should be a matter of individual choice, particularly as most of the red meat production in Scotland is grass-fed? I thank the member for that question, and I am aware that the Environment, Climate Change Committee took evidence from the climate change committee as well this week. We want to continue to lead in promoting behavioural change towards low-carbon farming. As I mentioned in my first answer to John Scott, we have done that through the establishment of the beef efficiency scheme and our support for the agri-environment schemes by ensuring that high-quality advice, information and on-farm demonstrations are available through the Farm Advisory Service and farming for a better climate. Of course, we want to work with farmers and to do that. I said that in the statement yesterday, and I know that the cabinet secretary for the Environment, Climate Change and Land Reform feels the same. However, we are in a climate emergency, and this is an issue that we have to try to tackle together. That is why we have a number of initiatives here. We also have our climate change champions, who are hoping to lead by example and to show how we can still have livestock farming and how that can still contribute to what we are aiming to do in this climate emergency. In order to change practice, farmers and crofters need advice and information, but they also need financial support. Can I ask what measures will be in the new agricultural support scheme to help farmers and crofters to make the required change in practice? I would say that, as I have already highlighted, we have a number of schemes already available at the moment where we are investing in that change. That is something that we will have to continue to do. Research and innovation will be absolutely vital as we move forward and as we try to work with farmers and crofters to see how we can tackle the climate emergency together. As I mentioned in my previous response to John Scott, we have the climate change champions, the farming for a better climate as well, where we are looking at soil regeneration. There are a whole number of schemes that the Government is currently providing funding for, and when it comes to research and innovation moving forward, that is something that will of course become a vital part of support as we move forward. Deputy Presiding Officer, to ask the Scottish Government what action it is taking to promote the food and drink sector in Canbasslang. Direct investment and support from the public sector, which helps to promote the food and drink sector in Scotland, equates to approximately £100 million per annum across a range of areas, including skills, education, research, industry development, standards and capital investment. That funding is provided on a national basis and would be available to any business based in Canbasslang. I thank the minister for that answer. The minister will be aware that the two sisters chicken processing plant in Canbasslang closed last year. That was despite the payment of £650,000 in regional selective assistance to two sisters on the basis of keeping the plant open. That money is now in the process of being repaid, but the Scottish Government has confirmed to me that it will be recycled for general economic activity and not invested in Canbasslang despite an assurance from the First Minister in November that Canbasslang would be involved in consultation of how that money is spent. Therefore, I ask the minister if she agrees that the money that is being repaid should be invested in Canbasslang and that the Government will urgently review its decision on that. I would say that, contrary to Mr Kelly's comments, the Scottish Government's position on that has been clear. The position and commitment in that sense has not changed. The First Minister had previously explained in the chamber that the process that Scottish Enterprise would embark on to obtain repayment of any moneys paid to two sisters in relation to the site of Canbasslang. That process has been undertaken, and a repayment plan has now been agreed with two sisters to return the moneys in full. I know that that was explained to Mr Kelly in a recent letter from my ministerial colleague Jamie Hepburn. The First Minister also said in the chamber that we would, in due course, have discussions with the local community about future investment. I know that, since then, Scottish Enterprise has been in discussion with South Lanarkshire Council on the actions that are needed to boost economic growth in the area and how they might be reflected in the council's refreshed economic strategy, which is supported by the £500 million Scottish Government commitment in the Glasgow city region deal. Further discussions are planned on 13 June, and at that meeting there will be a discussion to identify the key economic challenges across the authority area, aligning with the Glasgow city region plan, and particularly around the five city region deal projects that are relevant to South Lanarkshire, which, of course, we are fully committed to, and where there are suitable projects both in the Canbasslang area and wider area. To ask the Scottish Government how it supports the food and drink sector in Glasgow. Glasgow is home to a wide range of food and drink companies and plays a key role in our food and drink success story. Since 2012, four companies have been supported, with £2.31 million in food processing, marketing and co-operation grants, including McQueen's Dairy, which I believe are based within the member's constituency. Bob Doris? I thank the minister for that answer. I draw the minister's attention to the company, The Vegan Kind, who is a hugely successful vegan retailer, including foods based in Maryhill. They use an online platform for their sales. I understand that their growing success is boosting demand for vegan foods and creating new opportunities for vegan food producers, including here in Scotland. Can I ask how the Scottish Government might consider supporting innovative models of food retail such as The Vegan Kind in Maryhill, given the boost that their success can offer both vegan food producers here in Scotland and offer additional accessible dietary choices to families? I would say that the growing vegan market still offers opportunities for Scottish food producers and businesses to develop the produce using our natural lardar here in Scotland. I know that Scotland Food and Drink is supporting food and drink producers to capitalise on that growing demand. I would say that there is another company, Fodolicious, that produces fresh convenience food using quality, locally sourced Scottish produce to help with special dietary requirements. Having started in the free-from market, they have now developed a successful vegan range. Although I know that some adhere to a strictly vegan diet for a variety of reasons, I am keen that we continue to promote healthy, locally sourced Scottish produce and produce grown and made here, which supports jobs here, supports livelihoods and, most important, helps to reduce food miles. I wonder whether the minister would agree with me that the biggest threat to the food and drink sector in Cambuslang and beyond is Brexit. It would help quite a lot if Mr Kelly and his chums were to come off the fence and oppose Brexit. Mairi Gwtiaw. Probably won't surprise the member that I agree very much with him in that statement, because we've been clear from day one that leaving the EU, specifically without a deal, would have an absolutely catastrophic impact on the food and drink sector, and it's expected to cost us about £2 billion, and that's from the UK Government's own figures. That impact would be felt whether that's on our exports, our PGI status for some of our most important products, and the free movement of people, too. I talked about some of the other impacts on our sheep sector in the statement that I made to this Parliament yesterday. The Scottish Government has always asserted that the best future for Scotland is to remain in the EU and, second best to that, to maintain as close an alignment to the EU as we possibly can. I think that it's high time that others started realising that, too, if we're to avert the untold damage that we've brought on, not just in this sector, but in our wider economy as a whole. To ask the Scottish Government what action it plans to take in light of the Scottish Affairs Committee's evidence session on seasonal agricultural workers. Presiding Officer, seasonal migrant workers have a vital contribution to farming and food production in Scotland. We share NFU Scotland's concerns about the availability of suitably skilled workers and the risk that that presents to this year's crops and harvests. The UK Government's future migration proposals do not meet Scotland's needs. The evidence presented to the committee highlights serious issues with the pilot scheme, which seeks to recruit 2,500 workers for the whole of the UK, not enough to meet the needs of a number of current vacancies in the horticulture sector in Angus alone. We will continue to monitor the situation and work across the Government to address skills and employment needs throughout the rural economy, but it is clear that one of the key solutions is to fully devolve immigration powers so that Scotland might develop a tailored migration policy to meet our needs. Presiding Officer, agricultural seasonal workers are often seen as low-paid and low-skilled, but all the evidence suggests that many of the jobs are highly skilled. Losing the workers will not only be a hard-boat employers and the local economy, but will have a significant knock-on effect on the de-population of ready, fragile, remote communities. Will the cabinet secretary join me in supporting the workers from Europe and beyond to form a vital part of the backbone of rural Scotland, providing school labour and injecting a fresh breath of fresh air into our rural communities? Yes, I am very happy to agree with what David Stewart has said. I am very pleased that he has made those remarks. Those workers work extremely hard—certainly in the berry picking. The day starts very early and the conditions are tough. The work is hard, and we really appreciate and welcome what they do and the contributions that they make to the economy and society in rural Scotland. We think that they should continue to be welcomed in Scotland. That is why it is so important that freedom of movement should continue to be the policy. I very much hope that the Labour Party in Scotland will support freedom of movement, because Mr Corbyn does not seem to. Subumentary from Richard Lyle. Would the cabinet secretary agree that it is scandalous that, after three years after the Brexit vote and Tory inaction, farmers still do not have any certainty or clarity about their workforces? Fagrishu. He has put it very clearly. The Tories are laughing. I do not know why they are laughing. That is extremely serious. Just about every employer in the rural economy in Scotland has made the same point for three years now—three years in which to find a solution to allow people from other countries who are working hard in rural communities and whose work is indispensable as a sine qua non of the rural economy functioning, and the Scottish Tories have said nothing about that for three years. It is an absolute scandal. Mr Lyle is quite right. To ask the Scottish Government when it last met with representatives of the fishing industry and what was discussed. The Scottish Government met with the Clyde Fishmen Association on 11 May and meets regularly with representatives of the fishing industry. Enforcement of marine protected areas is already very difficult, which allows a small number of rogue fishing vessels to wreak havoc in protected habitats and undermines the fishing industry for everyone else. Last December, the Parliament voted to roll out electronic monitoring of fishing vessels across the whole fleet to ensure that enforcement can be effective. When does the Government expect to be able to properly enforce marine protected areas by monitoring all fishing vessels? I am delighted that the Scottish Government is investing £1.5 million in fishing vessel tracking and monitoring. I myself had an excellent and productive meeting with the stakeholders about precisely how this investment is made to get best value and to be the most efficacious. That is one of the most practical things that can be done to ensure that sustainable fishing takes place. I am determined that that will be done as quickly as it can, but the real priority is to make sure that it is effective, that we have the right systems and that there are options available and that it is efficacious to secure the objective. As Mr Greer referred to and alluded to in that debate, it is important that we get it right. However, I can absolutely assure the member that there will be no feet dragging. To ask the Scottish Government when it last met representatives of the food and drink sector and what was discussed. The Scottish Government meets representatives from the vital food and drink industry on a regular and on-going basis to discuss the range of issues. I will also be attending the prestigious Scotland food and drink excellence awards next week in Edinburgh to meet representatives from the sector and to celebrate the best that our successful industry has to offer. Months ago, I have met a number of local businesses in my constituency, including an impressive family-run business, Fife Creamery. They are just one of a growing number of companies who have become increasingly aware of their environmental responsibilities and the importance of phasing out single-use plastics in their packaging. Can the cabinet secretary advise what support and guidelines exist for businesses who are keen to invest in the greener and more sustainable alternatives? Yes, Zero Waste Scotland's Food and Drink Advice and Support Service provides audits to businesses to help them to reduce their food and drink waste, and it has an £18 million circular economy investment fund to support investments in that matter. I am indebted to my hard-working energetic colleague, the Minister for Rural Affairs, Ms Gougeon, who has assured me that she has recently met the company and that it does great work. We are keen to continue that work with them and our agencies to ensure that the changes that are made in respect of the matter and the objectives that we all share are pursued in an effective and pragmatic fashion to help businesses such as those who, quite rightly, want to do their bit by the environment but want to do so in a way that is sensible, well-thought-out, pragmatic and deliverable. To ask the Scottish Government whether all outstanding agri-environment climate scheme claims from farm businesses in the north-east for the 217-year claim will be paid by the end of June 2019. The remaining cases from 217 have been complex to process, with eligibility issues associated with each claim that staff are currently working to resolve. My officials assure me that they are confident that all outstanding issues will be cleared over the next few weeks, allowing all remaining claims to be paid by 30 June this year. Tom Mason I thank the cabinet secretary for that answer. I appreciate that this is not an instantaneous process and there are going to be some delays along the way. Given that the total Scottish farm debt is currently around £2 billion and almost half of our farmers are famed to make enough money to pay themselves the equivalent of the minimum wage, those resources are vital and important. What safeguards can the cabinet secretary put in place to make sure that such delays are lessened in some of the years? Michael Matheson I think that Mr Mason raises a perfectly fair and correct general point. It is precisely because of that point that, in Scotland, at my specific direction, working with the full co-operation of colleagues, including the finance minister, that farmers in Scotland last October, starting on 5 October, and crofters in Scotland received, in most cases, effectively advanced payments of up to 90 per cent of their full entitlement, starting from 5 October. Nearly £18,000 offers over £317 million from memory, Presiding Officer. That money was received in farmers' and crofters' bank accounts around two months before any other farmers south of the border. Yes. It is precisely because of the need to make sure that, in these difficult times, facing the enormous uncertainties caused by Brexit, Mr Mason's party's preferred policy—at least we think so anyway, they do not really say—that, because of these difficulties, we have made sure that farmers and crofters get their money and get most of it earlier than the rest of the UK. I want to keep it that way. Can the cabinet secretary confirm that the payments for 2018 are on time, and can he also confirm that the Scottish Government wants to keep farmers farming in Scotland and producing food, contrary to what Mr Gove told us this morning? We have made a strong start to the payment of the 2018 claims. We have commenced 2018 payments on 29 March. That is two months earlier than the 2017. Over 47 per cent of claims have now been paid were £7.8 million. At the same point last year, we had not yet begun making payments, so I hope that members will agree that that is an excellent progress. I pay tribute to all the hard-working staff in the office of the country who are delivering the work. They do a superb job, they are respected by the farming community and I am wholly indebted to them for their efforts. That concludes questions on the rural economy. I will move on to questions on transport, infrastructure and connectivity, please. 1. Liam McArthur To ask the Scottish Government when road equivalent tariff will be fully introduced on Orkney and Shetland ferry routes. Paul Wheelhouse The Scottish Government is engaging with the European Commission following a stated complaint made to them by a private operator on 8 June 2018 regarding our plans to reduce ferry fares to the Northern Isles. Officials met with the commission officials on 12 November and we await a formal view from the commission regarding next steps. In June 2018, we reduced passenger and car fares on routes to Shetland by 20 per cent, with that being possible to implement as it did not affect Orkney services. We remain committed to pursuing all avenues to reduce fares for Orkney and Shetland. 2. Liam McArthur I thank the minister for that response. Next month marks 12 months since RAT was supposed to be rolled out on ferry routes serving Orkney and Shetland. Over that time, those using those lifeline routes have been forced to continue paying over the odds. Will the minister commit to reinforcing with the commission the urgent need to conclude its investigation, reach a decision and allow those who rely on those lifeline services a fair deal? Will he also commit to ensuring that the money that has not been spent on RAT over the past year is directed to supporting the internal ferry services in Orkney and Shetland? Paul Wheelhouse Thank you very much. On the first point that Liam McArthur raises, just to reassure him that we continue to engage, as I say, with the European Commission regarding the state aid complaint made by the private operator. We have recently written in light of the judgment made by Lord Boyd of Duncan's Bay in relation to the judicial review that was held in the court session. Of course, the member will be aware that there is now a potential appeal to that decision, so I cannot comment further. Just to reassure the member that we continue to engage with the commission to urge for as quick as possible resolution to the state aid complaint. On the second point that Liam McArthur raises, we have discussed the point regarding the use of RAT revenues or funding allocated for RAT for internal ferry services. It is something that was raised by Orkney Islands Council's leader, Councillor Stockin, when I last met him recently in Parliament. Orkney Islands Council has committed to taking the issue away to engage with local stakeholders, presumably Mr McArthur and other local elected members. I will discuss the issue further and I remain open to holding further discussions with the council on the issue. On the subject of RAT, the minister will be aware from his recent visit to Dunoon that local residents there have asked whether or not RAT would be applied to this particular service now that is in the CalMac portfolio. Can he provide Parliament with an update on that? Indeed, that is an issue that has been raised. As the member may be aware, there was, for a period, a risk that there might be a judicial review of any decision to implement RAT on the Gwyrwch Dunoon route. However, I am pleased to say that indications from the private operator in the area of western ferries is that they would not pursue that option and are keen to discuss with ministers the implementation of RAT on the Gwyrwch Dunoon services. We have indicated to local stakeholders, including the ferry group, that that is a discussion that we wish to have. Certainly, our intention is to take that forward positively. Rhoda Grant Could the Scottish Government look at indemnifying private operators who implement RAT in the Northern Ireland Isles route prior to receiving reassurance from the commission? That would allow the Scottish Government to implement RAT sooner rather than later. Paul Wheelhouse I have not looked at that specific proposal before that Rhoda Grant raised. However, we have to tread carefully. There is a live complaint and we are continuing to gauge with the commission to as early as possible resolution, as I said to Liam McArthur. Clearly, I think that we all have an interest in making sure that that happens as soon as possible, and we have made a commitment to implement the policy when we can do so. However, I certainly have not looked at a particular opportunity that Rhoda Grant raises and I will think about that and perhaps write to Ms Grant about that particular issue. 2. Jamie Greene To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on the development of ferry vessels 801 and 802. Paul Wheelhouse The delay to delivery remains a concern to Scottish ministers and we share the frustration of the communities affected and the workforce in the yard. The management of the contract is, for Ferguson Marine, limited. However, Scottish Government officials have written again to FML this week, suggesting or requesting information relating to vessels 801 and 802 to support a detailed programme with key milestones to support a revised cost to completion for both vessels. In order to move matters on, Scottish ministers have sought an independent view of the contractual dispute between FML and CML. Jamie Greene We learned this morning in rural economy committee that the first of the new ferries might be ready in about a year or so, more than two years behind schedule. The second ferry might be complete at some point next year. It might be over budget, to the tunes of £10 million, and the public purse might have to foot the bill. Is it not simply the case, Minister, that your Government might just have made a complete shambles of this? Paul Wheelhouse I think that Mr Greene might want to reflect on the views that are held strongly in Inverclyde about his lack of support for the shipbuilding sector in Inverclyde. The Government has made a commitment to try and support shipbuilding jobs in the Clyde, and we are working very hard to ensure that those vessels are delivered. I hope that Mr Greene will reflect on the fact that, as much as the Government is doing, given the contractual nature of the dispute between Ferguson Marine and CML, we are trying to bring that to a resolution, as best we can. Clearly, we have had revised timescales indicated by Ferguson's foredelivery, which the member has alluded to, and I believe that my colleague Michael Matheson discussed this morning with the committee. As I have said in my original answer, we have sought further detail to underpin those estimates, because we want to see detail about the work plan. Indeed, Mr Greene can trunter from the sidelines. I am trying to answer his question, and I would have thought that he would want to listen to the answer. We are trying to make sure that we get the detail. Mr Greene can continue to criticise, but I expect that Mr Greene and other members would expect us to get the detail of the commitments from Ferguson Marine to deliver the vessels in our revised work schedule and key milestones, so that we can manage that contract to completion. To do anything else, I think that it would be a mistake, and I hope that he reflects on the nature of his question today. I have three supplementaries that I would like to take, and I ask them to be quick, please. Stuart McMillan. Thank you, Presiding Officer. Notwithstanding the issues between CMAL and FMEL regarding those vessels, can the minister confirm his support for the workforce at the yard, who are attempting to make sure that those two vessels are built and that they will help the CMAL fleet? Paul Wheelhouse. Absolutely. The member who represents and reclides me makes a very important point that whatever the issues that have arisen, there is a recognition that the quality of the workmanship at Ferguson Marine and the standard of the skills that are there are not in question. I have certainly made very positive remarks around the workforce that are at Ferguson's. We clearly want to do all that we can. As I have said, the actions of this Government, led by my colleague Derek Mackay, have been to try to support the shipbuilding sector and ensure that there is a long-term, sustainable future for the workers in the yard, and that is what we continue to try to focus our efforts on. Colin Smyth. Given the impact of the dispute on Ferguson's Marine, in particular in the fact that the workforce wants to see this issue resolved more than anyone else, can the minister tell us a bit more about what has been done to support the workforce specifically and, crucially, to protect the long-term future of the yard and the vital jobs and skills that it delivers? Paul Wheelhouse. Clearly, I appreciate that it is probably a matter of record now the significant funding that the Government has provided to ensure that it is worth stating that Ferguson has won the contract fair and square, but, thereafter, we have been trying to support the yard to continue the work and to make sure that there is sufficient resource there to see the contract through and support the workforce during that period. Obviously, we continue to engage in terms of, as we would expect with the business, of all the support that we can give to investment in skills and to continue to look to establishing a longer-term pipeline clearly for the whole shipbuilding sector in Scotland to ensure that there is visibility of further work. Most latest vessel, of course, that we are currently doing design for, is the Isle vessel, and that will obviously be an opportunity for Ferguson's other yards to tender for. We are trying to make sure that we do a number of things across the spectrum, but I am happy to meet Colin Smyth if he wishes to discuss this matter further. Kenneth Gibson. Thank you, Presiding Officer, and will the minister confirm that the Scottish Government remains absolutely committed to the completion and delivery of the Glen Sannocks, 75 per cent of which has already been outfitted to serve the address and to Brodic route, as well as boat 802? I would say to the minister that, unlike Mr Greene, having asked the question, I will now listen to the answer rather than heckle it. Paul Wheelhouse. Thank you very much to Kenneth Ferguson for the question. The contract, I want to use this opportunity to stress, the contract for the vessels for CMAL is with FMAL, as the member has indicated. We are currently seeking details, as I said to Mr Greene, on the programme to complete the vessel. I would not want to comment the exact percentage of the work that we understand has been completed at this time, but I note the figure that the member quotes, but I obviously seek to have that confirmed and have further detail of the work that remains to be completed on 801 and 802 as well. As we previously stated, we remain absolutely committed to the completion of those vessels, to their deployment to serve the communities such as those in Arran and North Ayrshire, more generally, who are served by them, and to ensuring that we rebuild the future of shipbuilding at the site and make sure that it continues for the long term. Question 3 was not lodged. Question 4, Peter Chapman. Presiding Officer, thank you. Do you ask the Scottish Government what plans it has to review the signage for the AWPR? Michael Matheson. A significant consultation was undertaken prior to designing the signage for the project. That resulted in a strategy that was agreed with local authorities during the design development stage. Prior to opening to traffic, all new sections of road undergo a safety audit, which includes a thorough review of signage. All signage is reviewed to ensure that it fully meets the required design and road safety standards. The audit confirmed that all signage is compliant with the appropriate standards and the aforementioned strategy. Consequently, no further changes are planned. Peter Chapman. I thank the cabinet secretary for that answer, but I am disappointed with it because there has been a litany of issues with the management of the AWPR project. Signage is one that is still causing problems. I can give the cabinet secretary three specific examples of where they fall down. Signs at the start of the AWPR at the Stonehaven end do not include major north-east towns such as Fraserborough and Peterhead. As a result, I have been contacted by local businesses in these areas as drivers heading to these towns who do not know the area, do not take the AWPR and end up going through Aberdeen as a result. Secondly, the signage still does not show that tractors are banned, causing confusion and disruption to the local farming community. Thirdly, local businesses on the old routes have had their own signage removed because Transport Scotland does not allow it, but refuses to work with them to find a compromise. It is clear that the signage is not up the scratch, so I would ask the cabinet secretary to commit to working with north-east councils and communities and to conduct a full further review of it. Excuse me, I will decide when a question is taken too long. Would you like to finish, please, Mr Chapman, in signs? Thank you, cabinet secretary. It is clear that the signage is not up the scratch, so will the cabinet secretary commit to working with north-east councils and communities and to conducting a full further review of it? There was a delay in the completion of the road, but it took some 65 years for the Government to make sure that it is delivered for the north-east of Scotland. I can say to remember that he is incorrect, because the standard of the signage is correct. The strategy for the signs were agreed with the local authorities. That is what has been complied with in the completion of the route itself. In relation to some of the signs not being able to hold local route information, part of that is because to do so would mean that there is too little room on the signs themselves to carry the information that is required. I know that the member has raised the issue of tractors being allowed on this road on a number of occasions, but the orders to designate this road, a special road, were issued back in 2010. Therefore, it is a special road that is not allowed to be used for agricultural vehicles of the type that I know that Mr Chapman is keen to see using the AWPR, but I am afraid that they are not allowed. Question 5, Mark Ruskell. To ask the Scottish Government how it ensures— Sorry, Mr Ruskell's point of order, Mr Chapman. I have just realised that I have been speaking about tractors and I did not declare an interest as a farmer, so I need to do that now. I am pretty sure that most people would have guessed that you were a farmer. Mr Ruskell's question. Thank you. We can move on from the tractors and start talking about airplanes. To ask the Scottish Government how it ensures that communities are protected from the effects of aircraft noise. Michael Matheson. I recognise the impact that noise from an airport can have on those affected. While airspace management is reserved to the UK Government under the environmental noise, Scotland regulations 2006 airports are required to produce noise action plans that set out the actions that the airport will take to mitigate the impact of its operations on local communities. An airport is required to use all reasonable endeavours to take action set out in its action plan and we would take action under the regulations if we thought that an airport was not doing so. Mark Ruskell. I thank the cabinet secretary for that response. He outlines the range of powers that airports have particularly as competent authorities in relation to noise regulations. They also have very wide permitted development rights in planning, which often allows their unregulated, uncontrolled expansion. Does the cabinet secretary believe that, in the case of Edinburgh airport, the minister should have more control over operating conditions through formal designation of the airport and the use of powers under section 78 of the Civil Aviation Act. Michael Matheson. As I mentioned, the powers that we would use as Scottish ministers would be under the environmental noise Scotland regulations 2006, which impose a requirement for the airport to have an action plan in place in relation to tackling noise. Any actions that were taken by Scottish ministers would be in relation to those particular regulations. That is the approach that we would take in relation to Edinburgh airport. On the point that he made in relation to permitted developments, he is correct to say that airport operators have permitted development rights. Within the area of the designated airport, permitted development rights are set out in secondary legislation under the existing planning powers. We have committed to reviewing permitted development rights following at the passing of the present planning bill before Parliament. Question 6 was not lodged. To ask the Scottish Government how much it has invested in transport infrastructure in the north-east in the last decade. Michael Matheson. In the last decade, the Scottish Government has invested in roads that benefit the north-east, including the £745 million Aberdeen Western peripheral route and the Balmedie project, the Inveramsey bridge improvement and our planned dualling of the A96, which will see approximately £3 billion invested in the dualling of the A96. We have also invested some £11 million in sustainable active travel and allocated some £7.8 million to north-east councils for cycling, walking and safer streets. We are funding the £330 million rail improvement project between Aberdeen and Inverness and Aberdeen and the Central Belt, which includes a new station at Lawrence Cook. We are purchasing of four vessels operating ferry services between Aberdeen and the Lollarnyles, and support of a further vessel and harbour improvements also totals some £59 million. Our annual support of £200 million to buses, including the national concessionary travel scheme, brings significant benefit to the people of the north-east of Scotland. Stuart Steele. Well, Presiding Officer, I think that that would, in any other context, be worthy of a round of applause. What we are saying from Aberdeen-Constantine is that there is a substantial increase in the number of views that potential customers are taking of houses to the south in Stonehaven and to the north of Aberdeen. Is this not a serious early indication of the 16,000 new jobs that it has predicted the AWPR might bring to us and other benefits from that massive investment that has just been described? Michael Matheson. All the early feedback on AWPR has been overwhelmingly positive, in particular those who recognise that it is transforming journey times in the north-east of Scotland, including helping to improve and boost the north-east economy. The type of feedback that the members just referred to is an example of the economic benefits that are starting to be realised by the Aberdeen-Western peripheral route. This is a demonstration of the Scottish Government's determination to make sure that Scotland has a strong and robust economy, including in the north-east of Scotland. We will continue to invest in major infrastructure projects, not just in the north-east of Scotland but across the country, to help to support our communities and the Scottish economy. I am sorry that there is no time for supplementaries. The afternoon's business is very packed. Question number 8 was not lodged, and that concludes portfolio question time. We will move on.