 Good morning. The first item of business is general questions. We start with question number one, Liz Smith. To ask the Scottish Government what discussions it has had with ScotRail regarding train punctuality and stop skipping in the Mid-Scotland and Fife region. Minister Humza Yousaf. As I said to Alex Rowley in the chamber last week, I completely understand the frustrations that poor performance can have on the customer experience and recognise that ScotRail has faced a number of issues and challenges in recent months, particularly in the autumn and winter months across the rail network, not least in the Fife and Mid-Scotland region. I fully expect performance issues to be addressed immediately, and I speak to Alex Hines regularly, as I have mentioned in the chamber. I think that Liz Smith is aware that there is an independent review that has been instigated by ScotRail to look at performance, in particular in skip stopping, which will be part of that. My Transport Scotland officials will continue to monitor that closely. I agree at the last session of general questions to organise the facility and meeting with Fife MSPs. I believe that Liz Smith has responded positively to that. There is still one or two MSPs outstanding. We are waiting for diaries to co-ordinate, but that meeting will take place. Of course, we will be able to hear from ScotRail directly on how they look to improve their performance and minimise skip stopping. Liz Smith. I thank the minister for that. I also acknowledge his willingness to discuss this. It is very good news that members will be permitted to meet with him and Alex Hines later this month. However, further to the questions that were raised on this issue by Christine Grahame and John Finnie regarding stop-skipping in their regions, about which we all await an important answer, not least because of the safety issues, I ask the minister at the forthcoming meeting to put on the agenda the issue of alleged congestion on the central Fife lines and also about the inaccuracy or inaccuracy, in some cases, of the notice board information stations when those problems arise. Yes, of course. I would be happy to put that on the agenda. What I would say to try to give some reassurance to Liz Smith is that 2018 is a really important and significant year in terms of increasing her capacity on the railways. We know that we are expecting those 385s to come from Hitachi, and we know that high-speed trains will be coming. All of that will allow more carriages to be cascaded across the network. I should say that Fife and I know the issues around capacity in the East Kilbride line as well. They are really top of the agenda when it comes to increasing capacity, but I would be more than happy for that to be in the agenda. Linda Fabiani. Thank you, Presiding Officer. The minister seems to have just answered my question, so I will give him something else to think about at the forthcoming meetings. As well as stop skipping, there is an on-going problem with East Kilbride line about passengers being put off at earlier stations than the ones that they are returning to. Is that something that could also be placed on the agenda? The meeting that we are having is specifically on Fife, but of course I will pass the decision. I think that Linda Fabiani may have met a new member of Scotland. If she hasn't, I will again get those arrangements made. In terms of skipping stops in East Kilbride line, they are relatively low, but again, because the autumn and winter performance has not been what it should have been, passengers on the East Kilbride line. I am frequently one of them because it is a line that I often use. I can see that that would cause disruption, cause delay and cause frustration to those on East Kilbride. Linda Fabiani has been consistent and persistent rightly around rail issues on East Kilbride, but I would give her the reassurances that I just gave to Liz Smith. When new trains are coming and new rolling stock is here, we will be able to cascade and have increased capacity specifically on East Kilbride line. To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to the Water Safety Scotland Publication Scotland's drowning prevention strategy. Minister Annabelle Ewing, the Scottish Government takes the issue of water safety very seriously and wholeheartedly supports the work of Water Safety Scotland and its strategy, which was published yesterday. In implementing the strategy, I hope that we can all work together to promote and ensure the safe enjoyment of Scotland's diverse landscape. In our ambition to build safer communities, we will continue to work closely with Water Safety Scotland and key partners to explore opportunities to progress initiatives that will help to reduce deaths from accidental drowning and raise awareness, particularly among those who are most at risk. In conclusion, I would like to commend Water Safety Scotland in the development of the positive strategy. I would also like to commend Claire Adamson, who is convener of the excellent cross-party group on accident prevention and safety awareness and has been actively engaged throughout the progress of this work. Thank you, minister, for your answer and your kind words. The strategy shows that 50 accidental drownings happen in Scotland and a further 29 were from suicide. One of the key commitments in the strategy is to create a subgroup looking at reducing water-related suicide, with the minister's comment on how that will fit in with the Scottish mental health strategy and the Scottish Government's suicide prevention action plan. Minister, I very much welcome the news that there will be the subgroup. Of course, we afford great priority to reducing water-related suicide, and we note that that was placed very high up in the strategy that was published yesterday. We are presently producing a draft suicide prevention action plan for Scotland, and as part of that work, we will engage with Water Safety Scotland on any proposals to reduce the numbers of deaths by suicide by drowning. I am very heartened to see that emphasis in the excellent Scotland's drowning prevention strategy that was published yesterday. In the prevention strategy Water Safety Scotland policy paper, it makes the point that sadly four in 10 accidental water deaths occur during recreational activities. I am lucky enough to represent a region that has a number of excellent sites for water-based sports, particularly Loch Llywund and Clyde. Will the minister tell me what support the Scottish Government will offer to local clubs or groups who offer recreational or sporting activities in Scotland's waters to improve safety? I am sure that the minister will agree with me that it is an excellent way for people to keep fit, relax and enjoy all the country's great outdoors that it has to offer. One thing that we say is that Water Safety covers indeed a broad range of policy areas, including sport, as the member mentioned, education, tourism and community safety. Scottish Government officials will bring together policy leads from across the Scottish Government relative to the key action points that are identified in the strategy to ensure that those can be progressed effectively. I would also add that I met recently with the Minister for Sport to discuss how we can collectively take this important work forward. To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on what plans it has to provide further funding for the schools for the future programme. In November, I announced the Scottish Government's intention to build upon the success of the schools for the future programme and our plan to publish as part of the programme for government and new education investment plan. The plan will set out proposals to improve the condition of existing schools within the lifetime of this Parliament and our longer-term ambitions to build more two-to-18 campuses and to establish an estate that is world-leading in energy efficiency. The detailed development of the plan is under way, and I expect to make an announcement later this year. When I asked the same question in September last year, the Deputy First Minister said that he would announce funding details later that year. Can you explain why there has not been the announcement that you promised? It does accept that failing to make additional funding available soon puts at risk innovative projects such as phase 2 of Dumfries learning, a project that he knows is not just about new school buildings but transforming education in the town and delivering what the Government says are key objectives around the attainment gap and delivering the young workforce. Will the Deputy First Minister also agree to meet with myself and representatives of Dumfries and Galloway Council to discuss phase 2 of the project and how we can ensure that it is delivered as promised to the people of Dumfries? I am very familiar with the Dumfries learning project. I had the pleasure of discussing its details with members of Dumfries and Galloway Council and other representatives when I visited Dumfries high school some weeks ago. It was a very positive discussion and I acknowledged the significance of the project. It is very important that we recognise the strength of the school building programme that has been undertaken. Since the Government came to office, 751 school building projects have been completed. We now have a situation where 86 per cent of schools are reported as being in good or satisfactory condition. That figure was 61 per cent when the Government came to office, so there has been a massive transformation in the school estate since we came to office. As I indicated in my original answer to Mr Smith, the Government will bring forward proposals for the development of the programme and I will report those to Parliament in due course. Recent months have seen the opening of the Riverbury school in Linwood and a new barhead high school, both in my constituency of Renfisher South. Can the cabinet secretary update Parliament on how much money the Scottish Government has invested in the school estate in both Renfisher and East Renfisher since 2007? There has been substantial investment in both East Renfisher and Renfisher by the Government. In East Renfisher, we have contributed funding of almost £40 million towards the construction of Eastwood High School, Barhead High School and Crookford primary school. In Renfisher Council, we have contributed almost £16 million to the construction of St James primary school, St Fergus primary school and the Riverbury school. As I indicated in my earlier answer, we have made substantial progress across the wider school estate, with 751 school buildings projects completed since the Government came to office. To ask the Scottish Government whether all schools should be fitted with fire alarms and smoke detectors. The health and safety of all pupils whilst at school in Scotland is of paramount importance to us. The Education Scotland Act 1980 places a statutory responsibility on all local authorities to manage and maintain the school estate and provide a safe school environment for all school users. I wrote to all local authorities in August seeking reassurance of fire safety across the school estate. I thank the cabinet secretary for that answer. He will of course be aware of the fire at Cernihill primary in Fife. The incident report confirmed that there were no smoke detectors fitted to that school. My inquiries have revealed that more than one in four five schools do not have smoke detectors and that not every school has an automatic fire alarm. In some cases, hand bells are relied on. There are also emerging concerns about whether head teachers are being adequately and consistently trained in fire safety procedures across Scotland. Five council insists that they comply with current regulations. Does the cabinet secretary agree that it is time to update the guidance to schools? Relying on staff roaming the corridors with a hand bell shouting, fire fire, does not feel like a 21st century response to fire risk? If Mr Ruskell wants to write to me with the very specific details of that example, I will examine it. I agree that it is unhealthy, but I would like to see the very specific details of which school that is and in which circumstances that is the case, and I will investigate that. I wrote to local authorities in August seeking reassurance of the fire safety across the school estate. From the detailed responses received, we have been given reassurance that local authorities have taken all steps necessary to ensure fire safety of their schools. It is an absolutely essential duty on local authorities to ensure that they are taking those steps. That reassurance was given to the Government on 26 January by Five Council, and I want to make sure that all schools are fully compliant with the guidance and advice of the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service, which all schools comply with the details of the Scottish building standards non-domestic technical handbook and ensure that those requirements are followed. We take the issue very seriously, but I make the point to Mr Ruskell that the operational responsibility for those questions rests with local authorities, and I expect local authorities to take those issues seriously. If he wishes to draw that case to my attention, I will investigate it. To ask the Scottish Government how it ensures that major road projects promote active travel. Minister Humza Yousaf. In line with the Scottish Government's vision to promote active travel in a long-term vision for active travel 2030 document, the cycle action plan for Scotland and, indeed, the trunk road cycling initiative suitable for all road users, including cyclists, is a significant part of our major trunk road projects. A plan for our major trunk road projects affects communities across Scotland. It includes a significant increase in active travel facilities, and that is demonstrated by our programme for government commitment for 35km of new cycle track on the A9 dualling programme to connect the A9 with the wider cycle network. The trunk road cycling initiative mentioned by the minister was introduced in 1996 by Lord James Douglas Hamilton. It was a great innovation, but has never since been updated. In 2015, spokes wrote to the Scottish Government suggesting an update, and the Government agreed to an update. They said that the TRCI would be included in Caps 3 by the end of 2016. That's never happened. We have projects such as the Mabel bypass in Ayrshire being designed without cycle paths. Can I ask the minister to say when the TRCI will be updated and if it can ensure that all new trunk roads include cycle use? I am very active in relation to the discussions around the A77 Mabel bypass, and I met the Mabel bypass committee, and they raised those concerns too. We will, of course, reflect on that. I would say that it is a major trunk road project, whether it is the M83-74 improvement project. We saw 16km of new and improved pedestrian and cycle routes. We looked at the A9, and I have mentioned 35km. We looked at the A82 Tarbot in Van Arden scheme. We will have a proposed 17km scheme for active travel. I could go on and on and on. Of course, I will look at the specific issue that the minister mentioned, but clearly this Government, when it comes to active travel, is putting its money where its mouth is. I would give a very gentle reminder to the member that the doubling of the active travel budget is something that he and his party voted against yesterday. Christine Grahame Thank you, Presiding Officer. Does the minister recall that, in May last year, I asked if the proposed improvements to the share of all roundabout on the Edinburgh city bypass, known to cyclists as the meat grinder, if those improvements would make provisions for cyclists when I was told that this would be developed in consultation with local interest groups? Can I ask who was consulted and what was the outcome, please? The member herself, of course, had a good meeting and a good conversation with her about some of the concerns that she raised in other organisations such as Spokes. On the back of that conversation and the back of some of those concerns, I can say that we are revisiting and having a conversation with stakeholders around the provision for non-motorised users at Sheriffhall, including cyclists, which is currently being developed in further detail. As we progress the detailed design of the schemes in consultation with local interest groups, I will, of course, keep her up to date. Question 6, Richard Lochhead. Can I ask the Scottish Government whether there is any plans to ensure that wind farm companies deliver adequate levels of community benefit to provide income streams for local communities? Mr Paul Wheelhouse, community benefits from onshore wind projects can make a real difference to communities located near such sites and, in many cases, can be transformational. As at 31 January 2018, more than £12 million has been paid out to communities over the preceding 12-month period at an average rate of £5,000 per megawatt, which is in line with our benchmark guidance with details of known support published on the community benefit register. There are, of course, examples of projects such as those that were developed by Berkshire Housing Association, the Borders and Fine Homes in Argyll, where social housing providers have developed projects that will invest in new social housing while in addition paying community benefit to communities in line with good practice principles. We want to ensure that communities continue to benefit from local projects in a manner that is appropriate for the current and future context in which projects are developed. That is why we have undertaken to review our good practice principles for community benefits during the course of 2018. Richard Lochhead I am beginning to hear more and more excuses from some wind farm developers who are trying to wriggle out commitments to community benefits or reduce their existing community benefits. I am also aware that many wind farm developments in Scotland do not pay the recommended £5,000 per megawatt threshold that is recommended by the Scottish Government. That effectively means that some communities are already losing out in potential millions of pounds and others may lose out in the future millions of pounds. Can the minister perhaps investigate this issue and does he agree that all wind farm developers should ensure that they deliver community benefits to those communities that host the wind farm developments? I certainly agree with the point that Richard Lochhead has made that it is very important that those developers have made an agreement and must stick with it. That is very important in maintaining trust with local communities. Clearly, we acknowledge that there are a number of developers who do not yet adopt good practice principles. We think that it is important that the vast majority should be recognised for adhering to those good practice principles. Of course, in the context of the review that we are about to undertake, I will happily look into particular examples if Mr Lochhead can make those available to me of where that is not happening in his constituency, because I appreciate it is a matter of great concern to him. For the record, we want to make sure that good practice principles are obviously providing a benchmark for the sector based on a voluntary principle, but we feel that it is important that it is followed by all developers where possible. Communities suffering from high deprivation are less likely to receive community benefits. Will the minister consider introducing renewable energy bonds or other measures so that every community would have a better opportunity at benefiting from renewables? Maurice Golden raises an important point. It is indeed a big thrust of the energy strategy that we published in December. We were looking at alternatives where that might be appropriate, and it may be a more attractive option for communities to invest in a shared revenue model, so they are investing in the wind farm and getting the full economic benefit and freedom to spend the revenue that comes from that project in the way that they see fit for their community. I am happy to discuss that with Mr Golden if he wishes to contact my office. In my region and across Scotland, communities such as Warnockhead are shaping their own sustainable low-carbon future, some of which choose not to be benefit dependent. How does the Scottish Government ensure easy access and information and support for community groups who want to take forward empowering energy projects themselves? I am grateful to Claudia Beamish for raising the important point. I am aware of the interest in Warnockhead. I would certainly direct communities who have an interest in developing a community project to contact local energy Scotland, where they can give specific help to those projects through carers funding and, indeed, our infrastructure fund, which will allow communities to potentially invest in their own future and have less dependency on others to determine their own economic outlook.