 I have selected an urgent question, which will be taken as the first item of business today, but, as a result, the decision time will be postponed until 5.15. I believe that all members have been notified by email. We turn to the urgent question, Liam McArthur. To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to reports that the merger of the British Transport Police in Scotland is to be delayed. We are committed to delivering the benefits of a single command structure to provide integrated infrastructure policing in Scotland. A safe and secure transition to the full integration of British Transport Police in Scotland and Police Scotland is our aim and a clear focus on public safety is paramount. The joint programme board set up to oversee that integration has been advised by Police Scotland and the BTPPA that operational aspects of the integration will not be ready for April 2019 as planned. Ministers have therefore agreed that a replanning exercise should take place in the coming months to ensure that all aspects have a clear and realistic delivery plan in place. As part of that, we will ensure that we take advantage of the opportunity to enhance communications with staff, officers and rail operators about the merger. The case that SNP ministers forced through the merger of the British Transport Police and Police Scotland despite serious concerns and overwhelming opposition from the BTPP officers and staff, and despite clear warnings from HMICS about a lack of detailed business case on the benefits, disadvantages and costs involved, DCC Livingston has now warned that those unresolved issues mean that integration cannot be achieved on the Scottish Government's terms, quote, without compromising public safety. Given those concerns, will the cabinet secretary now accept that the joint board has been handed a poison chalice and that this politically driven merger should not go ahead until a proper business case has been published, scrutinised and approved by this Parliament? Let me deal with a couple of factual issues in the first place. The idea that we forced through this proposal is somewhat bizarre, given that we are a minority government and had to require the support of other parties in this chamber. I recall that stage 1, the Liberal Democrats supported the proposal and changed their position through the process. It is hardly forcing something through Parliament, Presiding Officer. In relation to the HMICS report that the member made reference to as well, I also pointed out to him that it was a report relating to matters back at the beginning of 2017, actually February-March 2017, prior to introducing many of the details that we then produced for Parliament when it was considering the legislation going forward. Since then, there has been a significant amount of work taken forward. It is also important to make sure that the comments that were made by Deputy Chief Constable Ian Livingston are not taken out of context. Let me quote him directly, Presiding Officer, because I think that the way in which Mr MacArthur has sought to try and interpret them is somewhat misleading. He stated, and I quote, over the last few months, that we have been assessing the feasibility of delivering integration by April 2019. It has become clear to Police Scotland that there are unresolved issues, which means that effective operational integration cannot be achieved by the date without compromising public safety. Independent consultants have endorsed our position on the matter. The issue that DCC Livingston is highlighting is that the assessment that has been made by Police Scotland on its state of preparedness in this matter does not allow them to be able to deliver it by April 2019. That is why they brought forward the proposal to the joint programme board on Tuesday of this week, setting out that they should undertake a re-planning exercise in order to look at setting a new integration date. That is exactly what the joint programme board agreed at the request of Police Scotland and the British Transport Police Authority. The Government was repeatedly told that its deadline was unrealistic, and its proposals are unrealistic. DCC Livingston has now confirmed that, and that is somehow taking his comments out of context. The Scottish Centre for Crime and Research has published a report today into the impact of integration on BTU officers and staff in Scotland. The survey found that 83 per cent were unsupportive or very unsupportive of the merger, leading to 64 per cent having given serious consideration to leaving policing because of the merger. One responder, with over 30 years' experience in the BTP, said that the service was being, quote, destroyed for political reasons, adding that it is this political motivation that has angered officers most. Another said that the merger was, quote, more transformation at an already turbulent time within Police Scotland's short history. Given the damning indictment of the Scottish Government's plans, does the cabinet secretary really believe that it is sensible to proceed with a merger that commands the confidence of a mere 7 per cent of BTP officers and staff? Does he now regret refusing to consult on any other options that are put forward for delivering the Smith commission recommendations? Let me pick up an issue about the date that was set. The date that was set for the integration being taken forward was one that was agreed with other parties. It was not one that was imposed by the Scottish Government, so the member is factual incorrect on that matter yet again. I can also highlight the issue about the benefits that will come from the integration of British Transport Police into Police Scotland as creating that single command structure, opening up aspects to specialist resources within Police Scotland that we do not have within BTP, within Scotland as well, making sure that we have an infrastructure arrangement here in Scotland for policing of it that protects it from the plans that the UK Government does not have, which is to abolish British Transport Police and integrate it with civil nuclear and also with MOD policing and to create national infrastructure policing that would leave us in a position that would be even more vulnerable and potentially only leaving Scotland with any form of railway policing on its own. What the member seems to often ignore is that, when the Smith commission and the subsequent legislation to implement the powers that were to be devolved to the Scottish Parliament that was taken forward, it places a requirement on the Scottish Government or on the Parliament to be responsible for railway policing. We therefore need to put a structure in place in order to achieve that. The member makes reference to previous alternative plans. The reality is that all of the alternative plans leave us in a situation that creates a confused picture where there is a clear lack of direction around who is exactly responsible for railway policing in Scotland, because a list of responsibility would still be with the transport secretary in London. The BTPA, which is appointed by the transport secretary, would still be responsible for doing that, despite the fact that I have no doubt that we would have Mr MacArthur and others coming forward here demanding that the Scottish ministers are responsible for the area of policing, which ultimately is the responsibility of ministers in London when anything went wrong. By providing a clear line of accountability, which is what we deliver through having integration into Police Scotland, alongside providing open up aspects to the specialist skills that we have within Police Scotland as well, we will help to support us in delivering first-class railway policing in Scotland under a single command structure and also making sure that we can deploy specialist assets to support railway policing as and when it is necessary other than what we have at the present moment when it is requested through special arrangements. If we can get very short questions and short answers, we might get through some of them. The cabinet secretary would accept that the public do not understand that we can have one police force for a railway platform and a separate police force for a road a few yards away. It is not joined up. Can the cabinet secretary reassure me and the public that he is committed to joining those forces together? I have got four train stations within my constituency. The reality is that when an incident occurs within one of the train station environments that are thereabouts, it is a local police Scotland to respond to those matters. If there is a requirement for some sort of specialist input from BTP, then that request is then made just in the same way in which the local commander would put in specialist requests. If there is a missing person, it needs air support for searching for someone. It will request additional support. The reality is that, for many people on a day-to-day basis, when it comes to having to police matters around railway stations or the environments of railway stations, it is police Scotland officers who deliver that. We continue to be committed to taking forward the legislative agreement by this Parliament to have an integrated single command structure for railway policing in Scotland, with the BTP being integrated into Police Scotland. For the vast majority of the travelling public, the reality is that they will want effective policing to be delivered no matter whether on a road, railway or anywhere else, and that is exactly what we intend to deliver with integrated structure. The SNP did not listen to the Scottish Conservatives when we said that this was unsafe, unnecessary and unwanted by virtually everyone connected with Scotland's railways. Now they have been forced into an embarrassing, humiliating U-turn, having told this chamber only four weeks ago that a delay would be, and I quote, preposterous. The cabinet secretary's claim that two years was a luxury has been totally discredited. Given that we now know that eight in 10 BTP officers and staff oppose the merger outright, will they listen to them and consider calling the whole thing off? We will create a national infrastructure police force, bringing together the civil nuclear constabulary, the Minister of Defence and British Transport Police to improve the protection of critical infrastructure such as nuclear sites, railways and the strategic road network. Those are the words from the Scottish Conservative Party's manifesto last year and the UK Conservative Party manifesto last year. The very hypocrisy of Mr Kerr to come to this chamber and try to kid on that he does not intend to abolish British Transport Police does him no favours and yet again just shows the depth of his amateur politics on show in this chamber. When he makes reference to who I said that two years was a luxury, he is yet again wrong in that matter. It was Police Scotland and it was ACC, Bernie Higgins who said that, yet again an example of the amateur nature of Mr Kerr's politics when it comes to these issues. As we have made very clear and as it is very clear that it is not within the ability of Mr Kerr to understand, it is that we want to make sure that we deliver the most effective infrastructure policing here in Scotland, and that is through a single command structure. As he set out in his manifesto just last year, here in Scotland and for the rest of the UK. He is a robust exchange. The robust exchange is let's not make them personal. Daniel Johnson, please. Liam McArthur has already made reference to the research published day by the Scottish Centre for Crime and Justice Research, which had responses from two-thirds of serving PTP officers. It stated that there was a deep strain of skepticism, cynicism and opposition towards the integration of the British Transport Police into Police Scotland. Will the minister therefore use this pause to listen to those voices of front-line officers and halt this merger? If not, what does he say to those officers about why he is ignoring their professional front-line opinion? As we have said, we remain committed to the integration of PTP into Police Scotland as was agreed by the Parliament. What we have under the replaning exercise that is now being taken forward by the joint programme board is an opportunity to look at some of the issues that still need to be resolved. As I said in my opening comments to the question that was asked by Mr McArthur, as part of that it will allow us to take advantage of the additional time to enhance our communication with staff, officers and rail operators around the benefits of integration and the merger. That is exactly what we will take the opportunity to do to address some of the issues that members who are within PTP presently have around integration plans. John Finnie. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I support the pragmatic decision of the Cabinet Secretary. You are constantly referred to integration, cabinet secretary, and IT and the integration of the existing forces that make up Police Scotland has been a challenge. Police Scotland leads in counter-terrorism Scotland. There is no suggestion to me other than that that would continue and that plans are in place to deal with things. However, is there any hitherto unknown factors that would impact an operational efficiency in the future that have led to that decision? The integration around IT stuff is a key part of making sure that there is a smooth transition to the integration of BTP with Police Scotland. That is one of the issues that Police Scotland is giving consideration to. The member is right when it comes to issues relating to counter-terrorism. Police Scotland has a lead in this matter. I have made the point in this chamber before when we went to critical it was Police Scotland to have the lead on those issues. BTPs have no armed officers capability within Scotland. They have limited capability around specialist assets. Most of that is provided by Police Scotland, as was the case when we went to critical. A number of the operational issues that have been worked on by Police Scotland in partnership with BTPs is to make sure that they work through all the various scenarios to ensure that there are the required operational arrangements in place within Police Scotland to pick up any of those matters as and when they are necessary. That is one of the issues that Police Scotland has reflected on over the past couple of weeks in looking at the progress that it has made to date, is to identify whether there continues to be operational sensitivities, whether there are risks and what they can do to mitigate that. The re-planning exercise allows them to reflect on that whole process and to input plans in place to ensure that appropriate measures are in place to deliver those issues once integration takes place. Rona Mackay Does the cabinet secretary agree that the decision demonstrates communication between the joint programme board, the Scottish Government and the UK Government is effective and working well? There has been some suggestion as though that this is some sort of dictate that has been taken forward on the part of the Scottish Government with this measure, which is clearly wrong, given the parliamentary support that was required for the legislation. Equally, the planning and integration arrangements are being taken forward on a joint co-operative basis. The Scottish Government, the UK Government, the BTPP, the Police Scotland and the Scottish Police Authority are all working collectively together to ensure that there is a smooth transition to the integration of rabies policing in Scotland. That will continue to be the case. The very fact that issues of concern were raised by the BTPP and Police Scotland around the timeline from their own reflections on where they were at in being prepared operationally, taking them and escalating them to the joint programme board. The joint programme board responded to them in agreeing that there should be an extension or a period of reflection around re-planning and then looking at having an extension to the integration time. In my view, it makes complete sense. No doubt had that been ignored, members of this chamber would say that it is outrageous that it was not taken into consideration and acted upon. That is exactly what the joint programme board is there to do—to look at the risks, the planning, the progress that has been made and to continue to take action as and when it is necessary to ensure that there is a smooth, safe transition of rabies policing into Police Scotland. That is an important point. If the report out today bears true and two-thirds of BTPP officers leave the service as a result of the merger that they have indicated that they may do, does the cabinet secretary not accept that this would be a huge loss of expertise and experience in this force? Will he publish full analysis of the drawbacks of his proposed merger as he has been asked to by his Majesty's Inspectorate? He may not be aware that the HMICS report was before we published our explanatory notes in the policy memorandum that went with the legislation that sets out the various measures in it. It predated when that information was placed in the Scottish Parliament and the member may want to go away and have a look at that if he is keen to be informed about it in greater detail. I do not underestimate some of the concerns that members within BTPP will have about the significant change that will come about as a result of BTPP being merged into Police Scotland. Some of those were the same concerns that came about at the time when we moved to a single force, with the eight legacy forces concerned about what the impact would be on individuals in addressing those matters. As I have already set out to the member, it will take advantage of the opportunity that we now have with the re-planning process that has been taken forward to double our efforts and to enhance our communication with staff, officers and rail operators. A significant amount of work has been undertaken by the representative bodies in partnership with the Scottish Government to try to provide them with as much information as early as possible about future plans and how it will go on. However, the member will welcome the fact—I have no doubt that he will welcome the fact—that the British Transport Police Federation and others have welcomed the approach that the Scottish Government has taken to this issue and the decision to allow the re-planning exercise to be taken forward, as it will offer an opportunity to its members to get some reassurance on some of those issues. The very concerns that the member seems to be particularly concerned about are the issues that the re-planning process will allow us to refocus on and to address and the Federation for British Transport Police Members has recognised that. I am conscious that there are three more members still wishing to ask questions, but it is time to move on, I am afraid. That concludes the urgent question. We will move to portfolio questions on rural economy and connectivity.