 The next item of business is topical questions, and we start with number one from Colin Smith. To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to reports that ScotRail has had to pay a record amount in financial penalties in the last nine months. Minister Humza Yousaf. The sole purpose of the service quality incentive regime known as Squire, one of the toughest if not the toughest in the UK, is to drive up standards for passengers and deliver new and improved facilities by reinvesting any penalties imposed in qualitative improvements throughout the network. That approach ensures that the onus to improve substandard assets facilities at stations or, indeed, on trains rest squarely on the shoulders of the franchisee as penalties are deducted from the subsidy that they receive and reinvested, as I say, in driving up quality through other customer-facing improvements. ScotRail's performance is above the GB average but, as is already well documented, it is not as high as ministers demand nor passengers expect. I fully expect the forthcoming independent Donovan review to be the building block in which ScotRail makes a marked turnaround in the overall customer experience. Colin Smith. Thank you, Presiding Officer. ScotRail's rail passengers really do deserve better than the transport minister simply repeating his words that he expects improvements. He is increasingly, frankly, sounding like a railway station tannoy announcer, repeating the same old message about delays, but in this case it seems without the apology. The problem is that no one is listening to the transport minister least of all Abelio. It is nearly four years since the Government awarded him the ScotRail franchise, promising to improve Scotland's railways, but those record finds reveal a rail service getting worse on this transport minister's watch, not better. Can the transport minister therefore tell us just when Scotland's hard-pressed rail passengers will have a railway system where the rail fares are not rising above the rate of inflation and wages, where new trains are not being delivered late, where passengers are not standing on a platform wondering if their train will stop. We are 76 per cent—yes, 76 per cent—of key performance benchmarks that are not being missed. I will ignore the personal remarks that he made in the beginning of his question and I will go straight into some of the substance if I can. That is to say that despite his apocalyptic version of events, he simply does not hold true. Yes, there must be improvement. I have always acknowledged that and driven that, and I will come to some of the positive effects of that, but there, of course, has been, under my watch but indeed under this Government's watch, record levels of satisfaction at 90 per cent. That made Abelio technically the best-performing, largest operator in the entire United Kingdom. Record investment in railway, which has seen new railway that has not been opened in 50 years, such as the Borders railway, for example. We did, of course, throughout 2017, see improved performance, admittedly, although that dipped through the autumn and winter periods. Clearly, there are areas of improvement. Through the squire regime, which is the most robust, we are seeing changes. There have been improvements, if you looked at the squire, at station shelters, train information screens and, for example, on train graffiti. Clearly, on other measures, there has to be improvement. Just to get to the substance of the point here, the squire regime, because of the interventions of Transport Scotland, myself and others, the result of that is that we are seeing far more staff being recruited now by Abelio, which in turn should help to improve the overall customer experience. I will be happy to share with the member some of those staff recruitments in more detail, but we are seeing 20 stations' positions being filled, 13 stations' dispatched positions being filled by Abelio, 18 gate-line staff, 38 catering posts and 14 catering staff on the Dumfries route alone. All those things should, I hope, help to see a better overall customer experience. What I would say to the member to encourage him is that, instead of sniping from the sidelines, if he came with some helpful suggestions, I would have been more than happy to listen to him. Let me just give the transport minister one helpful suggestion and tell him exactly where I stand on Scotland's railways and Britain's railways. The transport minister does not seem to accept that we have a problem and that the railway system, frankly, is broken, so when we stop praising and trying to prop up a privatised railway system that, frankly, has come to the end of the track, will he answer this straightforward question? Does he support not just preparing public sector bids for franchises but bringing our railways back under public ownership so that people and performance are the priority, not profits? Will he give a straight answer to that straight question? Minister, here is a straight answer. It was Labour that denied the Scottish Government the powers to introduce a public sector bid, so I will take no lectures of Colin Smyth on a publicly owned railway. What I will also say to him, of course, is that he forgets that 54 per cent over half of the delays on the rail network are by the nationalised part of the network rail, which is a reclassified body under the Department for Transport. What Colin Smyth cannot tell us is how much will it cost, of course, to bring it back into national hands. I bet that you are putting tens of millions of pounds of their own investment. What budget will that come from, the health budget or the education budget? Thank you, Presiding Officer. On customer experience, is the minister aware that, despite the promise by ScotRail of five carriages to transport rugby supporters from the borders of Midlothian to the international and Sunday 11 February, which I then publicised to constituents, a train breakdown meant that there were only two, so the train was packed from Tweedbank and Gallus Shields and stop-skipped, leaving folks standing on the platforms in Newton range at Gore bridge. The promise from ScotRail for the Calcutta Cup matched this Saturday as yet again five carriages. Given ScotRail's track record, can I ask if the minister will take a particular interest in whether that promise from ScotRail is fulfilled or not? I would say to the member, her constituency and her part of the country, that she has seen some great improvements in the ScotRail service. Of course, we want to go further with the new trains that allow us to cascade across the network. I accept her point fully that extra carriages are only helpful if those extra carriages are running. I will, of course, look into major events, planning for future events and pass that message on to Scotland. I am sure that they have heard it loud and clear here, but I know that she also has a direct relationship with the MD of ScotRail, and she can raise those issues to herself. We repeatedly hear in this chamber from the transport minister that the status quo in terms of performance is unacceptable and that there must be improvements, but he will be aware that the moving annual average performance metric has not been met since August of last year. We now find that the squire report shows that 14 out of 34 benchmarks were missed for an entire year. Can I ask the minister what his view is on those disappointing trends? What assurances has ScotRail given him regarding turning things around, but more importantly, when does he think that the current franchise holder will meet its contractual obligations in terms of punctuality and performance? I think that it makes a fair point that, of course, performance is not at the level that we expect it to be, but I take it back to my previous answer. Once we put in a performance improvement plan, when we faced challenges or ScotRail faced challenges towards the tail end of 2016, we saw a number of periods and months of improvement. In fact, we took that to record levels and I think that that was acknowledged at the time by his predecessor in the transport portfolio. There has been improvement, but clearly autumn and winter resilience in planning on the railways by ScotRail was not good enough and they accept that themselves. In terms of when we expect to see that improvement, I stress upon them that I intend to expect to see that immediately. What will help with that will be the Donovan review. Nick Donovan is somebody who has decades of experience in the railway. I had a preliminary conversation with him just a couple of weeks ago—in fact, it was just last week—and it was very, very positive to hear from him the areas that he is looking and examining and exploring. I don't doubt that if those Donovan review recommendations are brought forward, most of them will be mulled over by the ScotRail board. If they are accepted, then clearly I expect them to make a difference. I will ensure that, when the Donovan review is complete, I will say to ScotRail that there should be some transparency in what those review findings are, so that other members can explore them and question them as well. In direct answer to his question, we expect to see their performance improving just as it did in the first half of 2017. Would the minister agree that it is a good use of the square phone to improve infrastructure at stations such as disabled access and provide a better service for all our rail travellers and, in that way, the performance of ScotRail for all its users could improve? Yes, I do. Mike Rumbles has been particularly forthcoming when it comes to the interstation, I know, and the accessibility issues around that. He has been particularly involved in trying to find a solution to that, and I thank him for the work that he has done thus far. In terms of the squire regime, the money is reinvested back into the railway for a better experience, not just for passengers but for staff as well. For example, some of the squire money has gone towards 250 body cameras and infrastructure for front-line staff to keep them safe and a job that can often be difficult at some parts of the week and the day. Yes, I agree with him that accessibility can certainly be part of that. He knows that there is also the minor works fund as well, which can help towards accessibility and, obviously, the UK Government's access for all fund as well. All that is combined, the more accessible our stations are, our transport is, the better for everybody. ScotRail obviously faces challenges with capacity on the Glasgow, Edinburgh review, Falkirk line, and they are suggesting that they are going to reduce the fares on the line via Airdrie and Bathgate, which is marginally slower. Does he agree with me that that is quite an imaginative and positive step, and that perhaps that could be used in future so that a lower fare would be offered on a slower route? Minister. Yes, he is right to point out that, as things stand this week and moving forward, the Airdrie and Bathgate line, the lower level Queen Street, will be off the all day. Therefore, £13 is fairly, of course, significantly cheaper than what it would be if it was during the peak time. Any lessons that can be learnt from that, from encouraging or incentivising passengers to move to other routes that are available, albeit that they may be slower, then that is a positive thing. However, he will be under no illusion whatsoever that the priority, of course, is to get attached to the manufacturer to deliver the 385s and the schedule that they have promised. The schedule has not been met and we are continuing to push them to make sure that those carriages arrive, so that we can cascade across the network and have those additional carriages. In the meantime, any lessons that can be learnt from the reduced pricing that is incentivising people to use other routes, we should learn those lessons. David Torrance Thank you, Presiding Officer. To ask the Scottish Government what assistance it is providing to burnt island fabrication in light of reports that redundancy notices have been issued to staff. Keith Brown The Scottish Government continues to support BiFab, and that support is allowing work to continue on the contracts for the Beatrice offshore wind farm. The loan facility that is extended by Scottish ministers will see BiFab receive payments on commercial terms to alleviate immediate cash flow issues that are experienced by the company in connection with the Beatrice project. Myself and Paul Wheelhouse, the enterprise agencies and my officials are working regularly with BiFab and all their interested parties to find a positive solution. I recognise that this remains a difficult period for BiFab's workforce and their families. We do not underestimate the anxiety and lack of certainty of future orders and the resulting employment that has created. It is also a challenging period of BiFab's contractors and creditors. However, we are continuing to do all that we can to help to secure the long-term commercial future of the company, including potential inward investment. I believe that there are opportunities for the Scottish supply chain to play a leading role across a range of energy sector investments, and I believe that BiFab can play a crucial role in the market. Cabinet Secretary, can you clarify what action the Scottish Government is taking to help to find further investment for a yard to ensure that the highly skilled workforce and BiFab remains at the forefront of wind farm construction and a key player in the UK renewable sector? I have mentioned in my first response the work that has been done by ministers, officials and the enterprise agencies, and collectively we are doing all that we can within the scope of the powers that we have to support the management and the workforce of BiFab, of course, a private company. That is in order to try to secure the long-term commercial future of fabrication at all three yards where BiFab are present. It is, without question, a challenging time for the company, but we continue to provide support also in the form of the Scottish Manufacturing Advice Service, which speaks with the offshore renewable and oil and gas sectors regularly about potential tender opportunities and, of course, crucially lazing with potential inward investors. David Torrance In the event of redundancies at the three BiFab sites in Berthalen, Meffel and Arnish, what support can the Scottish Government offer to ease employees affected? On our topic, my previous answer is that we want to try, along with the agencies and others, to avoid any redundancies. We are working with BiFab senior management, Scottish Enterprise and trade union representatives to do everything we can to avoid that situation. However, it is also true that we stand ready to provide support through our partnership action for continuing employment pace, by providing skills development and employability support. In that way, pace aims to minimise the time individuals who may be affected by redundancy are actually out of work. Alexander Stewart Thank you, Presiding Officer. In December, the First Minister told his chamber that the Scottish National Party Government had saved BiFab and kept the workers in a job. Can the cabinet secretary explain to us why this chamber now today that 260 jobs are under threat, which equates to 20 per cent of the workforce? Were we aware of that in December when the First Minister made the claim? It is an unbelievable question for the member. He obviously was not listening to the First Minister when she made that statement. It was made clear at the point, and, as we made clear ever since, that what we were able to do in November was to safeguard the contract, to see through the contract. Had we not done that three times in that week, BiFab would have gone to the wall and nobody would be working at BiFab. That is what the Scottish Government did then. That is the commitment that we have shown ever since, that underpins the work that we are currently doing. We would have thought, even from a Tory, that there might be some grudging, respect and admiration for the work undertaken by the First Minister. Rhoda Grant The cabinet secretary will be aware that all the workforce that Arnish has already been paid off with only two retained for care and maintenance. He will also be aware that the specialist equipment at Arnish is publicly owned. Can he make sure that BiFab are carrying out their obligations to protect that equipment and that there is adequate staff and cover in the yard to do that? Michael Matheson That is a very fair point raised. Of course, I will ensure that that is the case although we have had discussions with the management of BiFab and with the trade unions who are very active in Arnish on that issue. I would say that the reduction in staff or something that would have happened regardless of the package that was put in place in November as the contract itself was wound down. However, what we are trying to do is to make sure that Arnish can remain, as I have said, a place of employment and also to see how we can perhaps get more money in to improve the infrastructure even further. However, the member makes the point about the public investment that has been made there already. We want to capitalise on that and I will take forward the point that she has made that it should be protected, that the equipment that is there should be protected in the meantime. Mark Ruskell Thank you. Can I ask what upskilling programmes are available to keep workers on the payroll and to keep the gates open over the next difficult few months? Also, what the implications would be for BiFab if the inward investment that the cabinet secretary mentions cannot be secured? I think again that it is a very good point. I would just want to say first of all that that is where our efforts are going. First of all, I am trying to get our investment that Mark Ruskell talks about. That is absolutely crucial. Also, to see if we can try to get some of the contract opportunities that are available, one by BiFab, of course, within the rules with which we are bound. Also, in the event that that was not in the case, and we are trying to avoid that, then Mark Ruskell is quite right to say that we should be examining as we are what opportunities there are for skills and further training of the workforce that is there, what other work might be able to be done at the yard in terms of improving the infrastructure. So the member can be reassured that we are examining that and looking at what the options would be, although just to underline the point that we are trying everything that we can to avoid that situation coming about in the first place. Willie Rennie This is a dark time for the workforce. What I want to ask the minister is what is the long-term strategy to make sure that companies like BiFab thrive on the back of the opportunities of the renewable energy sector, particularly the offshore renewables that are coming down the track? They should be thriving, not just surviving. So what is the long-term strategy from the Government? I think that it is worth pointing out to Willie Rennie that BiFab is a private company that enters into those contracts. What we have tried to do is try to help them to make sure, not least because of its employees, that they can continue to do that. There is a thriving sector in Scotland. In 2015, it supported 58,500 jobs in Scotland. That is around 14 per cent of the total UK employment. It generated £10.5 billion in turnover—again, 14 per cent of the total UK turnover in this sector. However, that is the case. I think that that is the underlying point behind Willie Rennie's question. We want to try to make sure that more of that work is substantial in both Scottish waters and throughout the UK and indeed Western Europe. We want to see more work coming to Scotland, so what we will continue to do is to provide support to the sector as a sector, but in the case of a particular company like BiFab, the different measures that I have mentioned already in terms of trying to get new investment and new contracts will provide support to individual companies as well. I apologise to Dean Lockhart and Claire Baker, I am afraid that there is not enough time to take any more questions today. That concludes topical questions, and we will move on to our next item of business, which is a debate on motion 10397, in the name of Derek Mackay, on the Scottish rate resolution. I invite all members who wish to speak in this debate to press their request to speak buttons now.