02/02/2017: First Minister's Questions Politics Scotland

A very warm welcome to the Scottish Parliament in Holyrood. The talk is

all about money, a deal to secure the Scottish Government's budget,

securing ?160 million extra for the government. A key demand from the

Greens. More cash for the police. The upper threshold you enter the

higher rate of taxation, we have frozen that at 40 3000. Rather than

rising with inflation this as Scottish Government ministers

intended. More details on that later. First questions to the First

Minister. Let's go to the chamber.

General questions under way, about to move to First Minister's

Questions. There will also be a busy time down the road in the House of

Commons, where the Brexit Minister David Davis will make a statement.

We are expecting the white paper, marking the government's position on

Brexit negotiations appearing after that at 1:30 p.m.. Will any

discussion on that filtered through to Holyrood? We will see. We are

bound to hear something on that budget deal. They will be a debate

on that. The new positions the Scottish Government has reached

after negotiation with the Greens. Particularly on local funding will

be an issue for discussion. We'll be conservatives want to pick up on

this change on the threshold for income tax? I want to ask you First

Minister what engagement she has planned for the rest of the day?

Taking forward the government's programme for Scotland. Does the

First Minister believe that having higher rates of tax in Scotland sets

a dangerous precedent for the prospects of economic growth? I have

been very clear about this. This government will not increase income

tax rates at a time of rising inflation, a time for pressure on

how come -- pressure on household incomes. I

am clear that in the time the Tory austerity, it would be wrong to cut

taxes for the top 10% of income earners. We will not do that either.

I am clear about our priorities. Also pretty clear for the Tory

priorities. Tax cuts for the richest, at the expense of the NHS,

education and those on low incomes. I cannot believe Ruth Davidson has

come to talk about tax cuts for the rich after the foundation said it

just this week about Tory tax policy. I hope she is listening,

they said Tory tax policy will make the poorest quarter of householders

up to 15% worse off. And the highest quarter 5% better. They say it will

be the largest increase in inequality since the days of

Margaret Thatcher. They said this about raising the higher rate

threshold, it will do nothing to improve living standards for the

majority of households. This government is on the side of those

on low incomes, those of public services. I will like Ruth Davidson,

or Harrison, whatever she is called, to argue for the rich. You can come

in a protector of Scottish family's pay packets. I thank the First

Minister for the answer. I have here then Admiral document that the First

Minister signed up to. It is called let Scotland flourish. The SNP told

us that lower taxes would send a message that Scotland is open for

business. The same SNP wants to put business taxes up. It told us higher

rates would send the wrong message for indigenous businesses and

business is coming to Scotland. Now the wrong message is the only

message. They told us that business tax cuts would protect government

revenue. Because it would drive economic growth. Now they say the

opposite is true. They used to get this, why not now? I think Ruth

Davidson might have missed something. I do believe competitive

business taxes are important. That is why we have the most competitive

business rates regime of any country in the United Kingdom. Why the

budget that will be debated this afternoon will lift 100,000 small

businesses across this country out of business rates altogether. Let me

go back to the previous issue, low income households. The truth of the

matter is that the Tories are the destroyers of the living standards

of those on low incomes. In case you did not hear me, let me remind her

of what the Resolution Foundation had to say about Tory tax policies.

They will make the poorest quarter of householders up to 15% worse off,

and the highest quarter 5% better. Widening inequality, that is what

the Tories are doing. This government will tackle inequality,

and protect public services. That is our priorities. The Resolution

Foundation found that Tory tax policy reduced inequality by a

coefficient. Absolutely. The First Minister to days stood there saying

she understands competitive taxation. She is about to make us

the highest taxed part of the entire UK. I will tell her who she needs to

listen to. She needs to listen to business leaders in Scotland. My

first question quoted from Liz Cameron, the chief executive of the

Scottish Chambers of commerce. I will quote her most extensively, if

the First Minister likes quotes, she says people paying high income tax

and Scotland would create a further barrier to Scottish business

competitiveness, and harming jobs. She says the sooner that politicians

realise that supporting economic growth, rather than hiking up taxes

is the route to increasing revenues, and improving investment in key

services, the quicker Scotland will prosper. We will vote on the budgets

in five hours' time. We have been well warned what increasing taxes

mean for families and businesses. Why is the first step stitching up

attacks packed with the Greens rather than protecting Scottish jobs

and business? I'm sure it will be of great comfort to those across the

country struggling to make ends meet, those who welfare protection

has been cut by the Tory government in Westminster to know that that

coefficient is all right. The truth, presiding officer, as far as the

Tories are concerned, the genie is out of the bottle. They are

presiding over the biggest increase in inequality since the days of

Margaret Thatcher. Not my words, the words of the Resolution foundation.

Let me turn to business taxation, I agree with Liz Cameron about the

competitiveness of business taxes. That is why this covenant is gimp on

-- is delivering the most competitive taxation in the UK.

15,000 businesses lifted out of taxation altogether. Let me turn to

the impact on householders. The difference between me every Davidson

is, I don't believe that the time the Tory austerity the priority is

cutting taxes for the top 10% of earners. In terms of our draft

budget, the final secretary will outline changes to Parliament this

afternoon. What we are asking, the highest earners to do, is to forego

a tax cuts amounting to ?6 a week. That is less than people in England

paid for a single prescription. In Scotland, of course, taxpayers not

only get free prescriptions, they get tuition free education, free

personal care for the elderly, above inflation increases in the NHS.

Detection of local services, the best deal for taxpayers anywhere in

the UK. That is what this government is delivering.

The First Minister seems utterly unconcerned about business impact is

having for companies across Scotland. We have been speaking to

companies, one of them is a hotel whose rates are going up by ?15,000.

They have been faced with a choice, reluctantly putting up charges, or

going bust. They have been forced to pass charges on. They have had their

first complaint from a customer paying ?80 to hire a room. Let me

read it out, the increase in the higher fees is excessive to say the

least. Should this fee of ?80 apply to future meetings, I will confirm

there will be no longer any bookings, and our business will be

taken elsewhere. The name of the customer, the bounce branch of the

Scottish Nationalist party. If they cannot support policy, isn't it time

to do something about it? What Ruud Davidson is talking about is an

independent re-evaluation of business rates. -- roof Davidson. As

we have outlined, two weeks ago, the final evaluations will be later this

year. All businesses have an opportunity to appeal if they think

their value is wrong. Let's get back to the core issue, we have the most

competitive is this rates regime in the whole of the UK. 100,000 small

businesses lifted out of business rates altogether. We have a tourism

sector, thanks to the good work of those in it, it is booming.

Employment rising much faster than the rest of the UK. The best

performing part of the UK outside of the south-east of England for inward

investment. These are the success stories of the Scottish economy, we

will continue to invest in the success of our economy. We will make

sure we protect public services, and those on low incomes. That is what

the budget will deliver, and I am proud to put it forward to this

parliament later today. The members seem a little excitable ahead of the

budget. Can I ask members to show respect to each other? I asked the

First Minister was engagement she has planned for the rest of the

week? To take thought the government's programme for Scotland.

In September I asked the First Minister about the number of people

being referred for mental health treatment, only to have the referral

rejected. The first minute to express concern, saying she was

determined to act. Can the First Minister now tell us how many more

young people have been rejected for mental health treatment since I last

brought the crisis to the chamber? We continue to invest in improving

mental health services. I have made it very clear to voices across the

chamber the priority we attach to that is a government. We have rising

demand for mental health services, which is something we should

welcome, meaning the stigma is reducing, more people coming

forward. Waiting times are producing, more people treated. Not

just rising investment, but rising numbers of staff. I readily accept

we have much more work still to do. Not unique in that sense in

Scotland, many countries experiencing the same challenges. We

are determined through our new mental health strategy to meet those

new challenges head-on. The members will have noticed the First Minister

was unable to answer the question. Let me share the reality. Since the

First Minister promised to act, there have been another 1600 cases

of young people rejected for mental health treatment. That takes the

total to ten and a half thousand cases overall. Thousands and

thousands of children and young adults in crisis, who have turned to

professionals for help, only to be turned away. We could reduce the

number of people needing clinical treatment in the first place.

School-based counselling is key to that. I came to this chamber with a

published plan for every secondary school to have access to a

counsellor. The First Minister said she would look at it. Not asking for

any new money, just a fraction of the ?150 million the government is

spending the mental health. We have had the warm words, when will we get

the action? As she knows, the plans she brought forward are being looked

at in the context of developing the mental health strategy. That is work

on going, and I thought she would have welcomed that work and the

consideration given to those plans. In terms of numbers, lately point

out that in terms of recent statistics, the number of patients

seen by services has increased by 21%, we have seen long waits

reducing, and we have seen the number of patients seen within the

waiting times also improving. This is progress. It is progress on an

issue where I have readily accepted and continue to do so, that we need

to do more work. That is why the ?150 million of extra investment

backing the mental health strategy is so important. On an issue that is

so important, I would hope all of us in the chamber would get behind it.

The First Minister said the government are looking at it,

considering it as part of the mental health strategy that is interesting,

that is not what Maureen Watt told the mental health committee. She is

a provision of councillors in schools was a matter for local

authorities. How on earth does the First Minister think local

authorities can do this when they are faced with millions of pounds of

cuts? The cuts we are faced with voting on this afternoon will make

it all the harder for schools and other local services to provide the

help young people need. These cuts will punish kids already in crisis.

He does not have to be this way. Will the First Minister do the right

thing, scrapped the cuts and investing Scotland's public services

instead? Any mental health strategy that will be successful has to

involve the Scottish Government working not just with the National

Health Service and local authorities. The fact that

councillors is a matter for local authorities does not mean it is

something we will look at as part of the mental health strategy, I would

think that point would be very obvious. She stands up and talks

about extra funding for mental health services, but she and her

colleagues are intending to vote against the budget to date including

extra commitment to mental health services. -- today. It says involves

her coming of the leader of the third party coming to the party that

won the election saying they live and talk to us if we rip up our

manifesto, and implement bears. It is student politics. That is what

rendered Labour are relevant, delivering no implements and

delivering nothing on behalf of the people they are supposed to

represent. When it comes to budget discussions, Labour should be deeply

ashamed of themselves. Two constituency questions, the

first from Claire Baker. Thank you presiding officer. Almost two years

since the death on the streets of Jacoby. The family still do not know

what happened that morning in 2015. Now the potential for civil action

as his family search for answers. Can the First Minister tell us that

the Crown will reach a conclusion on the report. And an enquiry on to the

wider deaths in custody. Can she make sure nobody else will have to

go through that experience? It would not be comedic comment on the

specifics of the case. The Crown Office has indicated a decision will

be made as soon as possible. The Lord Advocate is meeting Sheku

Bayoh's family to discuss the case. The previous Lord Advocate made it

clear that regardless of the investigation the fatal accident

enquiry will be heard. This will include public scrutiny into the

incident. I personally made it clear to the family when I met them I am

not ruling anything out in terms of white enquiry at an appropriate

point in the future if that is required. I hope the member will

agree with me, it is important to allow the processes to take their

course and conclude. The First Minister will be aware of the report

from NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde setting out cuts of 330 million

pounds, and the sweet -- sweeping centralisation of

services. The balance of care has been used as a cover for cuts.

Specifically the report talks about cutting unscheduled care assessment.

On that basis, will she guarantee what she promised in the Vale

vision, that the medical assessment unit will remain in place? Firstly I

think Jackie Baillie is being slightly misleading in her question.

Referring to report that was never discussed by Greater Glasgow and

Clyde health board. The chair of the board said he did not agree with it

and they did not go forward for discussion. The Health Secretary

said had such a report gone forward for discussion she would not have

approved any of the proposals. For Jackie Baillie stand up and try to

give the impression this is the policy of Glasgow in greater Clyde

health board is misleading. This government will continue to do were

discovered has done is from day one in 2007, continuing to do what the

previous Labour administration failed to do over many years, and

continue to protect services at the Vale hospital. I Russell First

Minister when the Cabinet will next meet? With the next meet on Monday.

It'll be the first of the travelling cabinets year. Everyone in this

chamber, and this country understands the value of public

local services to all of our quality-of-life. Over recent weeks,

councils in this country have been forced to contemplate cuts to a wide

range of services, unacceptable cuts from bigots class sizes to scrapping

public transport. Ignoring late-night noise and vandalism

complaints, to scaling back recycling. Removing librarians and

specialist support staff from schools, to increasing charges for

people burying their relatives. This is not a position that any

government should leave our councils in. Late last year, under pressure

from the Greens and others, the government gave ground on the

centralised control of additional council tax revenue, that will be

available for councils to allocate as they see fit in local

circumstances. Isn't it clear, presiding Officer, that even if we

do see this afternoon a budget concession restoring significant

funding to protect local services in every part of Scotland, that is not

only essential, but should mark the beginning of a new approach. One in

which we invest not only resources, but local control back into the

hands of our communities. As the chamber has heard me say before, the

draft budget the Finance Secretary outlined to the chamber at the end

of last year involved funding, additional funding if councils used

council tax powers of ?240 million additional funding for local

services. That was a strong draft budget for the protection of local

services. What the Finance Secretary also said is that he wanted to

listen to parties across the chamber and enter into constructive

discussion about how we could take forward these priorities as well as

the priorities we have identified. It is fair to say the Conservatives

and Labour refused to take part in any meaningful way in that

discussion. The Lib Dems at least made the pretence of doing so,

whether it was serious I'm not sure. What the budget this afternoon I

think will outline is the continued priority to protect local services.

Also making clear that those in the chamber prepared to take part in

constructive discussions achieve something on behalf of those they

represent. The hats other parties across the chamber could learn from

that. -- perhaps the other parties. I'm sure all of our colleagues look

forward to hearing the detail of what is announced this afternoon. I

can hear how eager they are to hear the details needed now. Can I make a

further point? Isn't it clear that the Spike Lee

further progress we will see this afternoon, tax policy, with the new

powers devolved to the Scottish Parliament can no longer be based

for the duration of the parliament on manifesto written years in

advance. That was the approach in the first year of devolution, when

this was just a spending parliament. We now to some extent make fiscal

policy in Scotland. It is essential not only to respond to the balance

of using parliament, but also events, that we have seen since

manifestos were written, the Brexit vote, the fall in the value of the

pound, a new UK Government, changes to UK fiscal policy. Isn't it clear

that tax policy throughout the parliament cannot be based on

manifestos written in previous years, and the house to be a living

debate, one in which we take new directions forward, with new powers

we have available? I do agree that any responsible government has to

take account of developments, things happening in the economy, and wider

society when it comes to budget decisions. The manifesto on which

this garment was elected was not written years ago, less than one

year ago. It is reasonable for this cover to say to the Scottish people

we want to seek to implement the promises we made to them. In terms

of Patrick Harvie's quite legitimate comments about the impact the

Brexit. These impacts cut both ways. On one hand, one of the implications

of the Brexit vote, because of the fall in the value of the pound is

rising inflation, putting greater pressure on household incomes. That

does underline the commitment to discover that not to increase income

tax rates in this government. It also puts pressure on public

services. Which I think underlines the commitment of this government at

this time not to give a tax cut to those who earn the most in this

country, the top 10% of income earners. The budget which will be

outlined in this afternoon, strikes the right balance. It does also

demonstrates where other parties in this chamber are willing to come

forward with constructive suggestions, they will find a

government willing to listen. There will be one opposition party in this

chamber this afternoon that can say to the people they represent that

they have managed to achieve something. The other opposition

parties, and this is a serious point, they have achieved not one

single brass penny in this budget for the people they are supposed to

be representing. And I think they should be ashamed of that. I asked

the First Minister what issues will be discussed at the next meeting of

the Cabinet? Those of the people of Scotland. Once upon a time the First

Minister said... Listen carefully, the First Minister said that the

police were safe in her hands. Now she says the same about Highlands

and Islands enterprise. This week we discovered through Freedom of

information that the economy secretary had to be educated about

what it does. After he had made the decision to abolish the board.

Instead of carrying on regardless, in the dark, can the First Minister

announced to date that the board of Highlands and Islands enterprise

will not be abolished? Can I thank the Willie Rennie for reminding us

at the start of the question that the Lib Dems occupy a fairy tale

world? In terms of the police, an important priority for this

government, the draft budget outlined before Christmas delivered

real terms protection for the resource budget of the police, which

we will see over this Parliament. An additional ?1 million going to

front-line policing. Who knows? I am only speculating, the Finance

Secretary may have more to say on these matters this afternoon. On the

question of Highlands and Islands enterprise, I and the economy

secretary are on record praising the good work it does. And the

determination of this government is reported to continue to do the work.

The review under way now is that looking at how we make sure all of

our enterprise agencies, working in the area of economic development and

skills provision are working together in a coordinated way to

deliver maximum impact on our economy. We will continue to allow

that process to take its course. The economy secretary was answering

about the work and will report back to Parliament on these matters in

due course. I think she needs a new joke writer. Another review by one

of our quango bosses, no substitute for a vote in this Parliament to

project her plans. The former chairman of Highlands and Islands

enterprise, Professor Jim Hunter denounced the move is ministerial

control free to read. Centralism running riot. He is a member of the

SNP. Highlands and Islands enterprise did not ask for this

change, local people do not want this change. The democratically

elected parliament of this country voted against this change. Yet this

government is hell-bent on taking control, running everything from the

centre, ignoring the needs of the Highlands and Islands. Why is it

that despite all the experience, she is so determined that she knows

better than everybody else? I am not sure if Willie Rennie was in the

chamber a few moments before first Mr's questions, when Keith Graham

was answering questions on the issue. Maybe he was too busy loving

himself outside the chamber, to find himself inside of it. If he had...

If he had been in the chamber, he would have heard Keith Brown quoting

Jim Hunter, and quite some of the representations made not just by Jim

Hunter, but by council leaders and MSPs on my own benches doing a good

job on behalf of the people they represent. We will continue to

listen to those representations, we are in the second phase of review,

and we will allow the review to conclude in due course and come back

to Parliament and report the findings of that review. That is the

appropriate right way to go about things. As we do that we will

continue to protect Highlands and Islands catlike enterprise and the

ability they do for the people of our Highlands and Islands.

Is just the First Minister agree that other spam and agrees to have a

referendum on Scotland assessment future then no Westminster Tories

should try and stand in their way? If this parliament voted to have a

referendum on independence, then absolutely, I agree that no

Westminster Tory should stand in the wake of the voice of this

Parliament. The mandate of this Government, in relation to this, is

unequivocal. It was the Tories, after all, hope that us in the

position of being taken out of the European Union against our will, and

with the support of only one of the 59 MPs in this country. It's

strange, is it not, that a Tory party that proclaims it would be so

confident of winning a referendum on independence now talks about trying

to block it. Isn't it the case that the Tories are actually running a

wee bit scared? To ask the First Minister what

representations the Scottish Government has made to the UK

Government towards the closure of job centres in Scotland is?

I'm very concerned about the announcement by DWP to close up to

30 job in the past site in Scotland. The lack of consultation with the

communities affected I think is totally unacceptable. These closures

will see the people who rely on job centre services travelling further,

encouraging increased transport costs and increased risk of benefit

sanctions. It's important the Government reconsiders this

approach. Clarification has been sought on the impact on the people

who use job centres and the people who rely on these vital services

will stop in a recent debate I brought strong cross-party support

to save my local Job Centre of Maryhill in Glasgow.

The Conservatives refuse to, and I quote, condone or condemn the

closures. One of the closures was an Ruth Davidson's own Edinburgh

constituency. Just a First Minister agree with me that it is time for

all MSPs in this place, including Ruth Davidson, unite in condemning

the closure of the job centre plus offices until there is full

consultation with the communities affected, as well as ensuring Phil

impact assessments carried out. Let's defend our constituents.

I do agree that it is important for all MSPs across the chamber to unite

to convince Westminster to reconsider their approach. And to

consult all the committees affected by the closure of what our local

services. The Scottish garment is taking a lead on this, and I know

Bob Doris and others have taken a key role in opposing closures in

Glasgow and other places. I think it is unfortunate that Tory MSPs are

declining to stand up and be counted on this issue that is so important

to Glasgow and other parts of Scotland. Equally unfortunate that

Ruth Davidson herself has declined to stand up for vulnerable people in

her own constituency that might be affected by these closures. Having

it's time for all of us across this chamber to say to the UK Government

that these closures are wrong, they will harm vulnerable people, and

these proposals must be urgently reconsidered.

To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government's responses to

the auditor general's comments regarding Police Scotland, and the

lack of progress made in demonstrating a financial leadership

is unacceptable for any financial -- public body.

The Scottish police's accounts have been signed off unqualified. The

response to the audit is that Police Scotland have taken steps to improve

both financial leadership and management, but these have not yet

have a chance to have an impact. The steps include appointing a director

of corporate services, strategy and change, and a chief financial

officer to provide strategical leadership on all financial matters.

This post will soon be filled permanently.

I thank the first most of that response. Just five months ago she

said, I don't think the single force is in crisis. In response to the

auditor General, seven days ago, senior SNP is MSP Alex Neil said the

organisation is in crisis. Who should we believe?

The police service is not an crisis, on the contrary, it is doing a

fantastic job the length and breadth of this country. Having it's

incumbent on all of us to get behind them. It is a sign of the importance

this Government attaches to the work of the police that the draft budget

did protect in real terms the police budgets, over the lifetime of this

parliament that will mean ?100 million more going into front-line

services, and Derek Mackay will present any changes to that later

this afternoon. Will continue to support the fantastic work of our

police force -- officers, because they do a fantastic job in keeping

each and every one of us safe. To as the First Minister how many

refugees the Scottish Government expects to welcome in 2017?

Scotland has already received around 1300 refugees under the Syrian

refugee resettlement programme, and refugees continue to arrive. The

arrival of refugees is dependent on many factors, including assessment

and screening by direct eg agency and Home Office. The matching of

logistical matters such as flight, travel documents and visas. For

those reasons, I can't get a figure of the exact number of people who

will arrive this year. However, I can say that Scotland will continue

to be a country which welcomes those seeking refuge from war and

persecution, and we're committed to welcoming as many as we can of those

arriving in the UK in 2017. In a little over two weeks,

President Trump has defended torture, banned US aid to

organisations providing health care to women in developing countries,

insulted dues on map Holocaust Memorial Day. He has opposed an

outright ban on Syrian refugees. At the same time, held hands with

Theresa May. Many these actions are designed to incite hatred and create

division. Whether First Minister join me in saying that, while we

can't be complacent about acts of hatred and prejudice, we should

recognise the 1.8 million people across the UK has signed a petition

to withdraw the red carpet from President Trump, and also paid

tribute to all this people, right across the world, irrespective of

their faith, colour, other nationality, there are join together

to say we support humanity entered as its forms.

Yes, I do endorse those comments. I disagree deeply and profoundly with

the executive orders issued by President Trump last week, banning

Syrian refugees and also imposing a travel ban on people from seven

Muslim-majority countries across the world. Banning people, or even

giving the perception that people are being banned on the basis of

their faith, religion or origin is profoundly, in my view, morally

wrong. I think all of that asset should stand up and say that. I have

already made my views clear about how inappropriate I believe it would

be to allow a state visit to proceed while these bands are in place, and

I would hope the UK Government will think again on this. Indeed, I had

the opportunity to express these views directly to the primers to

when I met her in Cardiff on Monday. The last thing I will say is this,

people around the world have expressed horror at these policies,

and we all have a duty on matters as fundamentally important as these to

speak out, speak up and oppose where that is Mrs vary. I think we're

under irradiated to do more than that, all of us have to lead by

example for the world we want to live in. Scotland is a road have a

small country, but I think in the actions we have our day taken in

accepting Syrian refugees, the actions we continue to take to give

refuge to those fleeing war and persecution, we can demonstrate

through our actions the kind of world we want to live in. So, yes,

let's oppose, but let also lead by example, and I want Scotland to

always do that. To ask the First Minister what

action the Scottish Government is taking to support people who have

been newly diagnosed with dementia? We will soon publish our new

dementia strategy which will outline a range of actions will undertake to

improve the delivery of dementia services. We also wish to improve

access for people with a new diagnosis of dementia to be provided

diagnostic support from an appropriate link worker.

The First Minister may be aware that recent figures show that out of all

those newly diagnosed with dementia, only two in five patients receive

months of post I must support. Given the delivery plan says all people

newly diagnosed should receive such support by 2015-16, dishy except her

Government hasn't done nearly enough to ensure this target has been met?

I agree we have more to do. In terms of the commitments we get around

dementia, diagnosis generally, but also post I must it support, we are

ahead of many countries around the world, and I think it is important

to recognise that. Most people are getting oppose diagnostic support

would not have been getting it at all unless we had set a very clear

commitment around that. I was Health Secretary will be said that

commitment, I know exactly how important matters. The figures the

member has cited to underline the fact that we have more to do.

Similar comments were made earlier in relation to mental health. We

with the changing demographics in western society, more and more

people are going to be living longer, that means more and more

people are going to be living with dementia. This has applications for

all aspects of our society, and it is vital that we get it right, that

is what this Government is determined to do.

May I ask the First Minister if she recognises the very particular

issues that come to a family when there is a diagnosis of early-onset

dementia, when sometimes there are still children in the home, people

can still be of working age, it has a very particular difficulties. Then

she let me know whether there are plans to improve data collection on

this, so provision can be made. And recognition across potatoes

departments of Government that, in these particular cases, very special

attention has to be paid? I think it is right to raise the

issue of early-onset dementia. The diagnosis for anyone at any stage in

their life is a devastating one. Article issues are raised around

those diagnosed with dementia at a younger age, even greater

implications for family, for example. The data is important here.

Last year, health Scotland published data and recommendations on

approving services were under 65 is. Better information for employers and

more age-appropriate services, and we will continue to consider the

recommendations as part of the next dementia strategy. We're also taking

action for those under the age of 65, focusing on key areas including

the fact that networks are as strong as possible. And also help with

financial issues that can impact on these particular care groups. So

does this is important. But it is also right to talk about the

importance of data so we know attack with the challenge we're dealing

with and how best to deal with that. Desmond exactly the challenge.

Figures on post diagnostic support sure there is a huge gap between the

Scottish Durham's pledge of support and a real experiences the people

have. Given that social care partnerships are ready struggling to

meet the Scottish Government's guaranteed, and local boys will have

to meet additional 40 funding shortfalls, where is the guarantee

that everyone with a new diagnosis of dementia will receive a minimum

of one year post I support? As well as the above-inflation

increase we are committed to delivering for the National Health

Service, the member will be aware that we are committed to make sure

that funding goes into the health service that he talks about. Last

year it was ?250 million, this year an additional ?107 million will go

in. That is part of the funding commitments that Voyager services

such as these can be delivered. I said this in part in a previous and

Sir, this commitment is really important. It is a commitment that

doesn't exist in many other countries. We were one of the first

countries to get this commitment to post diagnostic support. And, yes,

we have made progress in delivering that, but we have more progress to

make. I do think it's important that we don't shy away from giving these

ground-breaking commitments, because it may be difficult to deliver them.

I'd rather we'll working towards that as we are doing with the

funding strategy necessary to deliver it, and that's what we will

keep focused on. That includes First Minister's

Questions. STUDIO: An eclectic mix, but

dominated by exchanges of the budget.

We'll get a statement later on the Budget Bill stage one. We'll go to

the budget later, but that question from Tom Arthur, he was talking

about the remarks by Michael Farren in the Herald and also on good

morning Scotland this morning. Michael Fallon the Defence

Secretary's in Scotland today, there's bit of a Tory Government

love bombing going on, because Chris Grayling is here as well. Ahead of

his arrival today, Michael Fallon had said effectively the UK

Government would block any second independence referendum.

He was asked that facilitated, he said, forget it.

You can imagine he received a phone call from rove -- Ruth Davidson,

because this is not the sort of message the tourist descending out.

He went on to track good morning Scotland, giving a more new songs --

new one statement, saying that the Government should be getting on with

the business of domestic policy. What did you make of it? Nicola

Sturgeon saw a chance there, didn't she?

Shoot dead. Talking like getting on with the day job, that's what

Michael Fallon wants the Scottish Government today, but know they can

surely turn back and say the same thing to him. He shouldn't be coming

up to Scotland saying, you know what, at the Scottish Parliament

votes for another referendum, we're not go into give it to you. He's got

straight on his job. Did he mean that, or did he mean,

don't do it, it's not a good idea. The demeanour veto, or it's not a

good scheme? And think what he meant when he

mentioned the veto is what a lot of Tories in London think is that

Nicola Sturgeon is bluffing. Repeatedly, she has said she is not.

I don't think she is bluffing, there is a question about timing and

whether not she's getting the right level of public support. He's

probably channelling a response and I shall reaction from Tories in

London. The key issue is that a definitely doesn't think it's and

intelligent thing to happen. Let's turn to the budget, the

subject of stage one today. We reckon it's a deal with the Greens,

money on Government services and freezing the threshold of other 40lb

tax rate as was intended. The Tories jumped on that, that is a point

about tax. Ruth Davidson making it very clear

that the Tories would support the budget. They say it will make

Scotland their highest-taxed part of the UK. And Ruth Davidson rebranded

herself as the protector of Scotland's pay packets.

Woody you make of it? The irony is that Michael Fallon

urged Nicola Sturgeon to get on with the day job, and that's that I watch

she's doing today. She will deliver with the Scottish Greens something

of eight political coup, something that will pay very well with her

base, it will counterpoint with Tories want to cut taxes.

She is adamant it's not an increased, it's just not taking the

cuts that will tate other the border.

She's also adamant she is not raising the raids.

In the sense, she is getting the best of both worlds. She's still

freezing the current rate, which means the people that are on the

higher band will be paying more tax than anywhere else in the UK. With

inflation, they will still be putting more into the Scottish

Government's coppers. That means she can spend it on politically

attractive policies which allow higher to then throw back at the

Labour Party and the Liberal Democrats in, we are putting money

back into public services, we are doing what you demanded, but you

haven't helped us do it. The point previously has been that

the cuts in the governments, this ain't no, if you include services

including going to schools, it's and increase. There's a lot a concession

that was wrong in the first place? It could be seen as that. It aims to

Greens have got about a extra for local governments, and that's about

half the money that Labour says has been cut from councils, quite a

significant concession of the Greens to win. It is telling that Nicola

Sturgeon pointedly told the other opposition parties in the chamber,

look at what happens when you deal with the Government.

She relate hammock that Homer. You can have a deal or, what is it you

always say, moaning on the sidelines?

There are a two crucial elements of this deal today, firstly, this now

times the Scottish Greens in with the SNP as a pro-independent

coalition in the Scottish Parliament. This means the Scottish

Greens are now more likely to start helping Nicola Sturgeon's Government

on issues like motion rejecting the Article 50 bill in the UK

Parliament. It increases the chances of the Scottish Greens of publicly

supporting an independent Referendum Bill. And for the Greens in means

that when they go into it may's local government elections, they can

point in lots of SNP voters who may get them a second or third vote in

multi-member wards. That was there concern, who is them

most concerned of an all action? That many other supporters may be

nationalists? Patrick Harvie needs to bind in

pro-independence voters in order to perpetuate meaningful help to get

Green councillors through the May elections.

Necklace Turgeon heading more money for the police, but that doesn't

appear to be part of the deal with the Greens, that appears to be

separate in the changes to the budget.

This is something else that came open questions, the problem is that

Polly Scotland has been having. Ongoing problems with funding, a

funding black hole that has grown in recent months and years. More money

there desperately needed. Police money, not come out from the

green Deal, but perhaps just the budget two Southern she can perhaps

thought Ruth Davidson with. -- taunt Ruth Davidson with.

They've spoken to Derek Mackay, the Finance Secretary, not able to give

the details in advance, you are triggered them to Parliament this

afternoon. We caught up with him at a police station this morning. This

is what Derek Mackay had to say. I'm confident that I've reached a

deal for the budget that will ensure it passes at all ages. That's good

news for taxpayers, the economy, the public services and communities. And

of course I will respect Parliament currently at the detail that later

today. What more can you tell it as Judge?

Looks like the Greens were willing to talk last night, is to deal with

the Greens? It is a deal with the Greens, I will

lay at that position later today. Is this a higher tax deal? Will be

and scholars be having to pay more tax on people south of the border?

I look forward to setting at the deal later today.

Scottish ministers were Bill is talking about an election, that was

a possibility on the cards. Were you threatening the Greens with an

election? They certainly did want that.

I think Ted is the opposition parties would reckon as I have

worked positively and constructively throughout and will make sure we

have worked out very, my. This is this is a deal for all three

separate parts of the budgets? Video I believe I have secured

through every stage of the budget to ensure this budget passes innocent

Irish say. Do you think in a future you will be

able to rely on the Greens for any future deal that you've got them

sewn up for the next five years? The budget is a year-to-year

process. This is approval, hopefully, for this year's budget.

That was Derek Mackay speaking a short time ago. I joined by Patrick

Harvie, co-convenor of the Green Party. Please with the deal?

I think it's really important that all opposition parties do their best

to make a meaningful difference. The Greens appear to be the only party

that's try to do that. When without your Derek Mackay speaking this

afternoon, he is going to be able to release the figures, I am not in a

position to do that, but Imad regulates we will see a good --

meaningful change in investment in public services. Councils all over

the country are making plans for cuts, they will be able to shelve

those plans and get on with delivering services that all of us

depend on. We know it will be more money for

local government, I know you can give the details, but more money

from a Government? I think we will hear a clear

reversal of a substantial amount of what was in the draft budget. Willow

see a much bigger investment in local services. That is about

ensuring the local council grant goes up. Not that we have a ring

fenced funding, with the central Government is telling the councils

everything they should be doing. Councils have a right to make

decisions about services in their area that people need, not to be

forced to make cuts a return central Government cracks the whip. There

are rebalanced the investment in services and local control well.

Lets talk tax. You wanted big changes, understandably, you had to

put them to one side, the SNP have more members than you. I understand

there is to be something on the threshold at which one enters the

higher rate? 40p rate? I did challenge Derek Mackay, the

Finance Secretary, during the committee scrutiny of the budget on

white and inflation based higher rate was necessary. That is a

smaller tax break to the wealthy than the UK is doing, but stole a

tax break to the wealthy. I do not think that is justified. I think we

need a long-term move away from the unfair distribution attacks we have

at the moment. You're saying this is the start of

perhaps increasing the levy upon higher earners and perhaps

registrable or errors came back I think we would like to see lower

taxes for low and average earners and progressive taxation for the

wealthy. Property tax, which is badly valid

at the moment, council tax is unfair, not based on real property

wealth and income inequalities as well, they need to be reduced. We

are now in a period we have a Scottish Parliament and Scottish

Government that makes fiscal policy in Scotland. It's no longer

appropriate to treat it as we did in the old days of devolution, where

Government just works is manifesto over four or five years. We do make

tax policy that is responsive to events, that means moving beyond

that old era. This is a deal for all stages, one,

two and three,? You will see later on this afternoon

except that what we said about all of those elements. We need to see

amendments which the Government expects to launch a stage two. It is

when we see this amendment is passed that we will note the position we

are in. Will be voting for the budget at stage one today on the

basis of the commitments made. Patrick Harvie, thank you very much

indeed. I was able to come back to my journalistic colleagues, moving

story there on taxation. Bye-bye for now.

To be in the Lords, you have to be punctual...

Sometimes you really do literally have to slam the door

What right do they have to tell me about my fashion sense?

Can you now control your bad language?

Yes, I will. Otherwise you'll be, you know, drummed out.

To win on something as important as this

A unique opportunity to meet the Lords...