09/06/2016 Politics Scotland

Politics is dominated at the moment by the European Union referendum and

the idea that the offer to extend registration to vote until midnight

tonight, but domestic politics remains important as well and I

guess it will be domestic politics to the fore in questions to the

First Minister. This is the second in a new, longer format First

Minister's Questions, asked for by the presiding officer, Ken

Macintosh. Domestic questions are expected to dominate. The chamber is

looking at a general questions. The presiding officer is moving on to

Prime Minister's Questions. Engagement to take forward the

programme for Scotland. We note the problem is that the NHS is facing.

Anti-ageing population, a Scottish Government that has failed to keep

up with the need to recruit and retain the staff are required. We

discovered this week that ?157 million of the NHS budget is being

spent on bringing in agency nurses because of staff shortages. We note

that is a problem with nurse recruitment. Can the First Minister

tell me how many vacant consultant positions have been lying unfilled

for more than six months? In terms of NHS vacancies, the position now

in terms of NHS vacancies is, in some cases, better than when we took

office, in some cases almost the same. What people across Scotland

will be interested in is the fact that today we have record high

staffing in the NHS. Today, compared to win the edge the SNP took office,

there are almost 11,400 additional staff working in our NHS. Qualified

nurses and midwives are up by nearly 6%, doctors are up by over 26% and

medical and dental consultants are now at a record high, up by 42.9%.

That is the reality of the workforce in our NHS. All of these doctors and

nurses are working hard to make sure that patients are seen quickly and

they get world-class treatment when they do so and offers them an

enormous debt of gratitude for that. The First Minister keen to give out

every single number except the one I asked for. The answer is that there

are 162 unfilled consultant posts. That is up 14% in three months and

up by more than 300% since 2011. The fact is this, Doctor Nicky Thompson

of the Scottish consultants committee says, the Scottish

Government must recognise that they have major recruitment and retention

problems and take action. Does the First Minister recognise that, in

the wake Nicky Thomson wanted to and she prioritised that action without

delay? We are prioritising action to recruit and retain staff in our NHS.

Ruth Davidson speaks specifically about the consultant vacancy rate.

The consultant vacancy rate in our NHS today is lower than it was when

this government took office. It was 7% when we took office, it is now

6.5%. That is a percentage of the total number of consultants working

in our NHS that is much higher than it was when we took office. However

you cut it, however you look at the statistics, there are more people,

including more doctors and nurses, working in the NHS today than it was

the case when the SNP took office. That is a record to be proud of, but

I note that we must continue to improve our NHS so it continues to

provide good quality care for people across Scotland. That is why we set

out at the election, in a manifesto we were a latching on, plans to

invest more than any other party proposed, but the nature of the

reform our NHS to ensure it continues to do the fantastic job it

already does. At the facts on the ground. I have feared the latest

report into the ongoing problems at Saint John 's paediatric unit in

Livingston. They'd be quite what it says. There is a continuing heavy

reliance on a small number of staff doing additional night and weekend

shifts and prone to sure this collapse because of sickness or

other unplanned absence. It adds that only four of the nine eight

hour slots are filled on a substantive basis. It continues, the

middle grade medical rota remains unstable treaty vacancies and

advanced nurse practitioner 's paediatric nurse practitioners are

required to fill the gaps. In other words, backfilling for doctors

because they cannot get the staff. This might be an exceptional case

but it is utterly unacceptable. Doctors say we need action and isn't

this, right here, the consequence of inaction from this government? In

terms of paediatrics at St John's. Yes, there are challenges. That

doesn't come as news to anyone. It is those challenges that prompted

the expert report on the future of the paediatric unit and that report

is currently being considered by NHS Lothian and I know they will be

supported by the Scottish Government and will take forward an actions

needed. I should point out the fact that under the SNP, the situation at

St John's in general terms is a lot more positive and the hospital is in

a stronger position than it was when this government took office because

we provided funding for an MRI scanner, funding for a short stay

collective surgery unit, we've redesigned A, we refurbished the

Labour ward. There has been a new lab in medicine training school

opened, a new regional eating disorders unit opened. These are a

range of improvements made and be are to sure we do the same in

paediatrics as well. I will never stand here, I am a former Health

Secretary, I will never stand here and say there are no challenges to

be overcome in our national health service. Scotland is not unique in

that sense, but we have more staff, we are investing record sums, that

is why there are waiting times that, in many cases, are not just lower

than when we took office, they are considerably lower than they are in

other parts of the UK. When you look at the situation in England where

the Tories are in government, I know they don't like this, but compare

the fact that junior doctors have been on strike in England and not in

Scotland. Look at A is one example. Performance in our record

units is 10% better in Scotland than it is under the Tories in England.

We will keep working to improve our national health service, but we will

take no lectures from the Tories on how to do it. I note the First

Minister is off to London for a debate tonight but we are talking

about the Scottish NHS that her government has been in charge of. We

are right to point out that The Royal College is publishing a

report. What she didn't mention is that the SNP tried to put it back

until after the election. She didn't mention that this was against the

wishes of health bosses in the area he feared that a delay in

publication would only add to uncertainty over the future of the

word. We need a serious and honest debate about a sustainable NHS in

Scotland. What we don't need is an SNP spin operation that buries bad

news because it is inconvenient. We have gaps in nursing, gaps in

consultants, gaps in GPs. After nine years, isn't it time the SNP

government sorted it out? I note the Conservatives have replaced Labour

in this chamber as the official opposition but I did not really

appreciate that that meant Ruth Davidson would stand up here and use

recycled scare stories about St John's. I thought she might be

aspiring to better than that, but clearly not. The fact of the matter

is decisions around the expert report, the timing of that and

taking forward the recommendations of that would be matters for NHS

Lothian and we will support them in doing that. Can I say, yes we are

talking about the Scottish NHS and I am talking about the improvements in

the Scottish NHS under this government. While I was doing was

comparing that to some of the respects in which the NHS where the

Tories are in charge has gone backwards instead of forwards. We

have had the sight of junior doctors out on strike because of the

intransigence of a Tory government. We will take action to improve our

health service. Yes, this government has been in office for nine years

and let me just remind people in this chamber what we have seen over

these nine years. Record high staffing, starting up by more than

11,000, nurse numbers up, doctors up, consultants up, paramedic

numbers. GPs are up. Senior managers, the number of them are

down because we have met our target to produce them. The NHS is in good

hands and we will keep it moving in the right direction. When will the

First Minister next meet carers Scotland. I hope I will have the

opportunity to meet them soon. The Minister for health will meet them

next week and as everyone in the chamber will be aware, this week is

carers week, therefore I want to take this opportunity on behalf of

others to thank carers and young carers for everything they do on our

behalf. Earlier this week, the First Minister was named as the 50th most

powerful woman in the world. Today, a report by UCAS confirmed that the

number of students from her background is going to university

has dropped. When will the First Minister use some of her immense

power to improve the life chances of Scottish young people? She clearly

pays more attention to these things than I do, but... Never mind, I am

sure she will get there eventually. On the important matter that she

rightly raises this morning, I, as people would expect, have studied

these figures in detail. We are ready to prioritise fair access to

university, but it is important and appropriate to look at the figures

in the round. They come with a health warning. They do not include

the number of students in Scotland who enter higher education through

college. They'd look at what they do show. Looking at 18-year-olds

exclusively, the numbers from our most deprived areas dropped slightly

from 2014 to 2015, but nevertheless are up considerably compared to

2010. The more fundamental point is this one, not everyone who goes to

university goes at it in. When you look at these figures and look at

the figures for people of all ages, the numbers from deprived areas is

applying to an thing accepted to university is up in 2015 compared to

2014. In both cases by about 10%. Yes, we have got work to do, I have

been clear about that. That is quite in lamenting the report is

important, but it is wrong to say the progress isn't being made. What

I heard there was three different excuses about why the numbers are

wrong, rather than an explanation about why the government haven't

done enough. What these figures show, very clearly show, is that

there has been a drop in the number of people from your background is

applying to university. There has been an even bigger job in the

number of poorer people being accepted when they do apply. This is

what happens when you cut grants and bursaries by a third. This is a

government that recently tried to scrap a scheme that secured

university places for the poorest students. Students are worried that

the First Minister will try that again. She says she wanted 20% of

university students to come from the poorest backgrounds by 2013. Given

that ambition, can she guarantee today that the government will fully

fund this scheme for the lifetime of this Parliament? I have made very

clear that we are determined to increase access and to do what is

required to do that. Can I say, and I hope we can find some agreement

here, I didn't say the figures were wrong. On the contrary, they said

they were right. I simply pointed out what the figures actually say.

What she says they say is right for 18-year-olds entering university in

this year. But 18-year-olds from the most deprived amenities entering

university has gone up from 2010 to 2015 and in terms of people of all

ages going to university, whether it is applying to university or

entering university, the numbers from our most deprived areas have

gone up in 2015. Both of them by 10%. I am not saying the figures are

wrong, I am simply setting out what the figures actually say. I think

that is the appropriate thing to do. I have made clear that while we are

making progress, I do not think that progress is going far enough or

going fast enough. That is what I commissioned the widening access

report. That is why I have committed to intimidate its recommendations

and will appoint a commission. If the Commissioner tells us that

universities are not doing enough, we will use the statutory powers we

legislated for that Labour voted against the nature of that

universities do more. We are determined to do this, we are

committed to doing this and I would hope Labour would get behind us.

Earlier this week, when the First Minister missed her health targets,

she moved the goalposts. Today she is trying to do it again when it

comes to the Ucas figures. This is a reference to a consultation on

potential changes on the way health targets are collected. Let's look at

the overall picture. Poorer people are less likely to apply to the

university under this government and are less likely to be accepted and

are more likely to drop out because of the cuts you have made two

bursaries and grants. Labour's manifesto pledged to reverse the

cuts to bursaries. Surely the First Minister will pledge to do just

that. When we last made changes to the bursary threshold, it was the

NUS president who I accept would like others to do more and was a

member of the widening access commission described it as great

news for Scottish students. One of the other things in our manifesto

was a review of student support which we will take forward in the

course of this Parliament. I say again to Kezia Dugdale, I know she

is genuinely interested in this, the statistics that I have been reading

out. She is wrong to say what she has said. I haven't changed a single

goal post. I am saying what the figures actually show. She is right

in saying that in terms of 18-year-olds, there has been a

slight decline but since 2010 it is up. She doesn't seem to grasp the

point that looking at people of all ages, applications or entry to

universities, the numbers from our most deprived communities are up. Up

10% for applications and entries. That is simply a fact than it is in

these figures. Instead of arguing over the fact because you can't

argue, they are what they are, let's get behind the action that this

government has decided to take and I look forward to Labour having the

gumption to get behind us and make sure we can achieve what we have set

out to achieve. APPLAUSE STUDIO: The Scottish Greenlee leader

Patrick Harvie. Recent days have seen revelations about the extent of

deeply unethical business practices in this country from exploitative

zero hours contracts, payments below the minimum wage, brutal

disciplinary procedures and the harassment of workers. Major players

on the high Street have been playing fast and loose with their employees

and throwing them on the scrapheap at a whim when lining their own

pockets. The Scottish Government should be able to make more

decisions about employment but does she agree that we need to Bush at

the edge of our powers to ensure that unethical business practices

are pushed out of our economy. Yes I do. I heard evidence from Mike

Ashley on practices at sports direct and it was utterly shameful and

every right thinking person should condemn that unequivocally. As a

government, as Patrick Harvie knows, have established the business pledge

which is intended to promote good business practices. We are

absolutely clear about zero tolerance for unethical business

practices, of the kind we heard this week or zero hours contracts,

companies not paying the minimum wage, we want companies to go beyond

the minimum wage and paid the living wage. We have had discussions before

about whether there should be more compulsion around the business

pledge and it is something we will continue to consider. I'm not able

to go into this in great detail but I will be in London tonight taking

part in the debate on the EU referendum and I don't want to move

to the position where we have a deregulated labour market with

people like Boris Johnson able to rip of the workers' rights that the

EU guarantees in this country. STUDIO: Wray another reference to

the studio debate tonight with Forest option. Promoting the

firework agenda and the business pledge. She is willing to consider

compulsion. Isn't it abundantly clear given the scale of the abuses

taking place on a daily basis that we need to do more than encourage

the willing, we have to make it abundantly clear to the unwilling

that these deplorable practices will not be accepted. Will the First

Minister insure that the firework agenda can give real consequences to

those employers who exploit their workers, use tax havens or have poor

environmental performance will no longer have access to government

funded taxpayer support, grants, loans and business support services

from the public sector. I'm determined and committed to making

sure that the firework agenda has the ability to do what we wanted to

do. I'm broadly in agreement with what he is saying but some of what

we heard from Sports cap! Direct was illegal as well as unethical. That

is something that we should make sure is tackled through the law of

the land. When companies break the law in treating their staff they

should be held to account not just in how we distribute government

money but through the law of the land and I hope all others in this

chamber would agree with that. STUDIO: A reference to the owners of

sports direct. To ask what is the government's reaction to the

Scottish Cancer patient experience survey results. We were very pleased

with the results but we know there is more to be done which is why we

have announced a cancer strategy supported by ?100 million over the

life of this Parliament. It makes clear the importance of listening to

what people with cancer are saying and acting on what they say is. Does

the First Minister agree with is that whilst our Scottish NHS is

achieving world-class outcomes, we can't afford to be complacent and

can she outline how the strategy will deliver the best Cancer care

for the people of Scotland in future? Cancer services have come an

awful long way in the last decade. Mortality rates are down 11% over

this period but the ?100 million cancer strategy will be in demented

with people with cancer, clinicians and other parties and it will be

invested to make sure we are doing more to support invention of cancer,

doing more to support early diagnosis of cancer and through

taking advantage of advances in radiotherapy, for example, making

sure that people have access to the best possible treatment. But also

the emotional and financial needs of people with cancer and the needs of

their family, those are taken into account with a sticky as well. That

is what I am determined we do so we continue to provide world class

cancer treatment for people. STUDIO: A Labour MSP. Despite asking for it,

49% of patients are not receiving ad vice on benefits available. 66% of

patients are not receiving a cure plan. One in five patients saying

that they didn't get an appointment soon enough after the suspicion

arose. Given these statistics, given the ongoing challenge of cancer

being the biggest killer in Scotland, can the First Minister

confirmed that the current expectations will not be included in

her target review? The Health Secretary set out the purpose of the

review and how that will be taken forward. It is a review backed by

clinicians and others. There are targets in the NHS that are vitally

important to people to give them the assurance and certainty of when they

will be treated and there is no intention to undermine that. He's

right to focus on the aspects of the survey that were positive and those

that indicated there was more work to do. Many of these areas are

around not just the clinical aspects of cancer care but the emotional

aspects and these are some of the areas that we have most work to do.

I was Health Secretary launching the first Macmillan financial advice

service. These do fantastic work but findings say we have more to do so

we will focus on all of this. Early diagnosis, speedy access to

treatment and also the way that patients in the survey say what they

want and need. STUDIO: Murdo Fraser, Scottish Conservative MSP. What

support will the government give the Scottish oil and gas industry? The

recent report highlights the challenges. We visited Aberdeen last

week and reiterated our commitment to securing a long-term future for

the sector. For example through the training fund, the energy jobs task

force. The UK Government retains control of the key taxation levers

and a clear conclusion of the report is that more action must be taken on

that front with more than half of all companies wanting to see wide

fiscal stimulus for the industry. We will continue to support exploration

and guarantee infrastructure. There is a briefing in committee room to

after. One thing that the report tells us is that a majority of large

companies see the opportunity to diversify into shale gas but sadly

most of these job opportunities will be created outside of Scotland

because of the moratorium on fracking. The science says and she

should know because her government commission the survey, it concludes

that the technology exists to allow the safe extraction of such reserves

subjecting robust regulation being put in place. Why is the First

Minister not listening to our government's own scientists on this.

The moratorium of fracking has been introduced so we can study all the

different aspects of this. It is guided by and based on evidence but

also takes into account the opinion of the public. Those who would have

to live in areas affected by technology like this. That is the

right thing to do. Murdo Fraser didn't quote the report when it

comes to diversity patient fully. The companies that talked about the

opportunities of diversification also took about the opportunities of

diversification into renewables. I wonder why a Tory member of the

Scottish Parliament didn't want to mention renewables. Against all of

the witches of people the length and breadth of the country, against some

of the investment decisions, the Tory UK Government is currently

destroying our renewables potential because of its wrong-headed

decisions. Perhaps he would be better advised to get onto his

colleagues in the UK Government and ask for support for renewables

before coming to this chamber to talk about fracking. On 21st of

January the 1st Minister was asked when she would provide an updated

oil and gas to analytical bulletin. I am giving her a second

opportunity. Given the severe challenges facing the oil and gas

industry outlined starkly by the Aberdeen and Grampian Chamber of

Commerce survey in May, will she now publish a revised oil and gas

bulletin and when will we see it? It will be published in June, sand I

will make sure she is one of the first to know when it is due. -- it

will be published in due course. We publish these publications routinely

but we don't need advice to tellers about the challenges faced in the

sector right now. We know that from our engagements with the industry

and report such of the ones we have received recently. In the meantime,

we will get on with the job of supporting the industry. Practical

support on the ground and calling on the UK Government to do the right

thing as well. When she meets Amber Rudd, would she

undertake to make a point about the tax relief being used to make sure

the jobs in this industry are here in Scotland, rather than taken

overseas to ignore away or other EU countries? I can give the commitment

that we will make that case. I will try to do it tonight but bewildered

on an ongoing basis. There is an important point here. We don't want

to see premature decommissioning, but decommissioning is a massive

economic opportunity for us and we want the nature of the benefit of

that opportunity is enjoyed here in Scotland and not elsewhere and part

of what we need to do is what he says, to make sure the tax

environment is the right one and we will argue that case very strongly.

What is the Scottish Government doing to reverse the reported fall

in women studying science and competing at higher levels?

Interestingly, the reported fall he says, it is not an actual file in

most cases. The figures that were released to the media over the

weekend are simply wrong. Every subject he named, with the exception

of competing, has seen rises in the number of girls, not false. Physics,

chemistry, biology, human biology, the. Including computed, the total

number of entries is up 10%. How come they are so wrong? Let me tell

you, Iain Gray arrived at his figures by counting only... He

excluded both the beef eyes and the... Did he do this deliberately

or whether the Labour education spokesman did not know that hires

were being reformed? I am not sure which is worse. In contrast, the

Scottish Government will encourage people into these subjects because

they are vital to these -- to Scottish future. Perhaps the First

Minister and I can argue about the numbers and other time.

I think we agree that we do need women to choose science and,

actually, I wanted to use this opportunity to congratulate her on

the appointment of Professor Sheila Rowan as Chief scientific adviser.

That is a great appointment, but it is also a fantastic role model to

encourage more girls and young women into science and she is a physicist,

which is good in my view. When Anne Glover was appointed as the first

chief scientist in Scotland, she had direct, open for access to the First

Minister. That has not been the case in recent years. It would be another

welcome and powerful signal if the First Minister or to re-establish

that, when she considered doing so? I will consider everything that will

help us in this regard. Can I thank him about his comments. We cannot

gloss over this, it goes back to the exchange with myself and Coetzee

Guptill, I hope the SNP and Labour can be allies, but we have do have a

debate based on facts, not distortions. Let me underline what

Labour did. They compare 2007 and 2015. They took the 2007 baseline,

when hires were the only thing young people sat and used that as the

baseline. Then they went to 2015 and only counted the old hires, they did

not include the new and revised ones which are replacing the old ones.

They then went to the media on the basis of that information and said

there was a fault in the number of girls studying these science

subjects. It was flatly wrong, it was a distortion of reality and

frankly it was a disgrace. If we are going to move forward to build

consensus, to build alliances about improving education for young

people, if you want to be part of that then let's stop the distortion

and did on the basis of facts. First Minister, an all girls team from

Saint Anders -- Andrews School recently reached the final of an

engineering challenge which is run by the engineering development

trust. Does the First Minister agree that it would be worthwhile to

ensure the ongoing success of the Scottish Government strategies in

this field, worthwhile to consider such initiatives as this on the

local and national basis, targeted specifically at girls and young

women? Yes they do and can I take the opportunity to congratulate the

girls in her constituency for their success. I understand 18 from

another high school in my constituency was also successful. I

congratulate all the teams involved. And I also agree with her about the

work of the scheme. Initiatives like these have a role to play in

inspiring young people and helping them develop their skills and an

awareness of the world of work. They often help us tackle outdated

stereotypes about so-called boy's jobs and so-called girl's jobs. We

are pleased to support schemes of a similar nature and we will continue

to do so. Let me agree with and entertained by congratulating all

the teams who took part in the scheme and I should remember the

team from... Went with the new ferry crossing open? Yesterday the

crossing is expected to be open for traffic by mid May which is head of

the contractual completion date of June 20 17. I think the First

Minister for answer. Many people will find it hard to understand why

25 days lost to adverse weather can lead to a five-month delay in

opening the crossing. Indeed, it has been an open secret in my

constituency that a delay was inevitable. I learned in January

that the facility making contract -- concrete road tax did not have

capacity to meet target. Does the First Minister belief parliament and

my constituents believe that she first year of this delay after the

election and they knew nothing about the problem with the road tax? If

the member has any evidence to the contrary he should bring it forward,

because of the Cabinet Secretary said yesterday is absolutely what is

the case. Ministers were informed on the 26th of May that the F C BC were

looking at whether impacts. The revised programme was ratified.

Since then, ministers have been making sure that transport Scotland

were subjecting that programme to rigorous scrutiny. I personally met

with the contract on Tuesday of this week to satisfy myself that

everything possible was being done to accelerate progress and it was at

that meeting that we took the decision, rightly, that Parliament

should be informed at the earliest possible opportunity. That is the

fact of the matter and eligible members would accept that. In terms

of the other points he raises, in terms of the delay, that was set out

very by Keith Brown yesterday. The constructors now believe

installation will take an extra two or three months. That creates a

knock on effect for subsequent activities like road surfacing and

wind barriers which will now take place in the winter months because

of that delay. That is the reason for the timescale that has been set

out. My last point is this, the bridge will not be late. The

contractual completion date is June 20 17. The December target did which

was six months ahead of schedule will not be met but it will still

open ahead of schedule. This is one of the most wonderful and compacts

construction progress -- projects being undertaken in the world and we

should be proud of it and proud of the people building it. Given the

wildly optimistic and skills that have now proven to be wildly

optimistic and the previous attempts to project short timescales for the

repairs to the old Bridge, would it not be wise for the First Minister

to generate a little bit more wiggle room? I am not sure I understand

what the question was there. We are putting forward the estimated

completion date based on the rigorous assessment and modelling

that the contract has been paid to build the bridge have given us. Can

I say to Alec Johnson, I know I was praised earlier for being so

powerful in the global context, but I am not a bridge engineer. I don't

have expertise in building bridges other than the ones I build across

this chamber of the time. So I prefer to take my advice on at the

time skills and the details of the construction of this new bridge from

the experts we are paying to build it. That is the sensible thing to

do. It is also the thing that ensures we are doing what matters

more than anything else, protecting the safety of the brave people

building the bridge. The First Minister just mentioned timescales

from experts. We can all understand why the weather might delay a

complicated civil engineering projects such as this bridge.

However, any complicated project will have contingency built into the

timeline. At what point did the Scottish Government knew that the

contingency had been used up and wouldn't have been prudent to

continue to claim that the December date was realistic if they had

already known the contingency was used up? Let me try to put this

simply. If ministers had known what Keith Brown outlined yesterday

earlier than of course it would not have been prudent or appropriate for

us to say it will be open to traffic in December, but that is not the

case. What I have just set out which Keith Brown said yesterday is that

ministers became aware that contractors were looking at the

whether impacts on the 26th of May and they set out the timeline that

happened after that. The fact of the matter is that in a project as

complex as this, there are challenges to be overcome all the

time and the contractors have overcome those that have eaten into

the contingency time. Until May they were confident that notwithstanding

the worst than predicted whether they could still meet December, the

date that was six months ahead of the contractual completion date.

They then revised that because they realised that was not possible. They

have informed ministers in the appropriate weight and ministers

have informed Parliament in the appropriate way. Now, for goodness

sake, let's get on with backing the people building this bridge because

we are all looking forward to think open to traffic next year. What

action will be Scottish Government take to ensure that the Scottish

National Blood Transfusion Service is adequately funded? ?43 billion is

being invested in a purpose-built state of the National Centre that

will deliver a first-rate in the testing and development of human

blood cells. This will bring together several core activities of

the transfusion service into one purpose-built site. NHS National

services Scotland, the parent organisation, has been provided with

record levels of funding, including a baseline funding increase of ?10

million in 2016-17, which is a real terms increase. Mark Turner, the

medical director, has warned that the Scottish Government funding cuts

are now so severe that over the course of the next Parliament, it

will face serious cuts to the service. Would the First Minister

believe that the funding reductions are going to help the aim of us

increasing the number of blood donors in Scotland and was she

agreed to reconsider the funding over the course of this Parliament?

We are pledging, over the life of this Parliament, above inflation

increases to the health service. I should point out that the Scottish

Government does not directly fund this. We fund the parent

organisation which is NHS national services Scotland. The funding for

NHS national services Scotland has increased by ?10 billion in this

financial year, which is a 2% real terms increase. I know the vital

importance of the work the Scottish National blood translation service

does. I used to say that with my own eyes as Health Secretary. It is an

important service, it is a highly valued service and we will continue

to do everything we can to support it. The last point I would make is

around the new centre. The new centre is about bringing all these

services together in one purpose-built site. As well as

improving the quality of the work it does over the years ahead it will

allow the service to provide its services in a more joined up and

effective and efficient way. That is why the capital investment is so

important. There we have it. The conclusion of

questions to the First Minister. The First Minister referred to purdah

which means when she is acting with the backing of civil service advice,

she shouldn't be intervening in the European referendum but she did

manage to get several references in. Let's speak about questions with

Robbie Dinwoodie and Kieran Andrews. Robbie, first of all, Ruth Davidson

going off on the issue of the NHS. They batted back and forth

statistics but where did it lead? If you're going to go after Nicola

Sturgeon with stats, you have to nail them down because she will

often have a rival reading of the same stats. Ruth focused on the 162

consultant vacancies for more than six months but Nicola came back with

a barrage of areas where the NHS figures are different. Often using a

different starting point for the calculation. She painted a

resolutely upward picture. A much bigger, angrier series of exchanges

with Kezia Dugdale and Iain Gray on education stats. She was noticeably

aggressive. The more things change, the more they stay the same. The

chamber was noisy with a lot of heckling. Nicola Sturgeon said that

you couldn't argue about backs and yet that is just what they did. She

accused Iain Gray of being selective with his information. It was a

damning indictment but if she is corrected will cause big problems

for Labour. He didn't come back all that vigorously. He seemed unable to

talk about the figures. He seemed conciliatory. It looked like he had

been found out and he knew it. It is a problem for the Education

Secretary. She was described as the 50th most powerful woman in the

world. Second in Britain after Her Majesty The Queen. I thought that

the First Minister was a bit patronising. You paid more attention

to that than me, yeah, right! The problem of getting young people from

poorer backgrounds into higher education, desired Dale was laying

the blame at the feet of the SNP -- Kezia Dugdale. But Nicola Sturgeon

had her own facts to defend them. She admitted the key fact that at

the level of 18-year-olds the figure had declined in a year but if you

took the broader entry, the number had gone up. Inter -- interesting

exchange about unethical business practices. She was challenged by

Patrick Harvie to do more. Her powers are limited in that field.

Patrick Harvie admitted that in his question and said that they want

more powers over businesses to tackle these issues. Nicola Sturgeon

is quite right, some of what has happened at Sport can!

Not sure what she can do about those practices. There was a fascinating

is danger with Murdo Fraser talking about fracking. Nicola Sturgeon came

back and top dog the prospects of decommissioning from the North Sea.

That was raised before the election. At that point, Nicola Sturgeon said

that people were talking the industry down and now it is a boon

for the industry in north-east Scotland. Let's hope for the people

there that she sticks by her latest proclamation. It didn't sound like

there was much support for fracking. Murdo is persistent. He is Mr

fracking. In putting him down in the same way as she does with the

Conservatives, she points to what the Tories are doing over the

border. In this case, she turned the question around from fracking to say

that the other area to diversify into is renewables and the

Conservative government are the ones who are damaging that. Any doubt

that the moratorium will end in a band? I don't think so. It looks set

in stone. There would be a party revolt if it ended in anything other

than a band. They want to wait for the evidence to support it first.

They are looking for the evidence for their conclusion rather than

using the evidence to come to a conclusion. Evidence being gathered

there. In Holyrood, it's filtered through the committee system which

is a core element of the work done here in Parliament. New parliament,

new committees, new members. Parliament will be asked to endorse

the new membership. The SNP no longer has a majority in the chamber

so they don't have a majority on the committees. There was a feeling in

the last parliament that the committees with an SNP majority were

a little bit soup pine and sucking up to ministers. The feeling is that

will change. We will look at the situation. Attacks on the and

powerful. There is a profound and unqualified apology for all of the

distress. Public humiliations. For a lawyer, you are remarkably cavalier

with any idea of justice. Exposing showdowns. Committee rooms are often

where the action takes place in Parliament. There has long been a

feeling that Holyrood's midi system once a jewel in the crown, hasn't

been living up to expectations. The cause of the SNP's domination of the

committees, people thought that reports were watered down and often

blocked by backbenchers. They didn't work as well as they should have

done because the SNP controlled the chamber and the committees. An

difficult issues for the government, people were turning to committees to

get a more positive spin on some of the evidence that the committees

were hearing. Last month's third historic election victory changes

everything. Having failed to win a majority of seats in parliament, the

government has excepted it can no longer expect a majority on the

committees. The arithmetic used to calculate emitting memberships is

our starting point. That would have given us a majority on some

committees. We felt that in the spirit of consensus we should accept

the parliamentary arithmetic on the basis that in the chamber we have

one less than a majority and that should affect the committees.

Parliament's new Presiding Officer says negotiations over committee

numbers have been consensual. We found that the parliamentary

committee recommended that the number of committees were kept small

to make them more effective. We are trying to balance that with strict

proportionality. That actually requires larger committees. I found

during the negotiations that all the business managers and parties were

very collegiate and collaborative in their approach. There is a lot of

give and take and we reached a conclusion that is fair to every

single party in the Parliament. There's also concern that two of

Parliament's main committees are all male. The Presiding Officer has

announced that measures will be taken to address gender balance soon

meaning that the committees will look very different. Joined by my

colleagues again. Is it right to say that the committees in the previous

parliament were lickspittle? It was a factor of their arithmetic. The

SNP had a majority in the parliament and therefore on the committees.

Were they bound to act as cheerleaders rather than

scrutineers, some con been as may have tried harder than others to do

that. It was an inevitability of the old formula. I think it will be

better this time. In what regard? Committees are meant to scrutinise

and question and sometimes meant to criticise and I think we are more

liable to get that this time. It reflected the majority and now it no

longer does because there isn't one. Was the instinct when the government

was up against it to roll in behind them rather than to add to their

trials? I think it was. Look to the Justice committee of the report on

court closures. The committee had been quite robust in its language

around closures but when it came to the crunch, backing the government's

one, the SNP majority voted it through without a change. Even when

members had spoken openly against it. The member for North East Fife,

one key quote was speaking out against it and he voted it through.

It's a result of the SNP being a very loyal party. It is what

happens. They automatically vote that way. We lay a lot of stress on

the importance of committees but do we over a gate a little bit? No. It

is a revising chamber. If you don't get legislation right first time it

is not easy to come back. There is no one overseeing it. The committees

are vital to ensure what is past is good law. We can't over exaggerate

how important they are. The subject that they're not speak its name, it

did occur a little bit. It is purdah, she can't talk about the

referendum because civil servants are obliged to remain neutral. She

got a of references to a certain debate. There are a lot of things

happening today on the European scene. George Osborne has decided to

come back north of the border and bring project fear back scarier than

ever. Gordon Brown is emerging when he does when it comes to referenda,

he comes out from where he has been. He is in Glasgow with Neil Kinnock.

The big beasts are out in force. A new report saying why he needs to do

this. Although the remaining side remains in the lead in Scotland, it

is softer and not committed and there is a danger it could slip. In

some ways, what the yes side might have wanted is that the gap is

narrowing, to have the effect that was had in the independent

referendum. They haven't got that but what they can do is analyse how

strong the drive is within that yes support. The Remain support. They

have the message that it can't be taken for granted. The Leave side

saying that George Osborne's figure of the negative effect on Scotland

is nonsense. They are being very strong on this in vote to leave.

They point out that George Osborne had to revise his own six-month

economic forecast so how can you say two years in the future but the

effect of Brexit will be on Scotland? It is a fair point to

make. These predictions also have a great deal of, you know... Thank you

very much for joining us. It will be interesting to see what Nicola

Sturgeon makes of the Treasury forecasts. She didn't like them in

2014. Will she like them now Ashton