16/06/2016 Politics Scotland

A very warm welcome to the Scottish Parliament here in the garden lobby

at Holyrood. There is a week to go until the EU referendum. It is the

only topic in politics but it might be difficult for that to be raised

in the next hour or so questions to the First Minister, it is a pretty

zealous interpretation but we might get lucky. Let's cross to the

chamber and my colleague Lucy Adams. Thank you, this is the last day of

Holyrood before the EU referendum vote and as Brian has said we are

expecting very much more domestic issues to be discussed today rather

than the EU is that as the ruling of a decision of Parliament. So, this

will be the last FMQs before the vote next week. In two weeks' time

we will be back again for more questions to the First Minister.

Right now we are still on the parliamentary questions to

ministers. Those are continuing until FMQs begins. We will pass now

to the Parliament to see what exactly is Scottish Conservatives,

Labour and others want to ask today. I think we can expect questions as

usual around the health service and education, attainment figures and

perhaps some of the report is out in today's papers looking at the

language skills of toddlers across Scotland and the impact that that

might have. We now move on to First Minister's Questions. Question one,

Ruth Davidson. What engagement does the First Minister have for the rest

of the day? Engagements to kick forward the Government programme for

Scotland. We are once again facing the prospect of teachers either

boycotting work or shutting altogether. I accept teachers have

every right to raise what hurt legitimate concerns about their

workload but I do not believe industrial action is the answer. It

is simply wrong that parents and pupils pay the price for a dispute

between teachers and this government. The First Minister

agree? The Government is working very hard to ensure that industrial

action does not take place in our schools. I don't believe it is in

the interest of teachers and I certainly don't believe it is in the

interests of young people in our schools. As Bruce Davison is aware,

this is an issue around what teachers consider to be -- Ruth

Davidson, it is about and unnecessary workload and the

Government has been clear about our determination to take action to

reduce the workload is and will take action to do so. That is why we

established a group on qualifications. The Deputy First

Minister published the initial work on the 26th of May and it set up

concrete steps we are kicking to reduce workload for teachers. This

week the Deputy First Minister has also written to all the teacher

unions asking for specific and deliverable proposals to help reduce

workloads. We are determined to address these concerns and to do so

in the interests of teachers, but most importantly in the interests of

our young people. I hear what she is saying but the question is how what

was it allowed to get to this stage because of

secondary teachers have been complaining about the assessment

requirement for national qualifications for quite some time.

We have all heard warnings about the added bureaucracy and the extra

burdens it is placing on classrooms and given that and that we may now

be facing industrial action, is the First Minister really satisfied that

the Scottish Government has done enough to sort this out before now?

Yes, I do believe we have been working to do this and if Ruth

Davidson is sincere as I hope she is about wanting to avoid industrial

action then I hope she'll behind the behind the actions the Scottish

Government is taking. It is indeed because we are determined to tackle

this issue that the working group on assessment and national

qualifications was established earlier this year. That group has

done a very detailed work in the report of that work was published at

the end of May. That set out some initial steps, concrete initial

steps that have already been announced. The Deputy First Minister

will reconvene that group and they said he has issued an open

invitation to the teaching unions to come forward and give examples of

where they think there is unnecessary workload and what can be

done to reduce that, so as we have debated in this chamber many times

over the last few months, improving education and the standards and

closing the attainment gap is my top priority. Ruth Davidson and others

joined us yesterday at an education Summit that was very positive and

constructive and if we're going to achieve that goal then enabling

teachers, our fantastic teachers across as countries to do what they

do best and give our young people the best education, is absolutely

central to that. Everybody has an interest in making sure this issue

is addressed and I hope the chamber will get behind the work of John

Swinney and the entire government is easy to so. I have listened to her

say the working group was established earlier this year but

Larry Flannigan of the EIS last night claimed that they need to

remove duplication was first raised by teachers in August 20 14. He

claimed that since then and I will content directly, not a single unit

assessment has been removed. After years of action from this

government, only this week do we see the Education Secretary asking for a

fresh ideas on how to cut down on bureaucracy. Teachers are preparing

to take industrial action right now. Isn't all of this just a little bit

late, First Minister? Firstly, as Ruth Davidson knows and this was a

view that they believe was expressed by the Chief examiner in Scotland,

to remove unit assessment to quickly would actually compromise the

certification of qualifications in this country. If that is what Ruth

Davidson is suggesting we do I think that is a deeply responsible course

of action for her to be putting forward. Bat irresponsible. We will

continue to work closely with teaching unions and the teaching

profession as a whole and will continue to take action that is

sensible to reduce unnecessary workload. It is in nobody 's

interests any more than it is indicators of pupils for teachers to

be burdened with workload that is unnecessary. They want all of the

great teachers across our country is to be freed up to what they do best

which is to teach our children and give them the best educational

experience. All party leaders joined us at the educational summit

yesterday and I was very grateful for them to doing so. They were last

heard as we did many great examples, the OECD praising the many strengths

of Scottish education and the work is cut government is now taking

forward, many issues raised about what we need to do including by the

teaching unions. Let's get together in a national endeavour to take

forward his actions in the interest of improving our education system

for all of our young people. Presiding Officer, there is a wider

point to be made here and that is the fact that we have a system which

is constantly sending out ever more directives and initiatives and

diktats to our schools but doesn't think about how they are to be

eliminated. -- imploded. At the 11th hour we have John Swinney saying he

wants specific ideas on how to cut down on teacher workload. He is

acting as if this is a year zero but this government has been in power

for nine years. He is trying to clear up the mistakes his government

has made. But if he wants clear, tangible ideas, let me give him on.

The EIS said today that they have resourced, named Person scheme will

be potentially dangerous, will be potentially dangerous and worse than

no scheme at all. Teachers saying it would be potentially dangerous and

worse than no scheme at all. If this government wants a scrap, -- wants

to scrap red tape on our teachers, they will cut the unwonted scheme,

let teachers get on with the job. Clearly I don't speak for the EIS

but I suspect the EIS will be as horrified as I am at the Tory

attempts to hijack their legitimate concerns and the point is that they

have put forward for the narrow political interests of the

Conservative Party. Lucy, clearly... -- you see, unless they are

interested in our children in -- they are trying to score cheap

political points. Getting back to the issue at hand, John Swinney has

asked for the suggestions in addition to the work that is already

underway. For example is Ruth Davidson is Jim is aware the chief

inspector of education has already published clear national

expectations for teachers and schools which will directly tackle

workload issues and help improve the learning experience for young

people. That includes advice on the preparation of young people in the

broad general education on the transition to the senior fears and

the importance of appropriate course choices. These are sensible actions

to deal with a legitimate issue and this is the way this government will

continue to take it forward because that's what our teachers and young

people deserve. When sheep that are true when will they next meet

Stonewall Scotland? I met representatives last night when I

was other party leaders attended the vigil in St Andrews Square to show

our sympathy and Solidarity of the victims of the attack in order

London. Ministers will continue to meet with Stonewall on a range of

issues and officials are meeting them today to discuss the new powers

coming to Scotland under the Scotland act. In the first ministers

were last night were the bat very welcome particularly on the driving

out homophobic bullying in schools and build an education system that

is inclusive so every person can be themselves and to fill their

potential. I hope the Cabinet Secretary of Education will meet

Stonewall at the earliest opportunity. The Government's Expo

statistics confirm that the European Scotland are Scotland's biggest

trading partner behind only the rest of the United Kingdom. What

assessment of the First Minister made on how many jobs in Scotland

are dependent on our unfettered access to the single market? Are

right now in Scotland more than 300,000 jobs that are associated

directly or indirectly with Scotland's access to the single

market. In addition, more than 40% of Scotland's international exports

go to countries within the single market and of the more than 2000

foreign owned companies in Scotland, 40% are owned by firms that are

based in other European countries. These are all positive reasons

related to the jobs and the livelihoods of thousands of people

across Scotland. From my conclusion that Scotland's continuing

relationship with Europe is absolutely vital. In the days

leading up to the referendum in 2014, this Parliament debated the

case for and against independence, and we did so with passion and a

sense of the importance of the decision we were about to make. This

is a parliament elected by the people of Scotland. Much more than a

public body. Next Thursday is about securing hundreds of thousands of

jobs for detecting the rights of workers, showing the world the

Cabinet country we want to be. -- type of country. When it comes to

issues of terrorism, climate change and the refugee crisis, does she

share my support for the principle of working together with the other

nations of the world? Yes, I do. I agree with that very strongly. As

Kezia Dugdale and indeed the whole chamber and I think it is fair to

say the whole country knows I believe passionately that Scotland

should be an independent country. And I very much hope that in the new

future we will be an independent country. But they also believe that

very strongly, in the modern interdependent world we live in, the

independent countries must work together. To tackle the issues that

no country can deal with on its own. That does include issues like

climate change, refugee crisis, and tackling terrorism. Independent

countries working together on this issues makes all of us stronger and

safer. I'll take the point of order at the

end. Thank you. Kezia Dugdale. The future of our economy is one of the

biggest issues being debated outside of this chamber. Sudden shocks would

have a damaging impact on our ability to fund public services.

People need to know what plans are in place. So can the First Minister

tell us what contingency planning is underway to prepare for a shock to

the UK economy? Well, clearly a very much hope that such a scenario does

not arise. But let me be very clear, as First Minister my duty is to seek

to protect Scotland's interests in all circumstances and therefore I am

ensuring that appropriate planning for all eventualities is being

undertaken by the Scottish Government. That we also say and I

have said this made her give for that is Scotland faces the prospect

of being taken out of the European Union against our democratically

expressed will, then all options to protect our relationship with Europe

and the European Union will require to be considered. Jackie Baillie.

Thank you. Prior to the election the First Minister and Health Minister

dismissed concerns about cuts to services at the Vale of leaving

hospital, Inverclyde Hospital, the Royal Alexandra in Paisley and

Lightburn Hospital in Glasgow is some house gerrymandering. Because

the SNP government would not approve any changes that would run counter

to the vision for the Vale which I have before me today. I have been

given a leaked document, the final draft of the local development plan

for NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde. It lists the closure of Inverclyde

but heard the unit, Lightburn Hospital and the transfer of

children's emergency care away from the are a hitch in Paisley. Can I

ask the First Minister if you will keep her promise to my constituents

so that babies will continue to be born at the Vale?

Jackie Baillie knows when I was Health Secretary I took actions to

protect the hospital at the time. It was under threat from the last

Labour administration. As I have made clear, as the Health Secretary

has made clear, we will not approve proposals running counter to the

vision for the Fail. I am not aware of the document Jackie Baillie is

quoting, I am yet to receive a copy of it. I'm sure what she has read

out our proposals. At most, proposals. Let me be very clear to

this government's vision for the Fail and our commitment towards it.

-- Vale. Last week the Education

Secretary was greeted with booing at the conference, when he was

discussing workload, talking about his plans for compulsory testing.

How does the first Mr think her minister is right and the teachers

are wrong? I'm astonished William Rennie asked that question, he was

in the room yesterday when Larry Flanagan made positive comments

about standardised assessment. I am paraphrasing, he said he felt much

of the opposition and objection to standardised assessment was based on

misunderstanding and misrepresentation of what the

government was actually doing. Having sat in that education summit

yesterday, while those comments were made, I am frankly staggered that

Willie Rennie has asked me the question he has. I don't know who

the First Minister thinks it she is building a consensus with, it is

certainly not teachers. We have heard about their plans for

industrial action, I don't know what planet she is on. Testing small

children is not the answer to our problems in education, we have been

down that blind alley before. Scotland's employers cannot get the

skilled workforce they need. Save the children told us about lack of

investment in early years vocabulary, nursery targets have

been missed, too. All the while, education budgets have been cut up

the fighting speeches over the first step provide the investment and the

early education investment we need for our future? Instead of fighting

with teachers? I notice Willie Rennie did not actually respond to

what I just said about the comments of Larry Flanagan at the summit

yesterday, that he was in attendance at. Willie Rennie also heard that

the OECD talked about the very clear distinction between national

testing, which we are not doing, and National assessment, which we are

doing. Andy Hargreaves, of the OECD, very respected on education, praised

the Scottish Government from moving from a culture of teacher judgment,

and that he felt we were on the right track. That is what we are

seeking to do to make sure we have the information we need to ensure

that our children, regardless of where they grow up, their

background, that they are getting the best possible education. Willie

Rennie can oppose that if he likes, I am all for it, and determined we

are going to achieve it. I would like to ask the First

Minister whether the Scottish Government plans to restrict the

amount of alcohol solvency markets or parts? We have no plans to

restrict the mad Beasant -- restrict the amount of alcohol sold. We are

still investigating the damaging effects of alcohol, and Scottish

targets for reducing Scottish capital harm use. The First Minister

will share my disappointment after a steady decline in recent years,

alcohol consumption is once again on the rise, Scottish adults consuming

on average of 41 bottles of vodka, with the health and social ills it

brings. While I'm please note legislation is being considered at

this time, existing legislation to restrict the overprovision of

alcohol selling outlets should be reviewed as to its effectiveness? I

agree with the sentiments behind Kenny Gibson's question. As I said

in my original answer we will continue to pursue an evidence

-based approach to tackling alcohol harm. The court case remains active,

restricting what I can say. I continue to believe minimum unit

pricing is more effective than tax, targeting the cheap high street

alcohol favoured by the heavy astringents. I am not alone in

wondering why a measure which would save 2000 lives over the next 20

years is so resisted by some parts of the industry? To

ask the buttons, particularly in East Lothian, that housing elements

were. And planning authorities should take

into account current infrastructure capacity, when they are approving

developments. A sensible approach. We need new housing in Scotland,

that is why we exceeded our target for affordable housing in the last

parliament, setting ambitious targets in this Parliament. We must

make sure the infrastructure is there to support new development,

and that is what our approach to planning is about achieving. I echo

Rachel Hamilton's concerns. The SNP Labour administration of Glasgow

Council approved the garden development against the advice of

officials. It is only most congested roads outside of the M25. Also the

medical practice is that capacity. 4000 extra patients mean it will

have to close its list. Not just about roads, but addressing the GP

crisis in our health service? All of these matters are important, when

any local authority is looking at new developments. These are matters

for local authorities, the Liberal Democrats frequently in this chamber

accuse the government of centralisation, talking about the

merits of localism. They should start practising what they preach.

The government is very clear, in the draft guidance I have spoken about,

the importance of housing development. Nobody can deny the

need for new housing development. The importance of making sure we

have advocate infrastructure, whatever the nature of it is, it is

in place, and that is what we will focus on. That the First Minister

had a position on the future of paediatric services across Lothian?

The board will consider next week the recommendation of an independent

review of the paediatric services by the Royal College of Paediatrics and

Child Health. The Scottish Government stands ready to support

NHS Lothian, including recommendations to make sure all

necessary improvements are delivered for the benefit of patients. The

report by the Royal College into children's services has recommended

a retention of a 24-7 board at St George 's. NHS must accept the

recommendation, a tremendous victory for people power

the first Mr has taken credit for good things happening at St John's,

after nine years in government, much of that time as Health Secretary

take responsibility for these failings, more importantly, for

putting them right? I would have thought Niall Finlay may have come

to this chamber to date, uttering an apology for what he has previously

said on this issue. Every time Niall Findlay stood up in this chamber to

raise this issue, it used to be from the benches of the official

opposition, now from the benches of the third party in the Scottish

Parliament, every time he has done it, he has suggested that the

independent report was somehow underhandedly forcing the closure of

the inpatients paediatric service at St John's. Now the report has

recommended the retention of the children's inpatients service,

surely Niall Findlay would have the good grace to admit he got it wrong

previously? Now that the recommendation has been made, it is

for the board of NHS Lothian to discuss its next week. I repeat what

I said, the Scottish committee will support NHS Lothian in implementing

the recommendations to ensure all necessary improvements are delivered

for the benefit of patients. We can add this to the long list of things

the government has done to insure improvement at St John's Hospital.

To host the NHS summit for planning? Obviously the issue is recruitment

and retention to the children's unit at Inchon 's Hospital, something

that has been under investigation and discussion, and lots of activity

has been taken to recruit people for a long period of time, that will

continue to be the thing. I would say in passing, we have, working

within the NHS, many first-class clinicians from many different

countries across Europe and the world. It would be a massive mistake

to close off the supply of any of them, and any decision we might be

taking the next few days. Just days before the election, the force

Minister wrongly denied they were proposals to close down the

theatrics services in Paisley. From Jackie Baillie's proposal, there are

proposals to move inpatients to Glasgow. 30 support those proposals?

The member will have heard my reply to Jackie Baillie. Before the

election Niall Finlay was standing up in this chamber week after week

scaremongering about the Scottish Government's plans to close

paediatric services at St John's Hospital, and today we're talking

about the reservation of an independent report about retention

of paediatric services. That underlines the commitment this

cabman has two quality, sustainable local services. That is what will

continue. What progress has the Scottish Government made to reduce

the visibility of unhealthy products in schools? School food legislation

provides high standards all schools must meet, lunches, tuck shops,

breakfasts, vending machines. Food brought in to school is exempt from

these regulations. The act requires all schools to promote health

policies. I thank her for her answer. As she

will be aware of our country's children now find it easier than

ever to gain access to unhealthy food and drink. Energy drinks cause

particular problems in schools across the country and have been

cited by those such as Forfar Academy is a contributing factor in

maybe several issues, he has brought in a ban and I fully support the

campaign to get it in place across Tayside. Tomorrow I will be visiting

a Dundee secondary school and I would be delighted to tell the start

that you will be backing they can it campaign. We'll be First Minister

join me in supporting this worthwhile cause? I know the Health

Secretary has already publicly supported the can it campaign, and I

think it is a very positive campaign that is worthy of support. As I

outlined in Nyanza and I do agree that there are some worrying

conclusions that have been drawn about the impact of energy drinks on

young people. Food and drink brought into schools by pupils is exempt

from regulations, but the act does require schools to set health

routing policies and I would certainly expect these help

promoting policies to apply to full -- food and drink permitted on

school grounds. I think schools have the tools they need here. We will

continue to talk to local authorities about all these matters

but all of us have an interest in making sure that young people eat

healthily because it is not only good for the health but also their

ability to learn as well. This is a debate also about what is purchased

by schools near as opposed to within schools. Given how many children

Hedda doosra markets and local shops at lunchtime or on their way home

from school and given that price... Will they be willing to engage with

the retail sector that have better policies to promote healthy

products? I think he is absolutely right. Not only are we willing to

engage of retailers but we are already engaging with retailers and

caterers to our supporting healthy choices framework challenging

retailers and caterers to rebalance the promotions and support children

and families to make healthier choices. As I have just said we also

welcome public health campaigns like the Can It campaign, so we will

continue to engage with industry to promote healthier choices wherever

possible and any efforts in this direction are very welcome indeed.

As the First Minister has acknowledged, this is more than

about what is sold within schools. Recently in North Lanarkshire

Council, they tried to enforce a ban on fast food snack vans operating

within the vicinity of local schools. This ban was overturned in

the courts, calling into question bands which operate across the

country in Glasgow, and other areas. Can I ask the First Minister to ask

the Cabinet Secretary for education to look at this recent court ruling

and consider whether it there is any legislative changes required to give

local authorities the power to enforce a snack van ban to improve

the health of pupils in Scotland? I will certainly do so and I will ask

the Cabinet Secretary for education to write when he has done so. What

action is the Scottish Government taking to improve access to IVF

treatment? This week we confirmed he would accept recommendations in the

National infertility group's report to build on the improvements we have

made to IVF access in recent years. This will see the number of IVF

cycles on the NHS increase from two to three and also allow access for

couples where one partner does not have a biological child. I thank the

First Minister for her answer and the action her government is taking

to ensure that IVF provision in Scotland is as generous as possible.

Can I ask the First Minister Wendy's changes will come into effect

ensuring that Scotland remains at the forefront in terms of IVF action

and right across the UK? We are working to ensure that Scotland

remains at the forefront of IVF action and rights across the UK.

This is in comparison for example to Northern Ireland where eligible

couples can access only one fresh and one frozen cycle of treatment.

England were the majority of patients can access only one cycle,

in Wales were patients can only access to cycles of taken. So the

actions we are taking puts us at the forefront. Working is beginning with

health boards to develop a sustainable in turn is --

implementation plan which will include timescales for introduction

of each of the criteria changes and I will make sure the Health

Secretary keeps Parliament informed of the implementation as it

progresses. Can I thank Margaret Mitchell for waiting to the end of

First Minister's Questions to raise her point of order? Thank you. I

seek your guidance on whether the line of questioning from Kezia

Dugdale and the exchanges of the First Minister have breached the

Parliament's rules in advance of next week referendum's the test of

which is I believe that the content is likely to influence that

referendum. And if they have been breached, what opportunity will

there be to point out the unfettered free movement of people will deeply

damaged the economy and our public services? And to point out, is the

economy in the world and the talented and innovative people, the

UK is more than capable of surviving outside the EU and in fact it is

being Nato and the UN which has preserved our security, not the EU.

Can I ask, is it the same point of order or separate? Can I thank

Margaret Mitchell? Think she is quite right to raise this point of

order. As members may know, the Parliament has decided to a decision

of the business bureau and business managers in the bureau to observe

our legal guidance that the parliament should not use

parliamentary resources, this is under legal advice is affects us

through the referendum act, that he Parliament should not use

parliamentary resources to promote one side or the other during the

referendum. The Parliament may also be aware that I wrote, as I believe

this was an oversight rather than intend, I wrote on behalf of the

Parliament to both the Speaker of the House of Commons and to the

Secretary of State for Scotland to voice our concerns that we should be

covered in this way. However we have agreed, I listened to but the

questions and the answer is very carefully, it is my judgment that

they did not breach that agreement and they did not take a side on

either side of the referendum issue. That is my decision and I listened

very carefully. They did not use parliamentary resources to promote

one side of the argument. My daughter. Thank you. -- point of

order. They said there was a lack of investment in early years. Having

read the recent press release it does not say a thing of the sort. Is

it correct that Mr Rennie should come here and misrepresent a very

important charity, save the children? That is a point of

information or accuracy. One second... One second, Mr Findlay.

Thank you. That is a point of information or accuracy for the

member. I am sure he heard your comments. It is for him to reflect

on, not a point of order. In reply to Margaret Mitchell's point. I

think whichever side they are on they have the right to be heard and

the right to have their views put forward in the chamber but you

expressed the view that parliamentary resources would not be

used, I am not making a point on one side of the other, but surely the

fact that we use power, we have the official report, these are

parliamentary resources, therefore I think we need absolute clarity on

this because it is very important. The point he makes is exactly the

one that we considered in the bureau and with our legal advisers. The use

of the parliamentary report to report on our proceedings is a user

parliamentary resources. In this particular case I did not judge that

either the questions or the answers were in abuse of those resources.

That was my judgment. But members have made a point of order... --

both members. My ruling so far, neither of these are points of order

but I have taken them on board. Thank you. I raised a point of order

yesterday during the members debate on a similar point to the ones that

were raised today. I still await a response and I wonder if that can be

forthcoming? I think the member will receive a response from one of the

deputy residing officers. The information will be passed to the

member I would imagine before the close of proceedings today, but just

for information, our decision was that it was not a point of order

yesterday either. More information will be passed later. For there are

any more points of order, can I suggest we move to members business?

I would ask members to leave the chamber quietly while we get on with

members business. Thank you very much. The bit of to do there in the

chamber. The new Presiding Officer facing his first challenge and it

was on the subject of, guess what, the European Union. We will be

talking about that in some detail later but it would be wrong to

entirely neglect the substantive questions that were also put a stop

joined now by two journalistic colleagues. David Torrance first of

all. That's cool with all the substance of the questions facing

the Christmas. She got a hard time from both rude Davidson and Willie

Rennie on the question of teachers that Ruth Davidson. There is a

cross-party battle for supremacy on this issue. Education was one of the

things that Scottish Parliament was supposed to focus on after it was

created and belatedly it is now doing that. What we are also seeing

is what someone much wiser than than me cold the narcissism of small

differences. There is not a lot between the two parties. They agree

the attainment back must be closed and that teacher workload must be

lifted. What the spots are over, slightly baffling spats, over how

that should be done. She was making a distinction about the nature of

the testing. One point that was being made both by Willie Rennie and

Ruth Davidson is they are treating this as if it was a new problem. It

plainly wasn't. The idea that they have been in power for nine years. I

think that is the key point they are trying to get across. Ruth Davidson

also managed to get in a little bit of a dig about the named person

child protection scheme which the Tories as we know are strongly

opposed to. The First Minister was particularly annoyed. She called it

a cheap political stunt. The SNP backbenchers were also very angry,

shouting, shame. I think you're absolutely right. The point that

Willie Rennie and Ruth Davidson were both trying to make was, they are

trying to fix the problem of your own making. What about the point

about testing? The MSPs are streaming down the stairs behind you

there. There appears to be a different interpretation as to what

the testing is. Willie Rennie saying don't waste your time testing young

kids, teach them instead Andy First Minister saying, no, you're getting

it wrong is the nature of the testing. And are also seized a

difference in saying the EIS and the Government and it is all as I say a

bit baffling I imagine for the outsider. Baffling for teachers as

well. They need clear guidance on this, what is coming down the line

in terms of testing. The key point is whether testing will provide us

with any new information. That is not altogether clear even after

these exchanges. The First Minister is adamant you're required to get

the data first and then the action. He said there is some scepticism.

Yes and we have significant data about the attainment gap and that is

why it is being discussed because we have data showing it has got worse

over the last few years. It is not clear as to what standardised

testing will add to that. Is this building up, Magnus, into a tough

one for the Government? Do you have the potential of industrial action?

Is this building up into a big one? Not on the testing. I think we are

gaining some well needed clarity on this. We are talking about national

assessment, not national testing. A lot of the political difficulties

around this I think stem from a few months ago when perhaps government

ministers tried to play to the gallery, play to public opinion a

little bit and give the impression this was a slightly more rigorous

national testing system that was coming in. In fact it is something

slightly different but relies on entirely on teacher judgment. The

EIS are happy with that. Nicola Sturgeon was careful to them that

back in Willie Rennie's face. On testing it sounds as if John Swinney

is taking this whole issue of workload very seriously. My hunch is

that industrial action will be avoided on this although there are

negotiations still to run. David, one of the serious things he was

doing was to call the summit yesterday. I'm sure it was with good

intention and good purpose. It is also bringing the opposition parties

onside and trying to keep them in the tent. Rather than lobbing things

at the campus. Summitry is the key part of the game. It brings the

opposition and it makes us though the Scottish Government is doing

something. They love to appear as if they are doing something. We are

both deeply cynical in that regard. Magnus, let's turn briefly to the

topic of health that was raised by Jackie Baillie and Neil Findlay.

Again they are from bottles on both occasions from the First Minister.

-- firm bottles. The question Mr Findlay has been asking a lot about

children's services at St John's in Livingston, that seems to be

resolved. The First Minister was committing support from the Scottish

Government to NHS Lothian. It looks as though that long-running saga is

reaching a solution and the Government are going to put the

money where their mouth is. In terms of long-running salad is, Jackie

Baillie has been pursuing the Vale of Leven Hospital and got a blonde

dancer saying regardless of what document you have in your

possession, the First Minister was saying is they would be no change to

the provision of services. He comes down to who the voters

trust. Highly unusual that the detail changes slightly after the

election. The First Minister used to be the Health Secretary. It is her

own record being examined. In terms of competence, her own record is

intrinsically bound. She will take everything seriously, but health

much more seriously. Briefly, we have tuck shop wars. I should not

mock. Children's nutrition. Described as being about the tuck

shop coming into the school. I was joking before we went on air, this

is what devolution was for, the Scottish Government set up to

regulate tuck shops. There is an autonomy issue, for schools, equally

a governmental role into what kind of food is sold. I imagine it is a

then when I was at school. Thanks, we will come back to you in a couple

of minutes. The European Union was discussed

between Cacia Dugdale and the European mint -- and the First

Minister. Before we began the programme today, I took the chance

to raise the question of the European Union with both sides in

the campaign. Asking the Conservative MSP, Graeme Morrison,

the fundamental argument for leaving.

Michael argument, always about pussy, sovereignty. About who runs

affairs in Scotland and in the UK. By taking back control from the EU

we can have much more say about what happens in Scotland and the rest of

the United Kingdom. Christina, a fundamental appeal? For Remain,

benefits we recruit from being members of the European Union,

workers' rights, female rights, peace, protection, all these

reasons, why people should remain in the European Union. A UK Government

unfettered by these regulations and rules, as I put it rights and

responsibilities, a dangerous prospect. A luck to lose? Cristina

Torkilsen policy decisions. These are decisions taken in Brussels. I

think, and I would think a nationalist like Christina would

think these decisions should be taken closer to home. Isn't it true

that the rights are underpinned by Brussels law. Implemented by the UK,

underpinned by Brussels? Take employment rights. These could be

enshrined in UK law. There is absolutely no reason... I would love

to have that enshrined in UK law. We have a trade union Bill taking away

rights. Proposal to repeal the Human Rights Act. What we have is

proposals from a government taking away those rights, they say we will

confirm them back to you commit because -- back to you because we

have goodwill. What about the argument they should be taken in the

UK? It is a red herring, there are 28 members of the European Union,

they will have elected MEPs. Elected ministers. They have a vote and a

veto. David Cameron has used it in the past. There is a democratic

structure in place. It is not democratic, decisions are taken in

Brussels by people who are not elected. Michael argument is

decisions should be taken by elected parliamentarians, as close to the

people as possible. In this case in Scotland. What are elected MEPs.

Someone like Christina, coming from the back when she does, I would

think she would support that. I noticed I was wearing a different

time in that pre-recorded interview! The substance that counts. The stunt

of the fate -- substantive debate. Questions raised to the First

Minister. One or two were unhappy that was the case stop we have the

presiding officer saying it was OK, they were not making a case one way

or another. Using public resources, the problem? In an election or

referendum? You can quantify that, in terms of people asking questions

in the chamber, tabling a written question, that all has a cost.

Difficult to pin down, but it is there. The official report. It

appears it directly contradicts the presiding Officer's own analysis. He

says it does not. There was some grinning on the faces of the

ministers. The First Minister. Probably quite a widespread view it

would be slightly absurd not to discuss the EU reference. Certainly

not the approach taken by Kinsey Sio that they'll. She said we debated,

it would be wrong not to debate the biggest topic. Far be it from anyone

to question the decisions of the presiding officer. That was quite an

extraordinary decision he made. The gist of the rule, cost comes into

it. Nothing should happen that is capable of influencing people. We

have a staged encounter between that encounter between Dugdale in the

first semester. There are photocalls NOW, telling you everything you need

to know. The first method set jobs depend on Scotland's relation with

the EU. I thought she challenged it really well. She made sure, even if

she was always going to get overruled, she got in some points of

heroin. From processes substance. A photocall outside with the five

Parliamentary leaders in this Parliament. Our people paying

attention to the political direction? Are they making their

minds up in way? Interesting point. They are making up their own minds,

there could be a difference between Scotland and the rest of the

country. There is evidence that your average voter ignoring Establishment

politicians, big business, independent organisations. At this

late stage, I am not sure joint photocalls will make much

difference. This photocall, and the event coming up this afternoon. The

European Movement, that is notable. Nicola Sturgeon was quite certain

she was not going to share platforms with conservatives. She has done it

once in a televised debate last week, doing it again this afternoon.

That speaks to the urgency of the situation, and the narrowing of the

polls. The early cast list did not include a conservative. Yesterday

one was added. It speaks to the position of conservatives in

Scottish politics generally. Despite the recent election results, still a

toxic one. All the parties nervous about being seen to cooperate with

them. A very different debate taking place in Scotland, to the one Taking

Place in England? Slightly different. There was a focus on what

will happen, in terms of powers for Holyrood. Really interesting, only

yesterday did John Swinney address that point. The Leave campaign has

been allowed to make a without argument. That powers would

automatically transfer from Brussels, not to Westminster, but

Holyrood. Particularly in the case of fishing and farming. John

Swinney, yesterday, really quite forthright in their that. Surprising

to my mind how slow the Remain side have been. The two sides have

fundamental messages. We got the message to date on the economy from

supporters of Remain. The message on the other side tends to go to

immigration. They do argue other points as well, that the default

argument tends to be in the Gration. Is that when we are, two fundamental

arguments battling. When they move from processed into substance, they

mention unfettered freedom of movement. The default argument. At

the late stage, one week to go. You have two boiled down your message to

the bare essentials. The polling shows immigration and economy jostle

for primacy in terms of what is most important for voters. It makes sense

for Remain to go with the economy, and Leave to go with the immigration

issue. Have the sides menace to counter the arguments? Not really, I

don't think so. The League side have not attempted to counter the

economic argument. They have dismissed it as scaremongering. --

the Leave side. That budget yesterday, quite striking in terms

of the lack of impact. It is designed to close down debate,

rather than encourage it. The whole tenor of the Remain campaign has

been on those lines, with one weeks ago, the same will not have impact.

As the immigration question been closed down by the Remain side?

Distracting attention. Moving focus onto the economic argument? The

question of immigration sums up one of the problems the Remain side has

generally. If you take Labour, contradictory views on immigration

within Labour alone. If you look at the Remain side generally, you don't

get the feeling of a coordinated campaign. Several campaigns talking

to discrete constituencies on their own. In stark contrast to the Leave

side, at heart a simple, clear message, resonating with focus

groups, taking back control. Talking about the impact, what about the

impact of the Conservatives? A Sirius Prospect, if it is exit, the

Prime Minister and the Chancellor could stay in office? It is an

extremely messy situation either way. If it is a narrow Remain vote,

Kamran is more unpopular with a section of his party than a few

years ago. Not even masking it anymore. Complete breakdown in

discipline. If there is a Brexit vote, Kamran would have to resign,

Osborne's chances of succeeding would be minuscule. Read unifying

the Conservative Party after the past few months, almost impossible.

-- unifying. I agree with David, absolutely. I cannot see the Prime

Minister remaining in office if we vote to leave. Thank you both very

much. Remarkable series of questions to the First Minister, the topic of

Europe being raised almost in defiance of the ruling. It was ruled

that they were not using public resources to making art. Things

going on outside, the leave campaign in Scotland at a rally. It is one

week to the vote. From, me, Brian Taylor, goodbye.

the most important issues of the EU Referendum,

and it'll be in front of a live audience of thousands,

in a final attempt to persuade YOU of their side of the argument.