29/09/2016: First Minister's Questions Politics Scotland

Hello and a warm welcome to the Scottish parliament at Holyrood. A

lot has happened in the last weeks since we last met for this

programme. The Labour conference in Liverpool, the Scottish Government

suffering a defeat over health policy at Holyrood and I've had a

haircut. Rank them in order of importance. Time to cross to the

chamber. Could be anything and everything to the First Minister,

including that health policy. To ask the First Minister what engagements

she has planned for the rest of the day. Take forward the programme for

Scotland including discussions with the Cabinet Secretary on the economy

and follow up on the welcome resumption of the economy and

conclusion of the DL steel plant. Is she in favour of shale gas being

used in Scotland? Ruth Davidson is well aware of the position of the

Scottish Government. We are taking a cautious, evidence -based approach

to the issue of shale gas and fracking. I think that's the right

approach. Given the range of environmental, health, transport and

community impact concerns that have been raised, we have a number of

research exercises under way right now that will report over the next

few weeks. They will be followed by a full public consultation. When

that has ended the Scottish Government will come to a considered

judgment. Given the seriousness of this issue, I think that's the right

and proper way to proceed. Interesting, because the Gammell

report was due out in the summer and Saturday will be October. Let's set

out this government's a principled stance on shale gas. For the last

year, when it comes to shale gas in this country, they have a laptop

that high horse, preached of a moratorium and boasted they are the

planet's best friend. But when the gas is poured into a tanker and

shipped all the way across the Atlantic to our shores, they turn a

blind eye and hope if they ignore it, everyone else will too. Not

surprisingly, the First Minister and cabinet have refused every media

opportunity to talk about the issue this week. I will give her the

chance. Can she explain the SNP's totalled double standards on this

matter? The decision about the import of shale gas to Grangemouth

is the decision taken by a company free to take those decisions. It's

an extremely important company in the Scottish economy. In terms of

the issue of fracking in Scotland, I appreciate the position of the

Scottish Conservatives is to ride roughshod over local opinion, over

environmental concerns and the range of other concerns that have been

raised. That is a position Ruth Davidson is perfectly entitled to

argue. I think it's better to take the evidence -based precautionary

approach that this government is taking. Because we shouldn't play

fast and loose with our environment. We will continue to undertake the

work we have set out. The detail of that work is well-known. When those

research projects report we will embark on a full public

consultation. Anybody with any opinion or interest in this issue,

including the Scottish Conservatives, will be able to

contribute to that conversation. I think when we take account of all

the issues involved here, that is absolutely the right and responsible

way to proceed and it's what the Scottish Government will continue to

do. The First Minister has already ignored her own experts on this. If

you go to the government's on website from 2014, the result of the

expert advice is there for everyone to see. Let me try another question.

It's quite possible that shale gas in the rest of the UK will get the

go-ahead soon if local communities back it. If it does, providers say

much of the gas will go to Grangemouth and end up in the

national grid power in Scottish homes. We could end up with a hand

on Scottish gas but with Scottish homes reliant on English gas to keep

the pipes one. Is the First Minister entirely comfortable with that? I

know the Scottish Conservatives are a party controlled by London, but in

the era of devolution, I think it's right we take decisions about

fracking in Scotland here in Scotland and in our national

parliament, and that's what we will continue to do. Given the concerns

that have been raised both domestically here in Scotland and

other parts of the UK and in other countries, we continue to take that

evidence -based approach. I will leave Ruth Davidson to explain to

communities across the central belt in Scotland why her party would

choose to ride roughshod over concerns that have been raised. It

terms of energy, of course it's an important decision and one that will

be considered carefully by the Scottish Government, but I thought

Ruth Davidson would like to take the opportunity to talk positively about

the record levels of renewable energy generation are seeing in

Scotland. Some of the world leading projects in tidal energy and

offshore wind that are being taken forward in Scotland. But the Tory

government in Westminster right now is more interested in undermining

renewable energy than supporting it. We will continue to take decisions

that are right for Scotland and right for the future energy needs. I

will leave Ruth Davidson to explain her position to communities across

Scotland. The First Minister might want to pick her own questions but

she still has no answers to the one she's being asked. I'm not

surprised. This First Minister doesn't want to admit her

government's failure on energy will leave us reliant on others to keep

our homes heated. There are 10,000 jobs in Central Scotland that are

reliant on shale gas coming here from other countries. But we still

have no answers on shale gas at home. I fully accept, fully accept,

that there are differing views on this. But nobody is well served by a

government that hides from view and kicks this into the long grass. The

moratorium was announced nearly two years ago. Her government has been

overtaken by events because the first tanker arrived this week. Will

the First Minister give the country some proper answers, and when are

they coming from her? We have set out the timescale for the reviews,

and the moratorium is in place while those reviews are underway. The

process and the timescale was described by Friends of the Earth as

a well-designed process over a sensible timescale. I would agree

with that. I have to say, being lectured on energy by a

representative of the party that is pouring public money into the white

elephant that is Hinkley Point, really is a bit rich. APPLAUSE

And I do say again, Ruth Davidson has managed to ask a series of

questions about energy today, and has somehow managed to forget to

mention the statistics out today that showed 2016 is on track to be a

record year for renewable generation in Scotland. That is a real success

story, and I think we've just heard that the Scottish Conservatives

don't like talking about success stories in Scotland.

Kezia Dugdale. When will the First Minister next meet the National

Autistic Society of Scotland? Let me pay tribute to the valuable work

they do to support people with autism in our local communities.

This month the Minister for childcare and early years made a

speech at the 11th autism congress in Edinburgh and will soon meet with

the director of the National Autistic Society of Scotland. That

is hugely welcome, thank you. On the steps of Bute House the day after

the May elections the First Minister said, we will always respect the

people, now and in the future. We simply ask that other parties do

likewise. Last night this Parliament, the representatives of

the people of Scotland, spoke with one voice on the planned cuts to

local NHS services. Will be First Minister now respect the will of

this Parliament? Kezia Dugdale raises an important issue. It's

important to firstly emphasise that no decisions have been taken on any

of these proposed service changes. It's also important to stress, as

the Health Secretary did yesterday, that there is a well-established and

long-standing process in place to consider proposals for service

change. The early stages of that process, which Greater Glasgow and

Clyde health board are currently engaged in, inform the judgment

about whether or not a particular service change is to be considered

major, and therefore ultimately decided by ministers. When the long

established process has reached the stage where that judgment can be

made, the Health Secretary will report it to parliament, and in

reaching that judgment, of course she will take account of the debate

and decision of the Scottish Parliament yesterday. We recognise

there is a due process, that is why we are angry that the SNP

candidates, during the election, promised people bees services were

safe, when they were not. -- these services. As Parliament we agreed

that the Health Secretary should call in proposed cuts by councils in

Lanarkshire and the Lothians, and that's because these services are

vital to communities across the country and they are now at risk.

Maternity services, cleft palate services in the Lothians, and many

more. Now that the parliament has spoken, will she immediately call

these decisions in and reject the planned cuts? This is another

example of the complete incoherence at the heart of Scottish Labour.

Kezia Dugdale says she recognises there is a due process. It's a five

stage process, it is here, anybody can read it on the website of the

Scottish health Council. At a certain stage of that process, the

decision on whether or not a service change is a major one is taken. When

we reach that point the Health Secretary will make that decision,

take account the views of the Scottish health Council and this

Parliament. We have the Labour Party standing up in this chamber accusing

this government of undermining local decision-making. Today we have them

standing up and demanding that we undermine local decision-making.

It's an absolute shambles. APPLAUSE We will continue to follow due

process. The last point I would make is this one, we will take no lessons

from Labour when it comes to standing up for local health

services, because, unlike Labour, we have demonstrated as a government

time and again, our willingness to actually block changes when they are

not in the interests of patients. When Labour were in government, they

sat to one side and allowed services, like the Vale of Lieven

accident and emergency services to close. Labour allowed services to

close, this government protects local services. If the First

Minister did it then, she could do it now. And there is a democratic

process. It's at work here, and it's called the will of this Parliament.

In March, Shona Robinson told this Parliament that services at the

Royal Alexandra, the Vale of Lieven and the Lightburn would be

maintained, but each face major cuts. George Adams said that we were

scaremongering when we said services in Paisley were at risk, yet cuts

are on their way. Before the election the SNP told people their

local services were safe. Even the First Minister did it on the front

of the Greenock Telegraph. This Parliament has now said that

promises made before the election must be delivered on. If the vote of

this Parliament, elected by the people of Scotland, doesn't make the

First Minister keep her promises, just what will? Unless Labour is

taking the position, and I assume Labour is not taking the position,

that local health services never, ever change, no matter the change in

demand or demographics, then surely she must accept that there is a

process that we go through to consider and reach judgments on

those changes. That process is long established, it has been in place

for years. It is here, and when we get to the particular stage in the

process that the Health Secretary has to decide whether it is major

service change, that's what she will do. I say again, every week we have

the Labour Party accusing this government of overriding local

decision-making. Today what they want us to do is override local

decision-making. We will do the right thing, and it's because of

this government, and let's never forget this, it's because of this

SNP government, that we still have an accident emergency in Monklands,

and in Ayr. They learned Lieven emergency services are only there

because this government stopped the trend Labour started to remove them

completely. We stand up for local services, Labour used the stand

aside while they were closed. I'm sure the first Minister will

share my concern at the News of potential job losses at AG Barr

including the number of sites in Angus as well as in Cumbernauld.

Although consultation on redundancies is still at an early

stage, can I ask the first Minister Watson for the Scottish government

will give to assist the business and the staff affected at this

challenging time? Of course I was disappointed to learn of potential

job losses and this will obviously be an anxious time for the company

of employees, families and local communities in fourth in

Cumbernauld. Scottish enterprise is working closely with the company to

understand any potential impacts on the two Scottish sites to establish

how and where they can support the sites and the workforce. And the

unfortunate and hopefully avoidable event that redundancies proceed, the

Scottish government stands to help those and we will be happy to engage

with local members of Parliament. First Minister, you'll be aware that

Highlands and Islands development board provides a valuable role,

economic and community benefits, you'll be with press speculation

regarding its future, can you give an assurance that these functions

will continually be discharged in the Highlands and Islands. I think

they do a fantastic job and has done over the last 50 years and I can

give the assurance to the member that we will make sure it is in a

position to continue to carry out these functions are provided

excellent service as it does to the Highlands of Scotland. The first

Minister and be aware that an agreement was reached this week

violent the council and historical council which allows my constituency

to be reopened, as a key component of the world Heritage site, the

closure would have had disastrous effect on the local tourism industry

before she accept that a planned shuttle bus service can only be a

temporary solution and Wilshere garage historical environment

Scotland to act on the planning permission that it already has for a

visitor centre, car park and pedestrian underpass of that is

needed in world-class attractions are served by world-class

facilities. Yes, I'm very happy to encourage those discussions to

continue. Obviously health and safety for visitors and staff is of

the utmost importance and overcome the collaboration between historic

environment Scotland and Orkney Islands Council on this project.

They have worked hard to develop an interim solution for they continue

to work towards a sustainable long-term solution to enhance and

enrich the tourism offer in Orkney and I know Liam McArthur will

continue to be very closely engaged in this and I'd be happy to show

that the relevant Minister corresponds with him as the

situation develops but one thing is sure, it is one of the world-class

attractions in Orkney and we want to do everything possible to ensure

that it continues to be so. Patrick Harvie. When the Cabinet will next

meet? Choose day. One of the first debates for Parliament had when we

return from the summer break was about refugees and the first

Minister and her colleagues backed a green amendment calling for the

evolution of the services around accommodation and support that

asylum seekers in our communities need. Since then the more

significant change that we've seen is an announcement by press release

from circle that they'll be taking over the provision of accommodation

services and shipment. What involvement of the Scottish

government have for awareness awareness communication little

private sector providers with the UK government in advance of that

decision. Has the Scottish government been able to exercise any

influence at all in this decision and how has the first minister

reacted? Firstly we are and have said before we are deeply concerned

about the continued allegations about standards of asylum

accommodation and allegations of mistreatment of asylum seekers. As

Patrick Harvie knows and has indicated in his question, the issue

of asylum seeker accommodation is reserved matter, these are not ever

decisions, we frequently make our views on these matters known to the

UK government that they are decisions of the UK government. I

would very much like to see these decisions devolved to this

Parliament. The communities secretary is due to meet with UK

Minister for immigration early next month, I think in the next two weeks

and will raise these issues with him when he does so. I understand the

community secretary is speaking with the Scottish refugee Council and I'm

sure these issues will be raised there as well. These are issues of

utmost aborted because the call to the very heart of how we treat the

most vulnerable people in our society and at I can give the

chamber and assurance that we will press the case for dignity but we

treat asylum seekers. I welcome that response and are once again

encourage the Scottish government to be proactive in putting together a

public sector bid to take on the provision of these services. We know

that the Scottish public sector and Scottish non-governmental

organisations can provide these services to a higher standard of

dignity that is being done at present. But as well as that the UK

government is putting pressure on Scottish local authorities to expand

the asylum dispersal programme and that may well be a legitimate goal

but it has to be done in a decent weight and a way that involves

negotiation and respect with communities and local authorities.

If that happens the Scottish government does have a role because

designation order to achieve that UK objective would require Scottish

ministers's consent. Can I ask the first Minister to ensure that

patches on the issue that the Scottish government has is used to

the maximum to advocate not only for an asylum dispersal programme that

means the needs of people on the basis of respecting their humanity

but also ensures local authorities are provided with resources are

provided to a service to provide a high standard and these are brought

back into this public sector as a matter of urgency. Our position and

principle that we believe asylum accommodation should be provided in

the public sector and I'm certainly happy with Angela to give

consideration to Patrick Harvie's suggestion for a public sector bid

if it is feasible and I'm happy to engage further with him on that. On

a question on asylum seeker dispersal, yet we will use any and

whatever influence we have two the maximum to try to make sure that the

arrangements for looking after asylum seekers are humane and

dignified, as we would want them all to be. We have an suitable

experience in that respect in terms of the programme unwelcoming Syrian

refugees to Scotland, many of them went to various other than Glasgow

around Scotland and there was good engagement through of attacks force

with local authorities and other agencies to make sure all the

support arrangements were in place, so I think we have some very useful

experience to bring to bear. I'm having to ask Angela Constance to

engage with Patrick Harvie about the detail with these issues but I will

give an assurance that we will always seek to act on this issue in

a way that prioritises the humanity and dignity of support we give

asylum seekers here in Scotland. The number of supplementary. Clear

victor. The first Minister will be aware of the deported crimes to six

that were published this week in violation and welcome drop in

overall crime is a worrying increase in sexual crimes, partly due to an

increased number of victims prepare to come forward but there are

growing concerns that we are seeing more and more sexual crimes

involving young people, particularly online such as the sharing of images

and videos. Can I ask the first minister to consider the call for

more support for its sexual violence prevention projects of its able to

reach every secondary school in the country. Yes, we will consider that,

we work closely with rape crisis Scotland and clear victor is

absolutely right to say that we should not in any way be complicit

in the trend in sexual offences as particularly in these days of social

media and online activity there is a real need to ensure education and

awareness is prioritised. I'm absolutely sure clear victor would

recognise the point I'm about to make, there is a sense and a

suspicion that in years gone by sexual offences have been

underreported and therefore a lot of what has gone into trying to

encourage and support people to come forward to report sexual offences

and indeed clear victor mentioned rape crisis Scotland. Earlier this

week when this statistics were published, the National coordinator

set herself that it's important that people have confidence in reporting

sexual crime. Changes by the police have transformed her sexual crime is

investigated and it's likely that at least some of this increase in

recorded sexual crime is due to people having more confidence to

report what has happened to them, so we should welcome that and continue

to get people the confidence but clear victor is absolutely right

will stop we should not take our eye off the ball of some of the

underlying trends and I'll certainly make sure that her specific

suggestion this followed up. First Minister, this morning there are

reports that the UK government has spent ?65 million establishing

Brexit departments. But they seem still to have no plan in place, is

the first Minister agree that it's time that the Prime Minister sets

out exactly what Brexit means? APPLAUSE

Yes, I do. We are now more than three months on since the referendum

and we have no greater clarity today than we did on the 23rd of June

about exactly what Brexit means. I think the UK government, the finest

in particular has to start to set out the detail of that very soon and

indeed I'm not the only one making comments like that. I notice two

Conservative MPs making similar comments today, Ken Clarke and Nicky

Morgan, the former education secretary making the point that if

the UK government doesn't suck to define what Brexit means, then other

people are going to start to do that for them. I think we need to see the

UK government get a grip here. I want to see the UK figure

negotiating position that keeps us in the single market. I know that's

a position that Ruth Davidson used to support,- think she does any

more, she's become a bit of a born-again Brexit year is

nevertheless I hope that common sense prevails but we need to start

seeing the detail and start to see it soon. To last the first Minister

in light of the ?5 million GMC investigation into the conduct of

its consultants at Aberdeen Royal infirmary, clearing all eight of

wrong doing, what actions of the first Minister take to reform

management practices and NHS Grampian. This was an investigation

by the General medical Council, concerns were raised, they have been

investigated in the normal way and a conclusion has been reached. It is

for the local health board and Grampian to take any and to learn

any lessons and the Health Secretary will ensure that happens and will be

very happy to correspond further with a member of the has any further

questions on the issue. File the SNP government has stepped in to save

the Scottish steel industry, Ferguson 's shipyard Prestwick

airport from closure and invested in support for oil and gas workers,

does the first Minister agree that it's high time for the UK government

to step up and take decisive action and explanation and development in

the North Sea or else take the blame for one of the most shameful

betrayal is in Scotland's industrial history. APPLAUSE

Yes I do agree with that question, obviously we have earlier this week.

This is actually quite an important matter and the serious issue for the

oil and gas secretary in Scotland, I think people should perhaps show a

slightly more respect. We have a report from oil and gas UK this week

showing the work that the oil and gas industry has done to reduce its

cost and become more efficient so it can be sustainable and hopefully

competitive in an era of lower oil prices. I visited Aberdeen last

Monday and met with oil and gas UK and discussed in more detail the one

that was fun but one of the key themes coming through that meeting

in coming through much of what we hear around oil and gas is the need

for further support for exploration because it's today's exploration

that is the production of tomorrow. We saw that in the report, still 20

billion barrels potentially of oil to be exploited in the North Sea but

he we have the exploration happening now and then the danger is that we

don't get the benefit of that. So I would call in the UK government

ahead of the often statement to add additional action, like it has done

previously, on investment for exploration so we can continue to

support the oil and gas sector as it comes through these difficult times.

Given the number of the first minister's Westminster colleagues

now helping the police with their enquiries is the first Minister

confident that fully Scotland have the resources to deal with this

upsurge in their workload? As the member is aware, we have committed

to real terms protection of the police revenue budget which over

this parliament will ensure it has an additional ?100 million to spend

and I think that a particular achievement when we consider that

since 2010 the Conservative government in London has cut our

budget by 5% in real terms. APPLAUSE To as the first Minister whether she

can explain how any political party can claim to be autonomous from

London when relying on money from London to keep them afloat. I don't

think any political party that relies on its London parent party

for funding can claim to be autonomous. That would seem to me to

be a contradiction in terms. To as the first minute of what

representations the Scottish government will make to the UK

government to ensure that reciprocal health care arrangements are a

priority in Brexit negotiations? We understand the importance of EU

health care arrangements to allow Scots to receive necessary health

care using this European Union health card. We also recognise the

considerable benefits of being able to travel in the EEA for plan

treatment under the gas two scheme and for our pensioners to receive

healthier finally choose to live in other EEA countries, so we will make

it clear to the UK government that citizens must retain their access to

access health care in Europe and I'm of the view that this must treated

in Brexit negotiations. The Tory government said no contingency plans

over the future of the European health insurance card service

meaning potentially hefty medical bills for Scots travelling abroad.

Three months on from the EU referendum as the first Minister had

assurances on any services, benefits rights which we are currently

entitled to as members of the EU and single market and how the government

is ensuring we don't miss out on these.

As I think has become abundantly clear in the last three months since

the referendum, the government did note contingency planning for the

event of Brexit, and I think that's a shameful abdication of its

responsibility. In terms of the specific issue, we have received no

assurances today from the UK Government on the benefits, services

and rights Scots are currently entitled to. That uncertainty is

disconcerting for businesses, universities, farmers, fishermen and

Scottish people in general. That's why we will continue to work as hard

as we can to protect the interests of Scotland and the people of

Scotland is the discussions progress. Given reciprocal health

care depends very much on health care provided in this country and

given the First Minister said about health care earlier, can I ask is

she aware of the moving of orthopaedic trauma from a hospital

was one of the decisions made ten years ago and the decision was made

in July with note public consultation. We'll see now call it

in in-line with the will of the Scottish people. I don't think that

is a supplementary on Europe and Brexit. Question five, Douglas Ross.

What is the Scottish Government's response to the Chief Constable that

it will take a two or three-year adjustment period to balance the

police Scotland finances. As I announced in December and mentioned

a few moments ago, we are protecting the police resources in real terms

in every year of the Parliament, a boost of millions by the year 2021.

I think the First Minister. The cancellation of the ?60 million I6

project was announced recently. Does the First Minister agree that the

shambolic failure of that project undermines the great efforts of

police officers and staff across the country dealing with ever greater

demands, including the challenges of dealing with a growing elderly

population? I don't. Police Scotland and the Scottish police authority

take decisions they consider to be appropriate and let's not forget our

police do absolutely fantastic job, a very difficult job, and as we saw

in crime statistics earlier this week, recorded crime is at a 42 year

low in Scotland, something I think we should thank every single police

officer across the country for. We will continue to work closely with

police Scotland and the Scottish police authority to make sure

pressures on their budgets can be properly managed and the protection

I have already spoken about will help protect front-line policing

services. As I said a moment ago, it beggars belief that Conservative

MSPs in this chamber raise issues of public spending when conservative

government at Westminster has reduced spending in real terms since

2010. As we saw in the Fraser of Allender report, they look likely to

cut the budget of the rest of this Parliament by up to ?1.6 billion. If

Tory MSPs wants to make the case of a well funded public services, can I

suggest they start making that case to their colleagues in Westminster.

Christine Grahame. Would the Conservatives not be better to

challenge their own government into returning the 75 million of VAT held

against police Scotland, the only police service in the whole of the

UK that has VAT levied on it? Absolutely. Christine Grahame is

absolutely right. Police Scotland is the only police force in the whole

of the UK that has VAT levied. If the Conservatives at Westminster

want to ease the burden on police Scotland, then they could do so at

the stroke of a pen by reimbursing the VAT payments, and I call on them

today to do that. To ask the First Minister what the Scottish

Government's response is to calls by those working with abuse survivors

for an urgent investigation into the direction of the National strategy

for survivors of childhood abuse? We are absolutely committed to

preventing childhood abuse, and we have consistently engaged with

survivors and support agencies across the country. Our current

framework builds on the original survival Scotland strategy of

support groups, and responds to the most recent evidence of impacts of

child abuse, specifically responding to what survivors say matters most

to them. We will of course continue to engage with organisations to

raise concerns to understand their views folly and ensure everyone has

accurate up-to-date picture of the current approach of our evidence

-based strategy. I think the First Minister for that answer. These are

difficult and sensitive issues, but they have to be addressed, and every

day seems to bring fresh concerns. When some of the leaders in the

field tell us that the National strategy for survivors of sexual

abuse has lost its direction, has deviated from the original

survivors' strategy, and describe the key body is unacceptable and an

ethical, it's not enough for the First Minister to provide simple

reassurance. We have also heard serious allegations against the head

of survivors support and the Scottish Government, and have seen

resignation of two of three panel members of this historic abuse

enquiry amidst allegations of government interference. I do not

doubt the sincerity of government efforts to get this right, but the

First Minister must accept that as far as survivors are concerned, the

government is getting it wrong. We'll be First Minister personally

investigate this, and take the action required to correct it? Of

course I will continue to take a personal interest in these issues.

The Deputy First Minister has ministerial responsibility for these

issues, and as we have seen in the chamber in recent weeks, takes these

issues extremely seriously. Iain Gray made reference to the

independent enquiry. I want to take the opportunity today to stress the

independence from government that enquiry. The Deputy First Minister

has appointed Ladysmith to chair that enquiry, a respected whose

appointment I think removes completely any suggestion of

anything other than complete independence. In terms of some of

the other issues Iain Gray races, we take these issues very seriously,

they are complex issues. When I answered the original question I

took care to say to him that we would engage with the organisations

who have raised these concerns, firstly to understand the concerns

more fully. Without going into detail, at this stage we wouldn't

agree with all those concerns, but we want to make sure we understand

them to respond properly to them. We will continue to engage with

survivors and survivors' groups, so we make sure the arrangements we

have in place so the support for survivors are the right arrangements

and they take full account of the impact on survivors. We take this

extremely seriously. They will never be easy issues to get complete

consensus around, but we will strive each and every day to do our best to

achieve that. To ask the First Minister what the Scottish

Government's position is on reports that there were 729 teacher

vacancies the week before the start of the 2016-17 term. The figure of

729 teacher vacancies is wrong. To get that figure Mr Scott included

200 vacancies in Argyll and Bute. As of the 9th of August, the date that

resulted in that figure, there were not 200 vacancies in Argyll and

Bute, there were 12. I also understand that yesterday the Lib

Dem convener of education in Argyll and Bute informed Tavare Scott of

that, so I hope he will take the opportunity today to correct the

record. In the time since the Lib Dem FOIA, many of the vacancies

advertised have been filled. That said, we all want schools with the

right number of teachers so every child has the potential to succeed

and we will work hard to achieve that. I understand those figures are

correct, but I don't think it's fair to blame and FOI junior officer.

Would the First Minister accept that there were still 500 teaching

vacancies at the start of the term, and would be First Minister accept

the steady numbers of teachers leaving the profession is a cause

for concern. Does she realise that yesterday the architect of

curriculum for excellence, the way we teach our children in schools,

said that the system is bedevilled by red tape, which Keir Bloomer said

was self evident lunacy. With the First Minister instead look forward

to the General teaching Council or the government investigating the

reasons behind the teacher vacancies. First of all, I didn't

blame anybody, other than perhaps Tavare -ish Scott, I simply made the

point that the figure he used previously was wrong, he knew it was

wrong, and given the fact he had just repeated it in Parliament, he

might take the opportunity to acknowledge it was wrong. The other

point about vacancies, before the start of the school term, there will

be vacancies and those vacancies will reduce as we go into the school

term. A figure of around 500 that he has now quoted will already have

reduced. Of course we will continue to work with local authorities to

ensure we keep teacher vacancies to an absolute minimum and we have the

right numbers of teachers in our schools. In respect to the comments

by Keir Bloomer, with the greatest of respect I would say that is

exactly why John Swinney has been working as hard as he had in recent

weeks, to reduce bureaucracy that teachers face, reduce their

workload, and look at the government review that takes a long hard look

at how schools are governed. This government is getting on with the

reforms we need to see in our schools and I hope we have support

from people across the chamber as we do so. Would be First Minister be

able to tell us when the GT Casillas reforms that would allow those who

have qualified as teachers in other countries would be able to teach in

Scotland? -- the GTCS reforms. What we are absolutely determined to do

as part of the work we are taking forward is make sure the

arrangements we have in place through the General teaching Council

support our dedicated to getting the best and brightest people into

teaching in Scotland. I don't have the detail of the question to hand,

but I will make sure it is provided to the member. Dundee suffered

chronic teacher shortages last year. This year vacancies are in primary

schools exclusively in the most deprived areas of our city. Council

officials tell me that there is a significant under recruitment to

teacher training. Why is this when it has such an impact on children

and their education? We have continued to work to expand teacher

training. We of course have provided funding to local authorities to

maintain the number of teachers in our schools and we will continue to

work hard to make sure we are getting the right numbers of

teachers into our schools. There is a range of initiatives that we have

taken forward in order to address particular shortages in particular

areas. In the north-east of Scotland we were talking about the

difficulties in the gas sector and one of the things we are taking

forward in the north-east is to get former gas oil workers into teacher

training. That is to make sure we have the right numbers of teachers

in our schools. I have said repeatedly in this chamber that we

need to make sure we have the best education system in the world for

all our young people, whatever their background, and that's the top

priority this government. That concludes First Minister's

Questions. We now move to member's business. STUDIO: The conclusion of

the First Minister's Questions. A diverse range of topics. We can chew

over them now. Let's go with the question raised by Ruth Davidson,

she was pushing very hard for an answer on fracking. But she ain't

going to get one, because the First Minister was talking about the

process. Then you have the two different policy standpoints, which

were going on there. Nicola Sturgeon knew this question was coming today.

When we saw the ships sailing under the bridges yesterday, I think she

knew that was coming. Well prepared, she said there is a process that

they will stick by, see it through, and that will dictate the timescale.

You will not rush me for an answer. Did she give any hint at all, she

accused the Tories of being prepared to ride roughshod over local

opinion. I think that meant they were prepared to go towards fracking

without taking... It wasn't necessarily her saying she was

anti-fracking, she was trying to avoid saying that, but it was pretty

close. We know the SNP don't like fracking. They don't want to be seen

as anti-business though, so therefore they have to find a way of

getting across that divide. The process is the way they do that.

Caught on that conundrum, that dilemma between business and the

environment. We are, and with the moratorium so far they have walked a

tightrope between the two of them. Nicola Sturgeon said today there was

a process under way, they want to look at the scientific process and

ask about public opinion. But at the end of this they will have to come

to a decision and this moratorium can't run for ever. Ruth Davidson

try to accuse them of double standards. Being very sceptical

about fracking in Scotland, but prepared to use imported shale gas

from America and eventually perhaps from England.

Some of the influences that have been made about discussions

ministers have been had about fracking which perhaps don't reflect

what they're the public. She was happy to say in the arts was

important to Scotland. Trying to keep business onside and trying to

take public opinion into account. Ministers have to decide ultimately

on hospital provision and health provision, so they don't want to

annoy local communities and Nicola Sturgeon says you cannot keep every

hospital in exactly the same for ever, reflecting the vote last night

in the chamber. What I love is that... One of the ways they seized

power from Labour, everyone wants in my backyard all the hospital

facilities and all this specialities, they want something

the size of Royal Edinburgh infirmary at the end of their

street. That was one of the big sticks that the SNP used to beat

Labour, now incumbency kicks in, they are faced with necessary

rationalisation of services as its leader who can legitimately make the

attack and run with it and again Nicola Sturgeon's Ansa, she was well

prepared on this one because it's an obvious one was to be able to see

that we'll stick with the process, process, process, process and we'll

see that through and then and only then would the secretary decide in

the light of last night given decision. Last night given decision

by the chamber was essentially a call to short cut that process. It

was really to say to the Scottish ministers, coal in these decisions,

make them major service changes, which means that the Health

Secretary would be responsible for deciding the services stay or if

they go, so the opposition parties want to put this responsibility on

to Scottish ministers. He step aside for just a minute, see what's going

on behind us. They are holding the earth, literally. About stopping

climate chaos. You can see all the party leaders joining together.

Nicholas they are agreed on that one. There

are agreed on saving the earth but they were not agreed on the health

provision. Quite a difficult one and she was accusing Labour of demanding

something that they themselves would not have done in government. That's

the game, you're the opposition party, you hold the government to

account, the SNP were great at it now at last Labour are getting

traction with this. Let's move on to another topic that came up at

various points. Fully Scotland. Broner Fraser made an off-the-cuff

remark well being very careful with your answer, what was he talking

about when he said that SNP members were helping the police. The police

budgets. It was a cheeky question. So many SNP helping the police with

their enquiries, some questions that he's been answering with the police.

In relation to financial things. They're convinced that matters will

be cleared up. We had charges levied against Natalie McGarry. Police

Scotland issue, it keeps dogging things. The Conservatives came in on

the cancelled IT programme. What I thought was interesting, again,

quite well prepared and her chances but for once an old hand came to her

rescue. I'll tell her you said that. I think old hand is fair! Christine

stepped in as a supplementary pointing out that a lot of the

problems in shortage of money properly Scotland is that the UK

police authorities pay VAT and of the Conservative government were to

ease up on that, millions of pounds would fall back into fully Scotland

covers. An interesting collectively let Conservatives and Nicola

Sturgeon used on that. The police one is coming again and again,

police numbers, provision, local provision, all coming as a result of

the shake-up. The Liberal Democrats press that most vigorously. We saw a

former and SNP Alistair Coote has come to the Justice committee again

and again with these questions about fully Scotland. Christine Grahame

stepped in and said what about the VAT issue because she was critical

and friends in her questioning as what was going on with the fully

Scotland budgets. Patrick Harvie raising the issue of treatment and

literally accommodation for asylum seekers and seeking a public sector

solution. Yes, I think his argument was that he accepted that providing

accommodation for asylum seekers in Scotland is a reserved issue. Soon

there is to come top of how they go about disbursing refugees more

widely. At that point, the Scottish government begins to have a locus

and he was urging Nicola Sturgeon to see is that Lethbridge, if you like,

to try and make sure that we find a public sector solution and a public

sector joint bid to avoid these things go to companies. Has

vanished. The ads and all it contains full back up the stairs,

you stay with us, another topic to talk about. The controversy about

sectarianism in football, how could you know otherwise. An act was

carried, the offensive behaviour in football and threatening

communications act was carried to try to clamp down on online

communications that were seen as being threatening and damaging and

also sectarian matters associated with football. To say the least it

has not been universally popular but MSP James Kelly is trying to scrap

it and midway through a public consultation on this topic, but we

decided to find out how things were going to catch up with them on how

he felt that she was going and I began by asking him what was wrong

with the act? It's absolutely clear that this legislation is not

working. Not all the cases are charged proceed to court, some that

proceed to court are kicked out on the basis that judges aren't able to

interpret the law and that is not good legislation. It's time to get

that of this legislation and put in place a proper practical strategy to

tackle sectarianism. What with that strategy involved, ministers say

they are not feuding al-Tanf and though the act is in place the say

there has to be an alternative? It shouldn't involve cutting funding on

anti-sectarianism projects which the government are doing just now. What

would you do? It has to be a priority to work in communities, you

need something, not a strategy worked out in Saint Andrews house by

civil servants, let's involve the people on the ground in west Central

Scotland, in churches and schools and charities. Let's listen to them.

It's been tried for years and decades. Let's work with them so

that we are listening to people on the ground working with people on

the ground rather than sending police officers into football

grounds with cameras to film fans, that's not helping. The act is in

place, I know you regret the act but it in place what signal does it send

if you know the move that legislation, does not send a signal

that that sort of sectarian behaviour can go on and carry on

singing about the Billy boys and the IRA. If you have impact in place and

is not working, you don't continue with that, you get rid of that act

and you reinforce the existing legislation, specifically around...

What about the point of that message, does it send the message

that Scotland has given up on it. I don't accept that at all and an

incumbency with politicians and also on football clubs to make it clear

that unacceptable behaviour, whether it is of a sectarian nature or not

should be tackled and should be taken on, but you don't tackle it

with legislation that is not working. Do clubs do enough, do

Celtic, Rangers and the other clubs do enough or would they do more? I

would like to see the clubs across the board to become more involved in

promoting good behaviour among football fans. We have 96,000

football fans at premiership grounds last week, let's try to promote

football, it's our national game, we all enjoy it, let's get behind it

and fight to bring people together to do that instead of introducing

legislation which divides people. The act also include threatening

behaviour online, crawling etc, without not be lost if you call

round your of scrapping it. But if you look at the number of cases that

have come through. Only 47 cases have been taken forward and of those

only 11 prosecutions. There's already telecommunications

legislation that deals with that. You say scrap the act. Scrapping act

in full, we don't need an adequate legislation that's not working.

That was James Kelly talking to me early on the subject of his attempt

to abolish that act. I'm joined by my colleagues again. You hear the

response from the Scottish government, they don't send to me

very vigorous in defending the act, they're physically challenging Mr

Kelly to come in with an alternative, but are they sliding

on? What we've all got to accept is that this was a rotten piece of

legislation, that's a fact. Much of the government would accept that. It

was a classic piece of legislation is because something had to be done,

dangerous dogs, whatever, something has to be done and something that

have to be done and sometimes the message that is sent out is quite

important. I'm a football fan, you're a football fan, we don't

like... Unfortunately not at premiership football fan! Next year.

Eason fans don't want this going on but above all this is where think

James Kelly has massive travel, the public hates hooliganism and

sectarianism. You try and sell the public the idea that this act should

be abolished and you're going to get nowhere. He is acting under pressure

from the campaign group Face which is mostly based within Celtic fans

and I can't see where he's coming from and I agree that some of his

criticisms of the act but if he tries to push at ease on the wrong

side of the argument. James Kelly is adamant, you don't make things

better by rotten lot. That's right and the government will have to look

at this because the numbers don't stack up in the parliament with all

the opposition parties saying they actually want to see something done

about this act and abolished and I wonder if the Justice secretary

might use the recent problems at Hampden Park at the Scottish cup

final to look at the whole situation again. In most cases the clubs have

been exonerated. They have not only been exonerated, the decision was

that nobody could act because they refused strict liability, ie clubs

being responsible for the trouble from their fans. Will there be

something changed? I wonder if a combination of deep down accepting

it is not a good piece of legislation. Without ever saying

that. Yes, whatever. No action has to be taken on the cup final, that

was the decision yesterday, we might go down the road on stronger

pressure if clubs don't go on liability it might have to be done

on statute. That is what the Justice secretary said he will do. On the

subject of football, I'll be spending my weekend thing attention

to the game outside the Premiership, a championship game, something from

Edinburgh -- something from Edinburgh called Hibernian, IQ

they're quite good! -- I hear they're quite good. First Minister's

questions ranged quite widely, the police, fracking, police Cullen.

From Holyrood and the Scottish Parliament -- police Scotland.

Extraordinary scenes, here. The atmosphere, absolutely electric.