The next item of business is a statement by Paul Healhouse on unconventional oil and gas. The minister will take questions at the end of his statement and so there should be no interventions or interruptions. I call on Paul Healhouse. Minister, 10 minutes please. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I welcome the opportunity to update Parliament on our consultation on unconventional oil and gas. This Government has continually presented impartial, independent information on unconventional oil and gas in order to encourage informed public discussion and debate, and our consultation is a continuation of that approach. Our consultation talking fracking, which we launched on 31 January, does not set out a specific policy proposal. Instead, it presents evidence and gives the public, businesses and organisations across Scotland the opportunity to consider and express their views on this evidence. This is a unique and important approach that demonstrates our commitment to exploring both the evidence and the views of people across Scotland without bias or prejudgment, and I will maintain that neutral position today. Unconventional oil and gas is a complex and controversial issue that has stimulated intense debate, motivated by deeply held and sincere views on all sides. Our approach therefore remains one of caution while we gather and consider evidence and the views of the public on this issue. Our cautious and evidence-led approach is the right approach, and it is one that has been widely supported by communities, industry and other interested parties. There are some who wish to pursue a gungho approach, either towards extraction or a ban, and we have put forward their own views without due concern for the differing interests and views of those who would be affected. It is the job of government, and one that I take seriously, to base our decisions on evidence, taking proper account of public opinions and to seek a collective way forward. As I have stressed before to this chamber at each step towards reaching a final decision, we must take a careful, considered and evidence-led approach, and we must do that alongside an informed public debate. Most of Scotland's unconventional oil and gas deposits occur in and around former coal fields and oil shale fields in Scotland's central belt, which are amongst the most densely populated parts of our country, as well as in the area around Canon Bay and Dumfrieshire. Scotland needs safe, clean, reliable and affordable energy to underpin the Scottish economy and to contribute to the wellbeing of our society. Scotland must also continue to demonstrate strong leadership on climate change, an issue in which everyone across Scotland has an interest. That is why it is so important that we not only consult local communities in the central belt and Dumfrieshire, but that we give communities, business and interest groups from across Scotland an opportunity to put their views across. It is also important to remember that this is not an issue that exists in isolation. Instead, the future of all potential energy sources must be viewed in the context of Scotland's wider energy strategy. The choices that Scotland makes about energy are amongst the most important decisions that we face. Our energy industry provides high-quality jobs and a vibrant climate for innovation, and affordable energy provision is a prerequisite for healthy, fulfilling living and productive competitive business. Achieving our vision for energy is also crucial to efforts to tackle fuel poverty and to prevent damaging effects of climate change, as part of the global community's fight to limit global temperature increases to two degrees Celsius or less. The Scottish Government is determined to support a stable managed transition to a low-carbon economy in Scotland. However, our draft energy strategy also makes clear our commitment to the oil and gas industry throughout the energy transition as a highly regulated and stable source of energy within an industry providing an estimated 124,500 high-value jobs and with the skills and expertise to meet the needs of the energy system of the future. Our draft energy strategy for Scotland also sets out the Scottish Government's position on underground coal gasification, a position that we took after a carefully considered period of evidence gathering. In my statement to the chamber on 6 October, I confirmed that underground coal gasification poses numerous serious environmental risks and should have no place in Scotland's energy mix at this time. As a result, our energy strategy sets out an energy mix for the future that does not include underground coal gasification. Our draft energy strategy is stimulating well-informed debate on the energy challenges in Scotland and policies needed to meet our aspirations to deliver a secure, sustainable energy future for all. I am keen to ensure that our energy strategy is infused with the thoughts and views of people from right across Scotland, and I would strongly encourage everyone to participate prior to the closing date of 30 May. The results of the consultation on unconventional oil and gas will be a key consideration in finalising our energy strategy later this year. I now wish to update the chamber on the Scottish Government's programme of evidence gathering and public consultation on unconventional oil and gas. To allow us to gather evidence to prepare a full public consultation, the Scottish Government put in place a moratorium on unconventional oil and gas in January 2015. That means that no such projects can take place, and for the avoidance of any doubt, the moratorium covers hydraulic fracturing, also known as fracking, and coal bed methane extraction technologies. In support of our cautious evidence-led approach towards unconventional oil and gas, the Scottish Government has taken steps to establish a comprehensive evidence base in which to consider the future of unconventional oil and gas in Scotland. In 2013, the Scottish Government asked an independent expert scientific panel to examine the scientific evidence on unconventional oil and gas in Scotland, and when the panel reported in July 2014, it identified a number of key gaps in the evidence base. On 8 October 2015, we set out details of the consultation timetable and programme of gathering further evidence to address the gaps identified by the panel. The Scottish Government reached a major milestone in November last year when we published a comprehensive suite of expert reports examining potential social, economic and environmental effects of unconventional oil and gas in more detail. The research was carried out by leading independent experts in their respective fields and the findings deepened our understanding of the issues. As we set out when we established the moratorium, the publication of the research has been followed by a period in which we and the public have had the opportunity to scrutinise and discuss the findings prior to the launch of the public consultation. I am confident that the reports that we have published deepened our knowledge of the evidence and shed light on the issues and choices that the industry presents. Now that both the public and those in the chamber have had time to examine the reports, conclusions and detail, I am sure that it is clear to all that no one study can give a conclusive view on this industry and whether it has a place in Scotland's energy mix. Some will say that this research shows that the economic impact is low and that environmental health and climate change risks are too great. Others say that the regulation risks can be managed and the potential economic gain cannot be ignored. The reports rightly do not make recommendations on whether unconventional oil and gas should be permitted or not. However, the science and evidence contained within them informed the debate and the discussion. To support this dialogue and debate, the Scottish Government published its consultation on unconventional oil and gas talking fracking on 31 January. To provide time for full and considered debate and to give the public and stakeholders time to respond, the consultation will last for four months, closing on 31 May. We have created a number of innovative ways for the public to engage in the consultation. In addition to the consultation document, we have launched a temporary unconventional oil and gas website, also called Talking Fracking. The site has been designed to provide a user-friendly route to accessing all the materials and evidence that support this consultation, and it would encourage those wishing to explore the issues further to visit this site. To help the consultation reach a range of audiences, the consultation document itself is available in alternative formats on request, including easy read, large print, Braille, British Sign Language and other languages that can be requested from the Scottish Government. We have also made provision to receive responses in alternative formats, for example spoken responses or languages other than English. Importantly, we have also prepared a discussion toolkit that has been designed to help communities and stakeholders to explore and discuss the issues in groups. The result of those discussions can be submitted to the Scottish Government and will be treated as a formal response to the consultation. I am pleased to inform the chamber that my officials have received a high volume of requests for consultation materials, including the discussion packs. I would also like to assure the chamber of the robust steps that the Scottish Government took to ensure that the evidence presented in the consultation and supporting materials was accurate and impartial. That included using direct quotes from the research projects and seeking assurance from the research contractors that our summaries were accurate. We have also undertaken a number of actions to promote the consultation via the local and national press and the consultation is being promoted through our digital and social media channels and via direct correspondence with a range of stakeholders, including community councils. We are seeing a strong response to this consultation into five figures so far and are satisfied that this level of participation indicates that the consultation is being viewed as a valuable process by the public. Presiding Officer, as I set out on 6 October, we are adopting a carefully considered process for reaching a decision on the future of unconventional oil and gas. I assure the views of the public, the evidence base and the views of Parliament are fully considered. Once the consultation closes and the results have been independently analysed and published, I reiterate our previous commitment to present our recommendation to Parliament and provide an opportunity to vote on it. After that, the Scottish Government will come to a considered judgment on the future of unconventional oil and gas in Scotland. Of course, we will respect the will of Parliament on this issue while also following the statutory assessments and procedures that are required. Our carefully considered approach to reaching a final position on unconventional oil and gas will ensure that we make the right choice for Scotland founded on the best available evidence. Given the significance of the issue, I am confident that that is the right and proper way to proceed. I take questions on the issues raised in the statement and intend to allow 20 minutes for questions after which we will move on to the next item of business. Could those members wish to press the request-to-speak buttons now? I call Alexander Burnett to be followed by Jackie Baillie. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer, and I thank the minister for advance notice of his statement. With such anticipation of his statement, I can only describe our disappointment with how little it says. Whilst many of us would have been hoping for progress in exploring Scotland's untapped riches, there was also a fear that an outright ban was the price of the greens of surveillance on Tuesday. However, the statement is none of these, talking fracking and no action as usual. Given communities such as Croy, Cumbernauld and Coat Bridge are waiting to gain hundreds of millions of pounds through a share of the proceeds, is the minister finally today going to give us a date of when a decision will be made? Through to form, Mr Burnett strikes again. Mr Burnett knows that our position on the emerging energy technologies has been consistent. Credible and evidence is also in line with our manifesto in which we were overwhelmingly elected in May last year. Until recently, our steadfast evidence-led approach to underground coal gasification was heavily criticised by Mr Burnett and others in the Scottish Conservatives, only for the UK Government to belatedly follow Scotland's lead and move towards a position of not supporting the industry on climate change grounds. I have noted, as I am sure many have in this chamber, that the Scottish Conservatives make no reference to their position on underground coal gasification in their recently published environment policy paper. Of course, Mr Burnett and his colleagues have a history of flip-flopping on issues to do with oil and gas. Last year, we were told that—this is a serious point that Mr Fraser might want to listen to—we were told that the Conservatives had secured a deal for the oil and gas industry from George Osborne. Of course, he was reshuffled out. Before the spring budget, the Conservatives were telling us that the oil and gas industry did not need any additional support in the budget. Of course, the chancellor recognised that it was the Scottish Government that had been pressing for changes in the fiscal regime to help the oil and gas industry. I will get on with doing the job that I am doing—elected on a mandate to do exactly what I am doing—and I will leave to Mr Burnett to sit and scream from the sidelines. In May 2016, the Parliament voted to ban fracking. In November 2016, the minister came before Parliament with expert reports and told us that he was cautious and consulting.  What we have had is, frankly, 15 minutes from the minister, a repeat of what we had in November, nothing but padding, nothing new, nothing that delivers on SNP candidates' promises across the country to ban fracking and nothing that delivers on the will of Parliament. The minister tells us that we will get a vote in Parliament, although that is indeed his kind of him. Then he says that the Scottish Government will decide anyway that we could not make it up, but we have already had a vote in Parliament. Can the minister tell me that this is a bit like the independence referendum, and we will just keep having vote after vote until you get the answer that you want? Let us get some things straight. First of all, the Opposition asked for a statement in the middle of the consultation period, and we are happy to provide a statement to update the chamber on progress. I would have thought that that is something that Ms Bailey would welcome. The other aspect of that in which she refers to, in terms of the not having made a decision, is within the period of the consultation. It is normal practice to wait until consultation concludes before you reach a conclusion, especially when she is listening to the views of the people of Scotland. I would have thought that Ms Bailey would want to hear what the people of Scotland would say about fracking before reaching a position. She would also be mindful of the fact that we need to be in a position to have an evidence-based position before making a decision. I am keeping true to the words that I said when I launched the consultation and the statement in November that we will give Parliament a decision on this issue, and we will have to take account of other statutory procedures that then follow by assuring Ms Bailey that we will be listening to the will of Parliament at that time. I move to questions from the rest of Parliament. I have 11 people wanting to ask in 17 minutes, so I want questions, not opening statements. I call Angus MacDonald for if I might. Maurice Golden and Mr MacDonald set an example. The minister will be aware of the concerns in my constituency regarding the environmental risks of fracking in Falkirk district and the wider Falls valley. He will also be aware of the 15-year contract signed by Ineos for the supply of shell gas from the United States for the Grangemouth plant, which puts the future of the plant on a sure footing, which is extremely welcome. Does the minister agree with me that, as long as there is any prospect of environmental risk, there is no need for a dash for gas in Scotland? Can he reassure my constituents in Falkirk East who are deeply concerned about the potential impact that the fracking industry would have on their lives? I want to acknowledge, first and foremost, that Mr MacDonald has been consistent in his desire to express the views of his constituents in Falkirk East. He raised his important points. He is indeed correct that Ineos has secured a long-term supply of shell gas for the plant. We continue to support the plant as a key employer in his constituency and neighbouring constituencies. We are taking a very cautious approach here. We want to take very much account of the environmental impact, the economic impact and the impact of climate change and other factors before we reach a considered decision and assure Mr MacDonald that we are very much taking into account considerations around the environment in reaching a decision. Maurice Golden, will you follow by John Mason? KPMG's modelling, commissioned by the SNP Government, stated that community benefit payments could be as high as almost £1 billion. Parliament still requires a date for the decision, but if unconventional oil and gas extraction is permitted, would the SNP Government support a community benefit fund? As Mr Golden will know, community benefits are not something that is taken into account in planning decisions in any case, and I do not want to prejudge the outcome of the consultation. We would obviously have to look very carefully at the science around the environmental impact, the economic impact and take that public opinion into account as well before reaching a decision. I do not want to prejudge the process. I am aware of suggestions in relation to community benefit. First and foremost, we are focusing on the questions raised in the consultation itself, and we have encouraged Mr Golden and all of our members in the chamber to encourage their constituents to take part in that so that we can have as broad a range of views from the communities of Scotland as possible. First and foremost, we want to listen to the people and study the evidence that is submitted to us and then come to a decision. John Mason, followed by Claudia Beamish. Can the minister assure us that he will hold his nerve, he will listen to the public and will not be swayed by the extremists on either side? I have got to be careful here. I do not want to upset anyone in the chamber, Mr Mason, but certainly we are listening to a range of views and we are trying to do all we can to listen to all those who have an interest in this subject. It is one of the real merits of having the consultation. It gives people an opportunity to have their say and the evidence. If they disagree with it, they can put counter evidence and to come to a view ultimately based on that. We have independent analysis of the responses to look into the breadth of views that come forward. I assure the member that I will stay true to what we have committed to do, which is to listen to the people of Scotland who have a very important role in this process and to take very serious consideration of all the scientific evidence that has been presented to me. I will not be swayed by people on either end of the spectrum who are not prepared to listen to reason. Claudia Beamish, followed by Mark Ruskell, Ms Beamish. I thank you, Presiding Officer, for being as reasonable as possible. The minister has just spent 10 minutes of Parliament's time telling us nothing new of substance. This comes after he has spent 10 months, frankly, actively ignoring the will of Parliament. The Scottish Parliament has already voted for a ban on onshore fracking. I remember that it was my amendment. When will the minister finally accept that on the basis of the irrefutable climate science alone that my bill for banning fracking onshore in Scotland is the best way forward for a sustainable future for the people? First of all, I recognise that Claudia Beamish has had a genuine interest in this issue. I would not describe her in any way as an extremist on this point, so I want to note that. As to ignoring the bill of the Parliament, we have a very important commitment that we gave to the people of Scotland in the manifesto on which we were elected, which was to have an extensive evidence-based process to decide the position on fracking. That is what we stood on. That is what we are fulfilling as a Government. I believe that it is the right thing to do because it is to be fair to all sides, to listen to the evidence from all sides and to take a decision ultimately based on that evidence and the views of the communities that will be most affected by this. As Claudia Beamish knows, because I know that she has taken great interest in this and obviously in preparation of her bill, the areas that are covered, as I said in my statement, are largely in the most densely populated parts of our country. There is a huge interest among the communities of Scotland in that. We want to give people a chance to have a say. I think that that is a very important part of the process and it is something that we have committed to doing. As to the point about irrefutable science, the very point of having a consultation is to put the science out there and allow people to challenge it if they feel that it is inaccurate in any way and to receive counter-evidences as part of the consultation exercise. That I think is a responsible thing to do as well. When we reach a decision, it can be seen to have been entirely fair and one that we can all stand behind, I hope, in this Parliament. It seems that the minister has come to his chamber once again to say that now is not the time for a decision on fracking. I respect the fact that you have a timetable and I respect the fact that you have emphasised the importance of a legally binding and watertight decision, whatever that decision may be. How important is the consultation and the response to the consultation in terms of delivering a legally binding decision? If you do not get the level of detail and the level of responses that you hope to get, will that jeopardise whatever that decision is? The first thing to say is that I might be missed because I did not go into it in great depth, but we have already received over a five-figure number of responses. We are getting a very good response from across what I could not tell the member what the composition of those answers are because they are being gathered independently of myself. I am not wanting to interfere in that process, but I can assure the member that there is very strong participation in the consultation exercise. The importance of it is because of where the activity that is proposed to take place affects many communities across Scotland. It is only right that they have a say as to whether they value their environment and potential climate change impacts over potential economic impacts that the Conservatives and others have referred to. I think that that is very important to hear what the people of Scotland have to say, feed that into the decision and ultimately make a recommendation to Parliament. Ultimately, members in this chamber will have a very important role in the process as well, because we will put a recommendation to you and we will then give the chamber the chance to say where they think that we should go on the issue of fracking. Willie Rennie, followed by Clare Haughey, Mr Rennie. I thank the minister for an advanced copy of the statement. There is nothing new in the statement, but it reminds us that he continues to flout the will of Parliament. Has he had his ears boxed by the First Minister for doing so? I do not know how things worked in the last Labour and Lib Dem executive, but we work as a team in this Government. Minister, can you speak into the microphone? I apologise, Presiding Officer. One thing I would say in response to Mr Rennie about this issue, he says that there is nothing new. We have a consultation, we are updating Parliament in the progress of a consultation, we are sticking to the deadlines that we have committed to, there is no change in the deadlines. We are trying to respect Parliament by accepting a request to give a statement to the chamber, including from Liam McArthur, his colleague. I think that Mr Rennie would do well to recognise that, but we are sticking to the process that we have been elected on in our manifesto, and I believe that it has been backed by a number of key stakeholders who have said that it is the exact right thing to do, including many within the media and trade union movement and others. Mr Rennie perhaps may not like it, but we are doing what we promise to do, and I think that we are doing it well. Clare Haughey, followed by Murdo Fraser. What engagement has the Scottish Government had with stakeholders during their investigation into the impact of fracking? That is an important point that has been raised. We have carefully listened to our stakeholders in shaping the consultation itself. They had a big part in designing the consultation, and that is important to make. I have met key groups representing the full range of views on the issue of fracking, and my officials have filed a series of workshops with stakeholders on how best to encourage participation, a report of which has been publicly available on our website. Stakeholder interest has been crucially important in forming our approach to the consultation, and it shows the importance of having a consultation to listen to people, because there is such a range of strongly held views on both sides of the debate, and we have done our best. Of course, no consultation will ever be perfect, but we have done our best, Presiding Officer, to make sure that we try to take on board those points. Murdo Fraser, followed by Christina McKelvie. Earlier this year, the advertising standards authority ordered friends of the earth to stop publishing misleading claims about the impact of fracking on health and the contamination of drinking water. How will the Scottish Government ensure that the public responses to its consultation are not influenced by irresponsible, scaremongering and lies spread by so-called environmental groups, seeking to unfairly slant the responses that are received? I am not keen on the word lies in your question, even though it is not accusing MD in here. Minister. I will not make any judgment on any material from either side that has been put out there, but we have taken a conscious decision to commission independent evidence that we believe is objective, and we have gone around our business to make sure that it is as neutrally worded as we can make it in the consultation documents that we are affair to both arguments. We have avoided promulgating material from various campaign groups to avoid being accused, perhaps by Mr Fraser or others in this chamber, of promoting information that was incorrect. We have tried to stick to what we knew to be commissioned and commissioned on a scientific basis. We have had the chief scientific officer looking at it and we have had it heavily scrutinised before it went out to the public domain to be as neutrally worded as possible, so we are not providing leading or prejudicial responses within the consultation document. We can only do what we can do, and we have tried to make sure that information is widely accessible to the public as possible. Indeed, members in this chamber can help with that. Christina McKelvie, followed by Richard Leonard, Ms McKelvie. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. My constituents will welcome the chance to participate in this process. On another matter, can the minister tell us why unconventional oil and gas does not feature in the climate change plan? It is a good point. I know that it has been raised in the chamber before, and Christina McKelvie is right to raise it now. Unconventional oil and gas is currently covered by moratoriums. There is no unconventional gas activity happening in Scotland. We have since intervened with the UK Government, thankfully, not issued any new licences for activity in Scotland while our deliberations are continuing and we give a commitment while we are considering this issue. No fracking or unconventional gas activities will commence in Scotland. Therefore, the cabinet secretary for the environment has stated previously that that is why it is not reflected in the climate change plan. If, of course, there was a change in policy position, we would have to look at that position again, but, because the position is, there is no fracking. It is not in the plan. Can I ask the minister who the cabinet secretary for economy, jobs and fair work met this morning at the site of the biggest shale gas exploration licence holder in Scotland, Ineos, in Grangemouth, in advance of this statement to Parliament this afternoon? What was discussed and will the Scottish Government publish the minutes of that meeting? I am sure that Mr Lennon knows that the cabinet secretary met Ineos this morning, and he was at the request to discuss issues raised by the trade unions. There was not a discussion around the issue of our unconventional gas consultation, so I would ask the issue about publishing minutes. I am not sure that that is appropriate for a private meeting, but I will leave the member to raise that with the cabinet secretary. Richard Lyle Can the minister expand further? He spoke about what he is doing in regard to the consultation, but what other action can he take to encourage people to submit their views to the consultation on fracking? That is an important point. The clock is running down. We want to get as many responses as we can to the consultation and to make sure that we are represented by a view of the people of Scotland as possible. We will continue to use social media, the traditional media and other channels, including I would encourage MSPs in the chamber and indeed counters out and candidates out in the country to encourage constituents to take part in the consultation exercise and to give their views. It is very important, as I say, because of the location of the sites that we take full account of the views of the people of Scotland, but there are issues that should affect communities the length and breadth of Scotland in terms of climate change impact in other areas, so it is important that everybody who wants to take part in Scotland can do so. I thank the member for raising it and encourage all members here to continue to promote the consultation.


There we go. Can everybody see my slides? Quick thumbs up, thank you Jacob. All right, so what I'm gonna take you through today is some thoughts on hiring, some new hires, what we're doing about it. Some key challenges, and I'll go into depth on one of those and then what we're thinking for next quarter's goals are okay ours. So first hiring, here are the hires that we've made since the last FGU, which I believe is April 13th. So lots of people have joined, really exciting. In particular, I wanna highlight that we continue to be very global, people from the Asia Pacific region, people from Africa, people from Europe, as well as people from North America, which is great. We're continuing to maintain our sort of status as a global company, which I'm really, really excited about. I'll highlight a couple of our key hires. The first is Tom Cooney, our director of support. I've highlighted some of his relevant experience in past companies, obviously coming from Zendesk, which is our tool is a very impressive pedigree and he's already started to collaborate with Lee and Lyle and they're starting to do some great things. So one example of the experience and breadth he's bringing is that he wants to bring customer satisfaction or CSAT back in as a key metric. And so this is something I think had been turned off due to a technical bug. It was not sort of a priority to us. He's sort of teaching us that like, no, this could actually be a more accurate representation of customer's experience support than SLAs. We obviously want to measure both, but that may be one of, if not our main key performance indicator going forward. So we're really grateful to have him and his experience. And next is Jerry. So really excited to have our director of infrastructure here. I've, you can see his pedigree, very experienced, but I'm, I should say one of the things I'm most excited about his background is that he's chosen to make his life in Valencia, Spain. So as we continue to grow, as we continue to get successful and attract some of the best talent around the world, obviously there's a danger that the geography has started to zoom into North America because that's where a lot of startups are or zoom into the Bay Area because that's where a lot of venture capital is. But this shows, I think the power of remote work is that, yes, there are people out there that have, you know, are deeply experienced with some of the most significant startups in the world and that nevertheless are global and multicultural. And I'm really happy that my management team is continuing to be international and reflect the rest of the company. So welcome to both Tom and Jerry. This completes phase one of my sort of personal project of building a engineering management layer. And so I've got a spreadsheet that I track here I've linked to it if anyone's curious, but phase one is essentially my immediate sort of what's called a span of control and Jerry and Tom are the last tires that complete that for me, which is great. And on to phase two, which we have already taken some bites out of but this is sort of completing the management structure in the rest of the engineering function. I already made some hires there. Some of them haven't started yet. So I've got them crossed out. We are waiting for two individuals to have their start dates come up one in June, one in September. And then, you know, we keep growing. We're growing 75% in terms of headcount year over year. So more positions, more opportunities are gonna be opening up. So I've got phase three in here but who knows what phase three is gonna be but we're continuing to track it and make sure that we're ahead of these needs so that teams don't find themselves without managers so that managers don't find themselves are burdened with a number of direct reports very much paying a lot of attention to this. This is what that sort of span of control looks like. This is a slide for my engineering 101 for new employees but I figured every once in a while it's good to check in with the whole company so everybody knows what our structure is like. Of course, it's also reflected on the team chart which is in the handbook in public to the world so you can check it out there. But these are the sort of eight departments that comprise the engineering function and represent my direct reports. And so we're starting to feel complete, starting to feel symmetrical and starting to feel like we can steer the ship which is an important thing. We're a large department, we're growing, making sure that we're all aligned requires really keep people in important positions making the most important decisions for their group and collaborating with me and their peers. Our most important vacancies so SREs and the production team we've made a couple of good hires recently not just Jerry but Devin who started and another SRE is gonna start at the end of June in fact a former Facebook SRE which we're really excited about but I think we have probably three or four more to fill on that team. So that's one of our key roles. Then we got a engineering manager position on our database team that's been open for a while and need to make progress on that and a lot back in developer positions open particularly the monitoring team is the smallest one. We really want that team to gain critical mass and what I'm calling escape velocity where we need a team of six or seven by the end of the year and we need to really build around the bend and he and Dalia are working on that but please refer anybody that may be your network that you know. Challenges, getlab.com ability and performance still feels like something that we just don't quite have a handle on. This is for sure one of the things that Jerry is here to own and help us with but lots to do here. One of the first big steps in that is our GCP migration project. I've linked to a chart on the right displaying our burn down which shows particularly the geocomponent of this we're in sort of product development mode. We're solving a lot of issues but we're creating a lot of issues as we encounter unknown unknowns and that means the achievement curve is essentially flat, the burn down is flat. So I literally just left a status call about that meeting and the team's working on what do we do to fix the slope of this curve and eventually get to a date that we can be sort of confident with. I've linked to the status doc for that call here if anybody wants to read the discussion that's going on in real time but obviously something that we're spending a lot of time and effort thinking about. You know, I talked to, you know in the prior section I sort of talked a lot about hiring, bragged about a lot of the hiring that's going on but there are hotspots in the organizations all for various different reasons where the pace of hiring is not matching the overall pace of hiring. So we kind of look good in aggregate across the function but if you zoom in at specific points there's various roles or various departments we're sort of under hiring and I'm very focused on those and helping with those. And these are some of them. And then clean interfaces which I'll go into in the next section come drill into this challenge and what we're doing about it. So by clean interfaces I'm talking about our org structure our team names and to some extent our titles, our specialties and expertise. So we wanted to make some changes here. We wanted our function to be easy to understand. We wanted to simplify the active release planning that product managers do. They need to understand like how much bandwidth do I have? How many people do I have? And we didn't have clear answers for them until very recently. And then of course we also want to maintain functional managers for our front engineers and our UX designers. What a lot of people do to solve this problem is just verticalize your team.  And that's a great way to remove a lot of gates ease communication but then things like career development and things like hiring for specialized roles really goes down the tube. And we know that from our past experience we know that from our peer companies. So we want to maintain the structure we have but we do want to simplify our interfaces and this is quite important. So the sort of concept that we're all snapping around when I say all product development which is not just engineering but also a product management is the DevOps life cycle. And so you've seen this diagram likely on our product categories page I've linked to it here in case you haven't this page does evolve quite rapidly. So I encourage you to check it out at least once a month. It's owned by Sid and the product managers Mark and Yop are our product management leaders. But this is the sort of concept they're based on. So you're going to start to see this reflected in team names and titles more and more and more. So we said that individuals and the front end UX teams are going to get specialties that are attached to their titles on the team chart. And it's going to reflect these what we call DevOps life cycle stages that are going to look symmetrical with the backend teams. The backend teams have them in the team name other individuals have it in their sort of specialty and this is going to eventually be symmetrical with PM. So obviously both departments are growing like crazy so it's never 100% in sync but now that we're aligned on what it is we're doing here you're going to see them be reflected more and more closely. This will give PM dedicated people for planning purposes so they'll know I've got this many front end people this many backend people this many UX people and that's going to make their lives significantly easier and hopefully cut down on a certain amount of project management that our product managers have to do today allow them to focus on quality. And then all this will be public in our team chart so transparent within the company but also at the outside world. So this is shipped for UX design. Sarah picked this whole thing up really, really quickly I was able to ship something I think earlier this week and most of it was done last week. So you can see a screenshot of our team chart here and you can see a link to the depth where we put this in place. So you can see for example, James on our platform team knows that Chris is this person for three UX design and so forth. And then for front end, it's a larger department there is a little bit more complexity here so we couldn't SIM ship so to speak the same thing but we have a similar pattern in mind. Tim is working through it and talking to his people and product managers and what we're hoping to do is ship something next week. It looks like we've got something that's really good that should make everybody happy. We just can't quite merge it yet without a few more conversations. So that's what we're doing about clean interfaces and the next thing is OKR. So again, we're limiting ourselves to three for the benefit of focus. I've linked to the issue here where we're authoring OKRs. We've got about three weeks to figure out so it feels like plenty of time to set some really good goals for the next quarter. Of course we still have flexibility as business conditions change, as technical things change, we can change throughout the quarter but I really like to kick the quarter off with solid goals and we've got a perfect amount of time frame to do that. We're going to do some, of course we're going to do hiring OKRs as we always do hiring is really important and we need to maintain focus on that. We're going to do some new things this quarter. We're thinking about error budgets. If anyone has read the Google book about site liability engineering they have this concept of error budgets and we're trying to figure out how to one do attribution at the team level not the individual level but not the director level of the team level for issues either outage or degradation like gilab.com and then how the individual teams can spend that budget and different companies do it different ways so we've got an issue where we're openly discussing how that should work. We want to incentivize the right behaviors so we don't want to encourage gamesmanship, we don't want to encourage slowing down or stopping shipping or anything like that so this is a very important one to sort of word correctly and attribution particularly where we've got a large app sort of a monolith can be tricky so we're going to do an iteration in Q3. And then the other thing I've posed is hey maybe we take prior to having new continuous delivery tooling and things like that what if we just take the current method that we're deploying to gilab.com via the omnibus installer we use for ourselves as customers and just start doing it weekly as opposed to monthly by thinking being deploying smaller chunks of code whatever that is is better than bigger chunks of code and it will help with attribution and it will help with forensics and other things. It's by no means easy though but I think a lot of people are up for that so we're kind of thinking through what would this mean what do we have to do is it possible and what exactly what the benefits would be and we have until we kick off the OK or just to kind of figure this out and if it looks like a good goal we're reasonably confident we'll kick off and we'll figure out the rest kind of interviews we go. So with that happy to answer questions let me stop sharing and I will open up the chat. Let's see yeah lots of comments about Tom and Jerry. That may be too much of an American reference I don't know if that cartoon goes globally but yes we do have directors named Tom and Jerry and we have a Tommy too. Let's see. Let's see. Brennan says I love the engineering team is a friend of this is clean interfaces great analogy for those who understand it. I think this is actually a company one thing this is something that Sid is quite passionate about and it's multiple places in our handbook so we can't take credit for it but we are kind of channeling our CEO and he believes that naming is one aspect of presenting clear interfaces and that it eases a lot of communication so we're definitely trying to take that to heart and to reflect it. Let's see Tommy says usually about 30 seconds change 30 seconds after change goes live we're still accurate really appreciate the attention that goes into the product categories page though it makes it really easy for Dalia and I to prep for candidates. Yeah this is an issue where the product categories page has been changing very rapidly and then as on the engineering side we're supposed to be reflecting it when it's who's on what team what teams are called people's titles obviously we want to make sure we're communicating that delivery and people don't feel like their heads are spinning so we're trying to figure out the right way for engineering to take part in those discussions subscribe to changes for that page just so we can all kind of stay and stay in sync don't want to slow down we just want to make sure that we're staying in sync and hollow line. Clement says dang UX teams iterating fast yeah agree they're moving really fast which is great and Sarah's got some cool plans for Q3 which you'll see in the form of OKRs Bob says I think it's worth mentioning that every issue discovered in GCP staging fail over an issue that we can avoid in prod so we're not standing still in the migration correct yeah this is all really valuable stuff to be finding but because it is unknown unknowns it means our predict our predictability is quite that and everybody is very curious customers executives internally when is the date when is the date and it's a challenge to provide a date and provide confidence in that date when we're sort of swimming in a river so to speak so we've got to find a way to slow down that river or speed up our swimming so the trend and that burn down is an accurate fit to the curve and right now the curve is very sort of flaky and linear so we got to get a handle on that not shipping it or shipping it slower isn't an excuse but by all means it's all great information to be finding these are things that would cause issues in prod and it's great that we're sussing them out through the act of rehearsals or whatever called agile demos let's see Philippe says release weekly our deployment is going to be predictable same day same hour that's a great question I would jump in the issue and pose that question Philippe you know to me this is an iteration towards continuous delivery where small bits go out when they're ready in which case you kind of care less about dates but obviously that's a big leap to get there and so yeah we may want to do something that's like on a given day and you know one of the goals of this is to decompose the big monthly feature freeze but it does mean maybe we have to have weekly feature freezes or something like that because clearly a certain amount of manual QA QA needs to happen and certain people need to be around and so yeah it's likely that we would probably snap to a day or something like that maybe we care less about the hour and that's a good way to sort of like train and prep ourselves and build the habits we're going to need for true continuous delivery where it's like things go out the moment they're ready and ideally the production team doesn't even know in codershipping because things are so smooth but it'll take a while to sort of get there but I encourage people to jump in that issue and let's get everything on the table about what it would mean to do that. Yeah well Eric if I may. Sure. What I wanted to point out if we have a feature that is split on different merge requests for example I don't want to be in a position when I merge the first merge request and it depends on other code that is not deployed yet and we have something working in production so if I know that the release point is going to be in one hour I will wait until the production is deployed to merge everything. Well another thing we're talking about recently and Dahlia sent a merged handbook change and is communicating this out today and next week is we need to get to a point where master is sacred and pristine and everything on master has proven to be deployable that's the heart of continuous delivery. So for something like a merge request and another merge request if there's a time gap between those you've essentially broken the build and we need to adopt a culture we never break the build and that means integration branches it means perhaps a staging branch prior to master where things can be proven out in a specific environment and we need to get there I think that's definitely a part of this. But if you have a feature with front end and back end if you merge the front end then right away it's going to be in production and after I click on the button to merge the back end we have the front end and not the back end in production. So that's this very thin line I want to avoid and make sure that we're not in the disposition. I'm adding more. Sorry go ahead. I know you've had a lot of thoughts on this. Sorry just real quick we are moving toward the CD vision and part of that is also talking about how we could use something like feature flagging we have to get to a place where we're able to do small merge requests that don't break master and one of the ways is using feature flags there's obvious things that you need to think about we don't want to end up with thousand feature flags that we have to manage. So I'll add that to the issue and we can discuss there but I think to leave that would help as well. Yeah I think feature flags can do this I think integration branches can do this I think keeping master peer can do this I think also having a separation of concerns between front end and back end we have a back end API that can evolve on its own and then a front end API that can consume it that would allow us to shift back end changes first front end can come on and consume it after the fact without breaking it and if the API is sembered that's when we're able to manage these changes as well. So lots of different levels which can handle these things and many tools in our toolbox to do it. So Erika I don't I hear you say staging branches a staging branch I don't think that's that might not be where we're going. I think what we want to do is continuous delivery so what GitLab allows is to have a staging environment for every branch and to review apps. Yes exactly. So it's more about those review app environments than that it's about adding a lot of steps in before I think that's the old way of doing things not the new way. True yeah and Mech and I have been chatting about this and that's one of the OKRs that Mech and his team and specifically Bremen are thinking of taking on is review apps for every branch in the GitLab project which would be a huge step forward. It's a great point to say thanks. For sure yeah and feature flags for sure and not for everything but for if we know that there's a likelihood of changing if it's a big change and it's easy to add them then that makes sense as well. So Philippa who's one of our current lease manager says it's possible we've been doing it already. Yes but as we're talking through this we realize there's a lot more to do to kind of do it in a true sense but I'm glad one of our lease managers in particular is enthusiastic as well as dreadful about doing something like this because it is a big change. And let's see. OK so Sid a link to the handbook change stable counterparts I believe that's the handbook reference I was looking for where interfaces are mentioned so next we're posting that. Yeah we don't call it interfaces because interfaces is pretty generic. It's about your counterpart. It's about the person on the other side and it's not about them being clean but being stable so they should deal with the same person every time. Obviously it wants to also make them clean because otherwise no way we can get them stable. It's just very simply dealing with the same person so you get to get to build a certain trust and certain credit with each other which makes all communication easier. Cool. Let's see Dan says sounds like a great feature track prod errors to teams so we can predict potential problems and release planning. Yes it's a very time tested sort of pattern but difficult to implement in practice without some work but we definitely want to get there. York has some ideas about well if we can't do you know line of code level attribution database tables are a way to start so we're looking for our kind of first iteration to get better attribution and that's part of the issue but if you have ideas if you have experience jump in there and we'll figure out what works for GitLab because this is different at every company that tries it and experience. Let's see John says for error budgets and attributing problems to a team I'm worried that we would develop too much into blaming how can we avoid that. Yeah great point we definitely have a no blame culture this is about being better not about casting blame. This is one of the reasons why we tend to focus on team level attribution and never individual level attribution and I think it's you know it's just something I need to keep reminding people of that like we want to be better each day and we're not you know seeking out problems. We definitely want to hold people accountable but that doesn't mean shaming if that makes sense. Yeah Tommy says if we let it turn into a blame game we're not managing correctly. Yes I would say you know look to the management structure I just talked about to prevent this from happening if it's happening it means we are not doing our job as a management team so hold us accountable for that. Tommy talks about understanding and mitigating risks not about apportioning blame yeah. Yeah and so like one of the things that well one of the consequences of a team you know going over the error budget is like well they'd have to spend more time on QA or something like that. So it's about dialing them in so that they're shipping fast. Like you know I really want to avoid the phrase like slow down or something like that because that's not what we do that's not our culture but dialing in the team's calibration so that they're shipping with the appropriate amount of quality but still shipping as fast as possible it's important. This is something that mech continually beats the drama of is that quality is about moving faster never moving slower. It does mean spending time on specific things but at the end of the day when you're spending a lot of time on forensics you're spending a lot of time fixing the same bug for the third time that is wasted velocity and that means shipping slower. Sometimes those things are hidden in your numbers and we want to make sure that we're always shipping faster and slower. Let's see, Sean says front end and back end MRs are an anti-pattern. Yeah, I agree. I think we can find a much better way to do this. We've got like I said a few tools in our toolbox to do this better. Lots of comments about that but so by all means jump in do we have an issue about that? I think this is maybe a level of detail underneath the weekly releases thing. Maybe we should have a separate issue to discuss that so I'll get that started and I'll email it out to everybody that was on the FGU and we can move the discussion there. Or I'll just slide it to the development channel. So anybody passionate about front end and back end MRs I'll post an issue after this to the channel and we can have a discussion going there. Let's see. Excited to see movement towards GraphQL. Yes, APIs in general are great. GraphQL in particular is an exciting technology for sure, it's from Andre. Bob says we have underscore version files for pinning versions. So let's say this is a lot of excited talk about front and back end MRs and you know, changes and things like that. So let's get all this into the issue. As long as we get the release train choo choo. Yes, release trains are again, like you know, release trains to me kind of speak of handoffs and gates and things like that. And so I want to try to minimize that release trains. I come from a company prior to this that was doing hardware and stuff like that. And there was some true waterfall going on there and release train really became a dirty word for me in that experience. And so when I hear release train, I'm like, oh, we got to rename that because we want to stay agile and we want to keep moving. But it's, this is about an automated release train. So not about the people all putting their things together. You just press the merge button and get a release train. And it's to make sure you can release faster than your tests are running. So if your tests take 50 minutes, the release train allows you to deploy every less than 50 minutes. So maybe we could call this like a release monorail or some kind of driverless train or something like that. That would make me a little bit more comfortable because the release train. There's a feature proposal for it. Feel free to make it release Mac lab. Let's see, Kathy says holding teams accountable should definitely not be perceived as blaming, shaming, right. Yeah, so she, you know, for Kathy's world in security, there's a ton of learning for us to do and security moves so fast. It's almost like a war of attrition. When we find security issues in particular, it's like, hey, this is something that we need to learn and obviously we don't want to repeat mistakes over and over and over again. But every week there will be some new technique or some new vulnerability. And so avoiding blaming, shaming is important. Everywhere particularly on security. So I'm glad she holds that value. Could a product feature help with error budgeting? Yeah, I think so. There's potential things in monitoring. There's potential things maybe on the victor's side of the world where we manage our projects in the app that could help with this. So for sure, let's get some feature requests and emanating from engineering about what we need to manage our product and our process efficiently. Will we be iterating on enforcing quality and master? Do we know what the next steps are on that? Yes, we will be iterating. I can answer that for sure. Do we know what the next steps are? And I think that's up for the current debate. I think we should have that discussion and issue about weekly releases, about what enforcement means. And obviously with an eye towards moving as fast as possible and avoiding the accountability problem that's been talked about. Josh, link to the review apps issue, great. Everybody check that out, add your thoughts there. I think that would unlock a lot of productivity. Let's see, Tommy's talking to Flippa. Release Rocket, yeah, I like that one, Clemente. Let's see. Okay, now we're getting into jokes about the release stream and release rocket and release monorail and stuff like that. Someone says Daniel has figured it out. The release hyperloop, there you go. That's the final answer. Cool, any other questions, either verbally or on Zoom chat before we break? Going once, going twice, sold. Fave ice cream, chocolate, obviously. Neurotransmitters and Dorfins, it's not just a flavor. Cool, well, everybody, thanks for the feedback. If you wanna get the discussion continuing, join me on my VP channel, jump in some of the issues that I linked to and let's keep this going and I'll create that new issue for the thing that I talked about earlier. Cool, all right, we'll have a good day everybody and see you in the team call, cheers.


How much can I earn teaching English in Jordan? In recent years, Jordan has definitely joined the list of countries that are good places for teaching in the Middle East. It has one of the most progressive school systems in the region, and is on target to become a fully bilingual country in the not-so-distant future. As almost one-third of the population is under 15, there is a particularly strong demand for teachers who are qualified and experienced in teaching young learners. As well as plenty of jobs, Jordan offers stunning landscapes, vibrant cities, and a warm welcome from the local population. What are TEFL salaries in Jordan? Although it is not yet competing with top destinations in the region such as the UAE and Saudi Arabia in terms of salaries, Jordan's lower cost of living means that your pay will stretch much further. Monthly salaries in a standard tutoring job are typically between $800 and $1,500 United States dollars. Those with the relevant qualifications can also look at international schools that pay up to $3,000 United States dollars per month. The highest-paying jobs are mostly found in and around a capital, Amman, although other areas such as Oz, Zarka and Irbid are also worth a look. Who are the main employers of English language teachers in Jordan? The very best salaries are found in international schools that follow American, British or Canadian curriculums. These schools all offer classes taught in English, which provides a wide array of opportunities for native English speakers from these countries. Most international schools have both primary and secondary departments, but you will need a high level of qualifications and or experience to land one of these positions. Private tutoring is a particularly popular option in Jordan. An online search will reveal many different programs that will arrange one-on-one lessons or group lessons in a private environment. A TEFL certification is typically a necessity in these roles. Volunteer teaching is also a popular way to gain classroom teaching experience, and Jordan has many organizations in need of help. In recent times, the country has taken in 1.5 million refugees from neighboring countries, which has led to a huge need for teachers to help young people who have already missed out on a large part of their education. What is the recruitment process for English teachers in Jordan? The main hiring season in Jordan is at the end of August and early September. The best approach is to get there early so you can shop around and find a right position to suit you. Most employers prefer to interview face-to-face, which also allows you to get a feel for the school and location before committing to a contract. It is standard practice to undergo a three-month probationary period where either party can terminate the contract without penalty. Once you have been hired you will need to apply for a work permit that is valid for one year. Many teachers arrive on a 30-day tourist visa and then the school will organize the work permit on your behalf. This process can take up to a month to complete. Competition for the top jobs is always strong, so a minimum of two years experience is often needed, as well as a degree and a TEFL qualification. What is the cost of living for English teachers in Jordan? The average salary in Jordan is considerably less than some of its neighbors, such as the UAE and Saudi Arabia, but so is the cost of living. By shopping locally and avoiding expensive imported goods, your weekly grocery bill should be small. Eating out is also cheap if you take advantage of local restaurants and avoid those aimed at foreign tourists. Housing is often the most expensive issue for most teachers, so if you can find a job that offers free housing or a housing stipend, you will greatly decrease your outgoings. Typically, teachers in Jordan are able to live a comfortable lifestyle.


As on the section 1091 of the value added tax at cap 15.42 the act it is provided that the minister of finance may by all the published in the cassette amend the schedules in the act and whereas it is further provided on the section 1092 of the act that an order made pursuant to section 1091 of the act is subject to an affirmative resolution of parliament except where the amendment is to custom tariff headings only and whereas the minister of finance seeks approval of the draft value added tax amendment schedule 3 number 3 order to amend schedule 3 of the act by an affirmative resolution in parliament to exempt imports of personal items food, clothing, toys and other household consumables contained in barrels for the period commencing from the first day of November 2023 and terminating on the 29th day of February 2024 be exempt imports of toys food supplies and care packages by a member of the house of assembly for the benefit of children the vulnerable and needy persons in the constituency of the number of the member of the house of assembly for the period commencing first day of November 23 food supplies and care packages by a member of the house of assembly for the benefit of children the vulnerable and needy in the constituency of the member of the house of assembly for the period commencing from the first day of November 2023 and terminating on the 41st of January 2024 Mr Speaker this is the most emotional Mr Speaker to exempt items in barrels imported between the months of November and I think February Mr Speaker in point solution to exempt it from value added tax Mr Speaker and Mr Speaker we must pay tribute Mr Speaker to the member the former prime minister the member for view for itself who started that that barrel import for solutions way back in 1990 1998 Mr Speaker and we are continuing Mr Speaker continuing that tradition in exempting these barrels from the items in these barrels from that Mr Speaker the upper limit on the value per barrel is 3000 EC Mr Speaker and the qualifying items must be for personal use and not commercial use and electronics are excluded Mr Speaker I want to tell the people of Selnosha that this barrel concession is a privilege that they should not abuse Mr Speaker and the customs and law enforcement have been mandated to pay strict attention to what is included in these barrels these barrels will not be used for illegal activity they will not be used Mr Speaker as a cover for illegality Mr Speaker so I want to tell the people of Selnosha that we are going to law enforcement is going to be very very strict because we cannot use these barrels as an excuse to import firearms or other illegal items Mr Speaker for them Mr Speaker you notice that this incentive is also will also be enjoyed by parliamentarians Mr Speaker and look at the difference in the way we do our things and the way they do our things they do their things we came we come to the parliament in the open and we say all parliamentarians regardless of your political color regardless of who where you represent or what party represent Mr Speaker we are in the open and we say everyone Mr Speaker when they did it the last time we had to literally squeeze it out of them as if we are pulling teeth Mr Speaker for them to allow us to do the same thing when they were doing it privately on their own account Mr Speaker that's the difference that's the difference between them and us that's the difference Mr Speaker we are transparent and we are open Mr Speaker that's the difference and we accept the will of the people of this country in 2016 the people in 2016 the people of this country went to the polls and they elected the opposition six of us sat on this side of the parliament they abused us they gave us no incentives they took their CDB funds and they share it among themselves they gave us nothing they did us that for five years six years nearly six years Mr Speaker we sat and we took it we never went on the outside to spread the economy and the lies that they have spread on that side Mr Speaker if you listen to the opposition you think we live in two different solutions you think there are two different solutions that a solution that is something in their own imagination and the reality that exists in solution Mr Speaker the opposition there are people who are saying to their relatives in solution they will not send barrels for them because the cost of goods in these places is too high after they pay the shipping they will not be able to make any gains they prefer to send the money for them in solution so they can buy the stuff in solution but if you listen to them you will believe that I am the prime minister of the world you will believe I am the one who caused the Ukrainians and the Russians to fight I am the one now who caused the Palestinians and Israelis to be in problems and I am the one who caused the Panama Canal to be suffering from a drought that will affect supply chain issues that's what they say that's what the pyramid is bigger all because they do not have the patience to lose the last two seasons that they have in the next election they do not have the patience to wait to lose the two seasons they have in there so if they had that patience they would sit and represent the constituencies take the CDP money that we give them do something in the constituencies and stop this calamity and this recklessness and these lies that they tell and they do not come inside and ask Mr Speaker what they do they rush out run outside children running as I said daddy they took my toys running outside the run outside is bigger run to the press run to their favorite media and few lies that's what they do they do not come and sit down and argue the facts put pen to paper through documents and deal issues of the country no no no no go outside go in safe environments and lie go in safe environments and spread calamity go in safe environments and say that they are completely untrue go in safe environments go in safe environments Mr Speaker and say and make pledges that they do not believe but to come in this parliament when the people send them instead of coming here and do what they have to do Mr Speaker they go outside and in their shame and their rootlessness they refuse to speak the truth Mr Speaker they want elections before independence next year but why is the opposition so much in a hurry to lose their two seats Mr Speaker the man from Mekunov in a few minutes will support a motion that will improve the wallet supply in Brazil he also next month will begin work on the Mekunov jet he also next year will deal with the Mekunov preschool when I have when you know Mr Speaker I came one day I said that we are going to win two then we see two seats two seats so said so done but you know Mr Speaker for the very fact that they do not respect the will of the people the fact that they do not respect the will of the people and they don't understand that the majority fell from a thousand to four hundred next election we are going to be taking the four hundred votes so when we come to this honorable house next election Mr Speaker they will have to be on the outside and you know sometimes I laugh because they seem to forget who calls elections they have forgotten that you see they seem to forget who will call elections they forget Mr Speaker we have a lot of them all their attitude talk call well cause people lie we will use all the rope you want threaten people do all kind of things calling people to attack people's families Mr Speaker do you know Mr Speaker I do not listen to these things that come from certain sections of the these so called tunnel villages only somebody from abroad called me and the sad thing is the person was a friend a friend of the people who spewing they rubbish and he said to me what has politics and Russia turned on where are we what kind of politics you are playing in this country where is this country Mr Speaker where is this country a prime minister comes to visit and to speak to the convention Mr Speaker that's not the first thing that has happened several prime ministers the Prime Minister of Grenada was here speaking on the platform of the United Workers Party the Prime Minister of St Kitts was here speaking on the platform of the United Workers Party the Prime Minister of St Venson one day he came to make peace but he also came to speak on the platform of the United Workers Party we listened they said all kinds of things a prime minister comes the one from Belize is not a prime minister the one from Belize is not a prime minister something else the one from Belize the one from Belize the one from Belize so the one from Belize came Mr Speaker and he went to view fort and you know the hypocrisy in these guys the hypocrisy the bluff the one from Belize went to view fort that is the same man the same man who spoke about horse racing in view fort the same man the same man who stopped the people's horse racing the same man who wanted to change the name of the people's country or the people's town to pole of the Caribbean the same man who gave one thousand acres of land some of it at 99 cents per square foot one thousand acres of land one thousand acres that's the same man who did that in the parliament member for Mr Speaker the same man on the point of order who spoke what is the point of order the members misleading the house because he is saying that there was a lease of a thousand acres or he is giving the impression that there was a thousand acres there was a qualifying wood most of which but it's not even most of which so the fact is how could a hundred and ninety acres be most of a thousand so there was no not even close to a thousand member for castries east please proceed so the fact is that if we are going to I have the same person I have asked the member for castries east to proceed the same man who the same man who one thousand acres of land in few four most of it for 99 cents per square foot the same man the same man Mr Speaker wants to say the member for Miku south I have ruled the member for castries will proceed so he is correct I have ruled Mr Speaker the same man who put one thousand acres of land in few four south who list who list one thousand acres of land most of it for 99 cents per square foot the same man the member for Miku south member for castries east in accurate statement Mr Speaker and I cannot sit in the house Mr Speaker and allow that statement to be made because it is a lie and the member knows that Mr Speaker so I am asking you which one the same man the same man who list one thousand acres of land who list one thousand acres of land most of it at 99 cents per square foot wants to call a solution Mr Speaker who want a few acres I have ruled the same man wants to call an entity wants to call is not member for castries because it is a product of Canada the same man who is a product of Canada member for castries east member I have ruled on three occasions I will not allow you to raise this issue again but I have ruled Mr Speaker no you will not have to I am sorry that he is misled you as well but reality is Mr Speaker that is not as much as member for microsoft please take your seat Mr Speaker member for microsoft I am asking Mr Speaker please take your seat there is a member prove that there was more than 500 acres that was the least member I am not going to ask you to take your seat again but I am asking you Mr Speaker no I am not going to ask you again do not debate with the president how can you allow a member of the house to mislead the house how can you take your seat Mr Speaker I am sergeant are you going to take your seat I am not taking my seat until you can give me a satisfactory answer remember I have made a ruling please take your seat it is a lie Mr Speaker and I am asking you to stand up members of GIS under the standing orders I do have the authority to ask you to turn off your cameras while I am about to do what I have to do please take your seat Mr Speaker Mr Speaker the leader of the opposition does not want to come in this horrible house and listen to argument and listen to fight and defend himself what he wants to do is go in a safe environment in a safe environment and say what are they want when nobody will challenge him you are going to be challenged on the truth and nothing you can do about it nothing you have to sit there and listen Mr Speaker you see Mr Speaker they believe because they are products of Canada they can come to this horrible house and because they believe that they are products of Canada Mr Speaker they can come to this horrible house or go into this country and completely mislead the public about what the Prime Minister of Canada said the Prime Minister of Canada never said to be Prime Minister Lucia he never said so he never said so and the record will show that he never said so but you know these old nazi tactics repeat the same thing all the time Mr Speaker they tried that for five years between 2016 and 2021 we beat them in the elections you know what they said they said a 15-2 majority is no majority you ever heard that we beat you 15-2 you say you have no majority but you know what we will do we will take this too if they believe that they can threaten us if they believe that we are weak and because we are focused on running the country if they believe that they can call there and say what everyone means talking about people's body parts you want to believe that you want to believe that in a public meeting calling people dogs calling people mongrels you want to believe that but you know this is habit calling people dogs let the jackass break let's say man but you know what happened to him his history will come back to hunt him because technology has made it possible for everything I see and every day everybody is on about houses to be replayed and we just begin to replay what has been said we just begin to replay because Mr Speaker we can't allow it to happen because young people are listening Mr Speaker young people listen to these lies we don't tell Mr Speaker we decided and tomorrow the prime minister of Britain and I'm talking about that and items conserved by Mr Speaker the prime minister of Britain tomorrow will go to parliament on feminine products tomorrow we in his own other house pass legislation to remove that on feminine products they made a joke out of it they had a demonstration happy with pampers what can I respect you have for the elderly of this country happy with pampers in a demonstration because the government removed that on feminine products they know nothing about pure poverty and when you talk to them about that they draw them and say I can identify you said Lucia hypocrites Mr Speaker suddenly they no longer products of Canada suddenly they no longer want to make they no want to follow Norway but they can identify you said Lucia Mr Speaker there are some hypocrites in this society when you use some words they pretend as if these words they pretend about these words they pretend as if these words are these words are these words are something that you mustn't say you mustn't say this word Mr Speaker because of the hypocrisy they accuse us they accuse us Mr Speaker they pretend about racism Mr Speaker Mr Speaker on a platform in Shorzel a member of the United Workers Party said in public and you know I want to open it up if they believe they'll make us say some words run behind it boy there's racism there's racism I'll open it up I'll open it up went on a platform in Shorzel and he said he will not vote for black man as prime minister he will vote for white man no member of the United Workers Party ever said he should not say that never corrected him the member for the member of you for self the member of yourself the member of yourself he had to go on the television and the radio and say that he was not what they were saying he was not what they were saying they never corrected him they never corrected Mr Speaker but suddenly if you speak about your identity if you speak about your identity if you speak about you are proud if you speak about to be proud of what you are Mr Speaker they talk about racism racism Mr Speaker to make people run and hide and hide behind these emotional we are not going to hide behind it we are proud Mr Speaker to say where we came from where we are now we are very proud Mr Speaker and you know Mr Speaker I'll put the public of solution notice we are now going to call them out for their lies and call them out for their deception that is starting now we are not going to allow we are going to go on the radio and soil the names of men and women in this country and lie and sell candy that never happened blame us for things we have absolutely no control over Mr Speaker we put Mr Speaker on speaking about that again these items Mr Speaker they will not attract the 2.5% like me they will attract it the items in the barrels the 2.5% like me but if you heard them if you heard them if you heard them Mr Speaker if you heard them 2.5% like me but I was the same man and the cabinet conclusion show who had a cabinet meeting and in that cabinet conclusion he said they have to consider putting a health and security level and that's the same man who was in the government and the member for the cabinet is not member for Mr Speaker members misleading the house if there is any cabinet conclusion that says that Mr Speaker I think that he ought to make it a document but you can bring the cabinet conclusion at a subsequent meeting your word today that he is misleading because he has to bring it Mr Speaker all I know is that we spoke about the health insurance program but we've never spoken about a health and security level that's his imagination that's his baby that's the bucket he has to carry not me Mr Speaker he was in the government when they came here and they passed a security tax they were in the government and you know Mr Speaker that hypocrisy he was in the government when they came and they passed a security tax and it and the member for castries north has admitted that he was prime minister when they passed a security tax he admitted that the prime minister he said they passed it at the right time because he was a nurse at the time but if you have him if you have him talk about health and security level you think that we have we have done something that is out of this world we have destroyed the economy we have destroyed everybody but he cannot tell us he spoke about health insurance there is not one document I have seen that speaks about anything about health insurance that's what I have seen Mr Speaker again the member is misleading the house member for castries east just take a seat yes there has been press conferences there is document there were consultants hired by the world bank specifically to do with health insurance we have held meetings throughout this length and breadth of society we spoke about it in every single document so again the members misleading the house in suggesting that there was never any discussions Mr Speaker Mr Speaker member for castries east member for mikus south if you are going to rise on points of order you respond to what was said the member for castries east said he has never seen he never spoke about press conferences said he has never seen are you going to tell him what he has seen thank you no Mr Speaker but I would make the point as prime minister if he has not seen it then I am even more worried than I am now that's not a point of order that's the point I have to say Mr Speaker he said that there is a program in which we spend money member for mikus south I am more worried because it means that he is misleading the whole country he is mismanaging the country member for mikus south member for mikus south it would appear that one of your purposes here today is to cause me to do something that would not happen but member if you are going to rise I have allowed you to rise on six occasions if you are going to rise on a point of order it ought to be a point of order if the member for castries east says he has not seen I don't know what point of order you can rise on to tell him what he has seen please proceed member for castries east thank you Mr Speaker I have not seen any document in the office I have not seen that says anything about having insurance I have not seen it Mr Speaker in the same way they render one and they abuse reporters tell him I am ashamed of you a reporter ask me whether I have read I have done this business what I read is my business how are you going to ask me what I read I said to him that's not your business because what I read is what I read what's wrong with that I didn't say I didn't insult him I didn't walk out on him I didn't call him a criminal I didn't call him a jail-board all I said was that is not your business what I have read that's all I said and anybody who ask me what's in my business I tell him that's not your business so Mr Speaker we are we are again again trying to give continuing to give relief to the people of this country and that is why as I said previously there is no there is no health and security level on the items in this bar so Mr Speaker as I end because today is a very long day we have a long day today Mr Speaker because today we will begin the government's response because they believe that we have been sleeping but while we have been focused and managing the economy as the Carrie Chris report says we are politicians and we shall respond so I am putting them on notice anytime anytime they lie anytime they deny that they said they are products of Canada anytime they deny that they were in government they behave as if they were not in government they were never in government you just start to cry they forget these things all of these things will come back so I am putting them on notice that we are now going to respond we are going to make we are going to tell the public about what this government is doing because the public is feeling the public is seeing how this country is progressing Mr Speaker next year I have one of them say I said that next year so what happened to this year Mr Speaker no one of these guys lost elections no one of these guys lost elections they are guys who are failures they are out of government now they are out of government but Mr Speaker I am proud to say I have won six elections six and you can do whatever you want the fact is you must put it in your pipe and you must smoke it I have won six elections you lost one I will tell you how you got the other one that you won you lost one I will tell you how I won't tell you I lost one and I won six and that's what you can take you have to take it all the time because you see your hatred and your envy will get you nowhere I don't love you I don't love you your hatred and your envy will get you nowhere and I am saying to you that when you continue like that we might leave Brazil but not you thank you very much