Good afternoon, and welcome to this virtual meeting of the Scottish Parliament. The first item of business is a statement by Nicola Sturgeon on Covid-19 update. The First Minister will take questions at the end of her statement, and so there should be no interventions or interruptions, and I call on Nicola Sturgeon, the First Minister. Thank you, Presiding Officer, and firstly, I wish you, everyone in Parliament and across the country, a happy new year. Today I will report on the continuing rise in Covid cases. I will outline our approach to managing this phase of the pandemic. Part of that I'll set out immediate changes to the requirements for self-isolation and testing, and while we are not proposing any additional measures at this stage, I will confirm that existing protections and guidance will remain in place for the coming week, ending further review. Finally, given that Omicron may not be the last new Covid variant that we face, I will also signal some longer-term work to consider the adaptations necessary to enable us to deal more proportionately and sustainably with any future phases of the pandemic. First, today's statistics. 16,103 positive cases were reported yesterday. 26.9 per cent of all tests carried out. 1,223 people are in hospital with Covid. That's 71 more than yesterday, but it is 544 more than at this time last week. 42 people are in intensive care, which is the same as yesterday, and sadly, a further five deaths have been reported, taking the total number of deaths under the daily definition, to 9,872. Once again, I send my condolences to everyone who is mourning a loved one. The surge of cases driven by the extremely infectious Omicron variant is continuing here in Scotland, across the UK and, indeed, in many other countries around the world. Here in Scotland, over the past week, the total number of new reported cases has increased by 87 per cent. Tomorrow's figures will almost certainly see us pass 1 million reported cases since the outset of the pandemic. However, the rapid and very widespread transmission of Omicron is such that the daily recorded tally of cases, which has always been an underestimate of the true level of infection, now gives us an even less comprehensive indicator of how prevalent the virus is. The weekly survey published by the Office of National Statistics gives a better indication. In the week to 23 December, it suggested that one in 40 people in Scotland had Covid. The results of the most recent ONS survey published just a few minutes ago suggest that, in the week to 31 December, that had risen to one in 20. The proportion of people with Covid is, though likely to be even higher than that now, a few days later. I would anticipate that we will see continued growth in the level of infection as work and school resume after the holiday period. In short, Covid is significantly more widespread now than at any stage in the pandemic so far and will almost certainly become even more so in the days to come. That, of course, has extremely serious implications for the NHS and social care, but it also has a severe and increasing impact on the economy and other critical services. That is primarily due to very high numbers of people off work with Covid, but it is, of course, compounded by the wider requirements for self-isolation. As I said last week, we have been considering very carefully the risks and benefits of changes to self-isolation requirements, and I will update on that shortly. More generally, as I said a moment ago, we are not proposing any new protective measures today. However, with the virus so prevalent, we do consider it important to continue to apply some break on transmission, particularly in settings that pose the highest risk. Accordingly, I can confirm that the restrictions on large gatherings, the requirement for distancing between groups of people in public indoor places and for table service in hospitality venues, diving alcohol on the premises will remain enforced for now, and indeed I expect until 17 January. In addition, while that is not a legal requirement, we are continuing to strongly advise the general public to limit contact with people in other households as far as possible and to limit the number of households in any indoor gathering that does take place to a maximum of three. After two long years of this pandemic, I know that asking people to cut all social interaction is just not feasible, and it would be damaging, of course, to mental health and wellbeing. However, limiting contacts in so far as we can and thinking carefully about the interactions that matter most to us is important just now. It helps to stem, at least to some extent, increases in transmission, and so it has a collective benefit, but it also helps to protect us as individuals. When at least one in twenty of us have the virus, as is the case now, the risk of getting it when we mix with others is really significant. So, if we limit the occasions on which we do mix, we also reduce our own risk of catching a virus that we know could have a nasty impact on our health. Trying to stem transmission, at least to some degree, is also important for the NHS, which is under increasing pressure. On the upside, the evidence that Omicron causes less severe illness than previous variants, at least amongst the under-60s, where the virus is most prevalent at the moment, does appear to be strengthening. Indeed, the fact that the numbers here in intensive care are so far remaining stable, while the numbers in hospital are rising quite sharply, may be indicative of that. We also know for certain that a booster drag provides strong protection against serious illness for people of all ages. However, notwithstanding the success of the booster programme and indeed the apparent lower rate of hospitalisation from Omicron, the sheer volume of people becoming infected means more people with Covid are being admitted to hospital. There is also remaining uncertainty about the impact on hospital admissions if Omicron continues to spread from younger age groups, where the risk of falling seriously ill from Covid has always been lower to those in older age groups. As I reported last week, work is also under way to better understand the detail behind the headline hospital numbers. I can advise Parliament that the first results from analysis to differentiate those who are in hospital because of Covid from those in hospital with Covid, but who were admitted for different reasons will be published on Friday. Work has also been done to assess whether the average length of hospital stay resulting from Omicron is any different to that associated with other variants. In short, our understanding of the precise nature and extent of Omicron's impact on hospitals and the wider health and social care system is still developing. However, what is beyond out is that it is already having a considerable impact. The number of people in hospital with Covid has increased from 679 to 1,223 in the past week. That is a rise of 80 per cent, and that is putting significant additional pressure on the NHS. Indeed, the NHS is now facing increased pressure on three related fronts. First, from dealing with non-Covid backlogs built up over the course of the pandemic. Second, many NHS staff are absent and self-isolating, either because they have Covid or are close contacts of people with it. That means that the increasing pressure on the NHS is being managed by a depleted and ever more exhausted workforce. Third, as we keep saying, even with a lower rate of hospitalisation, the sheer volume of cases caused by the much greater transmissibility of Omicron will lead to more patients with Covid ending up in hospital. With reference to the analysis to be published on Friday that I spoke about a moment ago, it is important to remember this. Even if Covid is not the primary reason for someone's admission to hospital, the fact that they have Covid means that enhanced infection control measures are necessary and that further constrains the capacity of the NHS, so exacerbates that pressure. We continue to support health boards and staff to manage that pressure. That includes working with councils to reduce delayed discharge and targeting additional capacity where possible. Work is also under way importantly to develop alternative patient pathways for people with Covid, enabling them where possible and appropriate to remain at home with appropriate monitoring and advice rather than be admitted to hospital. That work will also help to identify at an earlier stage patients likely to benefit from new anti-viral treatments. Of course, we can all help the NHS by taking steps to reduce transmission of the virus as much as possible. While abiding by current guidance and protections is at this stage vitally important, we know that measures that restrict our lives are not sustainable indefinitely. With a variant as infectious as Omicron, the kind of protections that are still possible within our financial resources and without causing greater harm in other ways, while still very important at this stage, won't control transmission to the same extent as those measures would have done with other less transmissible variants. In light of that, coupled with the fact that, unfortunately, Covid won't suddenly disappear and that Omicron is unlikely to be the last new variant that we encounter, we need to continue to adapt our thinking about how to manage the virus and become more resilient to it in future. Let me be clear at this stage that this does not, in my view, mean giving up on trying to control Covid completely. The impact of it on individual health and on our collective wellbeing is too significant for that, but it means seeking ways of doing so that are more proportionate, more sustainable and less restrictive. There are no easy answers here, but adapting to the on-going challenge of Covid is inescapable. The Scottish Government is therefore currently working on and will publish over the next few weeks a revised strategic framework, which will set out more fully how that process of adaptation can be managed with a view to building that greater resilience. We will seek views from across Parliament as we develop this new framework in more detail. However, the changes that I am about to confirm to the requirements on self-isolation and testing are an early indication of an already adapting response. I said last week that it was important to consider carefully changes to self-isolation rules. We wanted to ensure that such changes are made only when, in the view of clinical advisers, the benefits of them outweigh the risks of them. I also want to make changes as far as possible in a coherent, not a piecemeal manner, given the importance of clear public understanding of what is required. As a result of that consideration, we are now proposing two changes to the self-isolation rules and one change to the requirement for PCR testing, and all of those changes will take effect from midnight to night. The first change to self-isolation applies to those who test positive for Covid. While the initial advice when someone tests positive will still be to self-isolate for 10 days, there will now be an option to end isolation after seven days, as long as you firstly have no fever and secondly you record two negative lateral flow tests, one no earlier than day six after testing positive and another at least 24 hours after that. The second change applies to close contacts of positive cases and this includes household contacts who are either under the age of 18 years, four months or who are older than that and fully vaccinated. Let me be clear that, by fully vaccinated, we mean first, second and booster or third doses. For close contacts in those categories, the requirement to self-isolate will end and be replaced by our requirement to take a lateral flow test every day for seven days. Obviously, if one of those tests is positive, self-isolation will then be required. Anyone identified as a close contact who is over 18 years and four months and not fully vaccinated will still be asked to self-isolate for 10 days and to take a PCR test. Those changes are significant and they are not completely without risk. However, at this stage of the pandemic, they do strike an appropriate balance between the continued importance of self-isolation in breaking chains of transmission and reducing the disruption that self-isolation causes in the economy and other critical services. We are also proposing an important change to the advice on testing and let me be clear again that that has been very carefully considered. Scotland, indeed the UK as a whole, has one of the most extensive PCR testing systems anywhere in the world. However, with infection levels as high as they are, we must fully utilise all available testing capacity, PCR and lateral flow and make sure that isolation and advice happens as quickly as possible. For those who have symptoms of Covid, the advice remains to book a PCR test even if you have a positive lateral flow test. Of course, the advice to everyone is to test regularly with lateral flow devices, especially before meeting up with others. However, from tomorrow if your lateral flow test is positive and you do not have symptoms, you will no longer be required to take a PCR test to confirm the result. Instead, you must immediately isolate and also report your result online so that test and protect can commence the contact tracing process and give you advice as quickly as possible. You will also receive an online form that you must fill in as would happen with a PCR positive to ensure that your contacts are notified. Other countries—Canada, for example—have already made this change. It has been made possible because lateral flow tests are now widely available and work well. Also, and really importantly, the test and protect system in Scotland can start contact tracing on the strength of a reported positive lateral flow result as well as a PCR. Crucially, at times of very high levels of infection, the risk of a false positive lateral flow result is very low indeed, around just three in 10,000. The safest thing to do at this stage is to treat a positive lateral flow test as confirmation of Covid, even if you have no symptoms. That allows us to maximise testing capacity and ensure a speedier start to the process of contact tracing and advice. There are a few further points that I want to briefly touch on today. First, the current situation continues to take its toll on everyone, of course, but it continues to take its toll on businesses. Last week, I confirmed the allocation of more than £200 million of the £375 million in business support that we are making available. Today, I can confirm the allocation of a further £55 million. Up to £28 million will be allocated to taxi and private hire drivers and operators. £19 million will support services such as beauticians and hairdressers. £5 million will be provided for sport and an additional £3 million for tourism. Local authorities are, as we speak, working to get money to bank accounts as quickly as possible. Secondly, in light of the widespread community transmission of Omicron in the UK just now, discussions are taking place today between the four UK Governments about possible changes to travel rules, including the requirement for pre-departure testing. If those discussions result in proposed changes, we will inform Parliament as quickly as possible. My third point relates to education and the start of the new term. All secondary school children are being asked to take a lateral flow test on the night before or morning of the first day back and thereafter to test twice a week and also in advance of mixing socially with people from other households. Lightwise, university and college students should take a test immediately before travelling from home to term accommodation and thereafter twice a week and before socialising with people from other households. Staff in all educational and early year settings should take a lateral flow test just before starting back to work and in line with broader advice after that. Our priority is to keep schools open and to minimise further disruption to education, but with community transmission high, I know that the next few weeks will be challenging for pupils, staff and parents. Using lateral flow tests will help, so too will the changes to isolation rules and updated education guidance reflecting those changes will issue shortly. We will also work with councils to ensure that guidance issued before Christmas is followed to keep schools not just open but as safe as possible. My final brief update today is on vaccination. I am immensely grateful to everyone involved in delivering vaccines and to everyone who has been vaccinated. By the bells and hug money, around 3 million people, 77 per cent of those eligible have received their booster or third dose. If you weren't one of those people and you are eligible, please come forward now. You can arrange an appointment online or go to a drop-in clinic. There is plenty of capacity. You can get details at NHS Inform or your local health boards website. Getting a booster does not mean that we will not get Covid, although it does reduce the chances of that, but it significantly enhances our protection against serious illness. It could quite literally save your life. 12 to 15-year-olds can now go to drop-in centres to get the second dose and encourage everyone in that age group to do so. If you are the parent or carer of someone in that age group, you can go with them to the vaccination centre. The vaccine programme has been an outstanding success, but there are still many people eligible but not yet vaccinated. If you are one of them, then for your own sake and indeed for the sake of all of us, please rectify that. It is not too late and no one will judge you for not having done it before now. On the contrary, you will be welcomed with open arms. This phase of the pandemic is possibly the most challenging that we have faced so far. The most infectious variant so far is creating a volume of cases that, notwithstanding its possibly reduced severity, still has the potential to overwhel us. Of course, two years in, the kind of measures that have helped to control transmission in past phases are becoming less tolerable and causing more harm. While it is not easy, we need to continually adapt our ways of managing the virus, and we will do so. In the meantime, we must continue to do what we know makes a difference now. Get fully vaccinated as soon as you can. Please do it this week. The more of us who are boosted, the less severe the impact of Omicron will be for each of us as individuals if we get the virus and for society as a whole. Second, limit your contacts. Right now, with infection levels at 1 in 20, at least every interaction that we have comes with a significant risk of catching the virus, so we should prioritise the contacts that matter most to us. Third, if you are meeting other people, test before you go every time and finally take all the other precautions that make a difference. Work from home whenever possible, as the new working year gets under way. I am appealing again to employers to enable that.  If you are meeting indoors, limit the number of households in your group to three at most and keep windows open and follow all advice on hygiene. I want again to record my thanks to everyone across the country who continues to do all of that and play their part in helping us through the latest very challenging phase of the pandemic. I am happy now to take questions. The First Minister will now take questions on the issues raised in her statement. I intend to allow around 55 minutes for questions, and I would be grateful if members who wish to ask a question could please put an R in the chat function. I call Douglas Ross. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I welcome the changes to testing rules. Those are sensible and proportionate changes that are similar to what we are seeing in other parts of the United Kingdom. I also welcome the changes to self-isolation, which the Scottish Conservatives have been calling for since day 1. When they were introduced, we said that this policy was not sustainable. Every other part of the United Kingdom made the change that Scotland was left as an outlier. So, First Minister, why did it take so long to make this change here in Scotland? I make no apology for considering those things very carefully. My clinical advice until now has been that it was possible that the risks of that in releasing people from self-isolation too early and therefore contributing to a greater increase in transmission outwead the benefits. That balance of judgment has now changed. After careful consideration, we are making this judgment today. None of those things are straightforward. I would doubt that there is any Government anywhere that is making those decisions lightly. They certainly shouldn't be. Sometimes we will arrive at different judgments for good reason. I will always be accountable for and open to scrutiny on the judgments that I make, but I will continue to take those judgments really carefully and with the best possible clinical advice. Even today, the changes that we are announcing, although I think that they are proportionate at this stage in the pandemic, because they balance the benefits of isolation with the disruption that isolation caused, they are not without risk. That is why it is really important that we communicate them properly and that people understand not just what the easing of some of those rules are, but what we are asking people to do in place of those. That applies to the changes on self-isolation, but it also applies to the changes around confirmatory PCR testing after an asymptomatic LFD positive result. Douglas Ross and I have had exchanges in the past. I say this non-pejoratively—this is the stuff of Brittany and democracy—but at times in the past, if I had followed Douglas Ross, we would have removed the requirements for face coverings prematurely. We would not have some of the mitigations that we now have in schools that I think are seen to be really important. There have been differences. There will no doubt always be differences, but the trust placed in me—the responsibility placed in me by the Scottish people—means that I have with my ministers the duty to weigh those things up carefully and, of course, to be accountable for the judgments that we arrive at. Douglas Ross mentioned the reason that Scotland remained an outlier was because of the clinical advice that she received. Will she publish the clinical advice from last week, which meant that this crucial change was not made, and the clinical advice that she received this week has now come into force? She also mentioned communicating properly. Yesterday, the deputy First Minister, the man who sits in her cabinet in charge of Covid recovery, said that virus rates were lower in Scotland compared to England because of the actions taken by the SNP. John Swinney was using data from before the SNP's restrictions were introduced, and the most recent data shows, in fact, the opposite of what he claimed. Tackling this virus is not a competition, but John Swinney tried to make it one. Why is the minister for Covid recovery using misleading data to make petty political points, instead of giving people the accurate information that they need? I do not think that that is the case at all. I will come on to most recent data in a second. First, let me deal with the issue of outlier. When the changes to self-isolation for index cases were first announced, it was only England that applied to it. For a period, England was an outlier. Last week, Wales and Northern Ireland decided to introduce similar changes, and today we are doing likewise. At different times in this pandemic, we have come to different views. Substantively, sometimes we have come to different views—or the same views—on different timescales. Right now, on protections, for example, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland are in very similar positions in terms of restrictions on gatherings and some restrictions on protective measures on hospitality. England is an outlier on that, not just an outlier in a UK sense, but arguably an outlier in a European and, more broadly, a global fence. We all have a responsibility to reach judgments based on our clinical advice and the responsibility that we have to keep the public in the most challenging of situations as safe as possible. That is what I will always do to the best of my ability. In terms of the impact of the protective measures that we have in place, it always has been and always will be very difficult, sometimes impossible, to prove causation between one measure and the outcomes in terms of virus rates. Common sense tells you that, if we did not have some restriction on large, potentially super-spreader event right now, if we did not have measures in place to try to stem, at least to some extent, the transmission in higher-risk settings like hospitality, and if we were not advising the public and the public were not responding so magnificently well to advice to cut contacts, then high rates that we are seeing right now are likely to be even higher and the pressure on the NHS is significant. I think that we are right to be trying to apply some break, notwithstanding the high levels of infection that we face. I agree that these things are not a competition. At times, Scotland said that we have had lower levels of infection, at other times we have had higher levels of infection. Right now, I think that the levels of infection are lower, whether they will remain in England, perhaps slightly in Wales, not so much in Northern Ireland, but that is likely to change. My final point would be in relation to the First Minister's use of the ONS data yesterday. He used the most up-to-date ONS data yesterday. I have cited in my statement today data that, as I understand it, has been published while I have been speaking. That is a week more up-to-date—there will always be a lag in it—that I think will still show that our 1 in 20—very, very high—is still lower, certainly than England. However, those things are not a competition. We just all have to take the decisions and make the judgments that we think are best to try to navigate the safest possible course through that. I will always seek to do that. I will be held accountable and subject to scrutiny, and that is the nature of the job that I am privileged to do. Douglas Ross I am glad that that is the nature of the job that the First Minister is privileged to do. Therefore, I hope that, on this occasion, she will answer my question on clinical advice. It has obviously changed, according to her answer, from last week when self-isolation rules remain the same this week when they have changed. Will she agree to publish that? Data is crucially important. John Swinney said that data from Public Health Scotland will be published today that the First Minister, in her statement, has now said that that will be Friday. That is vital information on hospitalisations because of Covid and hospitalisations because people are unvaccinated. It is information that is essential for the public to know why they are being asked to put up with restrictions on their lives. It makes it difficult for anyone to judge the Covid situation properly when the First Minister has information, but the public does not. Can she confirm that Friday's update with that information will include all the parts and figures that we have been calling for and that the public needs them? First Minister, I am not sure that I will contain everything that the Scottish Conservatives have been calling for. I think that if we have done everything that the Scottish Conservatives have been calling for over the past few months, we would probably be in more of a difficult position than we are now by referring to some of the policy issues. We will continue to take the best judgments that we can and we will continue to publish as much data and evidence as possible on the provisal that there is a confidence in the robustness of that data. We do publish evidence papers. We will continue to publish as far as reasonable and appropriate the evidence and the advice underpinning the decisions that we take. Ultimately, though, those decisions involve the application of judgment. That is what people will let me and my Government to do, to take the responsibility to weigh up all of the factors and take the judgments and be held accountable for them. Last week, I did not think that it was the case that the benefits of changing self-isolation would outweigh the risks. The higher transmission now, the bigger the burden of self-isolation on the economy, has changed that judgment. Those are judgments that we will continue to have to make in a whole range of issues in the weeks to come. On the issue about the data that will be published on Friday, Public Health Scotland has been doing that work. It is important that that data is robust. That data will be the first result of the analysis that will show the differentiation between those who are in hospital because of Covid—in other words, it is the reason for their admission—and those who are in hospital for another reason but who have Covid, either they came in with it or perhaps contracted it in hospital. That is important information to know—that is why we are doing that work carefully—but it is also important not to put too much store on that. Again, I refer to that in my statement. Just because somebody with Covid is in hospital for another reason does not take away the impact of Covid, because the fact that they have Covid means that there has to be special infection control measures around that patient in terms of distancing and other things that apply. That reduces further the capacity of the health service and increases the pressure. It is important that we understand all those things as our knowledge about Omicron develops, but we should not kid ourselves on that, because somebody with Covid is in hospital for another reason, that somehow takes away all of the difficult impact of them having Covid had. We will continue to publish evidence, we will continue to publish data, but I will also continue to do the job that I am elected to do, which is to apply the judgment to all of that and reach decisions that are motivated by my desire and my responsibility to navigate the safest possible path through this pandemic. I start by passing my condolences to all those who have lost a loved one, and I would like to also put on record my gratitude to our vaccinators, NHS and social care staff and all front-line workers who have continued to work and keep us safe over the Christmas and New Year period. I welcome the changes that have been made to the self-isolation period. There will be a relief for public services and businesses who are feeling the impact. I also welcome the broadening of financial support to businesses associated with hospitality, in particular, with the events, taxis and the beauty industry. Issues have been raised about the speed of distribution and the impact that it has on risking businesses going bust and people losing jobs. Can the First Minister commit to the speed of distribution of those funds? We all agree that we must confront and challenge disinformation online. It undermines public health, but that is not helped by the Government, providing unclear or partial information. It is clearly a difference between being in hospital or intensive care with Covid and being in hospital or intensive care because of Covid, especially if there is an outbreak in a hospital. Surely, the First Minister is basing her decisions partly on this information. If she is not, then why not? If she ends, she must have seen that data and she should share it now. Can the First Minister commit to this data being made available as a matter of urgency so that we can maintain public confidence in the decisions that are being taken and why? The First Minister On the first point, councils are responsible for distributing the money that we have made available. I know how hard they are working to get that out the door and into the bank accounts of businesses as quickly as possible. Businesses, particularly in the hospitality trade, will be being contacted over the course of this week. I know that councils are doing that at speed and that that process will continue. On the second part of Anas Sarwa's question, I have not seen the data around Omicron. Previously, data on the question was published by Public Health Scotland in relation to previous variants. I have not seen that data yet on Omicron. I have said in my initial statement that the first results of that analysis will be published on Friday, which is as soon as Public Health Scotland considers that it will be in a robust state to publish. On the last point, which I covered in my statement and also my answer to Douglas Ross, yes, there is a difference between somebody being in hospital because of Covid and in hospital for another reason but having Covid. However, we should not overdate that difference because if they are in hospital with Covid, even if the reason for their admission is something other than Covid, the fact that they have Covid means that they have to have the same protective infection control measures applied as somebody in hospital for Covid. The impact on the individual may or may not be different if you have another condition. Having Covid potentially will exacerbate and complicate that other condition. However, the impact on the hospital, on the national health service, is not as different as people try to suggest. The bed that is occupied by somebody with Covid is occupied with infection control measures around it, whether they are in because of Covid or in with Covid. Yes, let us understand this, but let us not overstate the importance of that differentiation in terms of the impact of those admissions on the national health service. I am not sure that the First Minister deliberately confuses the issue. No-one is questioning whether having a patient with Covid impacts on hospital capacity, but what it does impact is on people thinking about how dangerous this variant is to them, their life and their loved ones. Level of hospitalisations and levels of those in intensive care due to the Covid outbreak is significant and important and why people are measuring how they need to restrict their lives and how they live it and the impact it has on businesses. That data is really important and people have been asking for it. For weeks since Omicron broke out, the urgency of it is really important so that we can maintain public confidence in the restrictions that we have taken. I would repeat the public health advice. The vaccine works. Please go and get your vaccination if you have not had your first, second or booster dose. If that is not too late, if there is not any embarrassment, please book an appointment and visit a drop-in clinic. Please also follow the restrictions. Please take lateral flow tests. Please go for PCR tests if you are eligible for doing so. Another issue that I raised last week was testing capacity. I note the new arrangements on testing, but issues still remain for the wider population and key workers' issues around PCR capacity but also supply of LFD tests. Across Scotland, key workers around NHS and beyond are reporting waiting days for PCR test results, despite promises of a fast-track service for front-line workers. A number of staff are having been in touch in their delay from going back to work for days as a result of that capacity. Given the new protocols on testing, can the First Minister confirm that LFD supply and distribution issues have been resolved and can she clarify who is now eligible for a PCR test? If you are symptomatic after LFD, for example, should you go for a PCR test, will there be new guidance published around PCR test eligibility and will the new freed-up capacity be prioritised for front-line NHS and social care workers? First Minister, let me take those issues in turn and they are all important issues. Forgive me, Presiding Officer. I will try to do it as briefly as possible. I want to give substantive answers. First, I would like to return to the issue of the distinction between people in hospital with Covid and in hospital because of Covid. Anasawa's points are not unimportant and I am not suggesting they are, but I would also ask him on the point that he is making about severity equally not to oversimplify things. As I said in my statement, all the evidence that we have so far, including the evidence from admissions to ICU in Scotland, which are not rising at the rate that hospital admissions are rising, suggests that the impact on individuals of Omicron is less severe than previous variants. Whether that is an inherent milder version of the virus or whether it is the effect of vaccination, we do not know for sure, but all the evidence points to that. However, there are two caveats that we need to make there. One is that evidence that is based so far on the circulation of Omicron largely within younger populations, which throughout the pandemic have been less likely—not completely unlikely but less likely to fall seriously out. We need to continue to monitor that if the spread, as is happening now, moves from younger populations into older age groups. That is the first caveat. The second caveat is about volume. Even if the rate of hospitalisation, therefore, the severity, is much less, the sheer volume of cases will add up to significant pressure on the national health service. That is not abstract or academic for people's health, because if the hospitals are so full of Covid cases that they cannot treat in the way that they want to, other conditions, heart disease or whatever other conditions, that has an impact on people's health. Even if not all the people in hospital are in because of Covid, that does not mean that we should be complacent in any way for any reason about the mounting pressure on our hospitals. I hope that that is clear. I recognise the points that have been made by appeal to Opposition leaders not to oversimplify those issues, because I do not think that that helps anyone. On the community transmission as high as it is just now, we will periodically have pressure on the testing system. We are working on a four nations basis, because most of our testing capacity is through the four nations system, although we also have considerable NHS Scotland testing capacity. We work on a daily basis to resolve and to flex the capacity as far as possible. Right now, there is no shortage in Scotland of LFD tests. We monitor the supply of those very carefully. Issues that we were seeing with turnaround times have improved again, and turnaround times have become much shorter again. The essential workers' route to prioritising PCR testing is there. There is also the sectoral exemption process that is available to NHS workers and key workers in other sectors. Lastly, we will ensure that there is guidance on the latest testing advice, but I think that I made this point clear in my statement. If I did not, let me repeat it. If you have symptoms of Covid, then even if you have taken an LFD test that is positive, the advice is to still book a PCR test. It is only if you have no symptoms and your LFD test is positive that we are then saying that there is no need to take a PCR test, not just because we are trying to maximise testing capacity, but because it is a pretty safe assumption, given the levels of transmission right now that you are positive, because the false positive rate is so low and working on the basis of that positive LFD test allows the contact tracing process to kick in as quickly as possible. Obviously, if you have symptoms, there is a variety of reasons that we would still want PCR testing to happen, not least as we get more antiviral treatment to allow us to assess patients who are most likely to benefit from that. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. At the start of the pandemic, the Government carried opposition party support for public health measures by providing us with almost real-time information about the advance of the virus. It meant that we were all signed up to the precautionary principle of hinging decisions around data rather than dates, but that transparency has ebbed away six weeks of Omicron in Scotland. We will only learn on Friday who is in hospital specifically because of Omicron severity, despite some of those details already making their way into the national press. If the First Minister is still leading the public health response of Covid on the basis of data and not dates, does she recognise the importance of being more transparent with the information that she has if she is to bring us with her? Secondly, can I ask specifically about PCR testing? Bias information published by the Government at lunchtime, in answer to my request last week, has revealed that PCR testing capacity is actually quite significantly down on what it was last year to a little over 50,000 tests a day. Does she recognise that that will have resulted in health workers waiting in some cases days for a negative result? First Minister, I take both of those questions. Firstly, the reason that I am not sharing the data on people in hospital because of Covid versus people in hospital with Covid is not because I am not being transparent, because I do not have that data yet, because Public Health Scotland is doing careful work to make sure that that data, when it is published, is robust and reliable. They published data on that question previously with the past variants of the virus and they are doing that work again. It is not trying to hide that data. We want to make sure that it is reliable and that what is published is data that people can have confidence in. It will be published on Friday, because that is when Public Health Scotland considers that it will reach that date. There is no point in publishing data that is not reliable, because it does not help anybody beyond that. I will continue to be as open and transparent as possible about data, about evidence. Ultimately, as I have said before, the data and the evidence does not make the decisions, it informs the decisions. The decisions have to be taken by those of us who are elected to carry that responsibility and that does involve the application of judgment. I am elected to do and it is what I am held accountable for, but we will be as open and transparent as we have been all along about the data and the evidence underpinning that. However, I make no apology for wanting that data to be as robust as it can possibly be. On the issue of testing capacity, I do not accept that characterisation. As of today, in terms of the UK testing network, Scotland's allocation share of that is about 50,000 a day. Over and above that, we have NHS Scotland capacity of around 32,000 per day. That testing is fluctuating at the moment. It always fluctuates for a variety of reasons. If there is equipment failure in one of the labs, for example, it will be down a bit while that is repaired. However, right now, as with so many other parts of society, one of the reasons for fluctuation is staff absences because of Covid and self-isolation in our laboratory network, which is another reason why the changes that we are announcing today are at the moment, I think, appropriate. However, we continue to work with UK Government colleagues to maximise testing capacity on a daily basis. However, we need to see testing capacity, not just as PCR—important though that is—but to utilise fully the LFD capacity, which is what lies behind the testing change that I have announced today. Understandably, there is a great deal of interest from members to put questions to the First Minister, and I would be grateful for more succinct questions and responses. It is my intention to allow this session to continue beyond the scheduled time in order to take as many questions as possible. I call Gillian Martin to be followed by Sandesh Gilhane. In the First Minister's statement that adjustments to the isolation advice have been made, I am certain that people are respectful of advice given based on the science. I trust that it is a science behind the Government's decisions, so I will not ask the First Minister to go over again the clinical basis for the adjustments, because she has been more incomprehensive today. The First Minister has said that fully vaccinated close contacts of those who have tested positive but who themselves have a full week's worth of negative lateral flow results will not have to isolate beyond seven days. In my area, people have told me that they are sometimes finding it challenging to get hold of enough lateral flow tests, particularly when they have got large families. Can the First Minister say what has been done to ensure that a supply in every area is available to make sure that everyone can play their part in protecting others and to test at home? Can I be clear that the change for fully vaccinated close contacts, including household contacts, is that the requirement to self-isolate at all will be replaced by daily lateral flow tests for seven days. As long as on each day your lateral flow is negative, you do not have to isolate, but on any day, of course, that your lateral flow test is positive, you do then have to start isolation. Again, that is something that we have considered carefully. We think that the benefits outweigh the risks, but none of that, of course, is risk free, but we think that that is a proportionate change overall at this stage. Of course, it means that the supply of lateral flow devices is always important and is even more important. Through all the various routes that we are working with, with colleagues in the community pharmacy network and local testing centres to make sure that there is a good supply of LFDs, there is no shortage at the moment. Procurement is on-going to make sure that supplies continue to be topped up. Right now, you can mail order LFDs, you can get them from local pharmacy places or local testing centres, and the number of councils are making lateral flow devices available in other places as well. There is also the key workplace testing, which businesses that are part of that know how to access. The Scottish people are struggling under the restrictions that are in place, some of which have been in place for a long time. We all appreciate that Covid necessitates some restrictions, but what information does the Scottish Government base its decisions upon? We simply do not know. To help the people to better understand, in terms of transparency, will you commit to publish weekly, ahead of the announcement, all the data that the cabinet faces its decisions upon? We have published acres of data and evidence, and we will continue to do that. However, I come back to the point that the data and evidence does not make the decisions, they inform the decisions. I would hazard a guess that the member who I know is a clinician is in a minority of clinicians right now who do not think that no protective measures are required. Indeed, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, many countries across Europe and the world are all in a similar place, in some proportionate but necessary protections to try to stem, even to some extent, the rise in cases. What is the rationale behind that? We know, particularly with Omicron, given its greater transmissibility and infectiousness, that large-scale events have the potential to quickly become super-spread in events, which is why we have, regrettably, put a temporary restriction on large events. We know that the kind of environments in hospitality where people come together, often poorly ventilated with alcohol, mooring inhibitions, also raises risk of transmission, particularly with a greater transmissible variant. That is the rationale for the particular targeted measures that we have in place. We know from evidence that face coverings help perhaps more than many other measures reduce transmission. I would expect somebody to clinically qualify probably to understand this better than most. All of the targeted measures that are in place right now are in place in many other countries, and all of them flow from our understanding of how a virus spreads, and, in particular, given its greater transmissibility, the risks that the spread of Omicron presents. Contrary to what the First Minister said earlier, the Deputy First Minister did cite ONS data to justify his argument about how much better we are doing in Scotland because of restrictions here. The data that he used covered the period up to 23 December. That, of course, was before restrictions were introduced when the rules were largely the same in Scotland and in England. Analysis by the Financial Times showed that the seven-day rolling average of cases up to 3 January has Scotland with a higher percentage case numbers than England. ONS figures published today showed largely the same level of infections in Scotland and England other than in London. I absolutely agree with the First Minister that this is not a competition, but would she agree with me that it is essential that ministers do not spin statistics and create misinformation that would weaken public confidence? I do not think that he is seeking to do that. It is not a competition, but since I have been asked those things, let me lay it again. The Deputy First Minister cited ONS statistics yesterday. I did not say that he did not. What I said was that he cited the most up-to-date ONS statistics, which until 2 o'clock today were the ones that he cited yesterday. We have further data today that I have already cited, so I will not go into detail again. I would urge significant caution about the seven-day rolling average of cases up to 3 January in any part of the UK because of the disruption to reporting over the Christmas and New Year holiday period and the different pattern of testing that we know is there when there is a holiday period. I think that I would treat those figures with significant caution. As I have said, we know that the daily reported cases are a significant underestimate in all countries of the true prevalence of the virus. If Jackie really wants to make this point and get an assessment of the overall performance of Scotland to date, because it may change next week or next month, then overall, in terms of the pandemic to date, levels of infection in Scotland—you can go on to the UK Government Covid dashboards and see this for yourself—over all levels of infection in Scotland are lower than, I think, in all other parts of the UK—certainly England and Wales, I cannot recall exactly if that is the case for Northern Ireland. Does that say that we have managed our way through this pandemic perfectly? Absolutely not, but it suggests that the balance of judgments that we are taking sometimes will get them more right than on other occasions. The balance of judgment has led us to that position, but I am not complacent about this. We face ahead of us a really difficult period, and that is why my responsibility is just to take the decisions based on data and evidence, but applying my judgment, which is my job, the decisions that I think are likely to get us through this as safely as possible. If they accord with decisions elsewhere in the UK, all good and well, but if they do not, then that will be for good reason that it is then my responsibility to set out for people and to allow people to decide. Before I move on to take Jim Fairlie, I have a point of order from Sandesh Gulhane. I seek your clarification as to the fact that the First Minister completely misrepresented my position at no point have I ever been against all restrictions at no point have I ever been doing the things that I have been accused of, and that was absolutely not my question. Dr Gulhane, that is not a point of order, but your comment has obviously been recorded. I now move on to take Jim Fairlie, who will be followed by Oliver Mundell. Thank you, Presiding Officer, and a very happy new year to yourself. While the support for the hospitality sector is very welcome, can the First Minister outline how it will be targeted and will there be a particular attention paid to local and family-run businesses as opposed to multinational chains? It is important that the support is targeted. I covered some of this last week that there is a generic element to our hospitality support, but we are also looking at how we target other sectors in a more tailored way. Overall, we are providing £113 million to support hospitality and leisure sectors impacted by the latest public health measures. Local and family-run businesses absolutely must receive that support. All eligible hospitality businesses who previously got support through the strategic framework business fund will receive a top-up payment, and they will be contacted directly by their local authority. That is the work that is already underway. They do not have to make a new application. Hospitality premises with a rateable value of up to and including £51,000 will receive a grant of £4,500, and those with a rateable value of £51,000 and £1 or above will receive a grant of £6,800. Oliver Mundell, to be followed by Clare Adamson. Thank you, Presiding Officer. Last year saw education attainment figures, which even in the context of the pandemic, making mockery of Nicola Sturgeon's promise, that education would be her top priority. We simply cannot afford any more unavoidable disruption to learning. Can the First Minister tell us how many additional non-classroom committee teachers will be called upon to cover lessons? What other additional resources are being made available to keep our schools open? Finally, can she confirm that every pupil in Scotland now has access to an electronic device to support remote learning in the event that they are required to self-isolate? Possibly Oliver Mundell meant to ask me that we would ensure no disruption due to unavoidable reasons, not unavoidable reasons. I do not want to see any further disruption to children's education because of the impact on attainment, not just in Scotland, but as any reasonable person knows in all parts of the UK and indeed in countries across the world. That is why we are determined to keep schools open. We have already provided additional resources, so there are additional teachers already in our schools with plans to recruit more teachers. As a result of that resource, we have done what we have said that we would do in terms of electronic devices to pupils starting, of course, with those in the most deprived circumstances. In terms of the situation more widely, as I am sure Oliver Mundell is aware, guidance was issued before Christmas to schools. We are looking at some of the things that schools could do to make the environment as safe as possible. For example, how to minimise contacts through groupings where practical indoors, tightening restrictions on school visitors, updated advice on ventilation and CO2 monitoring, updated advice on asymptomatic testing. In relation to staffing, and I am sure that Oliver Mundell is aware of this, the Scottish Negotiating Committee for teachers has previously agreed a number of contingencies for flexible staff resourcing to maintain continuity in education. For example, the ability if necessary to combine classes and stages, increase class contact time or relocate staff temporarily. Those arrangements are already in place. Of course, our funding for additional teachers is already resulting in more than 2,000 more teachers in our schools than was the case before the start of the pandemic. Of course, right now, the ratio of people to teachers is at its lowest level, partly because of that additional recruitment since 2009. Claire Adamson, to be followed by Gillian Mackay. Thank you, Presiding Officer. First Minister, you have already alluded to the huge challenges faced by countries across the globe from Omicron. In December, John Caffix described Omicron as spreading at lightning speed as he introduced restrictions on citizens out with the EU from travelling to or through France. Post Brexit, of course, the UK is a third country in EU terms. What are the implications of that for Scotland, particularly for our exporters? First Minister, it is important to raise what requirements travellers need to meet for entry into their territory. It is for the French authorities to decide whether and when to follow Germany and open access to UK nationals. However, there is no doubt that post Brexit arrangements have been a factor in the temporary French decision to prevent UK nationals from transiting France to homes or destinations elsewhere in the EU. That is one of the many, many damaging consequences of no longer being a member of the EU and is one of a long list of reasons why I regret that decision. I think that many people across Scotland regret it, too. Gillian Mackay, to be followed by Willie Coffey. Thank you, Presiding Officer. 11 local authorities returned to school today, and school staff, pupils and parents are understandably anxious about what effect the Omicron surge will have. Many teachers will be opening windows to ensure adequate ventilation, but with temperatures close to freezing, that creates other problems. Will the First Minister consider deploying some of the money currently allocated to economic support to instead assist local councils to purchase air filtration units for classrooms that require them? Of course, we will continue to consider all suggestions like that. We have a separate fund available to help businesses with ventilation, so we will certainly look at the scope and eligibility for that. As Gillian Mackay knows, we have already provided councils with additional funding to do CO2 monitoring. Councils should already be acting on the outcomes of that to make improvements to ventilation, including air filtration systems where that is necessary. However, we understand the impact on councils, so we will continue to talk to them about what further support we can provide. The other thing that I want to acknowledge is how anxious a time this is for young people going back to school, but also teachers and other staff in schools and for parents. That is not the position any of us wanted to be in. For reasons that we all understand, keeping young people in school with as normal a school experience as possible is really important, but that requires steps and mitigations to be taken to keep schools safe or as safe as possible in the situation that we face right now. It also makes it important that those in the 12 to 15 age groups that are eligible for the second dose of vaccination come forward to take that up and, of course, we will continue to pay close attention to future advice from the JCVI on extending vaccination to other groups of young people. The First Minister will be aware that, in every constituency, there are a high number of businesses such as the salons and barbershots and so on who are experiencing a lack of footfall due to the necessary precautions, and many have significant staff absences too. Given that the Barnett formula means that Scotland only gains access to its own financial resources if the UK Government decides that England needs financial help, what indication has the Scottish Government had from the UK Government that it will extend support to those businesses who can remain open but whose trade has been drastically affected, or will we continue to have to support those sectors from our own resources as just announced by the First Minister? We have no further indication of what was announced by the Chancellor before Christmas of any additional support being in the pipeline from the UK Government to businesses either in England or that would flow to businesses elsewhere in the UK. My view is on the constraints of the funding arrangements generally, but, in particular, in the situation that we face right now, our well-known and Willie Coffey has articulated them again. We are providing as much support as we can from within our own resources. I think that it is right that we do that, but there are limitations to that. Some of the businesses that Willie Coffey has referred to today—Headdress and Barber Salons, for example—will benefit from the allocation that I have spoken about earlier on. I hope that, while it will not fully compensate those businesses, it will go some way to easing the pressure that they are dealing with. Of the 1,223 people in Scotland in hospital with Covid today, approximately how many have not been vaccinated? I do not have that information to hand. I will check with Public Health Scotland to see whether we can get that information, and, if so, I will make sure that that is published. What we do know beyond any doubt is that fully vaccinated with a booster or a third dose of the vaccine significantly reduces the likelihood of becoming seriously ill, and therefore is being vaccinated. We know that, and I will check what information and how up-to-date the information is about the vaccination status of those who are currently in hospital. First Minister has called for increased testing in schools on the exact same approach that the Government has said at each stage, yet the result has been a steady testing rate at pupils of below 5 per cent. Labour has written to the Government with a raft of suggestions, including mobile testing units in schools, and the availability of mass testing at certain primary and secondary schools. Why will this Government have created a culture of testing in our schools that is needed to understand the spread of the virus and to help us to stay open and safe? There already is mass access to lateral flow testing for secondary school pupils and staff in education settings. That is about encouraging people to make use of that, and we have all got a part to play in that. We cannot force people to use the testing, but we can strongly encourage it. We have seen across the population over the past few weeks, as we have been dealing with the Omicron surge, a significant increase in the uptake of lateral flow testing. I certainly hope that that will be reflected in the approach to school testing as the new term begins. We will always continue to do everything that we can to encourage people of the importance of testing and the benefits to them and to the wider population of taking full advantage of it. Eleanor Whitham, to be followed by Sue Webber. Recognising the important role that our health and social care partnerships play in delivering critical and essential care package services, and the pressures that they are currently operating under with limited staffing in a build-up in demand, and noting that East Ayrshire, one of the exemplar partnerships in Wyrmstall a councillor, is struggling at this time, and looking at a range of temporary alternatives whilst recruitment is on-going to bring in additional staff to support the increase in demand. Can I ask the First Minister what supports the Scottish Government can provide to assist health and social care partnerships at this critical time? First, Eleanor Whitham is right to say that East Ayrshire is an exemplar partnership. I think that it does really good work, but, like all partnerships at the moment, they are under significant and increasing pressure. That is likely to remain the case for the foreseeable future as we continue to navigate our way through the latest phase of the pandemic. We have already allocated significant funding to all health and social care partnerships to support them through winter. That includes, for example, £40 million for interim care for people leaving hospital, £20 million to enhance multidisciplinary working and a further £15 million to recruit additional health support workers. That is on top of, I think, over £60 million to enhance care at home capacity and funding to increase the hourly rate of pay to make these jobs more attractive. We continue to work really closely with councils and with health and care partnerships to try to navigate our way collectively through this, but this is not easy and is not going to be easy in the weeks to come for the NHS or for social care, which brings me back to my central point. Difficult, though, it is, if we can all follow the guidance and abide by the protections in place right now, we will help to some extent to stem transmission and to ease that pressure, even if just a bit. To whoever should be followed by Neil Gray. Will the First Minister apologise to my colleague Dr Sandesh Gohani for the blatant misrepresentation of his position? I do not think that I have any need to do that. I do not intend to misrepresent anybody, I do not intend to misrepresent anybody, but Dr Sandesh was, as I heard it, suggesting that the restrictions and protective measures were in place as he put it for some time lacked evidence. I was saying and I said and I will say again, I thought particularly for somebody who is clinically qualified, the reasons for these targeted interventions was obvious and so obvious that many, many other countries, all other countries apart from England and the UK and many other countries across the world were implementing very similar measures. I heard what he said to me as indicative of him not agreeing with those protective measures. If that is not what he intended to say, then I accept that and his position is as he has put on the record, but I do repeat that he of all people presumably understands the rationale and the evidence phase for the targeted measures that are in place in Scotland. I call Neil Gray to be followed by Pam Duncan-Glancy. As children return to nursery and other childcare settings this week, including my two-year-old daughters, can the First Minister advise what support is currently being made available to private nurseries, which, like other sectors, are struggling with staffing related to Covid? Can she also advise what the current guidance is for testing under fives, as some childcare settings appear to be requesting proof of negative PCR tests for attendance? We will continue to do all we can to support education settings, including early years settings that are experienced in reduced staffing levels right now, because we know that this is a really difficult and stressful time. The changes to self-isolation that I have announced today will help with that and will help the early years and childcare sector, as well as other sectors. It will mean that the sectoral exemption process, the community effect before Christmas, is no longer required. In relation to the second part of the question, children, just to be clear, but as children under five years old are required to get a test where they have Covid symptoms, children under five years who have identified as close contacts, though, are encouraged but not required to be tested, so I hope that distinction is clear. I am done con glancy to be followed by Siobhan Brown. Thank you, Presiding Officer, and happy new year. Unpaid carers are absolutely broken. Many have not had a break for nearly two years and now health boards are asking them to step in even more to help with delayed discharge. What new action will the Government take to support unpaid carers? Considering that they still have a key role in the response, will the Government guarantee that the carers allowance supplement will be doubled again this year? We will continue to do everything that we can to support unpaid carers through the carers allowance supplement. Scotland is the only part of the UK that has a carers allowance supplement and I am personally very committed to maximising that. We have doubled it over the course of the pandemic and we will continue to maximise the support through that. Unpaid carers, everybody is struggling with the impact of the pandemic, but there is no doubt that some of the most difficult toll is being felt by unpaid carers who already have a really difficult set of challenges to deal with on a daily basis, as well as the additional financial support. Some of the changes that I have announced today, reducing the pressure on the formal social care service, I hope, will help with that and reducing the pressure overall on the NHS will help to avoid, I hope, some of the additional pressure that otherwise will be put on unpaid carers. This is one of the most, in a whole series of difficult and concerning aspects of what we are dealing with right now, one of the most difficult and concerning. I cannot magic away the impact of this virus, but all that we are doing is trying to reduce the burdens as much as possible. We will continue to make sure that unpaid carers do not get ignored, absolutely do not get ignored in that wider consideration. I have recently been contacted by a constituent who is concerned about the social care that his mother receives. Due to Covid and all the staff absences, services have been cut, so time slots for care can no longer be given. With the new Omicron variant and the increased staff absences crippling many sectors, including the NHS, rail, bus and ferry services, can I ask what engagement the Scottish Government has had with local authorities to combat absences across the care sector due to Covid? Just following on my answer to Pam Brunk and Glancy, where I talked about how worrying the additional pressure on unpaid carers is, it is also a cause of real concern to me and to the Government, the impact that Covid and staff absences, because of Covid, is having on social care packages the reduction of support that is available, time slots not being available. Of the many things that concern me about the current situation, those aspects are right up there at the top of the list. What we have announced today in terms of self-isolation will help with that, but we need to get Covid rates down to reduce that pressure overall and allow services to return more to normal and to do that as quickly as possible. On engagement with local councils, we engage on an on-going basis with local councils individually and collectively through COSLA. The Deputy First Minister, along with the Cabinet Secretary for Local Government and Health, is meeting COSLA this afternoon to discuss collectively what more we can do to try to address those particular challenges around unpaid care and social care more generally. Jamie Halcro Johnston, to be followed by Paul O'Kane. Thank you, Presiding Officer. There is still over £100 million of the business support previously announced by the Scottish Government still to be allocated. That money is clearly not supporting Scotland's bank accounts in Edinburgh. Can the First Minister tell us when it will be allocated by her Government and when it will start hitting the bank accounts of those businesses across Scotland that need it so much? The majority of it is allocated and therefore work is under way to get it into bank accounts as soon as possible. I have covered all that today, but we are continuing to consult with other sectors that perhaps have not had support before or need more targeted support about how we can best use the remainder of that, and we will do that as quickly as possible. It is worth saying, just for the record, that in the part of the UK where the member's party is in charge, this is funding that is not even available to the extent that it is available in Scotland. Yes, we want to consult properly to get this money as targeted as we can to those who need it most and to get it into bank accounts as quickly as possible, but it is money that is needed for the actions of the Scottish Government that would not be there to be followed by Joe Fitzpatrick. Constituents in Edinburgh Clyde with family living in care homes have contacted me deeply concerned by a return to a strict no-visitor policy, as I understand on the basis of advice from local public health teams due to some staff awaiting PCR results. That is contrary to the current guidance that a one-visitor should be allowed during a controlled outbreak. Indeed, Doral McAskill, chief executive of Scottish Care, has expressed concern that there is inconsistency on visiting rules due to public health teams or incident management teams' interpretation of what is a managed or controlled outbreak. Will the First Minister clarify the guidance on care home visiting and ask Public Health Scotland to communicate that clearly to local teams and ensure that people living in care homes can have regular visitors as is their right? First Minister, I inadvertently misquoted Doral McAskill last week when the line between Willie Rennie and I had broken up a bit, so I have apologised to him privately for that. Let me take the opportunity to do it publicly today as well. I will take care not to inadvertently do that again today. He is raising legitimate concerns about firstly the need for the mental health and wellbeing of care home residents and their families to continue with safe visiting, but also to make sure that visiting is safe and that we are taking all necessary precautions. Some of what I have announced today will have an impact on the self-isolation rules and testing that affects care homes. Therefore, I will ask Public Health Scotland or the Scottish Government for updated guidance to be published so that there is clarity about the rules and any changes as a result of what we have announced today. My final point is that we are determined to keep visiting possible and happening in care homes for the reasons that everybody understands, but we must make sure that we are taking appropriate precautions in care homes. We are seeing an increasing number of outbreaks in care homes at the moment, reflective, of course, of the increased community transmission. Therefore, appropriate precautions are necessary to ensure that we are keeping people in care homes as safe as possible. The requirement to limit attendance at indoor spectator sports to 200 is significantly impacting revenue from ticket sales for sports such as ice hockey, netball and basketball, including the Dundee Stars, a professional ice hockey club in my constituency. Can the First Minister provide any further details, particularly in relation to timescales, on how the £5 million that she announced today will support such professional sports clubs? The fact that we have allocated the £5 million today is an indication that we know the impact that the restrictions on large gatherings and spectator sports is having on the profitability and, at some points, no doubt, the viability of sports and sports clubs. We are working with Sports Scotland as quickly as possible with, for example, ice hockey and basketball clubs, as well as football, rugby and horse racing, to determine fully the financial impact that the current measures are having. Following that, we will get the money to clubs as quickly as possible. As I said last week, for some sports, there will be the ability to recoup those losses as events start to be rescheduled. I hope that, in the not-too-distant future, for others that will be more difficult, so we need to make sure that we are getting the money where it is needed most. That work has been taken forward. Sorry, I think that there is some interruption there, First Minister. Are we content to move on to the next question? I believe that we are, and I will call Tess White to be followed by Michelle Tawson. Thank you, Presiding Officer. First Minister, three things he said earlier resonated, publishing evidence, and the application of judgment. Of the £168 million announced by the Scottish Government on 29 December in relation to business support, are you able to say, please, how much has been allocated to north-east businesses and when will it get to those who really need it in order to survive? As I said, on several occasions now, local authorities are, as we speak, doing that work. Over the course of this week, I will be corrected if I am getting this figure wrong, but, from memory, around 14,000 hospitality businesses will be contacted so that those grants can be paid without the need for further applications. In due course, of course, we will be able to break down the allocation of that money by different areas and the answers to the question that has been asked will be available. That is happening really quickly. Councils are working really hard on that, and that is what everybody would expect. I will make the point that I made a moment ago. It is really important that we get that money out to businesses, but that money is not available elsewhere in the UK, because the Scottish Government, unlike the UK Government, has decided to dig into our own funding to make really difficult decisions to provide that support. Therefore, while it takes time for the administrative processes to get that money into bank accounts, if you are a business in other parts of the UK, that is money that will never get to your bank accounts, because it is money that is not available. Paul Michelle Thomson, to be followed by Maurice Golden. Thank you. Successive waves of Covid variants have presented different challenges, and we have covered many of them today. Further variants may well arise, and I note that the Scottish Government plans to publish a strategic framework in the next few weeks. Can the First Minister give any further detail as to what may be contained in this framework and what research and preparations beyond the immediate priorities are being put in place now? It is a good question. It is one of the most important issues that we will grapple with over the next few weeks. In light of what we have experienced so far with different variants, we have taken steps to better understand and detect those things earlier. The investments that we have made around wastewater sampling, for example, and genomic sequencing are really important resilience steps so that we are better equipped and prepared, hopefully, to pick up new variants more quickly and try to contain and suppress them. More generally than that, we were two years into a pandemic, partly because of the financial constraints that devolved Governments work within, but more generally because of the harm that restrictions do. We cannot go on managing this virus only through restrictions, to be fair. We have not been doing that for some time, but increasingly we need to find different ways of managing it. I am not of the just let it rip kind of mentality, because I think that we do need to try to control and manage it, but we need to find more proportionate and sustainable ways of doing that. That is not easy, but it is essential, and that is the work that we are continuing to do right now. It is also the case certainly with Omotron, and we do not know if there will be future variants, whether that will be true too. The kind of measures that are difficult though they were, that would have suppressed earlier variants, will not do that with Omotron to the same extent, because it is so much more transmissible. The use of restrictions or protective measures is becoming less tolerable, it is becoming less affordable and it is doing more harm, but with Omotron it is also perhaps less effective because of the greater transmissibility. Some of what we are doing, like the changes that we have announced today, is about different judgments of risk and benefit, and we need to do that across different areas of society. Lastly, to business in particular, who understandably and often call on me and the Government to just let us live with Covid, you will need to continue, as many of you have been, to put in place the adaptations that enable us to do that. That is the kind of work that we are doing just now, and we will put more detail on exactly what that means in practice as we get to the conclusion of the work that I spoke about earlier. Thank you, Presiding Officer. The First Minister suggested that restrictions on large gatherings will remain until at least 17 January, perilously close to Scotland hosting the six national games in February. That could be a big boost to struggling hospitality, but they need clarity. Can fans go ahead and book tickets and can venues order stock and plan shifts? There are many things that I have wished that I had over the course of the pandemic, and one of them is a crystal ball to be able to see into the future with certainty. I do not say that to be facetious in any way. It is really difficult, particularly at this stage of a phase of a wave of the virus, to be certain about the future. That is why we need to monitor things on a closer time basis, but we have, right throughout, had very good discussions with the SRU about matches at Murrayfield. They have been very, very constructive at working with us to enable games to go ahead. I know how important clarity is for those who cater for big sporting events and not least matches at Murrayfield. That is very much in our mind, as we take decisions. I hope very much that we will not have to go beyond 17 January with those restrictions. All of us, including myself, want to be able to cheer Scotland on at Murrayfield in the six nations. I do not do anybody any good if I try to give certainty ahead of our ability to do that, but we will continue to use the data, use the evidence and reach the judgments that get that clarity and certainty as quickly as possible. I certainly do very firmly hope that those matches will go ahead and will go ahead to crowds of supporters. Stuart McMillan, to be followed by Craig Hoy. I am happy to be working into the link that the FFARAL has made, however, with the increased number of people having to self-isolate. What flexibility can the First Minister provide for those households where they have not been able to enter another home at this time? Mr McMillan, there may have been some interruption there to your broadcast. I just want to confirm that the First Minister has heard sufficient of your question. Unfortunately, I am not sure that I heard sufficient of that to even make an educated guess about the question, so I do not know if it is possible to ask Stuart McMillan to repeat it. I will go back to Mr McMillan. Mr McMillan, could you begin again, please? No problem at all. Thank you for saying that. The presence of working into the link that the FFARAL has made, however, with the increasing number of people having to self-isolate due to the high-legions-myswell-only-convariant, what flexibility can the First Minister provide to those households where installation of link systems is delayed due to people not being able to enter another home at this time? I think that I heard that being about the installation of smoke and heat alarm systems, so if I am wrong about that and I am about to answer a question that was not asked, I apologise in advance. There is a requirement for homeowners to install these alarms by 1 February, but there is also flexibility for homeowners who are unable to do it by that date. Mains-wired alarms can be fitted by an electrician or longer-life battery alarms can be fitted by residents themselves. The important thing is that nobody will be breaking the law or criminalised if they need more time. There are no penalties for non-compliance, so the issues around the impact of self-isolation are catered for in the broader arrangements that are in place. If I have answered the different question to the one that Stuart McMillan has asked me there, if he wants to send my office an email after this session, I will be happy to provide an appropriate answer. Dr Gilhane called for the data that underpins the Government's decisions, the very data that the First Minister said that she does not have. Rather than falling back on the weasel words that she did with my colleague Sue Webber, will she agree to go back and look at the official report of what Dr Gilhane said and then come back to apologise to Parliament next week? I will take this opportunity to remind all members at all times to treat one another with courtesy and respect. I call on the First Minister to respond to Mr Hoy. I always seek to do so. What is the data? The data is published on a daily basis. We have seen over the past week an 87 per cent increase in recorded cases of Omicron. We see today, published by the Office of National Statistics, the fact that one in 20 people across Scotland right now probably have Covid. It probably is a bit higher than that now, because those statistics are from a few days ago. We are seeing a rising number of people in our hospitals because of or with Covid. That is the data that informs the decisions. We also have developing data, which does not need the Scottish Government to publish it, because it is published by people globally about the increased transmissibility of Omicron. That data is available to not just members of this Parliament, but to anybody across the country. What we do is take that data and the evidence of the impact of Omicron, and we apply our judgment to what measures will help us to stem transmission. As I have said, the increased transmissibility means that that involves regrettably restricting large, potentially super-spreader events and trying to contain transmission in settings that we know have a higher risk because of low ventilation or the kind of behaviours that happen in those settings. I am not sure what evidence and data of this is missing. We continue to publish evidence and the fact that many other countries are doing similar or the same as us suggests that it is not just the Scottish Government that thinks that this evidence justifies those actions. I take that seriously. Those are important issues. We agonise over those decisions. I spend most waking hours thinking, as is my job, about the right balance of judgment to apply here. I do not try to misrepresent people, but I would also ask people to go back and listen to the member's question. My impression from that question was that he was not in support of the measures that were in place. That is legitimate. I answered the question on that basis. If that was not the impression that he was intending to give, I accept that and I hope that he will accept in turn that I was not seeking to misrepresent him. We have all got more important things, frankly, to deal with right now because of the significant challenge that the country is facing. Beatrice Wishart Thank you, Presiding Officer. Some people currently living with long Covid and some with Covid got nearly two years before widespread testing have no proof of a past PCR test and consequently had difficulty accessing the treatment and support that they need. Given the change announced today regarding no requirement for a PCR test where a lateral flow test is positive with no symptoms, can the First Minister provide assurance that those who may go on to develop long Covid in the future and have not had a PCR test to confirm will not have similar delayed treatment experiences such as the first waivers? Yes, I can give that assurance in some of the terms. I am happy to ask the health secretary to write to the member to set out that assurance in more detail. Of course, the question also gives me the opportunity to reiterate an important point here. When you do an LFD lateral flow test, whether it is positive or negative, you should record that result through the website that allows that to happen. That is particularly important, obviously, if the test is positive, because not just will there then be that record of that, but it means that test and protect kicks in. That is something that we can do in Scotland. We can trigger the contact tracing on the strength of lateral flow test results and not just PCR tests. Those are important points. I will make sure that the health secretary sets out the detail of that in more depth, but this is about making sure that we both use fully all of our testing capacity across the different modes of testing, but we also make sure that, when it is highly likely that somebody has Covid, even if they do not have symptoms, the advice and contact tracing kicks in as quickly as possible. That concludes the statement by Nicola Sturgeon, First Minister, on Covid-19 update. My apologies to those members who were unable to put the question, and I close this meeting.


The Department of Economic Development is St. Lucia's national-designated authority on the Green Climate Fund. On September 3, 2021, the department officially launched a process of developing a new climate change investment program for St. Lucia. The program dubbed Transforming Finance to Unlock Climate Action in the Caribbean is led by the Caribbean Development Bank, CDB, which will serve as the Green Climate Fund GCF accredited entity. The program aims to scale up the investment in climate action among micro-small medium enterprises and home owners by improving their access to credit via the St. Lucia Development Bank, SLDB, while also enhancing the capacity of the SLDB and other financial services stakeholders in St. Lucia to better understand, assess and manage climate-related risks in their lending and operations. The program Transforming Finance to Unlock Climate Action in the Caribbean will be developed over the next 9 to 12 months and is expected to be ready for submission to the GCF by the 3rd quarter of 2022.