The first item of business today is general questions. Question number one from Alex Rowley. To ask the Scottish Government what information it has on when the reports on the operation of the five-ethiline plant that was born by SIPA and the health and safety executive will be published. Cabinet Secretary for Health and Safety, Rosanna Cunningham. On 25 April, SIPA announced a formal investigation at the site. The timetable for that this investigation will be decided by SCEPA, which provides updates through its dedicated Mossmorran and Brightfoot Bay hub. HSE carries out regular inspections at the site under various regulations. At present, HSE is not expecting to publish any reports in relation to the the Mossmorran complex.  Felly, oedd iddyn nhw'r blwyddyn a'i所有u i'r gwirioneddau a'u arhalis i lai gaelio'r profiad o'r drych i'r gweithio'r mewn i Obviously, the member also has a joint role in respect of that. The member must be aware that HSEs are effectively a reserved organisation, and I am not sure whether or not I have the ability to direct them in any way. From what I understand, they have completed their own investigation and confirmed that actions had been completed i'r disafellyoli, dwi'n di tightlyage o'r model astand lots ond do bry hi yn cael eu reports? Rwy'n ddiem those who wish to ask questions. Kышdorgyraedd a review of best available techniques recently submitted by the operators and the upshot of the report on that. It would be interesting to seek clarification on that, but the cabinet secretary will be aware that I have written to her supporting calls of my constituents for the Scottish Government to commission an independent investigation. I am seeking a meeting with the cabinet secretary and I hope that she will look favourably on my request for a meeting. On the point of the meeting, I believe that my office is already being in touch with Annabelle Ewing's office in respect of that meeting. It is the case, as I indicated to Alex Rowley, that we do understand the huge impact that unplanned flaring is having on local residents. I am aware of the work that SIPA has been doing in terms of best available techniques. That is obviously a key step in identifying the way forward and improving performance on the site. SIPA is currently reviewing those technical assessments with a view to providing a summary update imminently. Mark Ruskell, to be followed by Alexander Stewart. Following last year's investigation, permit variations were served on the operators, requiring them to introduce best available technologies to tackle noise and vibration. However, in a letter that I received from the SIPA chief executive just last week, he told me that, I quote, that previous reviews had concluded that best available technologies were being used at the installation already. What was the purpose of those permit variations if those technologies were apparently already in place? I do not know that I have very much to add to the answer that I have given Annabelle Ewing in respect of what SIPA is doing with that. They are reviewing the technical assessments with a view to providing a summary update imminently. I am anticipating that those members who have a particular interest in that will be awaiting the publication of that summary update with interest. Alexander Stewart Thank you, Presiding Officer. Some members are calling for the plant's closure, and I am certainly not one of them, because I do believe that it is a major employer to the area that is vital. However, what we do need is a robust maintenance plan implemented that we can give reassurance to the community. I would ask the Scottish Government what they are doing to facilitate that. Annabelle Ewing As I could remind the member, SIPA is the independent regulatory authority in this respect. I do not want to do or say anything at the moment that would actually cause a problem for the investigation that they announced on 25 April. I appreciate that that can be a little difficult for people who are under pressure locally in terms of the community, but equally for those members who are looking for very early answers. However, if I were to start to cause a difficulty in that investigation, there would be many greater problems down the line than we currently experience. Bill Bowman To ask the Scottish Government what progress has been made in addressing the areas for improvement identified in the Healthcare Improvement Scotland report, the review of adult mental health services in Tayside. Scottish Government officials are in contact with the board to discuss progress, and the Minister for Mental Health met the NHS Tayside senior management team on 12 March to seek further assurance. Healthcare Improvement Scotland has also followed up on their report and provided further feedback to the board on improvement priorities. Given the gravity of concerns raised about provision in Tayside, the independent inquiry into mental health services was established in May last year as an overarching review into mental health services in Tayside. Bill Bowman I thank the cabinet secretary for that response. In recognition of mental health awareness week, I met volunteers in Dundee regarding adult mental health facilities. They wanted me to ask you if you knew that there is still no out-of-hours mental health crisis service in Dundee. Cabinet secretary, did you know that? Is it time that you delivered on the SNP commitment of 24-hour mental health crisis care in Dundee? Cabinet secretary, I am grateful to Mr Bowman for that follow-up question. That issue has not been raised with either I or the Minister for Mental Health. If he would care to provide details of that, then we will certainly look at it. I know that the provision of a seven-day service for the people of Angus is being pursued and with new provision coming on stream. We are very happy to consider any particular issues that might be getting faced in Dundee and to resolve those as we are doing elsewhere. Jackie Baillie To ask the Scottish Government what funding is provided for social work services and how it ensures that those services are adequately staffed and have the appropriate facilities and resources to help children and families. The Scottish Government is delivering a funding package of £11.2 billion for local authorities this year. Compared to 2018-19, that is a real-it-terms increase of £310 million or 2.9 per cent for essential public services, including social work. However, it is the responsibility of individual local authorities to manage their own budgets and to ensure adequate staffing facilities and resources for social work services for children and families. Jackie Baillie The minister may be aware that social workers, social work assistants and support staff in children and family services at West Dunbartonshire Council are ballasting for strike action in June. Their concerns centre on the lack of staffing and the council has failed to secure sufficient agency staff to cover. The facilities are inappropriate for conducting difficult and often sensitive interviews with families. I understand that there is now a backlog of more than 200 cases. What direct assistance can the Scottish Government provide for the council to resolve the problem? Will she meet Unison to discuss staffing issues more generally? The minister may be aware that any industrial action that would affect services would obviously be really regrettable and I hope that it can be avoided. I encourage all parties to work together to seek a resolution to the dispute. My officials are in close contact with West Dunbartonshire Council and the health and social care partnership and the care inspectorate are all monitoring the situation. I understand that the council is making progress with the issues of concern to Unison and their members and that they have invited Unison to contribute to the work. We are liaising with the care inspectorate to support West Dunbartonshire Council and the health and social care partnerships in their work to ensure the delivery of services and the continued protection of those at risk. Of course, the Government is committed to supporting strong trade unions in Scotland for the benefits of workers in our economy. I am more than happy to meet Unison in future. To ask the Scottish Government what value it places in local decision making in planning matters. Ministers recognise the importance of local decision making and use our call-in powers sparingly. Elaine Smith I thank the minister for his response, but a recent application by Ineos regarding that recent evidence obtained through an FOI shows that the minister not only disregarded the initial decision of the local authority and the advice of independent reporters, but also the recommendation of civil servants, which was to refuse Ineos planning permission to close Bones Road in Grangemouth. Why did the minister decide to grant permission and put the interests of the large corporation before the interests of the local community? Will he reconsider that controversial and unpopular decision, which undermines local democracy? I point out to the chamber that the application was appealed on the grounds of non-determination, which is when the local authority fails to determine the application within the statutory period. Ministers carefully considered all the evidence relating to the planning application. There were very strong economic and security grounds for granting this appeal, and ministers have set out their reasons in full in the decision letter, which is available publicly. Angus MacDonald Thanks, Presiding Officer. With regard to the Bones Road in Grangemouth, I acknowledge that the reasons that were given by the minister were based on the economic benefits and the issues of security that have arisen in recent years. I also acknowledge his comment on non-determination. It was due to the previous Labour Administration at Falkirk Council failing to make any decision on the application locally within the timescale set out for major planning applications. Does he agree with me that the principle of local accountability works both ways? Does he also agree that, if a stopping up order is granted by Falkirk Council, it must include mitigation measures that are currently estimated at £22 million, which INEOS must pay, given that the petrochemical plant has returned to significant profitability and that any mitigation costs must not be borne by the local or national taxpayer? Thank you, Presiding Officer. As I say, we much prefer it if local decision making takes place. The reason why that was appealed was because of a non-determination by the local authority, who should have determined that application. In terms of the stopping up order, that is currently a matter for Falkirk Council for determination. As that is a live application that may come before ministers, it would not be appropriate for me to comment on the specifics of the case, as that might be prejudicial to the decision making process. The minister might be aware that, earlier this month, the reporter overturned a decision by locally elected members of Orkney Islands Council to refuse applications by Hulun Energy for two local wind farm developments. Constituents have been in touch with me to question why such a sensitive decision with significant local public interest was left to be taken by an official rather than ministers. Mr Stewart, please explain why that decision was not called in by ministers. I believe that I have written to Mr MacArthur on the issue in some depth. I am always wary of that special place in the ministerial code for the planning minister when it comes to talking about particular applications. If Mr MacArthur has any other queries on that one from the letter that I have sent him, I would be happy to respond to him further on that issue. To ask the Scottish Government what analysis the housing minister has undertaken of whether complaints against property factors and letting agents are being effectively resolved through the first-tier tribunal for Scotland housing and property chamber. The first-tier tribunal for Scotland is an independent judicial body, and so we are unable to comment on or intervene in its decisions. In accordance with the Tribunal of Scotland Act 2014, the Lord President is responsible for making and maintaining appropriate arrangements for securing the efficient disposal of business in the Scottish Tribunals. The president of the Scottish Tribunals will prepare an annual report about the operation and business of the Scottish Tribunals and how they have exercised their functions at the end of each financial year. That report will be provided to the Lord President, who must publish the report. Graham Simpson. I thank the minister for that answer and for his letter of Tuesday spelling out the legal position around letting agent enforcement orders. I have been contacted by numerous constituents with problems caused by either a letting agent or a property factor. I have done some analysis of enforcement orders issued by the tribunal and found that, despite receiving orders, some companies, governed by a code of conduct, continuously ignore the orders and are getting away with it scot-free. The first-tier tribunal for Scotland lacks transparency when disclosing details of those who continue to break the law and ignore those orders. They told me that they have issued 26 enforcement orders and half have not been complied with. Ten of those were reported to police, but the tribunal point-blank refused to say which ones and have not yet been able to establish whether the police are doing anything about it. That is unacceptable. Will the minister agree with me that, in order for the system to work properly, it needs to be seen to do so and have a greater degree of transparency and, indeed, action is required to deal with the few unscrupulous operators? I apologise to Mr Simpson if I do not cover all aspects of that, because I had some difficulty in hearing all that he said during his question. Failure to comply with the letting agent enforcement order or a property factor enforcement order are offences and are a matter for Police Scotland to investigate. Where ministers are notified by the tribunal of a failure to comply with an enforcement order by a registered agent or factor, Scottish ministers will, where appropriate, contact the business to highlight their legal requirements and the consequences of non-compliance, including the risk that they might be removed from the register, making it unlawful for them to continue. I am very grateful to Mr Simpson and other members for pointing out difficulties that their constituents have faced. I will always do all that I can to ensure that there is openness and transparency and that everyone who is involved in the process is doing all that they can, including Police Scotland. If Mr Simpson has any other information that he wishes to share with me, I am more than happy to talk to him once again. To ask the Scottish Government whether it is satisfied that everything possible is being done to aid the recovery of Suckey Hall Street following the Glasgow School of Art fire. The primary responsibility for the on-going recovery of Suckey Hall Street is with Glasgow City Council. That said, we have been supportive of restoring Suckey Hall Street to its position as a significant business retail and cultural location. Following the exceptional circumstances of the fires, the Scottish Government has assisted Glasgow City Council to support businesses through what has been difficult trading conditions. In July 2018, I announced a recovery fund of £5 million for businesses affected by the fires, and that fund has provided over £3 million of grant support to more than 200 eligible businesses. Following engagement with the business community, I allocated the remaining £1.85 million to the council in December to further support business recovery. In addition, we continue to fund discretionary rates hardship relief for affected non-domestic properties. Presiding Officer, I would like to put on record my thanks to the cabinet secretary for extending that business rates assistance to Suckey Hall Street businesses. However, I hope that it is still acknowledged that residents are businesses that are still struggling. The O2 ABC academy is widely seen as Glasgow's most iconic and popular music venue. I met recently with the owners who are keen to have the O2 rebuilt. As the cabinet secretary, does he agree that it is vital to Glasgow's status as UNESCO's city of music but also to Suckey Hall Street's long-term survival that the O2 ABC academy is rebuilt? Of course, I will continue to work with the council businesses and local MSPs. I have been very constructive and consensual in taking forward the recovery of Suckey Hall Street. I will not want to overstep my role as finance and economy secretary role or try to act as a determinant on future planning use. However, I think that there is a very strong case for that performance venue to continue to be able to flourish to support Suckey Hall Street, the wider economy and, of course, Scottish performance. I am sympathetic to Pauline McNeill's case. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. I thank Pauline McNeill for raising this particular issue and the work that has been on-going by the cabinet secretary. In regard to the O2 and the Glasgow School of Art, the cabinet secretary agreed with me that if there was extra money coming to the Glasgow School of Art, perhaps it could be persuaded to some of that money to help the local people and businesses of Suckey Hall Street. As I say, I am more than happy to continue to engage with business support, with retail support, with the vision for the avenues project itself. As I said just moments ago, there has been a good cross-party approach to that. I hope that that will continue so that Suckey Hall Street and the economy of Glasgow can flourish. Thank you very much. That concludes General Questions. Before we move to First Minister's Questions, I invite members to join me in welcoming to our gallery the honourable Colin Brooks MP, Speaker of the Legislative Assembly of Victoria.


Aloha. Thanks for your consideration of the views expressed in this ThinkTech commentary, which we are calling, Not Supporting Ukraine is Completely Irresponsible. The subject we will cover is why the failure of Congress and particularly the refusal of the Republicans to support and send money and weapons to Ukraine is a huge historical and profoundly misguided mistake and completely irresponsible. The problem is that without the support and the money and weapons the US can provide, Ukraine will not be able to win the war with Russia. And if Ukraine loses that war, the US will pay a much greater price. If you didn't know it, Putin has plans to move against the rest of Eastern Europe. He's already executing some of those plans. If he prevails against Ukraine, he will almost certainly initiate similar moves against other countries in and beyond that region. This will undermine Eastern Europe, Western Europe, the EU and NATO as well as the global influence of the US. Our trading partners, our markets, our reserve currency, our banking system and our prosperity in general will be affected. More than that, our national security and the security of our allies will also be affected and it will incentivize and empower autocrats and war criminals like Putin to do more of the same. It's not too late. There are some things we can do. We can promptly provide money and weapons to Ukraine and not be intimidated by Putin's threats. And we can make the resumption of our unconditional support for Ukraine known to everyone in Europe and the world and thus hopefully rebuild the confidence we've lost because of the machinations in Congress. And at the same time, avoid predictable opportunism by China. Here's the takeaway. The price of supporting Ukraine is a small price to pay for the protection of the interests of the US and US allies and the preservation of the liberal world order. If the US ignores these things, we will be taking a huge and completely irreversible risk. So, Mike Johnson, the Republican members of Congress and of course Donald Trump, are you listening? You've been acting badly on these issues. And at this point, we really need you to do the right thing. Thanks for your consideration of the views expressed in this ThinkTech commentary, which we are calling not supporting Ukraine is completely irresponsible. Aloha.