Mae'r drws mewn gwneud amddangos a'r cyfnodau y pryd y dywedd, ac a y cwestiynau yng nghymru, ddigon wedi y bydd ym Niadegol. Mae'n mynd i bain i chi'n gwneud cael llawer i'w leif yn dodod o Doddie Wirr, sy'n cymryd ffordd i'w yma i ymwyafio â Saddydd. Ond o ffaisi rydd eich ffionwyr o'u cwyr fewn yr oedd eich pwyllwyr yn cwrs eich dodod, Doddie Wirr yn gennym i'w lef cael bwyllwyr, ymdweud, ymdweud, ymdweud, i'r oligiau. Yn ymddangos i doddau'r amser, Cathy, y ddweud, Haimish, Angus Nbenn, yn sy'n bod yn dweud, ymdweud i gael amser, ymdweud, ymdweud, ymdweud, ymdweud, yr hyn ymdweud i'r llen o'r gwaith i gael i'r mwyaf i gyda bledig o'r ddydd. Felly, yn y mwyaf, yna yng Nghymru yng Nghymru yw'r ddweud nid yn gweithio yn ymddangos o'r ddweud ond y Gender Recognition Bill. Rhyw Masalim raised concerns that the bill would potentially open up the door for violent males to abuse the process of acquiring a gender certificate.  Last night the Scottish Conservatives asked Parliament to simply acknowledge the report of the UN Rapporture, but the First Minister voted against it. First Minister, why can't you accept the concerns raised by the United Nations Special Rapporture? First Minister, can I also take the opportunity to pay tribute to the life and legacy of Doddie He was a hero on the rugby pitch, but he was perhaps even more so an inspiration off of the rugby pitch. There is, of course, a question later in this session of FMQs that will allow me to pay more fulsome tribute to Doddie, but for now let me say that my thoughts and condolences are with his wife, children and all of his loved ones. On the specific issue, not only do we acknowledge the comments that were made, but it is not a UN report. Those were comments by a UN Special Rapporture. Not only have we acknowledged that those comments have been made, the cabinet secretary has written a substantial response to them. I believe that that response can be found on the Scottish Parliament website because it was sent to the Equalities Committee, which, of course, is the lead committee on this bill. Of course, a number of organisations representing women who suffer male violence and abuse, including Great Crisis Scotland and Scottish Women's Aid, have been part of a number of organisations that have responded as well. I have set out in a number of respects why they disagree with those comments. I take the safety of women and girls very seriously, perhaps more seriously than any other issue, as I am sure all of us do. I have spent much of my adult life and indeed all of my years in public office seeking to do things, along with others, to help advance the rights of women and girls and to ensure better protection for women and girls against male violence. Of course, any man who wants to abuse a woman, certainly in my experience and I think that that will be shared by many across the chamber, do not need to in some way pretend to be a woman in order to do so. Anyone who feels that need, of course, does not need a gender recognition certificate. Our focus is a Parliament and our focus as a society should be on those who perpetrate violence against women and girls. That is men, not all men, of course, but it is men who abuse women and that should be our focus. In taking on those issues and debating them fully and respectfully, which I believe is really important, what we should not do, in my view, is further stigmatise a group in society, a very small minority in society who are already perhaps the most marginalised and stigmatised group in society, of course, talking about trans people. In any group of society where there are bad faith actors, we deal with them, we do not stigmatise the entire group and I believe that very strongly I am not then sure from the First Minister's answer why she couldn't have voted for the Conservative amendment yesterday, which simply asked Parliament to acknowledge that report from the special rapporteur, which the cabinet secretary has responded to, yet the First Minister and the majority of SNP MSPs couldn't support that. But let's just have a look at the valid concerns that have been raised by this expert. Rhym Asalim says, The efforts to reform existing legislation by the Scottish Government do not sufficiently take into consideration the specific needs of women and girls, particularly those at risk of male violence and those who have experienced male violence. To prevent the risk of attacks on women, my Scottish Conservative colleague Russell Finlay submitted an amendment to ban convicted sex offenders from changing gender, but the Scottish Government voted that amendment down. So why does the First Minister believe that a convicted male sex offender should be able to change their gender when there is a risk that they will exploit the system to attack women? Not only has the cabinet secretary responded in detail to the comments of the special rapporteur, and I encourage all members and all members of the public with an interest here to read those comments, because it sets out very clearly why, respectfully, we do not believe that those concerns are well founded and that sets out the reasons for that very fully and very clearly. The cabinet secretary will also meet with the special rapporteur next week to discuss those concerns in more detail. Of course, this is a bill that has not only gone through two public consultations, but is currently going through very extensive parliamentary scrutiny. In terms of stage two of the bill, a number of amendments have been passed and that has responded to a number of the concerns that have been raised with members across all sides of the chamber. There are some amendments that the cabinet secretary will have set out again very fully and very clearly to the committee why the Government could not support those amendments and the reasons for that. Of course, it is for the committee then to vote and to decide on those matters. Ultimately, it will be for this Parliament as a whole to reach decisions at stage three, which of course we will reach before the end of this parliamentary session. Those are difficult issues that people have strong views on on different aspects of this. I think that it is really important that we engage seriously, that we engage respectfully, that we engage in detail and that we remember that all of us see protecting women and girls as a priority. I hope that all of us also see protecting the rights of trans people as important to them. I feel that part of my duty is to set out clearly why I do not believe, having considered in great depth all of those issues over a long period of time, why I do not believe that those objectives are conflicting. In fact, I believe that it is important that we advance both of those things and that is what the Government is seeking to do. I agree with the First Minister that we have to treat this with the seriousness and respect that it deserves. I am looking into detail with those things, but again, I asked a very simple question as to why the Government could not support Russell Finlay's amendment and we got no answer on that. I think that we should surely all be able to agree that convicted male sex offenders should never be able to change their gender. This is not about trans people, these people are criminals and that is exactly what Russell Finlay was trying to stop. The First Minister is also trying to say that the Government has dealt with this issue, but the UN expert says differently. The special rapporteur said this. The Scottish Government does not spell out how it will ensure a level of scrutiny for the applications made to acquire a gender recognition certificate. Other Governments that have adopted a self-identification procedure for the legal recognition of a gender identity have done so. Other Governments did the necessary work before changing the law, but the First Minister has not. Right now, there are live court cases that could have a material impact on the bill. The UN expert says that the Government should, as a minimum, await the outcome of the judgments on those very issues in front of both Scottish and UK courts. The First Minister said that this bill is currently going through extensive scrutiny. Therefore, surely, First Minister, you must agree to pause the bill until we have heard these legal judgments. First Minister, it is ultimately for Parliament to determine whether or not a bill passes through this chamber. On the issue of sex offenders, let me set out in more detail the reasoning for the Government's position on that particular amendment. Current provisions for management of sex offenders are robust and effective. However, we will expand—this has been made clear during stage 2—the reporting requirements to include notification about an application for gender recognition. It is important to point out that, under the existing process in the 2004 Gender Recognition Act 2004, there is no requirement that an applicant must be what that amendment would have required. The amendments lodged by Russell Finlay, our consideration is that they would not be compatible with the European Convention on Human Rights. While we think that the processes for sex offender notification requirements are already working well, notwithstanding that, the Scottish Government has made clear that, before the gender recognition reform bill is commenced, we will introduce legislations to amend the sex offender notification requirements to include notification about an application for a gender recognition certificate. We are taking those issues seriously, but we are seeking to proceed in a way that will ensure that the bill is compliant with the European Convention on Human Rights. We have been open to other amendments put forward, including by Jamie Greene, a member of the Conservative group. On the comments of the special repertoire, we take those seriously. That is why we have responded in detail. However, respectfully, we do not believe that those criticisms are well-founded. That is not a view that we hold alone. Organisations that work day in and day out with women and girls who are subject to male violence, rape crisis Scotland and Scottish women's aid also believe that many of those criticisms and concerns are not well-founded. We will continue to proceed carefully. There has been considerable consultation and scrutiny of the bill, and that is right and proper. On the First Minister's response to sex offenders, we know as a result of a Scottish Conservative freedom of information request that, in the last three years in Scotland, more than 500 times a sex offender has changed their names. If they can change their names so easily and for the reasons they want to, why would they not also change their gender if this now becomes easier as a result of this legislation? I also asked—I know and I understand that this was a complex issue—that the First Minister did not mention the point about the live legal cases that are currently on-going for which the special repertoire asked for this legislation to be delayed. Those judgments are crucial, and a delay would be sensible. It is far better that this Government and this Parliament make good laws rather than quick laws. We want to make legislation with full and proper consideration of all the implications, but, for some reason, the Government seems determined to rush ahead at full speed to put this bill through this month so that experts and women's groups could have potentially damaging consequences. The First Minister said that the special rapporteurs' criticisms are not well-formed. Rima Salim is a United Nations expert. She is a special rapporteur on violence against women and girls. I personally think that very few people can speak with greater authority on women's safety. The Scottish Parliament, including the committee in charge of scrutinising this bill, has not had the chance to examine her evidence and hear from her in person which the cabinet secretary will be doing. Will the First Minister agree today to pause this legislation so that we can properly consider the findings of a leading global expert on this crucial matter? I cannot comment on live legal cases and would be open to criticism if I did. Secondly, regardless of any individual's view on the legislation, one thing that cannot be said with any credibility or basis in fact is that it is being rushed through this Parliament. The process, through consultation, introduction of draft legislation, introduction of legislation, the formal parliamentary scrutiny process has been under way now, I think, for a period of six years. This has not been rushed. This has been done carefully and rightly so. Let me respond before I come on to again the issue of the UN special rapporteur, to the issue about registered sex offenders. It is the case already that registered sex offenders must by law notify the police of any change of name. That requirement applies to an individual irrespective of what name they use or what gender they identify with, and that is important. Disclosure Scotland takes steps already to ensure that a person requesting a disclosure certificate does not succeed in avoiding the disclosure of any previous convictions by using a different name. It is important to recognise the protections that are already in place and that the bill does nothing to change. Many of the issues that are being talked about here and many of the issues that are sparking concern I accept are not issues that are changed or impacted in any way by the detail of this specific legislation. Now, coming back to the special rapporteur, it is because we respect that person and the role they hold that we are treating these concerns so seriously. The response, and again, I would encourage every member to read the cabinet secretary's response on the Parliament's website. Cabinet secretary will meet the UN special rapporteur next week, but there are other voices in this debate that also speak from a lot of experience and expertise, and it's not right to dismiss them either, because they are people who work with women that are subject to male violence every single day of the week. Lastly, given that we are speaking about a UN special rapporteur, the reforms in this bill align with the stated position of the UN human rights office that trans people should be recognised legally through a simple administrative process that does not require medical diagnosis. Lastly, Scotland is not the first country in the world to make changes of this nature. Many other countries have done so, and as the cabinet secretary's response to the UN special rapporteur sets out, the concerns that are being raised in the context of our legislation have not materialised in the experience of other countries who are ahead of us. Let's continue to treat these issues seriously, respectfully and calmly, and allow Parliament to continue to do its job properly. I would like to join others in paying tribute to the late Doddie Weir. It was clear throughout his life, both as a player and a campaigner, that he was a force to be reckoned with. He viewed his heartbreaking diagnosis of motor neurone disease as he called to action and bravely shared his story with the world, raising millions of pounds for that cause. He was an inspiration to us all and a champion for those battling MND, and our thoughts are with his family and friends at this difficult time. Breast cancer chemotherapy in NHS Tayside has collapsed, leaving vulnerable women travelling across the country to receive life-saving treatment. At the root of the problem is a chemotherapy dosing scandal that has gone on for three and a half years. Yesterday, the courier released a documentary where the women affected and grieving families demanded answers. We now know that nobody believes the conclusions of the reports commissioned by the First Minister's Government. Patients don't believe them, the doctors don't believe them, and even the whistleblower who first raised the alarm described the conclusions of the reports as nothing more than a guess. For years, Labour has raised the issue and has been dismissed by the Government. Will the First Minister order an independent inquiry to restore confidence, to relaunch the service and to give patients and the public the fact that they need it? Before responding to the serious issues that have been raised, I say first of all that Anna Sarwar is wrong to describe the Tayside service as having collapsed. That neither comes close to accurately describing the current service nor does it do anything to help any current patients or the dedicated doctors that are working within that centre. Let me illustrate that point, because it is a really important point for those, particularly those in Tayside who might be watching this right now. There are around 150 new patients referred to Tayside breast services every week. Out of them, around seven will receive treatment in another centre, so it is just wrong and I think shamefully wrong to use the word collapsed to describe a service in which doctors are working in a dedicated fashion in which many patients are being treated every single week. In terms of the issues about the review, those are serious issues. Those are issues that require to be assessed by experts and by clinicians. I am not and politicians are not clinicians with the expertise to reach judgments ourselves on these matters. I will look carefully at what has been reported today, as will the health secretary. If there is a further process of review that is necessary, we will not shy away from taking that. The RCP review commissioned by NHS Tayside into prescribing practices up to early 2020 happened. The board will be implementing all its recommendations. That review looked at a random selection of case notes from before and after the HIS review and confirmed variation in practice against national norms, as the HIS review had already found, but pointed to a range of improvements in practice since then. The authors of the RCP review included four oncologists and, of course, its findings aligned with previous published reviews, including that of healthcare improvement Scotland. We will continue to take those issues seriously, but we will also do so responsibly. I suggest that the First Minister watches the documentary and listens to the stories of staff at NHS Tayside and the experiences of families. There are zero breast cancer oncologists in Tayside—zero. If zero does not equate to collapse, I am not sure what definition the First Minister would use. That does have consequences for staff. There is a workforce crisis across our NHS, but particularly felt here in Tayside. A recent freedom of information request showed that there are nine vacancies in the oncology department, with the lead breast cancer consultant post now vacant for 839 days. That has consequences for patients, too. Over 200 women have had to travel to other parts of the country to get their treatment. In February, the First Minister said that this was unacceptable, but since then things are getting worse. The Government's failure to get a grip of this crisis is putting women's lives at risk. At one of the most traumatic times in a woman's life, they are facing additional barriers to treatment and all the anxiety that comes with that. Can the First Minister tell us when local oncology services will be restored and can she guarantee that breast cancer oncology services have a future in Tayside? Anna Sarwar asked about watching the documentary. I will certainly take the time to do that, but the health secretary has not just watched the documentary, but he took part in the documentary. Those issues are issues that all of us take seriously. The cabinet secretary is meeting with the current clinical teams next week. Let me take the opportunity to assure patients in Tayside that they have a very committed and compassionate team of doctors that deliver excellent care. Recruitment efforts are on-going, and there has been recent success in recruiting a consultant in colorectal cancer in Tayside. Tayside NHS works closely with oncology teams in the other four cancer centres across Scotland to ensure that patients who need treatment are prioritised appropriately. Let me repeat what I said in my original answer. Yes, there are challenges in the Tayside service. Yes, there have been reviews that have been necessary. If there are further reviews, we will not shy away from those, and there is further work to be done. 150 new patients referred to Tayside breast services every week, and just seven of them have to go to another centre to receive treatment. It does a disservice not to raise those issues. It is absolutely right to raise those issues, but it does do a disservice to those working in that centre to describe it as being in a state of collapse, because that is not the case. Anna Sarwar First Minister, the women in Tayside do not want to see the health secretary in a documentary. They want to see a breast cancer oncologist in Tayside. That problem has still not been fixed. I am sorry about what the First Minister has said little today that will reassure women in Tayside and their families. We have been failing cancer service, and that means staff are being let down, women are being let down, and the First Minister has no serious plan to restore services. As per usual, Nicola Sturgeon keeps telling us that it is unacceptable but expects patients to accept it anyway. We have seen it again this week. Ambulance is still queuing at A&Es. Elderly patients are still waiting on trolleys for treatment. The longest waiting lists in history are now over three quarters of a million Scots on an NHS waiting list, and women in Tayside have been failed by the collapse of cancer services. First Minister, you are in charge of the NHS in Scotland, and you have been for 15 years. How long does Scots have to wait before you get to grips with this crisis and actually do your job? I am in charge as head of this Government of the National Health Service, which is why I understand that running the national health service that resolves challenges and problems in the national health service takes more than glib sound bites in the chamber of the Scottish Parliament. As they have been throughout the entirety of the 15 years that my party has been in government, the people of Scotland will be the ultimate and indeed the only judge of whether or not this Government is trusted to continue with its stewardship of the national health service. All of those issues are taken seriously. It was because of original concerns about potentially substandard care that many of those issues came to the fore. I repeat again what I said. There is work to do here to ensure the sustainability and the on-going quality of breast cancer care in NHS Tayside, but the vast overwhelming majority of those referred into that service do not go for treatment to another centre. They get quality treatment in NHS Tayside, and I say it again that it does a disservice to that service to suggest otherwise. On the wider points, again day in and day out, this Government works to address the significant challenges that our NHS is under. If we look at the statistics published just this week, a significant increase in the number of in-patient and day-case patients seen in the last quarter, a 7.3 per cent increase, the referral to treatment target, an increase in the percentage of those seen within 18 weeks, 72.5 per cent, and reductions of the longest waits in our national health service, a 20 per cent reduction in out-patients and a 22 per cent reduction for in-patient and day cases. We will continue to do the hard work of supporting our NHS through these difficult times, because that is our job and our responsibility, given to us by the people of Scotland. Question 3, Gillian Mackay. Thank you, Presiding Officer. As others have, I want to add the thoughts of my party to the tributes paid here to Dodie Ware. His legacy will not just be as rugby, but will be the honest state and bravery with which he faces health condition and the incredible work he did in raising awareness and funding. I say in the most sincere and heartfelt condolences to his family, their bravery has never failed to astound me and his sons in particular have been in my thoughts this week. It's awful to lose a parent and they're so young. They've been amazing in accompanying their dad to events over the last few years, and I hope that the whole family are getting the support they need. To ask the Scottish Government whether it recognises the harms caused by alcohol sport sponsorship to vulnerable groups such as young people and those in recovery. It is the case that alcohol advertising and promotion can encourage young people to drink alcohol and indeed act as a barrier for those in recovery. Restricting alcohol advertising and promotion is one of the world health organisations' three best vies to prevent and reduce alcohol related harms. We have launched a public consultation setting out potential restrictions on a variety of methods of alcohol advertising, including on sport sponsorship. This consultation closes on 9 March next year, and I would encourage anyone with an interest to respond. The Minister for Public Health will meet with key stakeholders, including sporting bodies, during the consultation period to hear about potential impacts and their views on those proposals. I thank the First Minister for that answer. It is well established that exposure to alcohol marketing is causally associated with the initiation of drinking, an increase in alcohol consumption and also an increased risk of relapse for those in recovery. Sports sponsorship provides alcohol companies with a prominent and highly attractive method of reaching a large audience, influencing how much and how often they consume alcohol. Does the Scottish Government recognise the need to implement restrictions on alcohol sport sponsorship as a public health measure to protect our population? I repeat what I said in my original answer. It is an important aspect of promoting better public health and discouraging young people from drinking alcohol and making it more difficult for people with alcohol misuse issues to recover from those. In terms of sporting organisations, there are difficult issues involved. We would encourage sporting organisations to diversify sponsorship away from the alcohol industry. It is because I agree very much with the comments that Gillian Mackay has made that we have embarked on this consultation. There are some complex issues involved in it, but it is important that we listen to a wide range of people and key stakeholders, which we will do. The Government has a good record in implementing sometimes controversial policies—minimum pricing—for alcohol to try to reduce the harm that we know alcohol can do. That is the spirit in which we will take forward the consultation. If the Government is seeking to curtail the advertisement of any perceived enjoyment of drinking, surely it must also raise public awareness of the harms of drinking. Especially at this time of year, we know that drinking under the influence offences has risen by 20 per cent over the last decade, yet last year the conviction rate for those offences fell by a third year on year. Many cases have been dropped due to delays in forensic testing as we enter the festive period, aside from Police Scotland's own public awareness campaign, as to the dangers of drinking and driving. What is the Scottish Government doing itself to raise awareness of the important issue? Does the First Minister agree that those conviction rates are simply far too low? We all recognise that drinking alcohol in moderation is something that many people do and enjoy doing. What we need to discourage and what we need to address are people who have a problem of alcohol misuse or drink alcohol in ways that pose a danger to them and to others. Obviously, conviction rates for any offence are a matter for the courts and the independent prosecution authorities. Of course, I want to make sure that the Government is doing everything to raise awareness. We will, as we approach this festive season, as we do every year and beyond, take steps to continue to educate people about the dangers of driving under the influence of alcohol and drugs. However, in terms of making sure that people who do that are identified and prosecuted, that is a matter for the independent authorities. However, we want to ensure that we have zero tolerance to that and that the Government will continue to support those independent authorities in all ways that are appropriate. Question 4, Gillian Martin. To ask the First Minister what impact any proposed reduction in the number of overseas student visas will have on Scottish universities. Scotland's world-class universities do a fantastic job of attracting students from around the world, and that should be welcomed. The UK Government, unfortunately, seems intent on jeopardising the internationalist outlook of our tertiary sector, as its policies continue to make it seem at least that the UK is not a welcoming place for people to come to live, work and study. I want to be absolutely clear that international students make a valuable contribution to our campuses, to our society, culture and, indeed, to our economy. Every year, I think, more than 60,000 students from around 188 countries study in Scotland, and we should continue to welcome and encourage that. Gillian Martin. I thank the First Minister for that answer and the proposals that seem to be outlined by the Prime Minister seem at odds with the positive aspects of universities that she has just outlined. Universities UK, which represents most Scottish universities, said that international students make a net positive contribution of £25.9 billion to the UK economy and are the source of 70 per cent of education export earnings. Can the First Minister give an initial assessment of the economic impact that any reduction in student visas from the UK Government could have on Scotland's economy? In a time when Tory and Labour-backed Brexit has already had a devastating impact on research collaboration between our Scottish universities and their EU counterparts, how might that impact remaining international collaborations? What can we do in Scotland to safeguard our universities from reckless UK plans like that? Restricting the ability of international students to come to study in Scotland will have an adverse impact on our education institutions and our society, which is more diverse and vibrant because of that contribution. It will have an adverse impact on our economy as well. Let me quote the director of universities Scotland when he said very recently in recent days that any attempts to cut international student numbers at Scottish universities would be damaging to universities and the Scottish economy every year more than 65,000 students from more than 180 countries study in Scotland. That diversity brings significant advantages to both our students and the wider university community, as well as generating a £1.94 billion net contribution to the Scottish economy. That is why we need to do everything that we can to make it possible for people to come to live, work and study in Scotland. Brexit is making that more difficult, as it is making many things more difficult, and we need to find a way back into the heart of the European Union. To answer Gillie Martin's last question, the only way now for Scotland to do that, given that the Tories, Labour and the Liberals seem to support the UK being outside of the European Union, the only way for Scotland to get back in is by becoming an independent member of the European Union. To ask the First Minister how the Scottish Government will mark United Nations international day of persons with disabilities. The UN international day of persons with disabilities is a very important day. It highlights that disabled people continue to experience inequality and barriers. As a mark of respect for the day and to help to promote it, the Scottish Government will be lighting up St Andrew's house in Victoria Key in purple. We also provide £5 million to support disabled people's organisations to tackle inequality and discrimination and promote the rights of disabled people. Of course, we have committed to incorporating the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities into Scots law. All of us, I know, want to ensure that disabled people benefit from all that we are doing to improve the lives of people and to achieve equality for all. Jeremy Balfour Can I thank the First Minister for a very positive answer? First Minister, I am lodging my final proposal to establish a disability commissioner for Scotland next Tuesday, an individual who will act as a champion for disabled community, for all disabled people. What better way to celebrate international day of persons with disabilities than by committing to supporting my proposal? Will your Government support it?  We need to see the detail and the consultation responses when those are published, and to see the detail of the bill when it is introduced, as I have said in other contexts. It is not possible for any Government to give a commitment to support a bill before it is actually seen at the bill. However, I know that the Equalities Minister has agreed to meet Mr Balfour to establish the details of the proposals, and we will certainly look as favourably as we can on that, because I absolutely recognise the sentiments behind the proposals for a disability commissioner. In saying that, it is also important—I am sure that Jeremy Balfour would share those views too—that we need to underline and remind people that there are existing commissions to support and protect the rights of disabled people. The Scottish Human Rights Commission, the United Kingdom equality and Human Rights Commission already play a role in relation to the rights of disabled people and, in respect of that, of age as a protected equality characteristic. There are existing mechanisms, but, of course, we should consider fully the proposal for a disability commissioner that I know the member will shortly bring forward. In 2018, Scope found that disabled people in Scotland spent, on average, £632 a month on disability-related expenses—things such as taxes, increased use of heating, special equipment and care costs. One in five disabled adults face additional costs of over £1,000, and almost a quarter of families with disabled children are facing similar costs. Given the current cost of living crisis, will the Scottish Government consider commissioning an update to this research? Yes, I am happy to give that consideration. I also recognise the reality for people with disabilities that Pam Duncan Glancy has narrated in the chamber today. Of course, we have already taken steps to implement a fairer Scotland for disabled people strategy that we have had in place. Over the five years of that delivery plan, we have, for example, increased the number involved in choosing and controlling social care support through self-directed support. We have also seen fair start Scotland helping more than 9,000 people into employment. We have established a new child disability payment to replace disability living allowance, establishing a new adult disability payment to replace PIP, and, of course, we are introducing a brand-new child winter heating assistance benefit, which will only be available here in Scotland. There is work that we have done, but there is much more that all Governments need to look to do. Of course, having research to underpin and inform that work is always important, so I will certainly look carefully at that suggestion. Question 6, Michael Marra. To ask the First Minister whether the Scottish Government will provide an urgent update on its discussions with the EIS after the announcement of new strike dates. Can I say first of all that these are really difficult times for everyone? That includes those who work across the different parts of our public sector, and that includes teachers. It is also a difficult time for public spending because of the inflationary impact on the Scottish Government's budget. It is in that context that I say that a fair pay offer has been made to teachers. That has been made as appropriate through the Scottish Negotiating Committee for teachers. It is, of course, the case that industrial action is in no one's interest. It is not in the interests of teachers, it is certainly not in the interests of pupils' parents or carers either, who have already faced significant disruption over the past three years. The education secretary is in regular dialogue with all of our teacher unions and spoke with the EIS general secretary most recently last Friday. Those discussions are, of course, on-going, although the chamber will be aware that only COSLA, as the employer, can make a formal pay offer to the teacher unions through the SNCT. The Scottish Government does not negotiate separately with unions on teachers pay. Michael Marra. The First Minister's offer describes that it was rejected by teaching unions was made at the last possible moment. It sat on the cabinet secretary's desk for over three weeks, and since the announcement of 16 more EIS strike dates, which will close our schools, deprive our children of their education and throw family life into chaos, no dates for negotiation have been sought or fixed. Next week, the SNSTA and NSWT will strike, closing schools again. No attempt has been made to avert that action by this Government. Our children have lost so much in the pandemic years. How can they afford a Government making so little effort to keep their schools open? That is just frankly not the case. The offer that was made to teacher unions last week was the fourth offer that has gone to unions. Can anybody look at this Government and bear in mind the point that I made about the Scottish Government not negotiating separately with unions through the Scottish Negotiating Committee for Teachers? Anybody who has looked at the efforts that this Government has made to give fair pay rises and settle any potential for industrial action with the wider local government workforce, with the NHS workforce will know that this is a Government, in contrast with other Governments in other parts of the UK, that is going to every length possible to reach fair agreements with our public sector trade unions. Looking at the offer that was made to teachers, again, the fourth offer that has been made recognises the impact of the cost crisis on lower pay teachers in particular, with an increase of up to 6.85 per cent for them. The offer is the same as the offer that has already been accepted by other local government workers. I have nothing but admiration for our teaching profession. They are rightly paid higher than other workers in other parts of the local government workforce, but the offer in terms of a pay increase that has been made to teachers is the same as that that has already been accepted by the janitor in a school or the dinner lady working in a school, so it is a fair offer. If it has been accepted, it would mean that, since 2018, teachers have had a 21.8 per cent cumulative pay increase. Lastly, we have the highest starting salary in the UK for a fully qualified teacher. Under the new and latest offer, a newly qualified teacher in Scotland would receive £7,400 more than counterparts in England. Our most experienced classroom teachers would get £5,600 more than if they were teaching in England on the main pay range. I think that our effort shows our commitment to teachers. I really hope that this is an offer that will be accepted in the interests of teachers and pupils across the country. The First Minister is noted already that strikes her in no one's best interests, not teachers and certainly not pupils. Does the First Minister agree that, on a fixed budget, the Scottish Government has been put in an impossible position by the UK Government with no additional support for coming to fund pay offers or mitigate the impacts of inflation? That is a statement of fact. It is important to remember that current pay negotiations are for this financial year. In this financial year, the Scottish Government's budget has been eroded to the tune of £1.7 billion by inflation, and not an additional penny extra has been provided to help to deal with that. However, we are not standing by and doing nothing. We are working really hard to give our public sector workers a fair pay deal. Take the NHS offer that NHS unions are currently considering. An average of 7.5 per cent in England under the Conservatives, in Wales under Labour, the offer to the NHS is 4.5 per cent on average. We are doing everything we can to get every penny possible into the pockets of public sector workers, because that is the kind of Government we are. That is our values. However, yes, we have a fixed budget and it has been eroded because of Tory Government incompetence. Willie Rennie. So that is the message to teachers. Just be grateful. You have hugged your lot. You are paid enough. That is not the way to treat teachers in this country. Playing one set of workers against another is a disgraceful way to treat those people who taught our young people through the pandemic. Is not that about time that, instead of making last-minute offers hours before the strike deadline, she treated teachers with the respect that they are due and gave them a decent pay offer with the budget that she has got? First Minister. I know that Willie Rennie does not get much attention these days, but, even by his standards, that was a pretty shameful tone to take on an issue that is so important to teachers, pupils and parents across the country. Let me set out again the way in which we are approaching this. An offer this year that recognises the impact of the cost crisis on the lowest-paid teachers. An offer that is as fair and gives as much of an increase to teachers as the janitor and the dinner lady has already accepted. In a fixed budget, part of what we have got to try to do is to be fair across all parts of the public sector, and that is what we are seeking to do. Secondly, an offer that, if accepted, would mean that, since 2018, teachers would have had a 21.8 per cent cumulative pay increase. I think that they deserve every penny of it, and an outcome that would mean that our teachers are paid better than teachers in other parts of the UK. Highest starting salary, not just in the UK, the OECD found that starting salaries for teachers in Scotland are 17 per cent above the EU average at primary level, so that is how much we value teachers. Within a fixed budget, we are doing everything possible to get every penny possible into the pockets of public sector workers, and that is the right thing to do. That tone, frankly, I think will be seen for what it was by people across Scotland. To ask the First Minister what action the Scottish Government is taking to build on the enduring legacy of Doddie Weir and support efforts to cure MND and similar neurological conditions. As we have been reflecting earlier today, Doddie Weir was a Scottish sporting legend, and as a human being, he was in so many ways one of a kind. He was a hero of rugby, but off the pitch the way he responded to his MND diagnosis was truly inspirational. He campaigned tirelessly to increase awareness of this cruel condition, as well as raising money for research through his foundation and the hope that a cure will be found so that others coming after him would benefit from that. I suspect that I am not just speaking for the Government here, I am speaking for everybody across the chamber. We share Doddie's vision of a world without MND. Since 2015, and this has been inspired and I think that it is important to say it, much of the work that we did after 2015 was inspired by the campaigning of the late Gordon Aikman, who also deserves great credit here. However, we have invested around £700,000 in research looking at the progression of the condition and the development of a pipeline for new treatments. We have also doubled the number of MND specialist nurses across the country and ensured that they are funded now from and by the NHS. We are currently implementing the neurological care and support framework to ensure that everyone with a neurological condition such as MND can access the co-ordinated and high-quality care that they need. I thank the First Minister for that answer. I think that to say that Doddie was a unique individual certainly undersells him. I do not think that we should forget that he was a world-class sportsman, but it is his indomitable character in the way he tackled his diagnosis of MND head-on that will endure. He has certainly shown us how to live your best life. As many have said, you could not fail to like him if you met him and be inspired by him and certainly I can think of no one who could possibly achieve what he has. Along with Rob Burroughs, he has brought the search for treatment and cure of MND into everyone's thoughts. I am very welcome to hear the First Minister mention the work of Gordon Aitman before that. The UK Government has pledged £50 million to help in the search for MND treatments, although the messages are positive. Can I ask the First Minister and the chamber to unify as a Parliament to encourage the UK Government to move quicker? Specifically, what will the Scottish Government do to work with charities like Doddie to tackle these horrible neurological conditions and keep up the momentum that the big man started? We have all mentioned the practical impact of the work that Doddie did and, indeed, Gordon before him, but what always struck me about Doddie and Gordon was the courageous way in which they never allowed that horrible condition and the diagnosis of it to dim their spirit and their love for and capacity for life. The last time I saw Doddie in person was at Murrayfield and his smile lit up the room. That fortitude and resilience in the face of something that I do not think any of us really know how we would cope with is utterly inspirational. At United Doddie and Gordon and in their memory, we all have a duty to go as far and as fast as we possibly can to find the cure for this condition. I encourage the UK Government to go faster, but I also say to my Government that we need to go faster and do everything that we can here and we need to work together. We already work closely with charitable organisations and we will continue to do that. There are positive signs, thanks to the research that is being done, but we need to make sure that we support those who have the skills and the expertise to find the cure, that they have all of the necessary support and resources to do that. I pledge today, in memory of the great Doddie Weir, that the Government I lead will continue to do all we can to find the cure that he so desperately wanted. Thank you. That concludes First Minister's questions. I would say that I regret that I've been unable to call any general or constituency questions today due largely to the length of some exchanges, and I will review today's exchanges to ensure that more members are able to participate in this session each week. There will be a brief suspension to allow members and the public gallery to leave before we move on to members' business.