Y cwestiwch yn gweithio i gynghwyl yn y cyfwyrdd yng nghymru, ac yn cwestiwch yng ngondol 1, Douglas Ross. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. Ysgrifennu dynistau Cymru yn cyd-feyddol o'r SMP's controversial plans for a Centralised Care Service i gynllun yng nghymru hynny. Humza Yousaf's Government haf refused. The last estimate for the centralised care service was £1.3 billion, but, after that figure came out, Audit Scotland said this. It is likely that the overall cost of the measures will be significantly above the amounts that are currently assessed. Will the First Minister tell us now how much is this really going to cost Scottish taxpayers? First Minister? First and foremost, let's not forget why, of course, we are introducing and have introduced the national care service legislation. It's to end that postcode lottery of care that we all accept exists right up and down the country. That inconsistency of care that has existed, we want to introduce a system that ensures that we put fair work principles at the very heart of the national care service, that we put those who need care at the very heart of a national care service. What I would say to Douglas Ross is, of course—and I think that all position quite rightly have asked for from the Scottish Government—is to ensure that we engage with local authorities, to ensure that we engage with our trade union colleagues. First Minister, just before we go any further, I would be grateful if members could treat one another with courtesy and respect. First Minister? It's hardly a surprise, planning officer, that they've grown when I mentioned fair work principles and working with trade union colleagues. What I would say to Douglas Ross is, he was one of the first to call for us to pause the national care service legislation so that we do engage with local government, so we do engage with trade unions. We are doing that in order to hopefully find a level of compromise in the national care service legislation, which will allow us to take that forward with, hopefully, an element of consensus. Depending on what that compromise is, of course we'll then determine whether there's any changes to revise financial memorandum. So once we've had that engagement intensively over the course of the summer, we'll return to the Parliament and ensure that there is a revised financial memorandum. The muted applause hasn't got any better from last week, and it's no wonder, because the answers haven't got any better either. The First Minister is suggesting there may be additional costs. Audit Scotland were very clear that the £1.3 billion cost is not going to be the final cost, it's going to be higher. It turns out, from that feeble answer that didn't address the point, the First Minister has no idea what it's really going to cost. He is throwing public money away when front-line social care services are in desperate need of more funding. The SNP could be investing to improve these local services, instead they're creating a bureaucratic nightmare and want a blank check to do it. Already the SNP have wasted £14 million on this plan. They've spent £1.9 million on consultants, but the plans are not advancing, there are no signs of progress, and the legislation has been repeatedly delayed. So is the First Minister paying consultants a fortune to tell him what everyone else knows, his plans are woeful and they won't work? It is hardly a surprise that a national care service plan that puts fair work at the heart of it, that puts sectoral bargaining at the heart of our plans for national care services, that puts ethical commissioning at the heart of our national care service, is wholly opposed by the Conservatives. Hardly a surprise to anybody in this chamber, hardly a surprise to our trade union colleagues and hardly a surprise to the people of Scotland. All of that, why are we bringing it a national care service for? We're bringing it forward because we know of the extreme challenges that are faced by those working in social care because of workforce.  Once again, the Scottish Government is having to pick up the pieces. Once again, the Scottish Government is having to mitigate the woeful decisions made by a cruel Tory Government, and how are we doing that? Yes, we are of course committed to spending the national care service, but we've also made sure that there's an additional £100 million to provide that pay-up lift from April of this year. That represents a 14.7% increase for those workers in the last two years. I was proud when I was health secretary to make sure that there was not just one, not just two, but three pay-up lifts for adult social care workers, and we want to go further where we can. We have committed to invest in social care right now to undo some of the damage done by the Conservatives' hard Brexit, and at the same time, we are absolutely committed to our plans for a national care service that will ensure fair work is at the very heart of any future care service. Thank you. You wouldn't have guessed it from that answer, but it was a question about spending almost £2 million on consultants on that proposal that the First Minister failed to address in his answer.  A bit hard for the minister in charge to get her head around. First Minister, she is talking about your plans, because before Humza Yousaf failed upwards, he was not just the health secretary, he was cabinet secretary for social care. He wrote those shambolic plans. So what does it say about the First Minister's policy if his own care minister doesn't understand it? First Minister. It just goes to show how desperate Douglas Ross says when he starts with the personal attacks on me or on to any of my colleagues. Not on the policy, not on the substance on the personal attacks from a man who is, of course, the least popular elected politician on these islands by any poll estimation in the entire country. The best retort that Douglas Ross has is that, as I am catching you up, you are still the most unpopular leader elected politician in this country by quite a country mile. Douglas Ross is on consultancy spend, because it is an important point, of course. The Scottish Government and our officials are absolutely focused on making the national care service work, but it is, of course, important that we bring in those additional technical and specialist expertise that allows the Scottish Government to ensure that we make progress on the legislation itself. In terms of the finances around the national care service, which is a very legitimate question, I have said that, of course, we will engage with future unions, with local government and, hopefully, when we reach a compromised position on the national care service, we will come back with a revised financial memorandum. However, I am hardly going to take, and neither will any of the ministers of my Government take any lectures on financial literacy from Douglas Ross, who demanded that this Government copy Liz Truss's tax cuts, which would have cost the Scottish Government £500 million and caused economic pernod to our Scottish public finances. Douglas Ross is absolutely hopeless from the First Minister. He said that it was a desperate tactic by me to quote his own minister. I am listening to that answer. I am pretty sure that Marie Todd still cannot get her head around the policy or the costings, because it is quite clear that the First Minister cannot. This is all starting to look like another humzaeusif disaster. The man who could not get the trains to run on time, forced police officers to breaking point and left our NHS in crisis, is now doing his best to throw social care into chaos as well. He does not know if he is building a national care service or a white elephant. Humzaeusif has no idea how much this centralised care service is going to cost, or when this bureaucratic nightmare will be ready, or how it will improve the situation for people who desperately need better care. The very last thing our struggling care service needs is our administrative overhaul, costing billions of pounds when it is being starved of cash from the front line. Will Humzaeusif do the right thing, stop wasting taxpayers' money and scrap those plans altogether? It is quite incredible that, when we have given a pay-up lift to adult social care workers, Douglas Ross describes that as a waste of money. Every penny that we spend on social care is ensuring that we lift standards for adult social care workers and ensure that we are lifting standards for those who are in receipt of care. While we do that, yes, build a national care service that has fair work at its heart, build a national care service that has ethical commissioning at its heart so that the profits from care are not just gleamed away into bank accounts in the Cayman Islands—something that the Conservatives would like to see—a national care service that makes sure that we put sectoral bargaining at its very heart. That is what we are committed to. All that is in the midst of the fact that we have had over a decade of austerity from Douglas Ross's Conservative. We have had a hard Brexit imposed upon us and, of course, the disaster of the mini-budget. If we had listened to Douglas Ross and gone ahead with tax cuts for the wealthiest, our budget would be worth £500 million less. I will take no lectures about financial literacy nor, indeed, for standing up for those who are working at our care service from Douglas Ross or the Conservatives. It has just been announced that interest rates will go up again, meaning higher mortgages, all because of Tory economic chaos. That is in the same week that the SNP launched its campaign for another Tory Government. I ask the First Minister to put aside his party's self-interest and be honest. What is better for Scotland? A Labour Government or a Tory Government? What is better for Scotland is independence, of course, because everyone will have the powers in our own hands. It is, of course, exceptionally brave for Anasawa to go on this topic of this week of all weeks, because what we have with Keir Starmer's Labour Party is somebody who has refused to reverse every single measure of Tory austerity. What we have with Keir Starmer is, of course, an individual who has been rigged on his promise to abolish tuition fees for students in England. What we have with Keir Starmer just yesterday is an individual who refused to repeal cruel Tory legislation such as the illegal migration bill. Scotland does not need cruel, harmful policies imposed on it, whether it is by a politician that wears a blue tie or a politician that wears a red tie. What Scotland needs is the full powers of an independent nation to chart our own course and get out of this unequal and broken union. Do you have it, Presiding Officer? We have visitors who have gathered to hear the questions and answers put. We have people tuned in across the nation who are also keen to do so, and I would be grateful while I appreciate your passion and interest that we try to behave ourselves with decorum. I think that you should be softer with them, Presiding Officer. It is the first time that they have shown life in weeks, so we should appreciate the SNP-backed benches. Isn't it amazing that they have shown life when it comes to attacking the Labour Party? A governing party under investigation by the police, sexual misconduct allegations, whistleblowers being silenced, division on the back benches, there is only one party that looks like the Tories, and it is not us, it is the SNP. The First Minister is so out of touch that he insults the intelligence of people across Scotland. Labour would deliver a new deal for working people and scrap the Tory anti-trade union laws. Labour would deliver a publicly owned energy company, something promised and failed to deliver by the SNP. Labour would make Scotland an R&D powerhouse, not impose SNP cuts on universities. Labour would bring down people's bills with a proper windfall tax, not something that the SNP and the Tories support, because that is the change that Scotland needs. I know that the First Minister is still trying to find his feet. I know that the job can be quite confusing for him, but isn't it the case that he prefers a Tory Government because it is a cover for his own incompetence? You know what the SNP is interested in, Presiding Officer? We are not interested in just getting rid of the Tories for a little while. We weren't rid of the Tory Government forever, and the way we do that is, of course, for voting for independence. We don't want to replace Tory with Tory light or Tory with a pale imitation of Tories, and we know that Keir Starmer is lurching to the right. There are no more, the little more than a Conservative Tribute Act. Just, of course, last week Labour was committed to keeping Tory's anti-protest legislation in place. On tuition fees, he has done a knick leg, and he has ditched, of course, his pledge to make university education free. On progressive taxation, we are absolutely committed to leading the way in the Scottish Government on progressive taxation. What does Keir Starmer say when it came to income tax for the top 5 per cent of earners? He said, we are in a different situation now. I think we have the highest tax burden since World War 2. What about railways? Starmer, of course, was previously committed to nationalising railways. Now he says that on water, rail and other services, and I quote, I take a pragmatic approach rather than an ideological approach. I say to Anna Sauer that we are prepared to work with any political party in order to keep the Tories out of number 10. Why is Keir Starmer refusing to work with the Scottish National Party in order to keep the Tories out of number 10? We are the most progressive party on these islands, but I say to Anna Sauer that I do not want rid of Tory Governments just for one year, just for five years, for one election cycle. We want rid of Tory Governments in Scotland for good. Anna Sauer is yet again more interested in attacking Labour than getting rid of the Tory Government. He did not want to talk about poll ratings with me. Why? Approval rating minus 12, competent 22 per cent, incompetent 40 per cent, trustworthy 18 per cent, untrustworthy 42 per cent, strong 19 per cent, weak 39 per cent, doing well 19 per cent, doing badly 44 per cent and the best of all, the best of all, better than his predecessor, 9 per cent, worse than his predecessor, 41 per cent. A pale limitation of Nicola Sturgeon. I'm not sure if that's a compliment anymore, but the SNP and the Tories two sides of the same coin, both wanting division, both wanting chaos, both wanting the damaged labour, both wanting a Tory Government all about saving their jobs, not acting in the interests of the people of Scotland because Scotland is desperate for change and desperate together of two failing Governments and economically illiterate and morally bankrupt Tory party, a dysfunctional and incompetent SNP Government. So, if you want change to lower your bills, to give more money to people's pockets, to earn fire and rehire, to transform workers' rights, to create thousands of jobs, then surely... Mr Sarwar, I'm sorry to disrupt this session further, but members are doing a very, very good job on that account. I would be grateful if you could remember the basic rules of the code of conduct which require that we conduct ourselves with courtesy and respect. I am seeing little of that, and this is not continuing. Mr Sarwar, if you could please put your question to the First Minister. They don't like it that the change is coming. They don't like it that they've been found out. They don't like it that they're plummeting. They don't like putting more money in the people's pockets with a proper windfall tax.  They don't like creating tens of thousands of new jobs. Question, Mr Sarwar. So surely even the First Minister can see that this is the change that Scotland needs and that can only be delivered by a Labour Government? First Minister. Oh, I'm grateful that even you had to step in to save the branch manager of the Scottish Labour Party. Of course, the reason why Scotland won't trust Keir Starmer is because he has a born-again Brexit here. Remember, of course, Brexit has caused economic devastation to this country, and, of course, Anna Sarwar said that he wants to see a changing relationship with the European Union. We want to see a relationship with the EU that means that Scotland is back in the European Union, that we rejoin the European Union, and the only way to do that is, of course, as an independent nation in an independent country. Here is the real proof about the fact that Keir Starmer's Labour Party has lurched again to the right. The very first major speaking event that I went to was at the STUC. Anna Sarwar was there. One person that wasn't invited, of course, was Keir Starmer. Of course, the Dundee TUC brought forward a motion condemning Keir Starmer's actions and behaviours, so they may well be led by a party that is named after the founder of the Labour Party, but if Keir Hardy could see the state the Labour Party is in, he would be burling in his grave, Presiding Officer. To ask the First Minister whether the Scottish Government will consider a full ban on disposable vaping products on health and environmental grounds. First Minister. We will give that consideration littering, of course, of any kind, is unacceptable. I share the member's concerns about the environmental impact of single use vapes, not to mention, of course, the increased use amongst children and young people who should not have access to them, of course, in the first place. The Minister for Green Skills for the Circular Economy and Biodiversity has asked Zero Waste Scotland to examine the environmental impact of such products and consider what the options are to tackle the issues. This review is considering a whole range of possible options, including a ban. Any future approach will be informed by the findings of the review, but I should make it quite clear that the use of these products is an issue that we are taking very seriously, and nothing is off the table at this stage. I thank the First Minister for that answer and look forward to the publication of the report commissioned by the Minister. Vaping has serious environmental and health impacts. That is why campaigners like Les Waste Laura, The Daily Record and a growing number of councils have highlighted those harms, and I thank them all for their work. A full ban on disposable vapes is needed, but does the First Minister agree with me that there is much that can be done ahead of a full ban to reduce harm? Keeping products away from public view, like cigarettes, raising awareness of the legal purchase age, highlighting disposable return points? Will the First Minister join me in calling on retailers to step up to the plate and implement those measures? Yes, I will join in that call, and we are keen to work constructively with retailers in this regard. I understand the many concerns around the environmental, but also the health impacts of single-use vapes that have been raised by campaigners, including Les Waste Laura, who Gillian Mackay mentions. Of course, our local government colleagues, who I know also take the issue extremely seriously—we have 15 councils who have now called for a ban. As well as the issues that the member raises around retailer responsibilities, they are being looked at in detail by the minister for the circular economy and the minister for public health as part of the review of the environmental impacts and in our refreshed tobacco action plan, which will be published in autumn later this year. That will include further action on education, but also crucially on enforcement, as we are and I will keep the member updated on publication of that strategy. Thanks to the work of local campaigners in February this year, Dundee City Council supported banning disposable vapes and called for a national ban from the Scottish Government. As there is already local support for such a ban, can I ask the First Minister what consideration the Scottish Government has given to introducing a pilot ban on disposable vapes in Dundee to help to develop a model for a national ban? It is very well worthy of consideration. As I referenced in my last response, there are around 15 councils who have called for a ban, but I am not surprised to see Dundee City Council, SMP-led Dundee City Council, of course, leading the way in this regard. I am more than happy to consider the issue of a potential pilot, but I think that it is important that the work that we have initiated through the review is allowed to happen. I will ensure that that work of course is published, but we take immediate action because this is an issue of growing concern both for the environmental impact that it is having, but clearly for some of the health impacts that it is having too. To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government's position is on the view of the children and young people's commissioner for Scotland, that NHS Lothian should review its children's rights impact assessment of the decision to end the youth navigator programme that operates at St John's hospital. The hospital youth navigator pilot will continue to be delivered by medics against violence and NHS partners at the Queen Elizabeth hospital for children in Glasgow, alongside the adult navigator programme in nine hospitals across Scotland. Navigators are key support workers who help individuals presenting at hospitals with multiple complex needs to access those support services. I understand that no decision about further future funding has yet been taken at this time and that NHS Lothian are evaluating all of their youth work provision in hospitals, including the pilot that is being referenced by Fiona Hyslop. I have confirmed that a children's rights and wellbeing impact assessment will be undertaken on those proposed options. A final report is expected to be discussed at the children and young people's programme board at the end of this month. As the First Minister has acknowledged, the youth navigator is supported by medics against violence, which has announced that funding will end at the end of June. It offers a youth work-based community outreach service to vulnerable young people at age 12 to 16 to access a time of presentation at St John's hospital in West Lothian, as well as the Sick Kids hospital in Edinburgh. Does he acknowledge that having debated a trauma-informed approach to services only on Tuesday in this chamber, that preventative youth work such as offered by the successful youth navigator programme should be supported, not withdrawn, and that a full childhood impact assessment would have flagged that adverse childhood experiences often present as a crisis on hospital presentation, and early support and intervention actioned quickly can be most effective? Fiona Hyslop makes a very important point, indeed, and one that I fully subscribe to, particularly in my roles in justice and in health previously. Of course, taking that preventative trauma-informed approach, particularly through the navigator's programme, can make a difference and has made a difference to many young people, in this case, in NHS Lothian. I value the importance of the service. Fiona Hyslop is absolutely correct in saying that the most effective approach to dealing with these issues is to take a trauma-informed and preventative approach. I did reference in my previous answer that those matters are under review. When it comes to the final provision of youth services in NHS Lothian, there is confirmation that children's right and well-being impact assessment will be undertaken, but I will ensure that the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care makes representations to NHS Lothian on the important issues that Fiona Hyslop has raised. First Minister, scrapping the service will have a devastating effect on vulnerable children and young people across the Lothian region. The QE hospital is hardly accessible. Many other youth work services have lost funding and statutory services like CAMHS are at breaking point. Cutting back on youth work is the wrong course of action and will just store up problems for the future. We hear so often about the preventative approach being championed by the Scottish Government and this project does exactly that, so why are we even considering cutting it? Can I say to Sue Webber that I agree with the approach in relation to preventative funding? Of course, this Government funds medics against violence, an excellent organisation who have had the pleasure of meeting a number of times over the years. We fund them to the tune of £337,000 in terms of this financial year and deliver a variety of violence prevention activity, including the core activity to deliver and support the national hospital navigator programme. I go back to the answer that I referenced to Fiona Hyslop. This is a decision that NHS Lothian is reviewing. It is looking at the youth service provision in the round. Of course, it will do that important impact assessment that Fiona Hyslop has called for. I am more than happy that the Government makes representations to NHS Lothian on the back of what has been said in the chamber today. Ultimately, of course, this will be a decision for NHS Lothian to take, and I would expect him to do the full impact assessments in this regard. To ask the First Minister what action the Scottish Government is taking to support colleges and universities in Scotland. Colleges and universities make a crucial and unique contribution to Scotland. We are investing nearly £2 billion in the sectors each year through the Scottish Funding Council. When we make this funding flexible, where possible, I recognise the challenges, I recognise the pressures that colleges and universities are currently facing. Of course, we will continue to engage with the Scottish Funding Council, as well as the sectors directly to ensure that institutions are financially stable. Two weeks ago, the Scottish National Party Government took a dagger to the heart of colleges and universities by cutting £46 million of funding that was only announced in December with no warning and no consultation. When the Scottish budget was announced, the Scottish Government trumped a £12.7 million increase for higher education, five months on from the budget. That is now £7.3 million cash cut between financial years. Since then, I have also received a letter from the City of Glasgow College stating that their intention is to begin a process of 75 compulsory redundancies. Despite claiming that education was her number one priority, the previous First Minister, Nicola Sturgeon, failed Scotland's young people. So can I ask the First Minister what is he going to do to prevent history from repeating itself? When it comes back to the question of the former First Minister, I can remind you that there are more young people from areas of deprivation going to university now than there ever have been before. That is down to the legacy of Nicola Sturgeon, the closing the poverty-related attainment gap because of the actions of the former First Minister on the savings that we have had to make. Those are difficult decisions that we have to make. I am not going to downplay the significance and the effect that that saving will have on both the colleges and university sector, but just to put it into some context, it is 2.3 per cent of the £2 billion budget for further education and for higher education in 2324. Why did we have to make that saving? We had to make it because every single party, I think rightly, stood here and demanded that the Scottish Government intervened, demanded that we help to assist local government in relation to settling the teachers' paid dispute. An additional £320 million had to be found to do that. It does not just grow on the proverbial magic money tree, so tough decisions had to be made. We were up front about that, so we will take those tough decisions. We certainly will not take lectures from a Conservative member of course, their party, the reason why we are facing the financial constraints on the Scottish public finances. Can I remind Pam Gosw, because of sky-high inflation and because of the decisions taken by a Conservative Government, our Scottish finances last year were worth £1.7 billion less at peak inflation because of the economic carnage that her party inflicted upon Scotland. We will take the tough decisions needed. We certainly will not take any lectures on financial and economic literacy from the Conservative party. Sally Mapstone, the head of University Scotland, described the Scottish National Party Government's policy on universities as managed decline. Why does the First Minister think that this multi-million-pound cut to the university's budget is going to reverse that managed decline? I do not agree with that characterisation. I am more than happy to meet Dame Sally Mapstone and other university and college principals in the course of the coming weeks and months and years to come. I take her views very seriously indeed in terms of the characterisation of managed decline. Can I remind Willie Rennie that the latest higher education stats show that a record number of Scottish domiciled students are studying at Scottish universities? We have some of the best universities in the world, world-class universities, because of the excellent initiatives by those universities and the excellent education that they provide, but it is also down to the funding that the Scottish Government has put in to higher education and further education sectors for many years to come. I am more than happy to engage with the university and college principals, but I simply do not accept its managed decline when we have such world-class universities such as St Andrews that are being funded by the Scottish Government. I refer to my entry in the register of members' interests. To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government's position is on the potential impact of the proposed timetable reductions by ScotRail on efforts to secure a model shift from car to train. My understanding is that, as a result of ScotRail's new May 2023 timetable, the number of daily services remains the same, with no overall reduction, and the resources are being focused on areas to better serve current demand. As a result, peak trains and school connections have been prioritised in order to support that very model shift that Katie Clark refers to. I want to make Scotland's public transport system more accessible. I want to make it more available. I want to make it more affordable. That is why I confirmed last month that the six-month pilot to remove peak time fares from ScotRail services will start in October of this year. That intervention, which is unprecedented in the UK rail sector, will also enable officials to gather evidence right across transport modes for the fair fares review and to inform future proposals, while, of course, encouraging importantly model shifts. I thank the First Minister for his answer. However, despite the Scottish Government's goal of reducing car use by 20 per cent by 2020, ScotRail is proposing to cut many train services, including many commuter services such as the 7.42am lags to Glasgow service. Will he agree with me that we need to do far more to encourage people to use the railways rather than cars if we are to achieve our climate change target? Will he carry out an assessment of how the timetable changes being proposed by ScotRail will impact on meeting those goals? I agree with the absolutely underlying premise of Katie Clark's question. It is so important that we make public transport available, affordable, as best we possibly can and as accessible as we possibly can, in order to get that model shift away from car to public transport. On the very operational matters that she refers to, I will ensure that transport secretary does engage with ScotRail, but they are operational matters for ScotRail. On the 7.42am lags to Glasgow, my understanding is that it has been replaced by the 7.54 from Addrossan to Glasgow. An additional train has been added to the timetable from Addrossan to Glasgow departing at 7.26. The May 2023 timetable will also provide journey saving times for those passengers travelling on the air to Glasgow route. Following on from customer feedback, the Addrossan and Lag services will now call it stations in the Garnac valley to improve connections. There have been changes that have been made right across the timetable directly influenced by user feedback. I would say to Katie Clark that she is absolutely right. We need to continue to do more in order to ensure that public transport—that model shift—happens between car and public transport. That is why I am really pleased and one of my first acts as First Minister was to announce the beginning of the pilot to abolish peak rail fares that will run for six months from October this year. Can the First Minister confirm that passenger numbers have not returned to pre-Covid levels partly because people are working at home? That means a shortfall in cash for either the railways of the Government. Can he confirm how that shortfall is being made up? John Mason is absolutely right to raise the issues that he does. Clearly passenger numbers are still recovering from the pandemic, so income levels are still down. Scotland's rail operators are also having to meet those really high inflation costs that are affecting every single business, every single person right now. All of that impacts on our rail budget, but I understand that the cost of implementing the May 2023 timetable change is, hopefully, projected to be neutral. It is difficult to accurately assess the exact financial impact of passenger numbers that have not yet returned to pre-Covid levels, but it is good that demand continues to—even if it is incrementally—increase and is currently recovered to over two thirds of pre-Covid levels. Clearly, we want Scotland's publicly controlled railways to succeed both in the short and the long term. ScotRail has been working hard through a range of promotions in recent months to encourage more people to travel by train, not least because of the contribution that rail can make, should make and will make to address climate change and cutting transport emissions. Following the tragic death of Hemi Carrasai in Mallorca due to a suspected carbon monoxide leak in a holiday home, I know that the chamber's thoughts and condolences will be with Mr Carrasai's friends, loved ones and especially his wife, now recovering. The dangers of carbon monoxide are frequently a subject for the cross-party group on accident prevention and safety awareness. Regulations vary greatly, both here and abroad. Does the First Minister agree that members of the public should consider heeding the advice from organisations such as ROSPA and the Safer Tourism Foundation and consider a carbon monoxide alarm as essential holiday packing? Yes, I agree with that. Of course, my thoughts are with the family of Hemi Carrasai and, indeed, with his wife, Mary, who remains in a very serious condition in hospital and, of course, with her friends and her family in the community that will be deeply saddened and rocked by those events. A carbon monoxide detector can give people an important life-saving warning of a faulty appliance. In Scotland, it is a legal requirement to include a carbon monoxide detector in any room with a carbon-fuelled appliance. Fyding one of those detectors is vital for safety. It could literally, quite literally save your life, so I would encourage everyone to find out about the importance of being aware of the signs of carbon monoxide poisoning and the actions that can keep them safe. You can find more information on all one word, gasafetyregister.co.uk. Sorry, I will say that again, gasaferegister.co.uk. More information can be found, but I hope that Mary Somerville, the wife of Hemi Carrasai, continues, hopefully, to recover my thoughts again with her and the family of Hemi Carrasai. Yesterday, the fight to save six libraries and Buxburn swimming pool in Aberdeen moved to the courts. Will the First Minister contact the SNP administration at Aberdeen City Council and tell him to get a grip, listen to the people they are meant to serve and not fight them in the courts? Or is this yet another example of the SNP failing the people of the north-east? Before the First Minister responds, I will remind members again that questions to the First Minister should be put on matters for which the Scottish Government have general responsibility. Of course, it is the SNP-led Government that has increased funding for local government and, of course, it would be Douglas Lumsden who would be the first one to complain if we interfered and intervened in local decisions that are being made. What I won't do is comment on any potential live-court proceedings that are taking place, but we have increased funding to local government. We respect the decisions that are being made by local government, and it is their right to make those decisions under section 163 of the Local Government Act 1973. We will continue to make sure that we fund local government, but what we won't do is intervene and interfere in those locally made decisions. Monica Lennon This evening, alongside the STUC and the Sunday Mail, I am hosting a parliamentary reception to celebrate the Food for Thought campaign and the positive impact of universal free school meals across Scotland. All MSPs are invited, and we hope that the First Minister can join to hear directly from young people how access to universal free school meals is reducing poverty, inequality and stigma. Further to comments that he reportedly made in the daily record, can the First Minister provide an update on the roll-out of universal free school meals in primary schools and on the pilot programme to be launched in secondary schools? The SNP-led Government is the party of universalism. That is why we abolished tuition fees, which Keir Starmer's Labour party will not be doing. It is why we are the party of the baby box. It is also why we are the party that has introduced universal free school meals from P1 to P5. Of course, we did not do a manifesto commitment and remain committed to the future roll-out in terms of P6 and P7. We are looking at a pilot in secondary schools. I simply made the point, and I continue to make the point, and I made the point at the anti-poverty summit, that we will look at what more we can do around progressive taxation. We will, because of the economic carnage that has been inflicted upon us by the UK Government, have to look at making really tough decisions. We will have to look at targeting across a range of potential policy areas. There is not a conflict between universalism and being targeted. Yes, there are some rights that should be universal such as a right to free education, to free university education. They are rights, they are not benefits, they are not luxury. At the same time, we should absolutely make sure that we are being targeted where we can, such as, for example, the Scottish child payment, the game-changing intervention that is helping the poorest in our society. We are the party that is both the party of universalism but also the party that makes sure that we target our resources towards those that absolutely need the most help, particularly the face of a UK Government that is inflicting harm upon harm on the poorest in our society. Marcus Ewing Presiding Officer, uncontrolled bracken is the perfect breeding ground for ticks, ticks that carry diseases that infect humans, such as the debilitating Lyme's disease. Will the First Minister end the delay and instruct the authorisation of acilox, the only effective treatment in order to control bracken? Given that time is running out, both for its procurement and use in the available season, will he do that straight away? If not, does he appreciate that the outcome will be likely the widespread infection of many human beings with this dreadful Lyme's disease? I will, of course, look into the serious issue that Fergus Ewing raises. The Scottish Government recognises the concerns about the potential risk of uncontrolled bracken, the difficulties associated with its control, particularly here in Scotland, as acilox is a herbicide that has no current EU or UK authorisation. There are specific legislative conditions that must be met in order to grant an emergency authorisation of the product to ensure that high level of protection for human health and for the environment. HSE is responsible for assessing emergency authorisation applications right across the UK against the legislative requirements. The Scottish Government considered and promptly responded to HSE's recommendation that HSE, understanding is, will issue the decision to the applicant once all other UK Governments have responded. The Scottish Government is aware of the importance of effective pesticides when used as part of an integrated approach, and our position is very much guided by regulation and, importantly, crucially, by scientific instruments too. This week, three quarters of people surveyed said that they think that we should meet our domestic energy needs from UK oil and gas production rather than imports. This Government's energy strategy specifically includes a presumption against new exploration and production in the North Sea. Yesterday, the First Minister tried to please both sides of this debate, yet carefully committed to neither. Here is the chance to get off the fence. Given the need for energy security to protect thousands of Scottish jobs and the climate benefits of local production, will he remove from the energy strategy this Government's intention to close down the North Sea? What the Government will do is, of course, listen to those consultation responses. It just closed a couple of days ago. We have had over 1,500 responses. We will analyse them carefully, but there is no doubt at all that we are absolutely committed to a just transition, a transitional way from oil and gas, but importantly and crucially for our economy and for our planet to make sure that we unleash the potential of the green economy. We have to make sure that we live up to our climate obligations, both domestic targets and international obligations. We have to make sure that we are playing our part in energy security, again domestically but also internationally too. What we absolutely will not do is what the Liam Kerr Conservatives did to the mining and steel communities in the 1970s and 80s. We will not throw a single worker in the northeast on the scrap heap during the just transition process. What the Scottish Government will see when it comes to unlocking our green potential is action. What we are seeing from the UK Government is complete and utter in action. For example, failing to make any meaningful progress on investment in the Scottish cluster or on the Acorn project, in particular, is complete and utter abject failure in action from the UK Government. We will take action to make sure that we unleash the potential of the green economy, not just in the northeast but for the whole of Scotland. That is important because we want to invest and unlock the potential for our economy, but it is also a moral imperative to ensure the sustainability of our planet in the future. Thank you, Presiding Officer. The economy secretary has now said that he would like to see Ferguson Marine return to private ownership as soon as possible. The GMB rightly said that the Ministry of Defence work from BAE is a sign of confidence in the workforce and that the Scottish Government should follow suit by developing a plan for the direct award of smaller vessels with robust oversight in place. The GMB is right to change ownership and to plunge the workforce into more uncertainty is not the solution. It is important that we listen to them. In fact, if their warnings had been listened to earlier, perhaps we would not have the fiasco we have now. Does the First Minister not accept that, given this whole mess that the Government is making, it is the Government's job to clear it up? Of course, the Government stepped in and saved hundreds of jobs on the Clyde. We saved hundreds of jobs. I make no apology for that. Of course, there have undoubtedly been challenges that the Government has fronted up. When it comes to GMB's letter on the decision to public versus private ownership, what Neil Gray said has been the Government's position for a long time. It has always been the intention of the Scottish Government to return Ferguson's Marine to private ownership. Indeed, that was made clear when we announced the yard being taken into public ownership in the very first place. There is not much—having seen the GMB letter, there is not much in the GMB letter that we disagree with. We want to work with them, with a wider workforce to secure the best possible future in the outcome for the yard, because we do absolutely have faith in that workforce and in the future of the yard. Investment in the yard is about more than just profitability. Of course, that is important. It is also about the retention of skills around jobs and manufacturing capability. Those will be key considerations in any decision over the future of the yard. Any deal to see the yard return to private ownership must prevent value for money, but let me be absolutely unequivocal about it. It must also ensure that it continues the good work on fair work, which is at the heart of everything that the Government does. That concludes First Minister's questions. The next item of business is a member's business debate in the name of Rachel Hamilton, and there will be a short suspension to allow those leaving the chamber and public gallery to do so.