Some of us were discussing Yogi Vera at lunch, which is an interesting cross-cultural discussion. But Jeff was talking about the theory of how this is going to work, and it reminded me of another Yogi Vera saying, which is in theory, theory is better than practice and practice it ain't. So we'll see how this goes. So we did the IT Bioinformatics Electronic Health Records group. I wanted to talk just briefly about the process that we used to come up with our prioritized list, because I suspect that different groups probably found their own way of doing things. So what we did was to discuss some more general philosophical principles to start with. I'm going to lead off with those. And then we articulated a number of things that we had heard through the course of the conference or that had been previously listed, and also new ideas that came up. We came together on shared understanding of what each of these is, which may not necessarily be immediately understandable to everybody in the group. So if there are some of these that need to be, I'll do my best to clarify these, but if there's some that need to be clarified, we'll do so. We used a voting process to prioritize, and I'll describe that as we get there. And I really want to thank our group. They bought into this and worked extremely well together, and it was just a pleasure. It's very difficult to do this in the short amount of time that we had, as I know you've all experienced. Okay. So the first thing is that we decided that our universe to discuss did not include anything prior to the creation of a VCF file. We know a whole bunch of stuff happens to get to the VCF file, but since we're on the implementation side, electronic health records, clinical stuff, we figured there are other people that can do that better, and we did not want to spend time creating solutions for things that are already underway. So that's one caveat. You can agree or disagree with that, but that was a decision that the group made. We also had a, there were a lot of conversations over the course of the last two days about standards. And so there was a fundamental question that came up, which is, if we as a group, which represents a substantial proportion of those that are in the genomic implementation space, if we chose to say, here's a standard, and we as a group are going to use this standard, there's a fairly decent chance that that could become a de facto standard. And so the question that was raised was, is it desirable, where possible, to identify a standard for a given class of data, description, definition, whatever, and as a group to decide, we would like to use, we are going to use this standard as we go forward with our projects. And overwhelmingly, the group said this is the desirable tactic, is to identify a single standard. Now we recognize that there are going to be some situations where that's just not going to be possible. We can't say, hey, we're all going to use ICD-10. So United States, time to turn that on, and those of you that are going to 11, come on back. So we want, but we wanted to avoid, you know, creating maps to different standards unless it was absolutely necessary, because the problem with mapping is that it can be done but you lose a certain amount of resolution and fidelity. And so that was just a philosophical decision that the group came to that probably doesn't lead to anything actionable, but might be useful in terms of informing how we implement some of the action steps that we're coming up with. So any questions about that philosophical discussion that took us about 10 minutes? Tim. Saying throw the BAMs away. No, no, no, we're saying for our discussion, for the purposes of our discussion only, that we are going to discuss data from the VCF file going forward. Nothing about throwing the BAMs away. Other people will solve the, and they may remap things and generate an updated VCF. Correct, which we will have to deal with. So we understand that there's work that's going to be happening over there behind the curtain and that we're going to have to deal with that because even if we decide, for example, we all agree that we're all going to call this variant this thing, that when you change the reference, that it may have a different name. And so we just didn't think that was something that this group would spend its efforts on. Okay, is that fair description? Again, you can agree or disagree with the decision, but that was the decision we made. Okay, so great. So this is going to be a little bit, this will go a little bit out of order. So I apologize for this. We just, in the three minutes we had between the end of the group and the presentation, here we didn't get a chance to put these in, reorder them. So you'll notice here that in the voting, there are two scores. Okay, so the first score was of all the things that we listed here, what are the things that you think are most important and everybody got to vote for three things? Okay, so a problem that we really need to solve. And that's the first score. The second score is how feasible is it? How easy would it be to solve this problem? And the vote was for how easy it was. And we asked people to separate those two problems and vote independently. I can only trust my members of the group that they actually did that, but that's okay. The interesting thing about this was, and then the complicated algorithm that I came up with is to add those together to get the total score, which gives us the prioritized rank order. So the one that clearly rose to the top of our group by a large margin was define the key elements that should be stored in the EHR. And by elements is purposely undefined, but it would include information relating to variants, phenotype, all of the things that would be necessary to actually make a clinical decision using genomic information. And so that was scored extremely important, and also it was thought to be very feasible. Number two, with 11 points, was to try and learn from others. We heard a number of groups from different countries over the course of the last two days, as well as consortia within the United States funded by NHGRI that are tackling a number of these issues. And so the group thought it would be important to study existing solutions and compare them in sort of an in vitro bake-off, if you will, to say of all the solutions that people have come up with for the problem of representing genomic data in the EHR, or for building a clinical decision support rule, or whatever, which ones are more robust and more generalizable? In other words, which ones could be more readily implemented across a group like this, and then use those to select as sort of best in class? And so this could be across a variety of different things, variant databases, meta databases, how we store VCF files, informatics pipelines, all these sorts of things. So it was felt to be reasonably important, but it was also thought to be quite feasible to do that sort of an aggregation. The third rank at 10 was to develop a global resource for actionable clinical variants. There is, this was deemed to be very important, perhaps less feasible, but certainly something that people thought was a very important thing to do. We had two at the number four position, collection and aggregation of gene and variant data, so we have examples of this, such as the Exon variant server, Exome variant server, and this should be HGMD, the human genomic mutation database, and there are others out there as well. This is thought to be extremely important, but I think everybody recognized that this is not an easy thing to do. And then also, with eight votes, define necessary federated databases that are needed to implement genomic medicine. So again, things like EVS, ClinVar, ClinGen. Now, you have recognized here that we did something that you can agree or disagree with. Here we basically said we want to have information about, you know, genomic information, but we also had one about actionable variants. And so I think we poached some of the votes from this into the actionable variant group. And so in some sense, the group agreed that these two things are separable and that it is more important for a group like this to focus on aggregation of actionable variants, however, that is defined as opposed to more general aggregation. This was not scored as being tremendously important, although people thought it was quite feasible. And let's see here. I'm sorry. I missed it. Oh, yes. And then there were two at number six, controlled vocabulary for a phenotype ontology and included within that it would be an inventory of existing ontologies. We've heard about a lot of ontologies and we should move those together. Everybody thinks this is really important, but I think they all recognize this is a very difficult thing to do, to create and then get everybody to agree to an ontology, although it has certainly been accomplished in some spaces. And then aggregation, clearinghouse of genomic medicine implementation guidelines. So as different groups actually implement genomic medicine, whether it be for pharmacogenomics or cancer or whatever, and we define here's the guideline that we're going to use to provide guidance to our clinicians to do this. If we could aggregate all of those, that would be a useful activity. Again, it didn't score very high on importance, but it was thought to be highly feasible. I won't go through the rest of them. They're all represented. Jeff, do you want to run your question? Do you want to run the actual voting process at this point? Yes, I'm getting there. I just wanted to say, do you want to take over? Do I want to take over? All right, great. You'll pry this microphone from my cold, dead fingers. So is there anything that we missed that we completely passed on that you think should be represented on this list that we did not cover? One that you have there. Studying existing solutions to IVs, so identify solutions. That was a, Jackie was trying to read my writing on the different. So this is the idea that we're implementing clinical decision support as an example in eMERGE-PGX. But each one of us is finding that we have to find our own solution to do that implementation. So part of the work that the EHRI group is doing as part of eMERGE is to compare the different solutions that we've come up with to say, is there a better way to do it that we can all learn from? And in fact, you've asked us to expand that to CSER to say, okay, we've got a CSER group doing this and an EHRI group doing this from eMERGE. Are there solutions that we all identify as saying, oh, that's a much better way to do it than what we tried to do. And then expand that to the much larger universe of attendees at this meeting to say everybody's trying to solve these problems. If everybody throws in their solutions around a certain problem that we identify as being important, can we identify what seems to be a best in class solution? So the idea being to identify best practices and then disseminate them somehow. We don't just identify them. Well, I think the idea would be that the dissemination might be as simple as a clearing house. So here's the different ideas and here's what we think. It wouldn't necessarily presume that we would say, hey, this is a great, everybody do it because we recognize there are local problems with that. Bruce, do you want to come down? No, you didn't have a question. Tim has a question. There's a discussion about these kind of databases so you don't have to all do it yourselves. The group in this room is kind of the academic group or the hospital group. It's not the commercial group that's now offering services. And as far as I can see, they're all doing these databases themselves. Are they being left out of the loop? Are they happy to do it themselves? Does anybody know what their state of mind is? I think it's fair to say, and I don't speak as one that's phenomenally informed. And actually, Heidi, why don't you talk to this? Because you've had way more experience with ICCG related to that. Yeah, so I think, I mean, those of us who are academic are also offering services, so they span both commercial and academic environment. But if you talk to the commercial labs, which we interact all the time with, they're in the same boat we're in. We all need better resources. And a lot of even the commercial groups are willing to share their data, and they want desperately a resource to draw from as well. I'm not talking about the commercial diagnostic groups. I'm talking about the companies that are now offering genomic interpretation services. They also want these databases. And there's some companies that I know of that are outsourcing curation projects and hiring people to go through literature and building massive databases. The problem is that there's not an evidence-based approach to the evaluation of that data. It's more of a collection process. And so the quality of what comes out of those pipeline processes is unfortunately not that high. But it is the only solution that the heavily bioinformatic-based companies have today. And absolutely, if they have a curated clinically-oriented database to draw from, there's no doubt they will be delighted, at least in my mind. I don't know if others disagree. So I think that that's good. I'm also being given the frantic time signal here that it is time to vote as they say. I am going to do this perhaps not the way Jeff would do it, but there was a clear winner from the workgroup. And so what I would like to do is to ask the group as a whole if you endorse the workgroup's conclusion that this is the one thing that we should take forward from the workgroup. And I'll just get a straw poll, yay or nay on that. And if there's a strong number of nays, then we'll go through and take a look at the others. Look at that.  Or is this the kind of thing that would take a span of months? I wasn't giving any specific instructions, but what I told the group was six to 12 months, that this is something that would be achievable within a six to 12 month period of time. But that was only me. So Mark, I'm letting you have your way with the way you're carrying out the voting, but I insist that you have a second choice. Okay, fair enough. So you said we were going to come away with one from this group. I'm trying to make it easy on you, Jeff. So if you don't like the result, it's your own darn fault. So for number two here, how many would endorse this as that we got it right? How many would say yes to that? Just show of hands. Yeah, you can't vote yes and no on this question, all right? So hands down, now you see what I was dealing with in the group, all right? So how many would say no, this is not the most important thing. How many would endorse, would say that? Okay, so there are four people, five people that would say that this is not the most important thing. Most importantly, two of them are the people that are actually funding us. So taking that into account, we will go through the others. Welcome to democracy, friends. Okay, so what we're going to do is very quickly go through the other that are on the list. And quick show of hands, I just say yes, you only get to vote once, so I'm going to show the whole list, you get one chance to look at it, go through and I'll just select the one that has the most hands by my determination second time around. So again, we're not voting on number two. So what's the connection between genotype and phenotype? Determination, the location of clinical decision support to expand that a bit. Should it be located in electronic health records? Should it be located in the cloud? Should it be located somewhere else? Archiving and aggregation of clinical decisions, so decisions made using the information? No, because you don't know all the choices. Geez, I didn't go through all of them. So I just wanted to make sure that everybody, I'm trying to do this so that everybody understands, I know I am. So despite the problems, controlled vocabulary, you know we'd be done by now if you, controlled vocabulary for clinical activities, controlled vocabulary for phenotypes ontology including an inventory, what information should face patient and how should this be organized. That was the only patient facing, one to emerge. The federal databases we talked about, define different needs for germline versus somatic variation, collection and aggregation of patient level data, and automated family history from electronic health record analyzed and pushed to clinicians. Okay, so votes for what is the connection between the genotype and phenotype? Okay, determination of the location of clinical decision support. Well, I can't count that fast. There was one for the first one, there are, I was just going to say here's the most, but that's okay. Jackie, count, quick, very quick, all right. Archiving and aggregation of clinical decisions, zero. Controlled vocabulary for clinical activities, zero. Controlled vocabulary for phenotypes ontologies including inventory of existing ontologies. Two, what information should face the patient, how should this be organized? Three, four, define necessary federated databases needed to implement genomic medicine, all these listed here. Once! Yeah, so this is your second vote, right. One, two, three, four. Four, define different needs for germline versus somatic variation, zero. Study existing solutions that are more robust and generalizable around, we sort of define that a little bit more. Eight, collection aggregation of patient level data, collection aggregation of gene variant data, excellent variant server, nine-ish aggregation cleaning, clearinghouse of genomic medicine implementation guidelines. One, two, you voted twice. Automated family history from EHR, push to clinicians, one, and global resource for actionable clinical variants. That one has about ten, so. But there were a bit more multiple votes here. So the two that I saw was this one, the global resource for actionable clinical variants which actually maps to an existing activity, and then the ontology. I think those were the two that I saw that had the most. So I'm just telling you that in the group, I don't disagree with you, but the group said we should look at these separately, not together. Right. So, okay, I understand. I'm just reporting what happened. I'm happy to stop anytime. Great, thank you. Thank you all so much.


Rwyf i, cyfnodd, i ni ddim i gilydd y maes arall i ni i gilydd yma i gyfryd gyda y cyfrannid a fron y hollwyd. Rwyf i, rwyf i gilydd y maes argylchedd. Nifrwng y trofnwchiau iddo o'r bwysig yma eich cyfrannidOD. I Anghrainol, mae'n bwysig fydd yn dd料u'r cwm wneud i chi, fyddwch i'n fwy pastorig, nid i atgrifennu hyfforddiant, i'r bobl o'r clartau i wneud y cwm fyddai na'n ac mae'n hynny ar yr chuulio cysylltu. James Dornan To ask the Scottish Government what engagement it has had with Police Scotland and Rangers Football Club regarding the reported Covid-19 regulations, but each has incidences of vandalism, violence and anti-catholic bigotry in Glasgow City Centre and at Ibrokes Stadium on 5 May. Felly, rydw i chi'n iawn i chi'n ddod o'i'r post, ond rydw i'n credu i mi ddigon. Rwyf i'n gwneud i James Arnaud y cwestiwn, rwyf i'n gwneud i'n cymdeithasol gyda'r Ffliolol. Felly, ac i ddwynt mae'r cyfnod ysgolio yn Glasgow. Rydw i, maen nhw'n cyddiol i'r ddweud i'r ddechrau i ddechrau i rwyf i'n cyfrannu Those of who suffered injuries have gone about their job. The assault on our officers is simply unacceptable. I am disappointed on many levels with the selfishness of the Covid beaches, but I am disappointed also with perhaps the violence and vandalism that we saw in George Square and with the anti-Catholic bigotry that we saw on display. Since the weekend, my officials and I have continued to liaise with Police Scotland, engage with Rangers Football Club directly to discuss the fallout and consider next steps. added team online portal to investigate the George Strength Incidents. I envisage that arrests will follow in the days and weeks ahead. Rangers are working closely withmniej Scotland to identify any supporters who are involved in criminal activity. I urge rangers to take strong action against any fan who has found to have broken the law. Mae'r sglaenau oedd ymddangos yma yn ymddangos, a mae'n debydd o'r rhan o'r fan yn y gweithio ar y law.  Rwy'n credu cyfaint o hyd yn cael ei anghydiadol ac, bydd y dyma o ddysgu yma, rydych chi'n braw o arli, iawn yn gwneud cyfaint nag a ddysgu unrhyw ag y gallai syrgyn i Llywodraeth a Llywodraeth. Ar ddysgu'r IE? I was thinking James Dorrney probably expresses the anger that many citizens of Glasgow, but I suspect even those right across the country feel. What I will say in relation to Rangers Football Club is in fairness to the club. They have engaged for a number of weeks with Police Scotland, with the Scottish Government, with Glasgow City Council and they have released a statement asking their fans, pleading with their fans, to respect the Covid guidelines. What I would say is that I would have liked that messaging to have been probably more explicit and stronger ond ond that messaging is coming forth. I think that James Dornan hits on an important point here, that as much as people may, and I think that legitimately of course I asked could government have done more, could police have done more, could the club have done more, let's not forget that the responsibility for those scenes that we saw, those dreadful scenes, lies on the shoulders of those individuals who took part in that disorder. There must be personal responsibility for those who don't need government to tell them, don't need police to tell them, don't need a clwp pwysig, a gweldwch eich gwaddig i resistiwn i gael i'r pan-demicus.  Os ydi, mae'n cycryd y pwysig i chi i chi i gael ei wcfyrdd, na wnaeth hynny eich ddych chi gael ei ddychydigau i chi i gael ei ddychydigau i chi i chi i chi gael i chi i chi i anty-Catholic ac anty-Irish bigotry.  It is disgraceful. I have zero tolerance for it. I don't doubt for a second that it will be part of the investigations that Police Scotland have committed to following up, and every single one of us has a responsibility to call it out and call it what it is. James Dornan. Okay, and I do thank Police Scotland, welcome Police Scotland, establishing a dedicated inquiry team to investigate the carnage at George Square. However, we also need to take steps from preventing these abhorrent scenes in the first place. As the Cabinet Secretary is well aware, I've been pushing strict liability for the years whereby clubs are held responsible for the actions of their fans, and whilst I do accept that personal responsibility is at the core of this, over the years I've been met with denial by football authorities in clubs and had death threats from Rangers fans. Can I ask the Cabinet Secretary if he'll speak with Rangers to ask them to reflect on what more they could have done as a club, what they can do in the future to dampen this climate of hate and intimidation? Will he consider legislating to introduce strict liability, or even better, work with the SFA and SPFL with a view of implementing it to ensure that scenes such as Saturday are never seen in the streets of Glasgow again from so-called football fans? I certainly am happy to take that conversation forward, or indeed, of course, after tomorrow's events, whoever is in post is the Cabinet Secretary for Justice, working alongside any minister that has responsibility for sport. It is important to engage with the clubs. It is important to try to bring the clubs forward with us in this journey as opposed to trying to impose measures on them. Ultimately, that is what we may have to do. If the clubs are unwilling to acknowledge, accept or confront the fact that there is a problem among some fans, we may have to work together, as a chamber or as a Parliament, to find a solution that is appropriate. I urge parliamentarians to work collaboratively together, many here, right across the chamber, are football fans of various clubs. We have a responsibility to work together to try to find a solution and a long-standing lasting solution to that. I am happy to, in my role, and I am sure that whoever is the Cabinet Secretary for Justice, I will be happy to work with James Dornan, because he has championed this issue. Strict liability is one of those options that should remain firmly on the table. I will take Pauline McNeill to be followed by Patrick Harvie. Given that Glasgow witness disorder and violence by some range of supporters in George Square only a few months previously, why did we not learn from this? In relation to the obscene anti-Catholic bigotry and anti-Irish racism, which I am pleased the First Minister and Justice Secretary rightly called out, does the First Minister acknowledge that the Catholic community is sick and tired of this? We need everyone to work together, including the football organisations, and they need to take a much tougher stance than they have done previously, with zero tolerances to bigotry wherever it is found, football and beyond. I absolutely agree with Pauline McNeill's articulation on the problem. On her first question, what have we learned in relation to the disorder that we saw in March, I would say to Pauline McNeill, which is extended to any other member, that having spoken to Police Scotland, they are willing to speak to any member of the Parliament to explain to them why the operational decisions were taken as they were taken. There is not an easy answer to that. I am not suggesting that Pauline McNeill is suggesting that, but if people think that we can just throw 10,000 people in the back of a police van or in custody suites overnight, that cannot be done. Therefore, ensuring that that disorder did not take place in the very heart of our communities was one of the very difficult decisions that Police Scotland had to try to take. Those operational questions are very legitimate for Pauline McNeill and other members to ask. Having spoken to Police Scotland, they have said to me that they are absolutely willing to do that. On the substance of her question about anti-Catholic hatred and anti-Irish hatred, I am disgusted by it. I think that she is absolutely correct to say that the Irish community and members of the Catholic community have faced this for far too long. Perhaps, collectively as the Parliament, we have not done enough to call it out and accept that from my own Government perspective. I woke up this morning to two rabid anti-Catholic messages that I have reported to Police Scotland. I am neither a Catholic nor an Irish, but that hatred was directed towards me. I am intending to call out, and I have reported it already to the police this morning. On that issue, I suspect that we will have support, we will have collaboration, and I am happy to work with any member right across the chamber on calling out hatred and bigotry of any kind. To reinforce James Dornan's point, given that so many thousands of fans are clearly unwilling or incapable of listening to encouragement and appeals for civilised behaviour, is it not abundantly clear that we are only going to see significant change when every fan of every club knows that any hint of vandalism, violence, anti-social behaviour or bigotry will bring not only criminal sanctions for themselves as an individual, but immediate and severe sanctions for the club that they follow, whether through the law or through the football authorities? Patrick Harvie makes a strong point, as did James Dornan. Strict liability should be on the table. Other suggestions that I have heard that should be on the table include potentially an independent regulator, as has been discussed for the English Games. Therefore, if football is unable to regulate itself, then perhaps somebody independent to look at that should be considered. The clubs could also take stronger action. I have referenced in my opening answer that Rangers Football Club has committed to work with Police Scotland. I hope that any supporter, fan or anybody involved in Rangers Football Club that has been found guilty of being involved in anti-catholic bigotry or vandalism or disorder will get a lifetime ban from the club. That is a punishment that probably fans would fear the most. I think that Patrick Harvie's points are well made and, as I said, this Government will work cross-party to come to some, I hope, solution, and hopefully we can bring the clubs with us on this journey. Liam Kerr, to be followed by Co-Cab Stewart. The scenes that we saw at the weekend were disgraceful. The attacks on our excellent police officers were particularly reprehensible. Crucially, coronavirus and the public health advice do not distinguish between reasons for gatherings, noting only that the risk of transmission is increased where they occur. Does the cabinet secretary agree with me that, to avoid public confusion, it is very important to ensure consistency of public health messaging by advising against all gatherings? That absolutely is important. I get the point that Liam Kerr is trying to make. I stood here on Friday to take an urgent question, and it was Alex Cole-Hamilton who asked me a supplementary question. I made it abundantly clear that any gatherings of any sort should not happen. We have said that from the podium of daily briefings. In this chamber, I have said, the First Minister has said that, if it was not for Covid regulations, we would have been, for example, at Kenmore Street, but we did not go, because any gathering of any sort is not something that we would encourage because of the public health emergency. However, I would say to Liam Kerr very genuinely that we did not see thuggish, loutish behaviour in Kenmore Street. We did not see disorder. We did not see protesters punching police officers. We did not see protesters uninating in public. We did not hear anti-catholic bigotry on Kenmore Street or, indeed, in some of the other gatherings. When it comes to the public health emergency, he is absolutely right. It does not distinguish. However, let us not think that there is an absolute equivalence between what we saw at the weekend—those scenes of disorder—and what we saw in Pollock Shields or, indeed, in some other gatherings over the weekend. I will continue to do what is important and necessary in the public health interest, and I hope that we can get the support of other parties in that endeavour. As the MSP for Glasgow Kelvin constituency that covers George Square, I have been contacted by numerous residents who live in the city centre and, along with myself, are appalled and disgusted by the behaviour of, frankly, a mob in the guise of football fans. Will the minister agree that my constituents in Glasgow Kelvin should not have to listen to such bigotry and racism and witness such disgusting violence and vandalism in their streets? What steps is the minister taking to prevent a repeat of those shameful events? First of all, I welcome Cokab Stewart to the chamber. I am delighted that she has been elected. I do not know whether that is her first intervention, but I suspect that it may well be. It is not a surprise to me that she has hit the ground running asking questions on behalf of our constituents within the first of her week of parliamentary business. To answer her question directly, I will ensure that Police Scotland speaks to her and debrief her as the local constituency MSP. I know that she has made that request. It is important that people can ask Police Scotland. I support the actions taken by Police Scotland over the weekend, but it is important that people ask those questions on behalf of their constituents about those operational matters. We will do our best to stop gatherings like that from taking place and disorder from taking place. Police Scotland will always do that in the best interests of public order and public safety. I go back to the point that I made to James Dornan at the beginning of this question exchange. People must accept personal responsibility. You do not need the Government, nor police, nor football clubs to tell you that assaulting police officers is wrong, or that running a mock and creating disorder or vandalism in our city centre is wrong, or that uniting in public is wrong, or that engaging in anti-catholic bigotry is wrong. You should know that they are growing men and women taking part in those scenes that we saw over the weekend. Co-cab strip has my absolute commitment that we will work closely with any stakeholder, clubs, city council, police to ensure that we can prevent these things in the future. However, we must be absolutely emphatic in saying that people hold personal responsibility here for their actions, and that is why Police Scotland will follow up in the coming weeks. We now move on to the second urgent question from Sandesh Gulhane, who is joining us remotely. To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on rising Covid-19 cases in Glasgow and parts of the greater Glasgow area. May I welcome Dr Gulhane to Parliament on the occasion of his first question to ministers? In her statement to Parliament on Friday 14 May, the First Minister outlined the latest status of the outbreaks in both Murray and Glasgow City, highlighting the public health response and plans to engage with local leaders, including around a package of support for the community and those affected. In the course of the last few days, there has been a significant expansion of the testing programme and capacity within the communities, most directly affected by the increase in cases. That has also been supported by an expansion of the vaccination programme. The First Minister committed to reviewing the situation again at the end of this week. That will include a review of any further areas where concerns emerge and the formulation of an appropriate response to any such developments. Mr Gulhane? As a GP and coming from Indian heritage, I am aware of the hesitancy of vaccine updates by members of ethnic minorities, and they are at greater risk of a bad outcome. I would like to ask what measures will the Scottish Government provide to ensure that we appeal to and convince those who are hesitant to take up the vaccine? I think that this is a very significant issue that has been raised by Dr Gulhane, and I give him the assurance that the approaches taken in relation to the deployment and delivery of the vaccination programme have been specifically designed to address the very issue that he raises by ensuring that communication and messages around the advantages of the vaccination programme are delivered within the communities that are affected, that we identify and encourage members of the community to exercise a role in communicating the advantages of taking forward the vaccination programme, and to ensure that all individuals who have been eligible and will be in the future are supported by particular messaging of encouragement to take up the vaccination. Obviously, there are challenges in trying to reach some of the affected communities, but I assure Dr Gulhane of the specific communication measures that have been taken to make sure that that is in fact the case, and we will sustain those during this very critical period ahead. Glasgow businesses thrive on people visiting the city from other parts of their country to shop to go to its restaurants and pubs and are hard hit by the current non-essential travel restrictions in force. At what assessment has the Scottish Government undertaken to ensure that the £750 that they are receiving is sufficient to support effective businesses through the continued restrictions? There is obviously a necessity for us in these circumstances to take action, which none of us would ordinarily want to take, which essentially restricts movement because of the need to address the public health challenge that is before us. The conditions that are being applied in the city of Glasgow we would prefer not to have to put in place, but we have to do so because of the public health imperative. The financial support that has been made available is regularly reviewed to determine its effectiveness and its appropriateness. It is consistent with the approaches that we have taken in other parts of the country and in other similar circumstances, and we hope that those restrictions will only have to last for as short a period as possible, but during that period we will continue to review and engage with the business community around the detail and the substance of the financial support that is available. There is a great deal of interest in those questions, as you would expect. I am going to take Paul O'Kane to be followed by Pam Gossel. Thank you, Presiding Officer, and on my first contribution in this chamber, I congratulate you on being elected to the chair. We are now in a race against time between new variants spreading and the number of people vaccinated. That is particularly true in places such as Eastround for Shire in my region and indeed in Midlothian, where numbers are rising. Many local people in businesses I have spoken to are extremely anxious given speculation that Eastround for Shire may move backwards to level 3 restrictions just a matter of days after moving to level 2, and past experience has shown us what is required to get outbreaks of the virus under control, and early evidence suggests that vaccines remain effective against the so-called endane variant. It is imperative that businesses are able to plan as far ahead as possible in the face of spikes such as the ones that we are seeing in Eastround for Shire, particularly given that many staff in businesses have been taken on in anticipation of restrictions easing and are not covered by UK furlough schemes. Does the Deputy First Minister agree that the Government needs to urgently prioritise an action plan for affected areas, which will ramp up vaccinations and testing and ensure proper measures for supporting local business to survive any changes and restrictions, putting place at short notice? First of all, I welcome Mr Cain to Parliament and wish him well in representing his constituents. He raises a number of very significant issues, and what I would assure him about is that we are carefully monitoring on a daily basis the progress of virus levels in every part of the country to ensure that we are able to signal where we may have to take action in due course. I am sure that Mr Cain will accept, as I am sure that Parliament will accept, that some of those circumstances can change quite dramatically over a relatively short space period of time. We are reviewing that information and where we need to take action we will do so. Having said that, I also accept the very clear view that I have heard from the business community that it wishes to avoid situations in which there is volatility in level settings. We all agree that that is an undesirable situation to be in. We were keen to move as a whole country down the levels last week. That had been our intention, but for understandable reasons in Murray and Glasgow, we were unable to make the change from level 3 to level 2, but we will be trying to minimise the degree of volatility in those judgments that are made at any stage. The last point that I would make is that there will be a need for on-going dialogue with the business community around the measures that are necessary to support recovery during these uncertain times. I give Mr Cain and Parliament the assurance that ministers will be engaged in that dialogue on an on-going basis to make sure that we support Covid recovery in every respect in our communities and that we try to manage our way through those challenging times. Obviously, the more there is public compliance with the measures that are in place, the quicker we can get those outbreaks under control and I would encourage such an approach to be taken in due course. I thank you, Presiding Officer, and I would also like to extend my congratulations to you. To ask the Scottish Government what actions the Government has taken to encourage people from the ethnic minority communities with lower vaccination uptake to make an appointment with their first dose as soon as possible, given the potential risks from the new Indian variant. First of all, I welcome Pam Gosselff to Parliament and wish her well in representing her constituents. I covered a number of those points in my response to Sandesh Gulhane and my earlier answers, but it is important that, as members of Parliament, we all have a role here where we can encourage members of different communities to take up the vaccination. It is clear from all of the available data that vaccination provides a substantial level of protection to any individual from the virus. On the early evidence so far—I stress that it is early evidence—that the existing vaccinations are providing a very robust protection against the so-called Indian variant. My message is reinforced by the Government's communication work and the public health work that is undertaken of the advantages of vaccination for every member of our community, as it offers a higher degree of protection in all circumstances. We have taken steps over the past few days to reinforce that message, particularly given the intensity of the outbreak in the south-side area of Glasgow. We will continue to do so in the coming weeks. NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde is writing to all those in the G41 and G42 postcode sectors to ask them to get tested. We know that surge testing works best when you go door to door. Any medical intervention should always be voluntary, but uptake is greatly heightened when the opportunity for a test appears on your doorstep. What consideration is the Government giving to that measure? In addition to the written correspondence to which Mr Cole-Hamilton refers, there are a number of steps that have been taken to deploy various aspects of testing capacity right into the heart of those communities. Lateral flow devices for self-testing are available from the Glasgow central mosque and seven other sites at mosques and Islamic education centres in Glasgow. As of Friday, more than 3,000 boxes of seven-pack test kits had been distributed through those channels. Eleven local test sites in Glasgow have been adapted to operate as dual PCR and lateral flow device sites all day from Saturday—across the working hours, eight in the morning to eight at night. There have been mobile testing units deployed in a number of locations. We are also working with Glasgow City Council and NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde to deliver lateral flow devices to more than 30,000 households earlier this week, and we will have 40,000 packs in Glasgow in the course of this week. There are a number of steps that have been taken to directly distribute lateral flow tests directly to households, and we will continue to review all possible steps to make sure that we maximise uptake to minimise the spread of the virus by maximising testing capability within individual households. I apologise to those members who have been unable to take. I move on to question 3, and I call Monica Lennon. I refer to my register of interests as a member of Unite the Union and the GMB. To ask the Scottish Government further to green-sil capital entering administration what action it is taking to mitigate the risks to jobs, vital industries and public finances in Scotland. Cabinet Secretary Fiona Hyslop. I also welcome you to your role. In answer to Monica Lennon, on 24 March, the cabinet secretary for the rural economy and tourism, Fergus Ewing, gave a statement to Parliament outlining the potential impacts of green-sil capital UK limiters entering into administration on Scottish businesses. In particular, his statement focused on the potential impacts to the Lochaber aluminium smelter and the DL steelworks. The Scottish Government's priority is to support Scotland's steel and aluminium sectors and the highly skilled jobs that they provide. A ministerial task group and officials have been active throughout the election period, engaging with local management at Lochaber steel and Lochaber smelter, union representatives, the STUC, GFG and the UK Government. The cabinet secretary for rural economy and tourism met MSPs and MPs across the parties in April to provide an update on the GFG alliance situation and we will continue to update parties across the Parliament. Monica Lennon. I thank the cabinet secretary for her response. When the cabinet secretary for rural economy gave that update to Parliament, he gave the impression that the GFG alliance only needed to refinance. However, with the reported collapse of rescue deal talks, the situation is increasingly worrying for workers in local communities such as those at Clydebridge and at DL in my own parliamentary region. At least 340 jobs in Scotland are at risk, and Scottish Government deals that have promised more jobs in the future are now looking doubtful. We welcome the engagement that is on-going. Can I have a question, Ms Lennon? Can the cabinet secretary explain what are the contingency plans in place to protect those vital jobs and industries? If the GFG alliance fails to refinance, will the Government bring the Lochaber smelter under public ownership? As the member will be aware, and as would have been relayed to her at the time of refinancing, she understands that it is a sensitive commercial matter for the GFG alliance. We need to be careful not to prejudice or undermine that process. However, I think that the member was alluding to the fact that this is a potentially changing situation. Clearly, the ministerial task group, which has been involved in two ministers and two cabinet secretaries regularly threatened this period, has been ensuring that we have clarity and understanding of what, as you can understand, is a very complex situation. So, our current plans are not to take into public ownership any of the sites. However, as we did when we intervened to save the sites previously, we will look at all options as required when those situations present themselves. However, as of now, we are monitoring the situation. We are keeping vehicles contact as should be aware with the management and the workforce and the unions in both sites. It is important that, as they will have relayed to her and us, that we have confidence in those sites, that we recognise the skills in those sites and that we recognise the strategic assets that those sites present. I now call Clare Adamson to be followed by Maurice Golden. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I also welcome you to your new role. Cabinet Secretary, you talked about the skills of the workforce at DLN Clyde Bridge, and as someone who served on the steel task force last time, I recognise that it is their skill and dedication that has secured production over the last five years. Can I ask how we can now engage, given the collegiate nature of the last steel task force, how elected members can engage with the Government in support of their efforts, and how will you keep us informed of any developments in a timuous manner? The local constituency member is right to emphasise the need to work collaboratively and collegially across the chamber, and that is what we have been doing and we continue to do. It is also important that we recognise that we have had assurances that the group's aluminium and steel operations here in Scotland are performing well and benefiting from strong order books and rising prices. Together with the experience and skills that she refers to in the workforce, those are important foundations on which we can build as we chart a way forward when things become clearer. I think that the point about keeping members informed is really important, and that is why my colleague Fyreys Ewing has done that in recent weeks, and we are committed to doing so indeed at our last meeting only two days ago. We were discussing when that might be the appropriate point and recognising that although I welcome you back because you are in your constituency capacity, there are many new members from different parties, and it is important that we make sure that they are properly briefed as well and that we will take an early opportunity to do that. Maurice Golden, to be followed by Daniel Johnson. Simple question, exactly how much is the Scottish taxpayer potentially liable for? As the Parliament would expect, we have taken a series of securities over the assets of the GFG Alliance at Locaba. We have not published details, so you can understand some of the commercial confidential issues involved in that. However, the full details of the total exposure and the securities were shared with the Scottish Parliaments Finance and Constitution Committee in 2016, when they approved the guarantee. We recently updated the finance committee with GFG's business plans, and that correspondence is publicly available. Thank you, Presiding Officer, and I, too, welcome you to your position. I wrote to the Auditor General at the beginning of April asking him to look into those matters. He confirmed that, in the last consolidated audits, he expressed concern about the lack of a clear framework regarding the Scottish Government's interventions into private companies. Does the cabinet secretary share that concern? What actions has the Scottish Government taken to correct that, since those consolidated accounts were provided in December 2020? The member may be aware, but the permanent secretary has given evidence. I think that it may have been to the Audit Committee, but I am happy to correct that, if that is not the case, setting out how the Scottish Government would approach situations in the future. Indeed, the advice from that and from the Auditor General has been taken on board. Indeed, I have ensured that, in the operation of the ministerial task force to date, we have been carrying out the principles and practice as recommended in that and has been set out by the permanent secretary in her evidence. Thank you. That concludes urgent questions. It is now time to move on to the next item of business. The next item of business is consideration of business motion 00045, in the name of Graham Day, on behalf of Parliamentary Bureau, setting out a business programme for Thursday. Any member who wishes to speak against the motion should press their request to speak button now. I call on Graham Day to move the motion. Against the motion, the question is that motion 00045 be agreed, are we all agreed? For agreed, and that concludes business for today, and I conclude this meeting of Parliament.


My name is Hanan and I'm a software engineer. I work together with my team to solve everyday problems with innovative technologies. I love what I do. The thing is, less than 10% of all app developers are women. 10%. I would love to get more women interested in the tech sector. I was looking online and I discovered some amazing projects nominated for the GemTech Awards. And now it's time to meet the finalists of the GemTech Awards 2016. The only international prize recognizing innovative policies and programs to promote and inspire women in tech. Be sociable. We have six branches of technology open to all women interested in being able to personally, socially and economically. 10% of women are actively participate in tech. That's too bad.  And she used to be the one that knows first hand about problems in society. She also has to drive to give solution for the well-being of this society. So, why not start to use technology to give solutions? I'm very excited to introduce you to five young Latinas that through computer science, information technology and engineering, they are changing the world and their communities. Listen to their stories, watch them smile and share their lives. In all of them, you will find one thing in common. They believed in life-changing power of technology and they were committed to follow their dream. WAAW actually is an acronym that stands for Working to Advance African Women. And the name stems out of my huge passion to try and engage with African women and try and move their plight forward in any way possible. And the vehicle we're using for that is science and technology education. As public access points, connecting women and adolescent girls to information and other services, they are assisted by young women from the community who play the role of information intermediaries. It's a men's world but IT industry, in my view, is very flexible for women because I enjoy flexible timing, flexible location and I can mix and match both my work and my family. It was very interesting to see ideas from all over the Mino region, such a complicated region. The queries enabled us to negotiate and find alternatives for the current status and at the same time investigate into the ways that are possible for the development of the internet ecosystem. To get more information about the projects nominated for the GenTech Awards, please click here. And on November 15, tune into a Facebook Live where a live stream with the winners will be posted here. And please don't forget to share this video to promote and inspire more women in tech.