I'm Ettore, I'm a poor career manager for medical anesthetists, surgeon and gynecologist. I started with them in safe in 2002, so it's quite a time that I'm in the family. Thanks a lot for the opportunity to share with you what was our intention and what we did. Alba is here, like Luca Ragazzoni, they are a member of the team of cremedim, who is cremedim. The special entity, University branch of Novara, not a part of Italy, that from years they are investing on research and training about humanitarium and catastrophe disease, something quite familiar for MSF. So, let's see how we provoke a bit doing something new inside the family. Is it working? Yes? Okay. The first things that we were considering is following the normal way of MSF. We have where we needed the feed, which kind of solution we can have to cope with the need. In this case, it's quite evident that there is a lack or shortage of trained anesthesia provider. And we were focusing on that, in which way trying to give a proper training before the deployment in the field. Quite interesting because even that is quite new inside MSF. And our intention as usual is to increase retention. Why retention? Because retention is a preface of the career inside MSF. So, our expectation is to have people committed to maintain their willingness to move with MSF and why not to keep position not so far. Research is another pillar of MSF and cremative is a research entity. So, one plus one, it means that we like to join academia to increase even this aspect. So, what was innovative? We create a concrete path to give a proper answer to this kind of need. Obviously, the need was to prepare a special training with our know-how as MSF and the academia experience in two phases for the art and the soft skills. Art skills are the professional one, so related to anesthesia and emergency room and the situation like. The soft skill, you will see later what does it mean for us as a soft skill. We choose the target population for the medical doctor almost at the end of the residency in anesthesia. Why? The majority of anesthesia performed in our project are voted by no anesthetist or technician of anesthesia. We are proud of them and we love them. If we consider to have a medical doctor after six years of study to become graduate and almost at the end of residency in anesthesia can be an added value, especially because in Italy medical doctor anesthetists are in charge not only of operational theater but even of emergency room and intensive care unit. So a broader spectrum of capacity and skills for life-saving activity. Obviously, after the course they will be deployed in our contest and the contests were Afghanistan, Pakistan, South Sudan, Yemen, Democratic Republic of Congo, Central African Republic and Philippines. And three months time is quite interesting because the specialists, normally they have not this length of availability for the field. So even this is quite interesting. About the research I'd like to tell you from now that last year one of our guys started a special operation research after the approval of the operational center in a remote area of Congo and this year the same person will continue this research in Afghanistan. Result. So we did a two different course in 2013-2015 with eight people participants and their best feedback that we received was from the end-of-mission evaluation of the line manager, project medical reference, medical coordinator that normally are in charge to supervise and to testify the effectiveness and the efficacy of our guys. And all of them were highlighting no problem in their professionality and the presence of the soft skill, soft skill like cultural awareness, leadership, communication, commitment to MSF principle and so on. And all of them were recommended to move again to the field. All of them agreed to move again in the field and someone started already. So last year we sent three people from the first course and this year we are planning more and more to these people moving again in our field context. So the expectation from the beginning of retention is quite present because the people is growing and as a commitment to move. As I told you, this commitment, this attention is really interesting for the future of this guy that can grow and have a career path inside MSF. And this year the third edition we double the number of participants so we start with nine and the third edition is just now ongoing. How much it costs? To be honest, we were lucky because no added cost. It means that the participants, by themselves, the training, sign of commitment and the intention to do something in their future. About MSF Italy, I need to highlight and to thank Alba and Luca that are here present because the majority of the expenses are covered more or less pro bono from academia itself. So I'm really thanking them publicly now because it's not so frequent. And about MSF Italy, we didn't do any added cost because we were following the normal recruitment criteria. So selection, recruitment process, validation. No added cost at all. To be honest, we spend even less because people on residency, medical doctor in Italy, by law they receive a salary and they can't have a double salary. So we spend even less. The challenge was to invest properly in a young generation medical doctor that was not usual in MSF because normally we have to fit the criteria to end the specialization and two years of work. We like on the future to enlarge the spectrum of medical background because this model is functioning and we are honest that till now we were lucky about the cost but we don't know until when. So we have to consider that for the future. I'm repeating myself. We really trust that open the door to other medical background and paramedical too can be a really added value. This model can be adopted from other people that are interested on that. They can apply in their MSF reality or what else. And as usual MSF as an intuition, put in practice, validate the process and then it's shared like we are doing now here. Obviously this presentation was not exhaustive. Be curious, there is a special leaflet if someone likes to have here and thanks a lot for your attention.


All right, how about another anti-derivative? How about e to the 5x? So we want a function whose derivative is e to the 5x, and again, we might recognize this. We should recognize this as an e to the function. And we know that the derivative of an e to the function is the same thing and some other stuff. So we might start out with e to the 5x and see what happens when we differentiate it. So there's my e to the 5x. Derivative is world's easiest derivative. The same thing, e to the 5x, times derivative of what our power is. Now, again, what I want is an e to the 5x. What I have is a 5 e to the 5x. So I can multiply by one-fifth to eliminate that constant. Over on the left-hand side, I have constant times derivative of function. So I can move that constant in, and my derivative one-fifth e to the power 5x is the same as e to the 5x. And so my anti-derivative is that function, plus any constant that I care to name. And maybe I'll name this constant George. All right, how about the anti-derivative of x times x squared plus 3? So let's do a little bit of analysis. This function that we're looking at is a product of two things, and the derivative of a product gives us a product. And one of the things that we might remember from the product rule is we always end up with echoes of the original function. So what we want is some function that's going to include x squared plus 3 and also x. So what's the simplest thing we could do? Well, we could just look at the derivative of that product. And we do have to apply the product rule combined with, don't forget, the chain rule. And we end up with that as our derivative. And two things happen, both of which are bad. One is that there's no constant I can multiply the right-hand side to get my original function x times x squared plus 3. And what that means is that I can't multiply this by a constant to get this, which means that what we've been doing to find the anti-derivative won't work. So what can we do? Now we can always do algebra. So let's take a look at that function again. That's x times x squared plus 3. That's the same as x cubed plus 3x. And I've gone from something that's a product to something that is a sum. And that's good because finding the anti-derivative of a sum is a lot easier. So I can find a function whose derivative is x cubed, a function whose derivative is 3x, and add the two together. So there's my function whose derivative is x cubed. And I want a function whose derivative is 3x. So I'll start with x squared. The derivative is close but not quite. And I'll multiply by 3 halves to get what I want and move the constant inside. And so the derivative of a sum is the sum of the derivatives. So that tells me the anti-derivative is going to be the sum of a quarter x to the fourth, three halves x squared, and then some constant.


We are now perhaps entering the most interesting part of thermodynamics and that is the second law. Of course, I can write off thermodynamics below this, but the second law of thermodynamics has a very special status in physics. Any person involved with physics, physicist, chemist will vouch to the fact that the second law of thermodynamics is the most important of the laws which they use. It is an odd law. Most of the other laws of thermodynamics, other laws of physics including laws of thermodynamics tell you that something is equal to something. The first law says there is something called energy and we know that delta E is Q minus W. The zeroth law says that there is something useful called temperature. And when you two systems are in states such that in spite of providing a diatomic partition between them, they refuse to have any heat interaction. That means they have the same temperature. We define them to have the same temperature. Second law unlike all these, finally ends up in an inequality. We define something for equality, but finally everything ends up in inequality. Delta S for an isolated system or delta S for an adiabatic system is greater than or equal to 0. We talk of possibilities and impossibilities. So second law unlike many, many other laws of physics is one of those laws which ends up being an inequality. And perhaps that is the reason why many people including some great physicists and mathematicians are uncomfortable with it. And again the second law has such a status that when you talk of a first law and we have a first law of thermodynamics, we have Newton's first law of motion, we have Kepler's first law of planetary motion. And I am sure there may be a few other first laws in physics. When you say the first law, people will say first law of what? But when you say the second law, a qualification is not necessary. The second law means the second law of thermodynamics. If you want to talk about the second law of Newton, you have to say Newton's second law. But when you say the second law, the default assumption is that it is the second law of thermodynamics. So that is the specialty of the second law. Now why do we need a second law? Why is it, what is it that we have not yet tackled? Let us review what we have done in the first law. First law tells us that we can define an interaction q and property of state e such that q is delta e plus w. It is an inequality and so long as that inequality is satisfied, first law has no objection to it. For example, let us take a system, we have a vessel containing water and we stir it and it is cooled. So the work done is by the system is negative and it is cooled. So the heat transfer takes place from the system to the surroundings and if we say that there is no change in the state of this, say the temperature does not change then delta e will be 0 and by default the things seem okay. We have if delta e is 0, we have q equals w s t both negative. This we see in practice. This is okay by first law. Then we propose that look, I propose a situation where this water absorbs heat from the surroundings and stirs the stirrer producing some power. That means if I say that q is greater than 0 and w stirrer is greater than 0, q is w s t and if q is w s t, first law says okay with this. But we know from our real life situation that this is not okay. This does not happen in practice. If I stir water, it will get heated up and if I leave it like that it will eventually get cooled. But then if I put a stirrer there, whatever I do, wait how long without I do something funny, explain more words, water will not absorb heat from the surroundings and move the stirrer. So first law is immune to direction of a process. If we have a process where a system goes from state 1 to state 2 with some interactions q w and delta e, then first law says it is okay if it comes back from 2 to 1, then the change in energy will be delta e with interaction minus q and interaction minus w. This is okay by first law. But we know that in practice almost always it is only one of these two processes which is likely to occur. In fact, one of the questions which is asked and which for some reason what was not asked is when we define delta e is minus w adiabatic using first law. We say if you want to determine the change in energy between, difference in energy between two states of a system 1, 2, 1 to 2, calculate, execute an adiabatic process from state 1 to state 2, measure the work done and e2 minus e1 is minus w adiabatic 1 to 2. The question which you will be asked once in a while by a smart student is that sir is it always possible to go from state 1 to state 2 by an adiabatic process. Before that he will ask sir which adiabatic process, our explanation should be any adiabatic process. So select one which is most convenient to you. Then he or she will ask is it always possible to go from a given state 1 to another state 2 by an adiabatic process. The answer should be well we know that it is not always possible but if it is not possible to go from 1 to 2 by an adiabatic process. Later on when we study the second law of thermodynamics it will assert to us that if it is not possible to go from 1 to 2 it is definitely possible to go from 2 to 1. So all that you do is execute an adiabatic process from 2 to 1. So minus w adiabatic 2 to 1 will be then be equal to e1 minus e2. So just take the negative of that and you will get e2 minus e1. But we always know from our daily experience that processes take place only in one direction. In colloquial language we say that in real life everything occurs. Kalaya tasma in the maha, time moves only in one direction. You cannot go back into the past. You always travel from the past to the present to the future. When things come into being, things get destroyed, they cannot be recreated, things are irreversible. Then you have all philosophies of life, death and all that. But the bottom thing is, bottom line is things occur only in one way in nature and whatever we do we cannot prevent nature from doing things which are one way. That is about the first law. What about the zeroth law? Zeroth law brings in the idea of a useful property called temperature. We define isotherms in the state space of systems. It allows us to determine given states of two systems separated by a diathermic partition, whether q will be equal to 0 or q will be non-zero. It does not tell us about the direction of q. It does not tell us anything about higher T or lower T. Remember we have solved problems. We have defined scales of temperature and using those scales of temperature like Celsius or the ideal gas Kelvin scale, we have defined some temperatures to be higher, some temperatures to be lower. For example, which of the two systems have a higher temperature? What shall we do? We will take an ideal gas in a cylinder piston arrangement, bring it in thermal contact with say system A, let it reach thermal equilibrium, find out the PV product, let me call it PV A. Then bring it to in thermal contact with system B, let it come in thermal equilibrium, measure its pressure and volume, call it PV B. Our definition of the Kelvin scale and higher and lower temperature based on Kelvin scale is that if PV B is higher than PV A, then the temperature of system B is higher than the temperature of system A. But this depends on our definition of what is higher and lower. There is nothing thermodynamic about it. We are using an ideal gas, which is an approximation of a real gas. Maybe tomorrow you go to a situation where there are no gases at all. So, there is no question of a Boyle's law being discovered. In which case, how do we define a higher and lower temperature? See the first law does not require the property of any particular substance or a particular type of system, not a zeroth law. But the higher and lower temperature which we have defined requires a system called an ideal gas. That is not a good idea. We need a thermodynamic definition higher and lower temperatures. And we want a thermodynamic basis for temperature scales, which does not or which do not depend on the properties of any specific material like mercury in glass, alcohol in glass, a thermocouple of copper and constanton or chromium and alluminium or some real gas or an idealization of a real gas called an ideal gas. So, all this thing is done by second law. So, what will second law allow us to do? The second law will allow us to do the following It will allow us to determine whether a specified process is possible or not. Then it will provide limits on processes. Either it will provide limits on end states saying you cannot go to pressure higher than this or temperature higher than this or it will put limits on interaction saying you cannot transfer more heat than this or you cannot do more work than this. Then it will dictate to us various relationships between properties. It will say that look if pressure varies with respect to volume like this, entropy we should vary with temperature like this. It will not dictate what value a particular property should have, but variation of one property with respect to a second property will be related to the variation of a third property with respect to fourth property. In the morning we notice that for a fluid like water, the solid liquid vapor line on the P T diagram is inclined towards the left and we all know this that if you put pressure on ice, it is melting point reduces. That means at higher pressure the melting point reduces, but the boiling point increases. As you go to higher and higher pressure, boiling point increases. But as you go to higher and higher pressure, the melting point reduces. That is the reason why you can do ice skating and skiing and ice sleds can work on in the north pole and south pole. Thermodynamics will relate this to the fact that the liquid of water is denser than the solid of water, ice floats on water, but steam is not denser than liquid. So the density variation, density difference which is higher which is lower dictates how saturation temperature behaves with pressure. All this is done by defining a very useful property called entropy. Entropy is a very misused and very improperly understood and hence misused property in thermal analysis. Perhaps in all of physics because people talk of entropy being a measure of disorder and all that.  In fact, if you look up the formulations of classical or classical formulations of thermodynamics, whether by Kelvin Planck, whether by Gibbs, whether by Caratheo-Dory or the latest absolutely esoteric topological formulation by Giles, entropy is not linked to disorder at all. In fact, disorder is something which is not mentioned at all. We will go through a process by which we will put all these things in proper order. So let us begin by considering a statement of the second law. There are a number of statements of the second law and the number of candidates. Historically many of these are important. Perhaps the oldest statement is that of Carnot. He never proposed it as a statement of the second law of thermodynamics. When Carnot proposed his theory of the efficiency of engines, he never knew what thermodynamics was. In fact, the caloric theory was very popular. Caloric was a fluid which flowed from material at a higher temperature to material at a lower temperature. So steam had higher caloric than water. Ice had still lower caloric than water and such things. So when ice comes in contact with steam, what happens is caloric flows from steam to ice. So the caloric content of ice goes up, it becomes water and caloric content of steam goes down. So steam also becomes water, such stuff. Carnot was an engineer working and looking after equipment in mines. So one of his jobs was to maintain and run machines, engines which would pump water out of the mine and move material in the mine. And naturally the engines have to be fed fuel, coal, wood or whatever. And naturally that cost money and if you could save coal, you could save money for the mine. And he had this idea of something called efficiency. He said, what shall I do to improve the efficiency of my machines, efficiency of my engines. And in his flights of fancy and that is where the greatness of Carnot lies, at that time we had essentially reciprocating steam engines of some funny kind, very crude ones, very leaky, very inefficient, nowhere near the so called ideal efficiency. But he came up with the idea that look, if I do something by which these machines will work in a funny way, which he called reversible way, then I will have the highest efficiency. That was his thought. Now his machines and his processes were nowhere near reversible. Even the so called relative efficiency is compared to an ideal machine where nowhere near one, there will be a small fraction of a percent for all you. But he could think through all that in his flights of fancy and said that look, if I have something called a reversible machine and he explained his idea of reversibility, then I will have the most efficient machine. And he never said that the most efficient machine will have a 100 percent efficiency. He will have that machine which is of this kind, will have the highest efficiency. Any other machine will have a low efficiency. So, he said that the efficiency of an engine will be less than or equal to that of a machine which will have a maximum efficiency. That was the idea of Carnot and that was the germination of thought processes leading to the second law of thermodynamics. His thinking and his working was not mathematically very robust. And hence although we give credit to him that as the proponent of the thermodynamic thought processes which led to the second law of thermodynamics, his statement is not today considered the basic statement of the second law of thermodynamics. We considered it as a derived statement and that statement we will today use as Carnot theorem. Next came Clausius and Kelvin and Planck. The Clausius and Kelvin Planck statements are the standard statements presented in every text books as the basic statements of the second law of thermodynamics. The Clausius statement says that you cannot have a cyclic device which will not be absorbing any work, but whose only task will be to absorb heat from a system at a lower temperature and reject it to a system at a higher temperature. So, this is the Clausius statement. All of us know that I will not spend time on this. This is proposed to be a statement of the second law of thermodynamics. This is an okay statement, but the problem here is we have not yet defined what is a lower temperature and what is a higher temperature. We have lower and higher temperature on the Celsius scale and lower and higher temperature on the Kelvin scale, but there is nothing thermodynamic about it. We could have defined all higher temperatures to have lower numbers as Celsius originally proposed to do and lived with it. In which case, maybe ice would have at a melting point of 100 degrees C and steam would have boiled at 0 degrees C and maybe boilers would have worked at minus 360 degrees C and the pressure of 40 bar and 50 bar. Today we find this to be laughable because that is not according to convention, but there is thermodynamic, there is nothing wrong in setting up a scale of temperature which goes to higher values at lower temperature because these are arbitrary scales of temperature based on properties of some material and the way we define that temperature scale. So, the Clausius statement is not considered a useful statement of the second law of thermodynamics. It is only a part of the history of thermodynamics. The statement by Kelvin and Planck is a useful statement. The Kelvin and Planck statement says that if you have a system which either does not undergo a change of state or executes a cyclic process, then that system will not be capable of executing one process. In that process is absorb heat from some system and convert it completely into work. So, if you have a system and if you have this device which is either no change in state or only cyclic processes, that means effectively no change in state when it executes its process, then absorbing heat from a system and convert it purely into work because cyclic means delta E is 0. This is what we really want, whether it is cyclic or otherwise what we want is delta E is 0. Now, Kelvin-Planck statements that says that this is impossible and this statement we will consider today as the basic statement and a very useful statement of the second law of thermodynamics. Of course, there are other statements which we will not talk about. For example, perhaps the neatest mathematical statement of the second law of thermodynamics is that of Karatheodori. But, to study that and derive the idea of entropy from that requires calculus of very high order, calculus of exact difference. Differentials, differential geometry and so on. The statement says that in the state space of any system, in the neighborhood of any state, there exist states, the typical mathematician statement of existing existence and all that. Of course, there is no uniqueness involved. But, he says that given a state in the state space of any system, in its neighborhood there are some states which are not accessible from this state through quasi-static adiabatic paths. This is the statement, just listen to it and leave it at that. We will come to it as a consequence, because our primary statement of second law is going to be the Kelvin-Planck statement. We will use K p to represent the Kelvin-Planck statement. Graphically, I have some system and this is a cyclic device. Actually, I should not say cyclic device. It is device which when you ask it to work, may be execute some set of processes, but finally finds itself in the original state, leading to data e equal to 0. If you propose a scheme by which it will absorb heat from some system and convert it completely into work, then the Kelvin-Planck statement says that this is impossible. Now, that is the basic characteristic. Second law statement says that something is impossible. Now, what is the consequence of this? In fact, all the further consequences will now be shown to be consequences of this. All further derivations will be shown to be consequences of this and for that, we will be using the first law of thermodynamics, we will be using zeroth law of thermodynamics and we will be using tricks of mathematics, logic and all the normal mathematical and logical tools which we use. We will now define certain terms which make our derivation simpler and it will bring us in line with typical textbook terms, which are used in textbooks on thermodynamics. We will define what is known as a heat engine. We will define what is known as the efficiency of a heat engine. We will define what is known as a thermal reservoir and then we will define certain secondary terms like a 2 T heat engine and all that. All this only simplifies our algebra. In fact, definition of a heat engine, a 2 T heat engine and a reservoir helps us do our derivation in an algebraic fashion rather than worry about details of calculation and integration of states or in the state space. When necessary finally, we will go back into the differential form. So, the first definition which we will use is that of a heat engine. First a heat engine is a cyclic device. By cyclic device, we mean a device which when we start or tap it will execute one cycle or an integer number of cycles. You cannot stop it in between. Suppose it is a 7 stroke cycle or 7 detailed processes cycle. If you say start, it will immediately execute 7 processes and then stop or it will execute those 7 processes twice and then stop or twice and then stop. But it will not stop after half a cycle or two thirds of a cycle or three of the 7 processes, nothing like that. The moment you say go ahead, it will execute one cycle or two cycles or three cycles as needed. You may even specify the number of cycles, but always one complete cycle or a number of complete cycles. Consequently, every time it executes a process, delta E will be 0. We do not have to worry anything about it. So, an engine must be a cyclic device that the first requirement. The second requirement is every time it works, it should produce work which is greater than 0. That means it should deliver power or deliver energy as work. Something which leads to net absorption of work is not okay. This does not mean that every time there is a work interaction it has to be positive. Part of the cyclic process may have positive work interaction. Part of the cyclic process may have negative work interaction. That does not matter. It should have a net positive work interaction. During a cycle, it may produce 50 kilo joules of positive work, but absorb 20 kilo joules work during say processes of compression. Well, the net work output is plus 30 kilo joules from the engine to some surrounding system. That is okay by us. So, W greater than 0 is the second requirement. First requirement is a cyclic process. Second requirement is that work should be greater than 0. Obviously, if delta E is 0, W is greater than 0. There has to be a set of systems from which it will be absorbing Q and net heat absorption will naturally have to be equal to the net work done. So, this is the scheme of an engine. But immediately, we will now define what is known and to define the efficiency of an engine, we will do the following. I said that look, this work may be made up of some positive components of work and may be made up of some negative components. At this stage, we are not going to worry about positive and negative components of work. We are worried about the net work output W net. You may call it W net as many text books call, but we are going to look at Q. Similarly, Q need not all be absorption. It is possible that some heat interactions are from the surrounding to the system. Some heat interactions are from the system to the surroundings. The net would be Q, which will have to be equal to W by applying first law to this device. The efficiency of an engine and now since we have understood an engine, we will simply call that engine E. So, E in a circle or E in a bubble would mean an engine, cyclic device as required. It will have to have W greater than 0. But then what we are going to do is whenever it absorbs heat from surrounding systems, we are going to combine all those things, heat interactions together and call it Q absorbed. Similarly, during some other part, it may be rejecting heat to some surrounding systems, the same ones or other ones. We will call that interaction Q rejected and just to be in conformity with conventions, the Q absorbed will be shown to be from the surrounding systems to the engine. Whereas, the rejected will be shown to be from the engine to the surrounding systems, which absorb that heat from the engine. This is just to be conformant with the textbooks of engineering all over the place, including the ones which are listed. Similarly, W by first law which needs to be equal to Q net absorption will turn out to be in this nomenclature Q absorbed minus Q rejected, W or if you want to write W net. So, this is the first law as applied to engine and then we define the efficiency of an engine as efficiency equal to W divided by Q absorbed. And using first law, you can show this to be Q absorbed minus Q rejected divided by. So, this is definition, this is a derivation which will be 1 minus Q absorbed sorry Q rejected by Q absorbed. And the visual thing of this is if this is an engine from some systems, it will be absorbing heat that is summed up as Q absorbed to some systems, it will be rejecting heat that is Q rejected, this is W. Now to simplify matters, we now define what is known as a reservoir or thermal reservoir or as many books say constant temperature energy reservoir. That is to take care of the fact that this Q absorption will be from different systems. Both systems may undergo a change of state, a change of temperature, a change of other variables of their property as the heat absorption proceeds during that cycle. And we will have to take care of how the temperature changes etcetera.


Hello, I am David Reumanns, I am a filmmaker who studies at Metro, and I'm about to graduate BFA in permaking the schools. And today I'm talking about lithography. The traditional win-making lithograph was from stone, which can only be cored in Bulgaria. And it uses the property of hydrophilic and hydrophilic traits of oil on a plate, or in this case a plate. Traditionally, it's on a stone. It allows for the imagery to have a subtle gradient. It looks kind of like a drawing, etc. to reproduce it. When you pull down this lever, it's what applies the thousands of pounds of pressure that help with this planographic process in making an image. Or transferring an image from the plate to the paper. Throughout the entire process you have to make sure that the plate is constantly wet. So it's greased and rested on it through sweat, touching anything, potentially a flat band on it. The specific plate I'm using is a faux litho plate. In that you expose it with a lightsaber unit, one sign, and it creates a positive image where the light is blocked. So this one specifically was based off the drawing. I'm just going with the hydrophilic and hydrophilic properties of the plate. Where the gray area likes the water and keeps the water there. And the black area likes the oil and the oil repels the water from it. So when you blow it up with the rollers, the ink only goes to what the ink should. And this press is the lithography press. The highest amount of pressure you can get in printing processes.


I think we want to create a society in which, from my perspective, you're able to enhance, but it isn't a prerequisite for participating in society to enhance in certain ways.


the of to ask you what is the club in your bag that gets you most excited to play You'd probably say driver If I was to ask you what is your least exciting club to use then the likelihood is that you might just say putter Now, whatever your answer to that question might be the chances are the clubs that weela ignoring are actually the most important. On screen for now is some data ac mae'r awgau fod yn ei sgop, a sy'n fromiol na dwi'n ffordd y gallwn am y cwmp ystafell, wrth gwrs mae'n ffordd sydd gennym ei ffrin yn rhaeg. 35% yn y peth, mae hynny, mae'r bwysig yn ymateb o'r bwysig, ond nid yw'n meddwl. Felly rwy'nbod bod mae'n dnomio heated o sylfaaeth ar flug i amlai. Felly, yn y pwysig y gallwn i'r meddwl, rai fod yn ôl y cwymiai llan fydd dromawr, yn ymddi'r gwasanaeth o'r meyrdd, o'r cyflawn, o'r sphynnyddol. Rhywbeth, rhywbeth, ac mae'r un element o'r ddweud yn ei newydd gennym MG4, felly mae'r ddweud eich golffa yn ddysgu ymgyngor. Felly mae'r ddweud eich gweithio ydw i'r ddweud eich gweithio'r ddweud eich llwyth, mae'n ddysgu eich bod yn fawr bod ymlaen i'r ddweud ymlaen, ac mae'r ddweud mae'n ddweud eich gweithio'r ddweud eich gweithio'r ddweud, they're going to suit every single type of wedge player out there and interestingly enough they've gone into what is a 115 gram lighter shaft as standard and that's supposed to help with sound and feel and that's something will discuss a little bit later on in the video. So let's start rating these things based on first of all looks and they've changed, I think considerably. We've got that black finish and we've got the chrome finish but I think it's mae'r model yw hyn yn dweud i mi i gael i chi. Dyna'r bod yn gweithio'r ffawr o'r ffawr o phwll ffawr P790 a P770. Felly mae'n teimlo'r gwahodd, ffawr o'r ffawr, mae'n gweithio'r ffawr o'r adres, ond ddwy'r gwahodd ac yn llefodol, a phwll eich ffawr o'r ffawr o'r ffawr P790 a P770.  Now let's get onto the main story about these wedgies and we'll also tie it in with on-course performance. I've hit a number of shots here this morning at Cardin Park from a number of different distances. Fairly moist conditions early on in the morning, there's plenty of dew on the ground, that's an important factor in what I'm going to talk about next and that is the main piece of technology that's been added to these wedgies in terms of MG4 is laser etching into that club face so in between each of the main grooves you'll see some other markings they're very visible and maybe more noticeable when you run your hand across the front of the wedge itself. It almost feels like sandpaper and it's a real noticeable effort they've made there in terms of a change in technology. What it's designed to do is effectively move moisture, water between the sort of contact area and the ball which effectively is giving you great consistency in terms of spin and in terms of control. Now actually this morning like I said it is a there's a lot of dew on the ground you can see from my club face we're cutting up a lot of grass and a lot of moisture being caught between ball and club face but we're still retaining a huge amount of control and a surprising amount of control so whilst I can't back up anything that Taylor made might say in terms of what their technology is supposed to do in terms of scientifically what I can tell you is from out here on the golf course they've performed incredibly well the spin so much so that it's something I'd have to get used to in terms of there's an extra bit of control I'm not used to experiencing so I'm used to seeing a little bit of release and roll out from that 52 in particular that I played earlier on and it's just grabbing surprisingly so so huge effort in terms of performance massive tick in the box in terms of what I've seen out here on the golf course all I can say is well done Taylor made mg for wedges go go that's not too bad now the next thing we're going to talk about in our scoring criteria is forgiveness and forgiveness in wedges well it's a debatable thing because if we can't find the centre of a club face with a wedging and then I'd suggest we're struggling there have been some alterations though in the way they've shifted a little bit of weight around the new mg for lineup and also the sort of the hotspot that I like to call it the centre of the club face has been moved in terms of that CG placements slightly as well which is more to sort of aid with I would say trajectory as much as it is forgiveness but I haven't really hit a shot that I would consider requiring any forgiveness out of wedges and assuming that they pretty much all are we'll give it another tick in a box so finally in terms of our criteria it would be dry ball data that we'd look at next and I have only hit a couple of full 52 wedges in door and all I can say is in terms of optimal performance parameters the only thing I would look at in terms of my wedge was the spin and the spin control is off the charts to be honest with you so I'm going to quite simply say that in terms of wedge performance at least on full shots they would tick that box as well so what that means is the tailor made mg for wedges become the first product to tick all the boxes in our new scoring criteria and I really do think you'd be hard pressed to find any sort of criticism in them they've got some great shaping that I've not talked about in and around the soul and plenty of sort of adaptability and flexibility that bounce as well the sort of within each category of bounce there is a secondary option that allows you to change that shape in and profile to very much suit your needs and I might make that change or I might consider making that change but from every lie from every shot they've just performed really really well and top that off with the look sound and feel then what is there not to like if we threw the price category and maybe that would be something that will get them owns and groans and if you take a look at our partner hot golf this is what they are retailing at once again I've filmed this before they hit retail so you'll see in that price point before I do my guess is it's going to be certainly at that top end again and it's going to be mixing in with those vocies and such like it's the price you're going to have to pay I'm afraid but yes they are super super good wedges I'm really impressed and that groove laser etched grooved face is probably a key change within these mg4 wedges that's you really need to try for yourself just to see how much it impacts in terms of that control out here on the fairways right that's me done as ever thanks for watching let me know your feedback are these on the agenda what are your thoughts on the tailor-made mg4 wedges and I'll see you all soon


The next item of business is a statement by Nicola Sturgeon on a Covid-19 update. The First Minister will take questions at the end of her statement, and so there should be no interventions or interruptions, and I call on Nicola Sturgeon. At the outset of the statement today, I can confirm that there will be no immediate changes to the Covid levels of protection that currently apply to different parts of the country. However, I will provide a general update on the state of the pandemic and, of course, I will address any question that members have. First, let me report on today's statistics. Yesterday, there was a total of 695 positive cases reported, which is 5 per cent of the total number of tests, and the number of confirmed cases in Scotland now stands at 241,864. There are 121 people currently in hospital, which is one fewer than yesterday, and 12 people in intensive care, which is the same number as yesterday. I am also pleased to report that no deaths were reported over the course of yesterday, which means that the total number of deaths registered under the daily definition remains 7,677. Once again, my deepest condolences go to all those who have lost a loved one. Let me turn now to the vaccination programme. It is now exactly six months since the first Covid vaccine was administered, and progress then has been remarkable. As of 7.30 this morning, 3,403,866 people across Scotland have received their first dose of the vaccine. That is an increase of 17,545 in yesterday. Most important, it means that almost exactly three quarters of the adult population in Scotland has now received a first dose of the vaccine. In addition, 30,944 people received a second dose yesterday, and that brings the total number of second dosies administered to 2,282,203. That means that more than half of the adult population is now fully vaccinated with two dosies. Those are significant, and they are really heartening milestones. As ever, I thank everyone involved in delivering the vaccination programme across the country. Last week, the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency approved the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine for use among 12 to 15-year-olds. That is also really good news, as it indicates that the particular vaccine is safe for use in children of that age. The Scottish Government is now awaiting advice from the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation on the vaccination of children in those age groups. I am sure that everybody will agree that it is vital that we continue to rely on expert advice in all of our vaccination decisions. However, vaccination may very well be a really important way of giving children greater protection, minimising any further disruption to schooling and also further reducing community transmission of Covid. I can confirm that if the JCVI does recommend the use of the vaccine for children aged 12 and over, we will move as quickly as practically possible to implement their advice. For the moment, however, we continue to focus on vaccinating all adults as quickly as possible. That remains absolutely crucial in the race that we are in between the virus and the vaccines. As today's figures show, case numbers in Scotland do continue to rise. In the last week, in fact, they have increased by approximately 50 per cent. Over the past seven days, there has been a net increase of 5,475 new cases. That is a rise from 3,728 in the seven days prior to that. That will partly be a consequence of restrictions easing. It is always the case, and we have always made it clear that as we start interacting more, the virus does have more opportunities to spread. However, the recent rise is also being driven by the more transmissible delta variant, which now accounts for the majority of all new cases being reported. However, although cases are rising, the key question is the extent to which vaccination is weakening the link between the increase in new cases and an increase in serious health harms. We continue to assess the data very closely. At this stage, it is important to be very clear that we remain optimistic that vaccination will allow us to move progressively to a less restrictive way of dealing with Covid. We already have evidence that two doses of vaccine give protection against serious illness, even with the new delta variant. As I confirmed earlier, more than half of the adult population in Scotland has now had two doses. That includes more than 90 per cent of people aged over 60 and more than 80 per cent of those over 50. Of course, those are the age groups that are most at risk of falling seriously ill if they get the virus. As I indicated last week, it appears that vaccination may be reducing the proportion of people who require hospital treatment as a result of Covid. At the start of the year, around 10 per cent of new Covid cases were admitted to hospital. Over the course of May, that was 5 per cent. That said, it is important that we continue to monitor the data so that the full impact of the delta variant can be properly assessed. There is also encouraging evidence that the length of time people are spending in hospital is reducing. Taking all of that into account, and just as we all hoped, vaccination may well be giving us more scope to ease restrictions and therefore reduce the social, economic and wider health harms that the response to the virus so far has caused. However, while all of those signs are very positive indeed, there is a need for continued caution, especially while a significant proportion of the population has not yet had both doses and so remain more vulnerable to becoming ill and needing hospital treatment. The number of people in hospital may not be rising as quickly as the number of new cases, but even so, it has roughly doubled in the past month. If cases continue to rise, we will see that trend continue. Even though, on average, people may be spending less time in hospital, it is still the case that if you end up in hospital because of Covid, the virus has made you seriously unwell. Of course, in some cases, those who suffer from long Covid, for example, you can be seriously ill without ever having to go to hospital. In summary, our position is still fragile. Case numbers are higher than we would like. The virus does still cause serious health harm and, of course, it still has the potential to put pressure on our health service. That is why we must continue to assess the data carefully as we make decisions about whether and when to ease restrictions further. However, on the upside, and I want to stress that it is a very significant upside, the vaccines do appear to be doing their jobs and that should give us all firm grounds for optimism. It is, of course, why our top priority and a key consideration in our future decisions remains the speed at which we can vaccinate people so that as many as possible get the added protection against serious illness as quickly as possible. While it is the vaccines that are offering us real hope for the future, it remains the case that we all have a role to play in getting us back to normal. I want to finish by reiterating the three key requests that are being made of all of us. First, please get tested regularly. Free lateral flow tests are available through the NHS informed website so that you can take a test twice a week, and I strongly encourage everyone to do that. Taking a test tells us if we might have the virus, even if we do not have the symptoms of it. Of course, if you test positive, please make sure that you self-isolate and get the lateral flow result confirmed through a PCR test. That is vitally important. The more we all do tests, the more cases we can find and the more we can break chains of transmission. Secondly, make sure that you get vaccinated when you are invited to do so, and please make sure that you attend for both doses. If you need to rearrange an appointment or if you think that you should have had an invitation by now and want to check up on that or if you are aged 18 to 29 and have not yet registered for your appointment to make sure that all your details are up to date, please go to the vaccination section of the NHS informed website. Getting vaccinated is in our own best interest. Whatever age we are, it will make it less likely that we become seriously ill from Covid, but it also helps us to protect each other. Getting vaccinated is likely to be the single most important thing that most of us will do this year to protect our family, our friends and our neighbours.  Finally, please continue to stick to the rules where you live and follow all the public health advice. I know that this becomes more and more difficult as time goes on. I also know that, as restrictions ease bit by bit and we try to get back to normal, any apparent anomalies in the rules and advice can be frustrating. We are trying to strike the best and the most appropriate balance overall, but I readily concede that it is not perfect. However, there are some principles that we can and should all follow. Meet outdoors as much as possible. No environment is ever entirely risk-free in any sense, but in relation to Covid, meeting people outdoors does pose less risk than meeting indoors. If you are meeting indoors, please stick to the limits and make sure that the room is as well ventilated as possible. Please continue to follow advice on physical distancing, handwashing and face coverings. All of us long to see the back of all of these mitigations, but for now, basic measures to prevent transmission are really important and effective against all variants of the virus. In summary and conclusion, please get tested regularly, get vaccinated when you are asked to do so and continue to follow the public health guidance. If we all do that, we will help to keep the virus under control while the vaccination programme continues to do its work. That will help to keep ourselves and each other safe and maximise, I hope, the opportunity of a summer of fewer restrictions and much greater freedom. The First Minister will now take questions on the issues raised in her statement. I intend to allow around 40 minutes for questions, after which we will move on to the next item of business. It would be helpful if members who wish to ask a question were to press their request to speak buttons now. I call Douglas Ross. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. Today is exactly six months since the first person here in Scotland and others across the United Kingdom began to be vaccinated against Covid-19. It is a moment for us all to pause and reflect on the huge success of the vaccination programme and express our thanks to the NHS, the volunteers and the British Armed Forces who have ensured that 75 per cent of adults in Scotland are now protected with the first dose of the vaccine and 50 per cent are protected with both doses. It is also encouraging that younger people may soon be able to safely get the Covid vaccine as well. That is because the vaccination scheme is our route out of both the restrictions and the pandemic. I hope that once the JCVI makes its recommendations on the safety of this use for 12 to 15-year-olds, we will be able to make swift progress so that young people's education is not disrupted any further. Just last week, the First Minister outlined in her statement to Parliament when she was announcing that many areas of Scotland would remain in level 2 rather than the move to level 1, as she had expected. She said, and I quote, we could still see a significant burden of illness and death and severe pressure on our NHS. Yet, a week on, we have heard nothing from the First Minister or her Government back up that claim. We are at a difficult point in this pandemic when we need the public on-side with the restrictions he continued to live with, yet we are not hearing from the Government evidence to support very strong statements such as the significant burden of illness and death and severe pressure on the NHS. That statement, as a whole, is telling for what it misses out and who it ignores. Nothing for people protesting outside the Parliament today about the restrictions of place centres. Nothing for venues confused why numbers for christenings are more limited than those for comedy shows. Nothing for couples frustrated that their wedding numbers had to be limited to just 50 at the last minute. Nothing for parents who want to be there in person to be with their young children as they graduate from nursery primary school. The First Minister referenced apparent anomalies in the rules, but she has not said anything about what she will do about those, if anything. Will she explain to people and businesses who are left wondering why 6,000 people can attend a fan zone without mandatory testing, but the limits on weddings, christenings and hospitality in general remain so strict? Will she reexamine the limits on weddings and funerals for areas in level 2? What specific reasons are there for the on-going restrictions to soft place centres who are currently protesting outside, and this is an answer that I think they will listen to closely? Finally, will she agree to find a solution so that parents can see their young children graduate from nursery to primary school? I will do my best to address all those points, but the one thing that I would say in an overarching sense is that none of that is easy. Those decisions require good quality clinical advice, but they also require judgement and the ability sometimes to make decisions that people do not want to hear because that is really difficult. To try to navigate our way through this in a way that shows as much leadership as possible. That is what I will continue to do and continue to be accountable and to do my best to explain decisions to people across the country. On the issue of vaccination, we are already doing the planning to extend the vaccination programme to children over 12. Should the JCVI recommend that, of course, it is the MHRA that opines on the safety and on balance of the vaccination, the JCVI has got to look at the clinical implications of vaccination, the priorities in terms of order of the population versus the supply and other matters like that. All of us across the UK or four nations followed the JCVI advice and it is right and proper that we do so, but in anticipation of the JCVI giving the go-ahead to vaccination of over 12, we have already started that planning. As I said in my statement, we will move to implement any such advice as quickly as possible, but it is important that we continue to follow clinical prioritisation. That is why we started with the frailest, oldest people and have worked our way down the age cohorts, making sure that those with underlying health conditions of whatever age they are get vaccinated as quickly as possible. On to the second point raised by Douglas Ross, which I have to say, I kind of struggle to understand, but I am going to do my best. I said last week that I do not think that there is a leader of any Government anywhere in the UK or anywhere in the world who would say anything different. As we face rising cases again and while we are still learning about the efficacy of the virus, it is the case that rising cases, particularly while we have a significant proportion of the population not fully vaccinated, could lead to a significant burden of illness, hospitalisation and death. The operative word there is could. Clearly, I do not want to ever be standing here bearing out that statement because I really hope that that does not happen. What we do—Douglas Ross said that he has not heard anything from the Government since I made that statement last week—that is just factually wrong.  People can see on a daily basis what is happening in terms of the burden of hospitalisation, those needing intensive care and those dying from this illness. In my view, one person losing their life is one too many, but we can see at this early stage a weakening of the link between rising cases and the burden of illness. We have to be cautious because it is too early to be absolutely definitive that this new variant will not change that dynamic. Secondly, even if we are seeing that link continue to break, as long as we still have a proportion of the population not fully vaccinated, a proportion of them ending up in hospital would still create a significant burden on our health service. We have to look at that carefully. All the evidence so far is positive, but it would be utterly irresponsible to deny the potential reality of the rising cases that we are seeing now that are causing that increased burden. We monitor that and publish data on a daily basis. Douglas Ross wants to listen to the Prime Minister and, indeed, to the Prime Minister's clinical advisers south of the border. I suspect that he is more likely to listen to them than he is to listen to me. He will hear the same calculations and considerations as he will have to make a decision next week about whether to go ahead with the next round of planned easing in England on 21 June. We are all grappling with that. To try to do it to the best of our ability takes that recognition and that attempt to show strong and clear leadership to people, which I think is incumbent on all leaders, not just those of us in Government. In relation to soft play, the clinical advice that the Government has had is that, given the indoor environment—and there is a big difference between indoor and outdoor environments—the indoor environment, coupled with the particular characteristics of soft play, means that it continues to pose a risk. Of course, soft plays in level 1 areas can reopen and we hope that more parts of the country over the next few weeks will go to level 1. The finance secretary set out an intention to continue to provide financial support in the meantime. I wish everywhere could open immediately, but I have a duty to try to do that in a way that keeps people as safe as possible. That means continuing to consider things in the round. There will always be apparent anomalies. I wish there were not, and we tried to avoid that. However, as we try bit by bit, step by step to get the country back to normal, we have to make sure that we are striking the right overall balance. It is not easy, I am afraid, but it is necessary and it is the job that I am determined to continue to do. I thank the First Minister for prior sight of her statement and six months on from the first vaccine. I thank our vaccinators and our volunteers for giving our country hope. While there are definitely signs of progress, the rise in cases and the increase in hospitalisations shows that we cannot be complacent and we must accelerate our response. Is the First Minister still intending to review the next stage of easing of the restrictions on 28 July? If so, will she commit to an ambitious target of double-dosing everyone aged over 40 and at least one dose for everyone aged over 18 by that date? Our target was 400,000 vaccinations a week. I want us to hit that target and go beyond that target to make that a reality. Can we also, in those areas where there is a high turnover rate in terms of property turnover and low attendance rate, ramp up the opening of walk-in vaccination centres so that people can access those vaccinations without requiring a letter? We can continue to go forwards and not backwards. On the issue of soft plays, it is important that we maintain public trust throughout the response to the pandemic. The way that we do that is maintaining strong communications and consistency of decision making. Does she recognise why the soft play industry believes that there is inconsistency in decision making given what has happened south of the border and what is happening in Scotland? Does she agree to meet with them and to work with them so that they can safely reopen their premises in level 2, like other parts of the UK, so that we can save jobs, protect Scotland's economy and get our country's mental health and wellbeing back on track? I will address most of those points. I mean this sincerely. Last week, at First Minister's Questions, Annas Sarwar, as he is entitled to do, posed a series of questions to me that criticised me for, in his words—it is not necessarily a characterisation, I would accept, but in his words simply following what was happening south of the border in an earlier stage of the pandemic. He stands here and says, why am I not just doing exactly the same as south of the border? We have to take decisions based on our own clinical advice that we think are right. What I recognise is that people do see perceived inconsistencies. Sometimes they will be right and we have amended things in the past with particular premises where it did appear to be genuinely inconsistent. Sometimes the inconsistency will be perceived because there is a good reason why soft play, for example, cannot open in level 2 while other things can. I absolutely accept that there is a need to communicate that as clearly as possible, but I also accept that, if you are running a business that remains closed, that is always, understandably, going to be very difficult to accept. I really do appreciate that, but the important thing here is trying to navigate our way through this as safely as possible. At every stage of this, it has been the case that, if we simply opened up everything, we would be overwhelming our ability to cope. We sometimes have to be limited in what we do, recognising that we have to continue, and Anasar was saying, is to work with people and compensate people. I accept that, and we will continue to seek to do that. On the issues of vaccination, we are vaccinating as quickly as our supplies allow. I would love us to be doing more, but the constraining factor is the supply. We are the latest seven-day rolling total number of new first and second doses, which is 343,548. We will get that above that if supplies allow. That is what is limiting our speed of vaccination, but our speed of vaccination is very fast. If you look at first doses, people over 60, pretty much 100 per cent, 99, 100 per cent done, over 50, 50 to 54, 93 per cent done, 40 to 49, 86 per cent, 30 to 39, 58 per cent. Even in the 18 to 29-year-old age group, 27 per cent have had their first doses. Over 50 per cent have had the second dose, so they are fully vaccinated. However, in the younger age groups, 40 to 49, already 29 per cent have had the second dose, 20 per cent of 30 to 39-year-olds and 14 per cent of 18 to 29-year-olds. We will speed that up as much as supplies allow us to do. On the point of review, it is 28 June, and that was simply a slip, but just to be clear, it is 28 June. I will set out in Parliament on 21 June what our expectation is of going ahead or not, or to what extent we will go ahead, and that will be informed by the latest data. Between now and then, of course, as far and as quickly as supplies allow, we will be getting as many people as possible vaccinated, not just with one but with two doses. The First Minister refers again, as she has in the past, to the race, the race between the vaccine and the virus. I think that it should be clear to us all by now that a global pandemic is the kind of race where we are only safe when everybody is safe. Does the First Minister therefore support the open letter that has been written by UNICEF and supporters to the leaders of the G7 about the global vaccination programme for developing countries? COVAX, they point out, is 190 million doses shot of where it needs to be, and if developing countries with more limited health infrastructure get large numbers of vaccine doses late, that will not lead to mass vaccination, it will lead to mass wastage. What response does the First Minister hope will come from the G7 leaders to the call for earlier, larger-scale and more predictable donations of vaccine by rich countries to developing countries, and how can Scotland's voice be added to the call for greater ambition on the global aspects of the pandemic? Yes, I broadly support the terms of the UNICEF letter and I hope to see coming out of the G7 an agreement that there is a real responsibility on the part of the G7 to help speed up vaccination not just in the countries of the G7 but globally as well. I will continue to add as loudly as I can Scotland's voice to that. In summary, we need to seek to do two things, make sure that the supplies of the vaccine that are available in the world are as equitably as possible distributed. We have to avoid the risk of false choices being put before us, the supplies through the very good procurement that the UK has done mean that we should not see that as a choice between, for example, vaccinating children and playing our part in helping global vaccination. The second thing that we need to do is support efforts to ramp up production of vaccinations in as many parts of the world as possible. It is absolutely the case that, although of course we are really focused on vaccinating our own population as quickly as possible because that is our first contribution to ending this global pandemic, we will not end the pandemic until the whole world manages to exit from it. The best chance that we have of exiting from it is through mass vaccination, so we have all got a part to play in that, and the richest countries in the world have a real model obligation to lead that effort. Carers week, but 72 per cent of unpaid carers have not had a break since the pandemic began. Last week, I asked the First Minister to reopen day services for adults with special needs. In response, the relevant minister issued a new letter today with a link to the old guidance, so nothing has really changed in the last week. It makes no difference what level you live in. The barriers to reopening are just the same. People are getting desperate, so will the Government issue new guidance to give local authorities the clarity that they need to get those services open once again. I understand the desire for that. I share the desire for that. I have done on previous occasions, as Willie Rennie to accept, that there is no minister in the Government that is somehow standing in the way of that for any other reason than the clinical position will still be that we need to be cautious and take precautions. Yes, we will get to a position of issuing new guidance and more permissive guidance as quickly as possible. I have said very clearly and repeat against today that we need to prioritise things like that, but nobody is trying to hold up moves like this for any other reason than trying to keep the most vulnerable in our society as safe as possible. However, I will make sure that the health ministers look again at this issue, given that it has been raised again, to see whether it is possible to speed that up, to go more quickly, and to have more distinction between the different levels of protection that apply. 16.1 per cent of all jobs that were created in the UK last year through foreign direct investment were generated in Scotland, some 4,500 remarkable in a pandemic year. Given that across the 12 nations and regions of the UK, Scotland has attracted the second highest number of overseas backed investments after London in every year since 2014, does the First Minister agree that it is time for unionist politicians to dispense with the scarce stories about this Government's commitment to independence deterring investment, desist from talking down Scotland and back the outward looking creative and innovative nation that Scotland is as we recover from Covid-19? I would suggest perhaps that the member is straying beyond the bounds of the statement. If the First Minister has a relevant response to the statement that may help Mr Gibson. I would say that, with your permission, yesterday's EY Scotland attractiveness survey should be welcomed by everybody across the chamber, and we should bring ourselves to come together to welcome it. What it does show is that, in the face of a global pandemic, Scotland remained the top UK inward investment destination outside of London. Indeed, that has been the case for eight of the past 10 years. We also managed to grow our inward investment at a time when it shrunk across the UK as a whole. Whatever are different political viewpoints, whatever are different ambitions for the country, surely in the face of this really tough time that we are facing as a country, we can all come together to welcome some thoroughly good news for the Scottish economy. Recent figures showed that fewer than one in every 20 pupils in S3 to S6 took part in the Covid-19 testing programme, and for younger secondary pupils, uptake was just 6.3 per cent. Warringly, despite being in the grip of an outbreak, rates of asymptomatic testing and skills in Glasgow were the lowest in the country. Given recent warnings from public health experts that skilled children are driving the epidemic in Scotland, what action will the First Minister take to ensure that there is an adequate testing regime in place? There is an adequate testing regime in place. All senior school pupils are able to access tests, and many do. While we cannot mandate and force young people to take the tests, all of us—and I would include all members of this Parliament in our constituencies—can encourage young people to do that. Like many other people across the chamber, I have family members in that age cohort that Annie Wells mentioned. I know that for any of us taking a lateral flow test is not something that we really want to have to do, but it is important because it helps to determine whether somebody might have the virus, even if they have shown no symptoms, and then all the other protections can flow in behind that. I do not have a magic wand to make 100 per cent of young people take those tests, but I will continue to encourage them to do so. They are easily available, and it really matters that people do so. I would ask Annie Wells and others across the chamber to echo that, to add their voices to that and to get uptake as high as we possibly can. I pay tribute to the work of NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde in partnership with the delivery of the vaccine programme in Glasgow. In recent days, I have been contacted by a small number of constituents who have approached our past 12-weeks period for their second vaccination. I appreciate that there will always be occasions where a small number of appointments do not run smoothly during any mass vaccination campaign. However, can I ask the First Minister to work with NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde to ensure that this does not become a particular issue in the city that I represent and that such instances are resolved quickly? Can I ask what information is available as to the efficacy of a second vaccination administer beyond 12 weeks? That is an important issue. I want to start by giving an assurance that we work closely with health boards on the issue. The first thing to say is that, in line with the latest advice from the JCVI, where vaccine supplies allow, health boards are bringing forward the second dose of vaccine from 12 weeks to 8 weeks, and many of us will know people who have had their second dose accelerated to within that timescale. However, Bob Dorris is right to say, in a programme of this scale, that there will always be small numbers that do not get what we want them to get or what we think they should have done. We are aware of a small percentage of the overall vaccinated population who have had to wait longer than 12 weeks for their second dose. For those whose second dose of the vaccine does run beyond the 12-week point, we encourage them to make contact with their local health board or attend one of the drop-in clinics that a number of local authorities are running. There will be a variety of reasons why that small number has not had their second dose within 12 weeks. However, get in touch with your local health board and check through the NHS informed website in order that that can be rectified. In response to the last part of Bob Dorris's question, although we want people to be vaccinated within 12 weeks and, as far as supplies allow, now within that 8-week timescale, it is important to note that receiving a second dose beyond 12 weeks does not pose any clinical risk. Therefore, if somebody goes beyond that 12 weeks, there is no need to recommence the whole vaccination cycle. I welcome the news that the Pfizer vaccine has been approved for use in children aged 12 to 15. The First Minister will know of the case of Katie Steele, a young girl with cerebral palsy. Katie missed all of her second year at school and has barely been in during this academic year, and she is not alone. Katie's life and her family's lives would be transformed if she got the vaccine. Subject to the JCVI decision, will the First Minister commit to vaccinating all children in the 12 to 15 age group before schools return in August and specifically prioritise vulnerable young people like Katie? I would absolutely love to stand here and give that commitment. I know of Katie and I know how important it is to her and, indeed, to her family and families of young people like her to get vaccinated as quickly as possible. I also know that people would agree that it should not be for me, with no clinical qualifications, to decide who gets vaccinated when. That is why expert advice is really important. There are a couple of issues that we have to await. First of those is the JCVI advice. They will advise on whether and in what order and to what extent we should commence the vaccination of children over the age of 12. However, the other issue, which means that I cannot right now give that commitment in terms of the return of schools, is that the speed at which we will do that will be dependent on the supply of vaccine. At this stage—I hope that this is something that changes on the upside—the MHRA advice is only for the Pfizer vaccine, so it is only that one manufacturer that, at this stage, would be available for that, and supplies are not limitless, so we do not yet know exactly what the supplies would be in order for us to set out exactly how long it will take to vaccinate that section of the population. It may be, and I do not know, because I have to wait and see the JCVI advice that, just as with the adult population, they recommend an order of priority for children over the age of 12, and that may take account of underlying health conditions and other factors. However, as soon as we have that advice, as soon as we have a clearer line of sight about supplies, we will inform Parliament of what our expectations are and what the likely timescale of any such extension is likely to be. Before I take the next member, I have much interest in the statement and the desire to ask questions from across the chamber. I would be very grateful for shorter questions and responses, and I call Christine Grahame. I will certainly try to comply. First Minister, can I ask if there will be a review of the vaccination status scheme? As I have constituents who are awaiting their second vaccination appointment, they did not receive those and logged on to check their own vaccination status to find out erroneously that it had been recorded that it had been vaccinated a second time, and then they had to go through the helpline and all that. Can I ask if there is to be an assessment of the whole vaccination programme and if that can be taken into account? Minority, though it is, matters. It will be a small minority, but every individual cares deeply about their ability to get vaccinated. NHS staff work to absolutely minimise any errors in recording and also work to rectify issues when they are identified. We are aware of some challenges that a small number of users have faced with the service, for example, where their first dose has been recorded twice in error, and where cases such as that are identified, the NHS works to resolve them as quickly as possible. We understand that, even in cases in which someone's first dose has been marked on the individual's record twice, that should not prevent an appointment for a second dose being generated. Of course, wider work is under way to ensure that records are accurate and amended in ways that are auditable and have clinical oversight. Of course, in due course, our focus right now is on vaccinating people, but in due course we want to have a review of the first vaccination programme, because I suspect that this will be a regular vaccination programme in the years ahead. Many cultural venues and festival organisers are understandably frustrated by the perceived inconsistency in physical distancing rules. In hospitality venues, people can be sat one metre from another without a face covering, but in cultural venues people must keep two metres apart and wear a face covering. Will the First Minister commit to urgently reviewing the discrepancy, especially in light of the various summer festivals that are about to occur across Scotland? I am sure that Donald Cameron is aware, because I am pretty sure that I said it during last week's statement that we are currently undertaking a general review of physical distancing, and we will set out the conclusions of that as soon as possible. Joe FitzPatrick, to be followed by Sarah Boyack. With Covid cases rising most steeply in some areas, including in parts of Tayside, can the First Minister advise what lessons have been learned from those areas that have recent experience of dealing with rising case numbers such as Glasgow and Murray, and whether similar public health measures are being implemented and considered in my constituency in Dundee and neighbouring areas to tackle our concerning rise in case numbers? The incident management team is actively managing the situation in Tayside, and I am grateful for their hard work. That includes deployment of mobile testing, unit, targeted engagement through schools and community outreach and, of course, the continued vaccination drive. As I said last week, there is a massive opportunity to share learning. To support that, the Scottish Government has developed an outbreak management toolkit for local authorities and other partners. That toolkit was shared last week. It includes practical material on enhanced testing, accelerated vaccination and a communications toolkit to support local messaging. That draws on practical material shared by colleagues in Glasgow. Public Health Scotland continues to support lessons learned activity, and the national incident management team provides regular opportunity for each of the 14 health boards to share experience to. First Minister, given that Edinburgh's incidence of Covid numbers is now overtaking Glasgow in terms of numbers per 100,000 over the past seven days, when will walk-in clinics be available for people aged over 18 to access vaccines urgently? What monitoring and testing is now being carried out across the city and workplaces both in public and private sectors and in our schools so that we can see urgent action when Covid transmission is identified to reduce its rapid spread throughout our city? The toolkit that I spoke about in my previous answer is available to NHS Lothian and to local authorities across the NHS Lothian area. It has plans in preparation for walk-in vaccination clinics and is also using testing as appropriate. Certainly during the height of the Glasgow outbreak, NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde communicated very effectively with local MSPs—I am one of those, of course—and I will ask the health secretary to ensure that NHS Lothian is doing likewise with local members so that there is an understanding of all the outbreak measures that are being taken to try to bring transmission back under control. Stuart McMillan, to be followed by Graham Simpson. Thank you, Presiding Officer. As a result of no fuller beverages been sold at Hamden for the upcoming Euro 2020 matches, some fans will have to wait for up to five hours in between eating or drinking, and this may cause an issue, particularly for those with underlying health issues. Whilst it is understandable that the decision was taken for health reasons, will fans be allowed to take food or beverages into Hamden for the four upcoming Euro 2020 matches? Well, concession stands will not be in operation for the Euro 2020 matches at Hamden as a result of all the mitigations that have had to be put in place. That is to ensure that physical distancing is possible on concourses where people are moving to and from their seats on entry and exit and when going to the toilet. However, spectators will be able to bring food with them into the stadium. I know that discussions are on going between the Scottish FA and UEFA to reach an agreement on what will be in place with regard to drinks. UEFA will confirm the situation with all ticket holders, and I will make sure that the member is updated when that has happened. Presiding Officer, I have written to Kate Forbes asking for extra help for the travel industry, particularly travel agents. I hope that the First Minister will agree to look at that. However, I want to ask about another issue concerning the industry. If someone travelled to a greenless country from an English airport, they could book a testing package using multiple providers for £60. If they flew from a Scottish airport, the Scottish Government says that they could only use one provider, CTM, and that same package would cost £195. It is similar for amber countries. What can the First Minister do to bring down the cost and stop Scots from being ripped off? I am not sure if it was Graeme Simpson who asked this question a couple of weeks ago. My answer is the same. We continue to look at those things, but we want to make sure that we have assurance and can give assurance around the quality of the testing that is in place. Why the difference? In many respects, the UK Government, and this is entirely up to them, choose to outsource more outside of the NHS than we decide to do in Scotland. We keep those things under review, but making sure that we have assurances around quality is really important. I hope that most people would understand and accept that. Over the last year, we have looked at different numbers at different times, be that the R number, the ICU capacity, the hospital capacity and sadly deaths. Can the First Minister say anything about the next few weeks and months and which figures we will really be focusing on? We have always relied on a range of indicators and criteria. We combine that with clinical advice, local intelligence about the state of the epidemic and, of course, judgment to construct a full, reliable and robust picture of the threat that Covid is posing across all of the four harms. We continue to monitor cases, obviously, but the number of hospital admissions, length of stay and deaths. As I hope is the case, we become increasingly confident that vaccinations are breaking the link between case numbers and serious illness. While we will not ignore case numbers, the balance of factors that we take into account can change. We can perhaps, as I have said before, be less driven in our response purely—we are not driven purely, but by so much by case numbers. However, we have to do that carefully and allow the data to emerge so that we can properly assess it and not act prematurely in a way that would cause a significant burden of ill health and pressure on the NHS. There cannot be a commitment to vaccinating schools by the end of the summer holidays. When can schools and education authorities expect amended Covid advice with regard to the safety in school, wearing of masks, bubbles, distancing and, particularly, school transport, given the rising infection rates that are linked to the schools? The advisory group on education, which is a subgroup of the overall Covid Scottish Government advisory group, looks at the issues on an on-going basis. It is important that it does so and gives its views to ministers and ministers through the education recovery group who have reached positions on the mitigations that are required to be in place. All of us want to see mitigations such as face coverings no longer being necessary, and that is particularly true when we are talking about young people in school, but right now it is important that that is there as an added mitigation. We continue to review that as the situation overall and our understanding of the new variant and the wider impact of vaccines develop. Emma Harper, to be followed by Finlay Carson. The Scottish Government is rightly committed to ensuring cancer screening and diagnostic services are prioritised as we continue to remobilise the Scottish NHS as we recover from Covid. Cervical cancer self-tests have been trialled in some health boards, including NHS D&G, and they have a potential to be an effective way for women to screen for HPV, and with 6,000 women in NHS D&G missing appointments, self-tests have also been proven to reduce the number of women who default on their appointment. Can the First Minister outline how cancer diagnostic services will be prioritised, and in particular, can she provide an update on the cervical cancer self-test roll-out? Self-sampling has significant potential to increase the take-up of screening and to make it easier for many who find the current process difficult. That said, the UK National Screening Committee is gathering evidence on the matter and has not yet recommended that self-sampling should be incorporated into the national cervical screening programme. We have convened a working group to explore the feasibility and requirements of different self-sampling models that will contribute to the evidence base. That group brings together clinical and public health expertise, including representatives from the Dumfries and Galloway study. Introducing self-sampling to the national cervical screening programme will not be an insignificant undertaking, but we are working hard to ensure that Scotland is well placed to implement any national screening committee recommendations when we have them. Finlay Carson, to be followed by Gillian Martin. First Minister, I am sure that you are aware of the significant backlog in people waiting to set both a practical and theory driving test. My constituency of Galloway and West Dumfries, poor or non-existent public transport, makes it imperative that young people obtain their driver licence quickly to allow them to get to work. There are genuine concerns for businesses this summer, particularly those in hospitality and agriculture who are struggling right now to find employees. I have contacted DVSA, who state that capacity at most steery sites in Scotland is still at 50 per cent as a result of the Scottish Government's two-metre physical distancing restrictions, despite the exam conditions. Will the First Minister look to relax the rule in order that DVSA can increase testing capacity and ease the plight of many Leonard drivers and do what she can do to address the long delays in sitting both theory and practical driving tests? I know how important this is and I know how frustrating it is that there is obviously an economic imperative to have people able to sit driving tests, but it is one of the rights of passage for young people that have been disrupted over the past year or more. Obviously, it is really important for them that we get this back on track. All of these issues are complex and they are unfortunately rarely straightforward to meet our physical distancing in certain environments remains a really important mitigation. However, yes, this is an important issue, so we are and will continue to look at this to see how quickly we can increase the capacity and get those backlogs down as quickly as possible. I absolutely understand the importance of this and I will make sure that the transport minister keeps members updated. The pandemic has had a significant impact on young people, particularly on their chances of employment. The First Minister has appointed a minister who is specifically tasked with supporting youth employment. Can the First Minister provide any further information about steps that the Scottish Government has taken to support young people to access employment and training? The young person's guarantee is obviously central to those efforts and I think that it will be increasingly important as we go through the next few years and hopefully through recovery from Covid. We will also continue to work very closely with local authorities and with schools to minimise any on-going disruption to children's education and their ability to go on from school to further higher education or into training and employment. Obviously, one of the key things that we are doing right now is working to get people vaccinated, including the younger groups in the population. That is going extremely well. However, as we come out of this pandemic, there is no doubt that as part of the overall recovery and the previous question relating to driving tests is only one aspect of this, but it is not an important aspect of this. I think that we need to prioritise recovery from young people who have borne so much of the brunt of what we have all gone through over the past year. Hundreds of thousands of my constituents are living under level 2 restrictions with no indication of when they will move to level 1. The councils currently in level 1 know that they may move to level 0 provisionally on the 28th. My question is when will the Scottish Government set out revised planning for when the 14 councils affected will move to levels 1 and 0? Perhaps Stephen Kerr took a bit more time to understand the situation here. He would know that what he has just said there is not really accurate at all. The next review of all of the levels of protection happens on 21 June. Of course, there may be circumstances that require us to move more quickly than that, but I hope not. On 21 June, I will set out for every area of the country what we expect the level of protection to be from 28 June. That covers those in level 1, which we hope can go to level 0, but also those currently in level 2, which we would hope would go to level 1, but we need to assess the data nearer the time. That is the three-weekly review cycle that we have committed to, and that is what we will continue. I wish that I could wave a magic wand and get every area of the country, not just into level 0, but beyond level 0, but we have to do that carefully and in a way that protects our progress and allows us to get as many people as possible vaccinated. Elena Witham, to be followed by Alex Cole-Hamilton. Thank you, Presiding Officer. In light of the recent news that Portugal has now been placed on the amber list, taking effect today, it is clear that international travel for holiday purposes remains risky and subject to sudden change. Can I ask the First Minister what steps the Scottish Government is taking to support our local tourism industry, particularly as many people are choosing to holiday at home this year? First Minister, first of all, before I address that question, can I just make a point of recognising, because I know that people who listen and hear us talk about international travel often in the context of holidays, but people who have family overseas and for whom international travel is about family connection often feel frustrated at that. I recognise that, for many people, the restrictions on international travel are keeping them away from their loved ones, and that is why we want to get back to normal there, as in every other aspect of life as quickly as possible. For non-essential travel for holidays, my advice continues to be do not go overseas if you can avoid doing that, because it is safer right now for us not to do that. It helps to mitigate against the importation of the virus. If you are in the position of being able to go a holiday this year and support the local tourism industry, we discuss those matters regularly. I have reasonably regular discussions with the Scottish Tourism Alliance about how we better support the tourism industry in the immediate term, but also as it recovers in the medium to long term as well. I think that a message all of us could helpfully convey to our constituents right now is where you can support your local tourism industry, support the Scottish tourist industry and support local businesses generally as much as you are able to. Alex Cole-Hamilton, to be followed by Brian Whittle. Finally, after weeks of asking, NHS Lothian announced an hour ago that from next week, walk-in vaccination clinics will be available to those over 40. That is very welcome. The Cabinet Secretary for Health and Sport told me last week that Edinburgh is now the new Glasgow in terms of infection rate. If that is the case, why do we still not have access to the door-to-door surge testing that has been available for weeks in areas such as G41? Why are Edinburgh residents not as deserving of Covid protections as Glasgow residents? That is just complete nonsense, if I may say so. I would urge everybody—by all means, rigorously—to hold me and my Government to account that that is absolutely essential, to avoid things such as Edinburgh as the new Glasgow or Edinburgh is not as deserving of measures as Glasgow. That can attempt to divide and set people against each other or suggest that we are not taking this pandemic seriously in every part of the country. I just do not think that it helps anybody. The local director of public health in Lothian, with the local incident management team, will be working to decide based on the nature of the outbreak across Lothian what the appropriate measures are. Surge testing will be a part of that. If they consider that necessary and essential, door-to-door testing will be a part of that, walk-in vaccination clinics. I do not, and it may surprise people to hear this, I do not mandate to local public health directors exactly what they do in local outbreaks, because that would be wrong for me to do so. It is them that understand the nature of outbreaks and, from the range of tools that they have available, what works best in local circumstances. What I would say genuinely to all local members is engage, as I am sure members do, with their local health boards, with their local director of public health, to understand the measures that are being put in place locally, which will be bespoke to the particular challenges that are facing. Please, all of us, just avoid the suggestion that one part of the country is being done down in favour of another part of the country. That is not true. We are all in this together, and we are trying to get through it together. Brian Whittle Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. I have been asked to raise a very specific issue around the European under-20, under-23 athletics championships, which take place this year. The trials for the Great Britain team take place in the 19th and 20th of this month in Bedford. Under the current Scottish legislation, it is illegal for Scottish athletes to travel to Bedford, which therefore means that there will be no Scottish representation at those championships. I wonder if the First Minister would look at that with a degree of urgency, given that each athlete has to have had a negative test prior to competing in those trials. First Minister, I would like to have the opportunity to look at that in detail before trying to answer it in detail. I will come back to Brian Whittle as quickly as possible. Of course, when there are travel restrictions in place, there are exemptions for essential travel. One of the things that I need to check is whether athletes would fall into the category of travel that was permissible. If that is not the case, I am happy to ask for that to be looked at to make sure that they can do what is required to compete as everybody would want them to do. Thank you. There will be a brief pause while the chair changes.


The the so there's billions going into climate change philanthropy, and it's very based on metrics, you know, like how many, you know, megatons of of of Greenhouse gas emissions is this going to lower, you know, it's it's very Because and I can understand why, you know, they want to make sure the money's well spent You need some kind of objective measure of it But what gets left left out of those metrics are things like the the the necessity of of healthy migration patterns of wildlife to distribute nutrients and and keep the forest healthy. Like it's really hard to say, OK, well, how many tons of CO2 sequestered does that translate into? Yeah, like you can't actually see it through that lens. You can't see the the the importance of living networks unless you're looking at earth as a living being. Yes. And and measuring and measuring if you can measure at all, measuring its health by something other than the quantity of a single substance. It's a completely different mindset and that that mindset, that holistic mindset that that is not just ecological, but cultural to that holistic mindset is is very it's it's it's, you know, kind of cutting edge and and unfamiliar to traditional philanthropy. But I think that there are there is an awakening, you know, among in in philanthropy, just like anywhere else, like every institution of our culture is having an awakening from within. And so I do think that there are philanthropists and funders who are like in like this kind of understanding and and wanting to put their resources, you know, in places that that the kind of things that you're doing that are tapping into a holistic understanding.