Doedd cuew, ac mae'n cwestiynau geniwyr. Efallai'r ffordd gyda'r ystyried ymddiannod i, yn golygu, mae'n golygu i fynd resultedyn nhw i fynd yn gweithio. Mae'n cwestiynau ymddiannod i, yn gweithio'r Fqwllwch Cymru. Maen nhw'n gynyddu'i Cymru ICU yn golygu i'w golygu i fynd i'w golygu IWGA, gan weithiwch hwnnw i'r 100th cyffredin. Felly, mae gynnalad, dwi'n credu bod nhw'n credu i'r byw iddi Oeddd yng nghymru yn pob ddim yn y ymlaen, a'i gafodd i'r fath o'i wneud o'r ysrydog nhw. Felly, yng Nghymru yn 1939, i Glasgow i oes我是 �ip-gerfyrdd sy'n hwyr i'u ei gynhyrchu i gefnogiol a ffamilie i'w fontoedau derbyn education. Scotland will miss his charm, his integrity and resolution, but we will never forget his testimony, and I believe that we can all commit to ensuring that his legacy will endure. Now, reunited with his beloved ingrate, may his memory be a blessing. Presiding Officer, can I remind the chamber that my wife is a serving officer with Police Scotland? The Hate Crime Act comes into effect from the 1st of April. We voted against this law and still oppose it as a serious risk to free speech, but in just 11 days' time, the police will have to enforce it. David Kennedy, the General Secretary of the Scottish Police Federation, has said this about training. We're only receiving a two-hour online training package. First Minister, is that really enough for a complex and controversial piece of legislation? First and foremost, I join Douglas Ross in paying tribute to Henry Wuga, a greatly respected Holocaust survivor, whom we know passed away at the age of 100 earlier this week. It's hard to think that, only a few weeks ago, we stood up to wish him well on his 100th birthday, and now we're standing up once again to mourn his passing. Henry Wuga was a truly remarkable man who made an enormous contribution to Scottish society, but his impact, his influence, his legacy goes far beyond Scotland as he campaigned against anti-Semitism and reminded us to never forget the horrors of the Holocaust. My thoughts are very much.  I also take with your indulgence a moment to congratulate Vaughan Gething on his appointment as First Minister of Wales. His appointment as the first black leader of a Government in the UK is a truly monumental moment, and I look forward to working with him. Vaughan Gething's predecessor, Mark Drakeford, was a principled First Minister, a model public servant, and, importantly, a very fierce defender of devolution. I think that the whole chamber wants to join me in wishing him well. First of all, when it comes to the Hate Crime Act, there has been a lot of disinformation that has been spread on social media, in some inaccurate media reporting and, indeed, by our political opponents. I'm hoping that, in exchange, we can shed more light than heat on what is actually in the act, as opposed to what is being said about it. In terms of training for police, let me say that I leave it as an operational decision and a matter for the chief constable to determine what training is absolutely appropriate. Of course, Police Scotland put out a statement just this week to challenge some of, in their words, the inaccurate media reporting that exists around the Hate Crime Act. I have absolute confidence in Police Scotland to ensure that the appropriate training is in place. Let me remind Douglas Ross, of course, that stirring up offences is not new in Scotland.  Since 1986, in fact, all of us are protected by that provision of stirring up hatred. The question is, if I have protection against somebody stirring up hatred because of my race, and that has been the case since 1986, why on earth should those protections not exist for somebody because of their sexuality or disability or their religion? The facts are that, for a new stirring up offence to be committed, we know that there is a very high threshold—in fact, an even higher threshold—than the barrier that there is or the threshold that there is for a racial stirring up offence. I would say to Douglas Ross that it is incredibly important. In the memory of people like Kenny Rugga, where he started his contribution, that we all unite in standing up an opposing hatred in all of its forms. A strong legislative framework to protect people is incredibly important. I would urge the Conservatives and Douglas Ross that it would be far better for him, I think, to put more effort into tackling hatred as opposed to opposing a hate crime act. Can I echo the First Minister's comments and wish for him getting well as a new First Minister of Wales? We oppose the legislation at the time and still oppose it now because the impact it has on free speech for people across this country. I am only reiterating the points made by the Scottish Police Federation, the representative body of our officers across Scotland. They say that their officers can barely deal with existing crimes, let alone this new law. They described the hate crime act as, I quote, a recipe for disaster. Humza Yousaf has reduced officer numbers to the lowest level since Police Scotland was formed. Now officers are being told not to investigate actual crimes, but instead they will have to look for the hate monster or police free speech. Criminals will be let off while innocent people are prosecuted. Is it not, Humza Yousaf, setting the police up for failure and undermining public trust in policing? With that contribution, Douglas Ross, who is undermining the fight against hatred here in Scotland, absolutely undermining it completely, utterly and entirely through so much disinformation. I do not even know where to begin. Let us take point by point of what Douglas Ross has said. First and foremost, he makes an incorrect claim around police officer numbers under the SNP Government. Of course, under the SNP Government, numbers of police officers have increased and will continue to increase, given what we have heard recently from the chief constable and backed by a record budget from this Scottish Government. Of course, there are more police officers per head in Scotland than in England where his party is in charge. Let us take the points that Douglas Ross raises around the act itself and freedom of expression. I remember, of course, because I was the justice secretary who took forward this bill, making sure that I engage with Opposition members around the issue of freedom of expression. There is a triple lock of freedom of expression in the act. There is protection of freedom of expression that is actually explicitly embedded in the act. There is also a defence available of a person's behaviour being reasonable, which safeguards people's rights. Thirdly, of course, the act itself is compatible with the European convention on human rights, including article 10, which includes and protects everybody's right to freedom. When it comes to stirring up of hatred, stirring up offences are so pervasive, so damaging and so dangerous in our society. Let me take Douglas Ross back to what Lord Bracadale said. Lord Bracadale, of course, was the one who reported on his independent review of hate crime, which then led to the development of legislation. He said, The stirring up of hatred can contribute to a social atmosphere in which prejudice and discrimination are accepted as normal. In any society, the freedom to criticise, the freedom to insult, the freedom to offend exists and should be treasured, in fact, but there cannot be freedom to engage in behaviour that is threatening or abusive and intended to stir up hatred. Everybody in this chamber, we engage, we talk often about our commitment to tackle hatred. Those who experience hatred tell me that they do not just want one word from the politicians, they want action, and that is exactly what this hate crime act intends to do. Douglas Ross said that people want action that is enforceable and the Scottish Police Federation is saying that it has serious concerns. Their officers are receiving a two-hour online training module for this legislation, and the First Minister keeps trying to say that these are my comments or not. I originally was quoting the Scottish Police Federation. Let me now quote legal experts, like Roddy Dunlop, the dean of the... Please continue, Mr Ross. I think that it is only right that we say that ministers in the Scottish Government don't think that we should be hearing from the faculty of advocates. Please continue, Mr Ross. Let us hear, Mr Ross. Well, I can say that it was Mary Todd. It was the minister that said that. Mr Ross can ask you to continue with your question. Members, can we please ensure that we can hear Mr Ross? So, legal experts, including Roddy Dunlop, the dean of the Faculty of Advocates, said that there is a danger of the police being swamped by completely malicious complaints. Not my views, but the dean of the Faculty of Advocates. Days before this law comes into force, it is unclear how those complaints would be dealt with by the police. People like J.K. Rowland could have the police at her door every day for making perfectly reasonable statements. That could lead to huge numbers of the public being monitored or even criminalised by the police when they have done nothing wrong. Isn't Humza Yousaf put in front-line officers in an impossible position by forcing them to police free speech? First Minister. Presiding Officer, we know that it's often police officers, unfortunately, that are the victims of hatred themselves. They are often the ones who are facing hatred when it comes to the course of their duties. Douglas Ross says that he has no idea how a stirring-up offence could possibly be enforceable. I'm making the point that a stirring-up offence in relation to racial hatred has existed since 1986, with virtually zero controversy whatsoever. I have absolute faith in Police Scotland's ability to police and enforce the act in a way that is appropriate. On the points that Roddie Dunlop—of course I respect greatly the points that I would say in respect to Roddie Dunlop—is that police, again, are very well tuned, adept and have ability to deal with vexatious complaints right across the legal framework with which they operate. I can't tell you whether there will be vexatious complaints or not. That will, of course, depend on people's actions, but what I can say is that the liability for criminal threshold is incredibly high. If you don't want to take my word for it, let's look at another legal expert, Professor Adam Tomkins. I think that he is known to Douglas Ross, formerly a Conservative MSP, somebody that I worked with in relation to the hate crime bill. He writes in today's Herald, and he is, of course, a Professor of Public Law. I will quote from him directly. Offensive speech is not criminalised by this legislation. The only speech relating to sexual orientation, transgender identity, age or disability outlawd, is speech that, one, a reasonable person would consider to be threatening or abusive, three, which was intended to stir up hatred, and four, which was not reasonable in any circumstances. He goes on to say, just because you feel offended by what someone does, does not make it a hate crime. He goes on to say, under the Hate Crime Act, the threshold of criminal liability is not a victim that feels offended, i.e. a subjective test, but that a reasonable person would consider the perpetrator's actions or speech to be threatening or abusive. Let's stick to the facts. The facts are that we are all purported to be concerned about the rises in hate crime that we have seen in our society over the years. However, there are only some parties in the chamber that I believe are willing to take the action that is necessary to tackle it. Of course, an act and a bill at that point that was debated thoroughly in this chamber is unfortunate that the only party that opposed it, of course, was the Conservatives. In a democracy, we have scrutiny, we have opposition parties to look at the legislation coming forward, and there have been and continued to be serious reservations about this act that was passed and now how it will be implemented. Let's remember Hamza Yousaf introduced this unworkable and dangerous law when he was just the secretary. Now he's bringing it into force as First Minister with little training and not enough support for the officers who will have to enforce it. Let's have a quote from a professor of law at Glasgow University, the First Minister, it just quoted. Alasdair Bonnington said this, Like many of the SNP's attempts at lawmaking, this act will be set aside when it is properly examined in a serious court. This looks like another SNP law that will have to be discarded just like the name persons and the offensive behaviour at Football Act. We've said from the outset that this law is a disaster in the making. It criminalises free speech. It risks a fundamental right. It's overreached by the SNP into people's homes. It could result in the public being criminalised for no good reason. It is set to be a shambles from day one in just 11 days time. Willham's use has finally accepted that he has created another bad SNP law that will quickly descend into chaos. What's dangerous isn't the law. What's dangerous is hate crime in our society. We did debate this act when it was a bill going through this Parliament extensively. Many years ago, it was a robust debate. I thought that debate is sometimes and often the best traditions of this Parliament. It was compromises. There were amendments that were accepted by the Government. We came out of that process with a good piece of legislation that fundamentally protected people's freedom of expression, freedom of speech and safeguarded people's right not to have hatred stirred up against them. Of course, there was only one party that opposed that bill—Douglas Ross and the Conservative Party. Maybe it's hardly a surprise given that the Conservative Party is far from working hard to tackle hatred. It's a party that has actively created the conditions for hatred and division to thrive in our society. The Conservative Party is the party of go-home vans, the party of the hostile environment, the party of Windrush, the party whose leader Boris Johnson called Muslim women's back robbers. It's a party that indulges in Islamophobic smears from Sorella Braverman to Lee Anderson, so instead of fighting against this bill, the Conservative Party has its own house in order. Question 2, Anna Sarwar. Can I join others in, first of all, paying tribute to Henry Wuga, a Holocaust survivor, who very powerfully shared his own story, the stories of others, and always campaigned against anti-Semitism? We send our best wishes to his friends, family and the wider Jewish community. We owe it to Henry and his entire generation to make sure that we share their stories and always strive for both peace and strive for a world free of prejudice and hate. Can I also join the First Minister and congratulate him on his election, another historic first, the first ever black leader of a nation in Europe, as the First Minister of Wales, and send our best wishes to his predecessor, Mark Drakeford? This morning, a damning report by the Royal College of Pediatric and Child Health has warned of the catastrophic consequences of this Government's failure. In pediatrics alone, over 10,000 children are waiting for the medical care that they need. 50 per cent of them have been waiting for more than the legal 12 weeks. So how does the First Minister respond to one of the leading pediatric consultants in the country, Dr Mary Stark, who said, if you miss the right window to treat a child or wait too long, the consequences can be irreversible, and that this is a clear failure to prioritise the health and wellbeing of our children? First Minister, first and foremost, I would take the report from the Royal College extremely seriously indeed, and of course we will be examining that report in detail. As ever, it is important for me to provide some context of why we are seeing such high numbers of young people, young children waiting. The undeniable reason for that significant increase is undoubtedly the global pandemic, hence why we have seen those significant increases in pediatric weights right across the UK and England, and in Wales and, of course, here in Scotland, too. Annas Alwar is right, of course, and the Royal College is right to raise the concerns around that issue, so let me try to give some assurances that we are focusing on tackling those far too long weights in pediatrics, just by way of some examples. We know that there are two main pediatrics specialties, pediatrics and pediatric surgery. If I take the data from April 23 to the end of the calendar year, December 23, the pediatric new outpatient list reduced by 21 per cent, weights over 52 weeks reduced by 12 per cent and weights over 78 weeks reduced by 31 per cent and weights over two years were completely eradicated. If I take the position over the two years, December 21 to December 2023 and look at pediatric surgery, the new outpatient list for pediatric surgery reduced by 35 per cent, weights of over 52 per cent reduced by 84 per cent, over 78 weeks reduced by 95 per cent. The purpose of reiterating those statistics, and we know that, of course, behind those statistics of the young child who is waiting and waiting too long for surgery is to show that there are improvements we are moving in the right direction. What makes the recovery of the NHS far more difficult is the fact that, of course, we are receiving cuts from the Conservatives on our budget, £500 million over two years, £1.3 billion in terms of our capital. We are, of course, investing in our NHS despite those cuts. It would be helpful to know from Anna Sawa that, if there is an incoming Labour Government, it would immediately reverse those Conservative cuts because it impedes our ability in order to invest in the NHS's recovery, which, of course, is much needed for our children, our young people as well as our adults too. The First Minister knows that this problem predates the pandemic, that the report makes clear 11 years of decline, every day of which there has been an SNP Government. He also knows that Labour is going to invest more in the national health service, and we do want to bring down waiting lists, but he has to take responsibility for his Government's actions, not look to blame somebody else all the time. The crisis in children's health goes further than even this report warns. Across our NHS, whether in CAMHS services or in other specialisms, children face unacceptable waits that have left them distressed and in pain.  Cody has been repeatedly diagnosed with tonsillitis, and his enlarged tonsils obstruct over 75 per cent of his airway, making it difficult to eat, drink and even breathe. She has told me that she has to lie awake next to him during the night because his breathing stops and she has to nudge him to restart his breathing again. She has had to fight to get Cody referred to a specialist, but has been told that an urgent referral for treatment will take three years. Amy has had to make the difficult decision to go private, borrowing almost £5,000 from her family. Why is he and his Government feeling Amy, Cody and so many families like theirs? I am more than happy to look at the case that is referenced by Anna Sawa in Cody's case. Indeed, any other case that a member raises, we are happy to explore the health board in terms of what more can be done. It sounds like a horrifically long wait that we do not want any parent to have to endure. The point that I make to Anna Sawa is that there is progress being made. I have given him a range of details on how that progress is being made in relation to paediatric surgery, which is relevant to his question, but we are also making sure that we are investing in the workforce. Paediatric specialty consultants have increased their numbers by 15 per cent in the past five years by 64 per cent in the past 10 years. When we look at qualified paediatric nurses, the workforce has increased by 11 per cent in the past five years. Since 2014, we have also invested in the recruitment of an additional 500 health visitors and 200 extra school nurses again, which is undoubtedly helped with young people and children's health and wellbeing. I do not take lightly at all the issues that Anna Sawa raises about the long waits that parents and children are having to suffer. In Anna Sawa's initial response, he did not answer the question that I asked, which was that an incoming Labour Government immediately reverse £1.3 billion cut, which is making an impact in terms of our health care provision. If he could give that combination, we might be able to plan further ahead in terms of the further investment that we are able to make, because it is only through record investment in the NHS are we going to be able to recover our national health services for children and young people. Felly, after 17 years of the SNP Government, I want to ask questions about a party in opposition rather than talking about their own record and failing children across the country. It just shows how out of depth this finance minister is. All those lists and excuses mean nothing to Amy, mean nothing to Cody and mean nothing to the thousands of families that his Government is failing every single day, because he simply does not get it. In every area of responsibility for this SNP Government, children are being failed with catastrophic consequences. After 17 years of this SNP Government, 240,000 children are living in poverty, over 10,000 children waiting for pediatric medical care, over 9,500 children turned away from mental health services last year. I suggest that the Deputy First Minister listen to the consequences for her constituents rather than trying to heckle what is happening to children across this country. For those who were referred, over 5,500 children are waiting to get mental health support, and nearly a third of pupils in Scotland are persistently absent from school in some areas as high as 50 per cent. Almost 40 per cent of pupils now need additional support. At the same time, this SNP Government has cut 400 ASN posts in the last decade. Is it not clear that Humza Yousaf and every single member of this SNP Government are failing Scotland's children? I do not agree with that. I thought that it was a reasonable question, which is unable to answer. He will want to be honest with people about the answer. He was unable to answer a very simple question, that if there is an incoming Labour Government, will they immediately reverse the Tory cut to Scotland's budget? The fact that he was unable to answer the question demonstrates that he either does not know the answer, or he is not being honest with the people of Scotland. It is fundamentally important in all the areas of public service that we invest in. That is why this Government took the decision to make sure that we prioritise our public services. That is why we gave an increase to the national health service. We made sure that there was an increase to education services. We made sure that there was an increase to social security. All those issues are incredibly important for our children and young people. That is why, of course, estimates show that 100,000 children in Scotland will be lifted out of poverty because of our actions. That is why, of course, more young people in this country are going to university from areas of higher deprivation because of our investment. That is why more young people—we have record young people going into positive destinations because of our investment in education, earlier learning and childcare. That is why, of course, it is imperative throughout all those challenges that Governments and political parties make a decision. Do they invest in public services? First Minister, I have asked that you conclude your question. I am now moving on to the next question. Question 3, Alex Cole-Hamilton. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. Can I associate the Scottish Liberal Democrats with the remarks that were already made about the passing of Henry Wuga and, indeed, the election of Rome Gething? To ask the First Minister when the Cabinet will next meet. Presiding Officer, yesterday, the Committee on Climate Change delivered a devastating verdict about the record of the Scottish Government. The key 2030 emissions target just won't be met. The Government is, of course, by a country mile on heat pumps, electric vehicles, recycling and more. Its chair, Chris Stark, said yesterday that the strategy is just not there. Take tree planting. They say that Scotland needs to do twice as much, but the Government has just reduced spending on that by nearly half. It's going to put people out of work, and tree nurseries have already signalled that they will have to torch hundreds of thousands of saplings because of the cuts. To think that the Environment Secretary once boasted that global leaders were looking to her Government for advice while her phone is silent now. Can I ask the First Minister where the Green Party is in all of this? Fewer bus and train services going nowhere on renewable heating, a botched deposit return scheme?  First of all, we take the report from the Climate Change Committee extremely seriously, and Chris Stark is well respected. Therefore, his opinions are being given the due and weighty consideration that he deserves. It is a serious point that he raises around the 2030 target. Of course, at the time when that target was being debated, the Climate Change Committee made it clear that it would be extremely difficult if not, frankly, impossible or that that target was stretching credibility at that time. Nonetheless, we, as a Parliament, came together—all political parties—to embed that target within the legislation. On tree planting, let me remind Askelhamilton that around 75 per cent of all new woodland throughout the UK is here in Scotland. Not only that, we launched the world's largest floating offshore wind leasing round through Scotland. We ensured that Scotland has the most concessionary travel scheme in the UK, with more than a third of the population benefiting from fee bus travel. We invested £65 million in installation of over 2,700 public EV charges, and we continue to offer the most generous package of grants and loans in the UK to support the move to clean heating. What I would say to Askelhamilton is that what makes this job of ours more difficult in trying to reach our targets, and we are committed to that overall 2045 target, of course. What makes that more difficult is that every time we bring forward measures, be it the deposit return scheme, the low-emission zones, the workplace parking levy, the proposal for power capture or, indeed, our standards around heating and reducing emissions, what makes that job far more difficult is that the opposition opposes every single measure that we bring to this chamber to tackle the climate crisis. Question 4, Kevin Stewart. Thank you, Presiding Officer. To ask the First Minister what analysis of passenger behaviour and numbers has been carried out since the inception of the removal of peak rail fares pilot. The trial is an exciting and unique opportunity to encourage more people to leave their cars at home, choose a safe, reliable and green form of public transport. I can confirm that an interim analysis is due to be published shortly. It examines the impact on rail travel patterns and other modes. The Scottish Government will carefully consider the impact and, of course, the long-term sustainability of any further measures before we confirm what our next steps are. Kevin Stewart. The removal of peak fares has been greatly welcomed by my Aberdeen central constituents and by tens of thousands of other people across Scotland. In my opinion, it has been beneficial to many during these tough times caused by the cost of living crisis. Can the First Minister give an indication on whether the removal of peak fares will become permanent? I am really pleased to hear about the positive impact that this particular policy is having on Mr Stewart's constituents. I have heard similar stories from my constituents and constituents of other MSPs right across the country, particularly during this cost of living crisis. However, the purpose of the ScotRail peak fares is twofold, to find out whether such measures do help to move people from car to rail use but also to help passengers facing the cost of living crisis. We know that price and simplicity are crucial for people when it comes to choosing how to travel. The pilot that we know, as has already been said, operates until the end of June. As such, it would be inappropriate to confirm whether, of course, the abolition of peak fares will become permanent ahead of a final evaluation. It will be important to review the data, as is the entire purpose of the pilot, to see whether we are seeing that modal shift and to examine the data around how much it is helping people during a cost of living crisis. However, when that evaluation has been properly analysed, we will, of course, inform Parliament of the next stages and steps in relation to that particular policy. There is no doubt that, if we are to get any place near reaching our net zero targets, we have to do much better when it comes to reducing emissions and transport. Will the First Minister commit to coming back to the chamber in enough time so that we will be able to, hopefully, make the pilot permanent? What, in effect, is the case is that people are being priced off public transport. If we want to tackle that and we want to get more people to use public transport, it is exactly that type of step that is a welcome that we need to now make permanent. Alex Rowley says that, of course, we will evaluate the data and we will, of course, bring forward an analysis of that data. It is important that we do not pre-empt that data. We need to see whether the data has shown us, has demonstrated that modal shift that Alex Rowley rightly talks about. Let us not pre-empt that data, let us examine that data, let us analyse the evidence and then let other MSPs do the same with the analysis of that data. I agree with the thrust of his question that it is important to invest in our public transport, so I am very pleased that this Government invested in Liam Rath railway, something that, of course, Alex Rowley, I am sure, would welcome. It is why we have an extremely generous concessionary travel scheme. I would say to Alex Rowley that that is why I make the point that it is extremely frustrating for this Government when we do bring forward various policies to encourage that modal shift to help to reduce our carbon emissions. They are often opposed by the opposition. We have brought forward the workplace parking levy, for example. It was called by his colleague, who is sitting just a couple of rows behind him, Colin Smyth. He described it as highway robbery. He called it a car park tax. It is really unfortunate, Presiding Officer, that when we bring forward these measures, opposition parties oppose it simply for the sake of opposing it. Question 5, Megan Gallacher. To ask the First Minister whether the Scottish Government will engage with NHS Scotland on ending the prescription of puberty-suppressing hormones to children following the recent announcement by NHS England. Presiding Officer, we are aware of the new clinical policy issued by NHS England last week on the routine prescription of puberty-suppressing hormones for children and young people as a treatment option for gender dysphoria. The details of this are being closely considered by NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde and the relevant clinical team, as a provider of young people's gender services at Sandyford. Any decision on how such healthcare is delivered in Scotland will rightly be made by health boards, but most importantly, the clinicians involved. It should be noted that NHS England's announcement follows our interim policy position last year. Recommending puberty blockers are only accessed via a research programme that is establishing. The Scottish Government and NHS Scotland remain observers to this particular study, and we are considering what further engagement may be appropriate. I ask the First Minister about the prescription of puberty blockers to children in May last year. The First Minister said, and I quote, I support such decisions being made by clinicians, by the people who have clinical knowledge, who should trust those who have clinical expertise, as opposed to standing here in the chamber making judgments about what is best for young people who need gender identity services. The truth of the matter is, we do not know if puberty blockers have long-term, life-changing consequences on young people who take them. That is why NHS England is conducting a review. Therefore, will the First Minister publish all evidence that his Government has that puberty blockers are safe for children, and if his Government does not have any evidence, why is he allowing NHS health boards to prescribe them? Meghan Gallacher read out my response to her last time round. My position has not changed one bit. I still believe that it is the point that clinical experts in Scotland should be the ones who determine whether or not puberty blockers are prescribed or not. I think that that is a sensible position, as opposed to politicians demanding what clinical treatment should be. It should be for the clinical experts. On the study that is taking place, I did reference in my response to Meghan Gallacher's very first question that we are engaging with the study that is taking place. The Scottish Government and NHS Scotland are well engaged with NHS England on its planned study into the use of puberty blockers in young people's gender identity healthcare. We are observers to that study, and that remains a work in progress. We are considering what future engagement in that research may well be possible. I go back to the point that I have made already to Meghan Gallacher. Of course, it is for clinicians to make those judgments. I think that it is right that we trust our clinical clinicians and their expert decision making. In terms of the studies that are taking place in England, I am more than happy to confirm that we are observers. We are keeping close to NHS England and we will continue to do so as that study develops. Question 6, Pauline McNeill. To ask the First Minister what resources the Scottish Government will be providing to Police Scotland for the investigation of complaints made under the Heat Crime and Public Order Act 2021. We have worked with justice partners, including Police Scotland, to ensure that the act is effectively implemented when it commences next month. The Scottish Police Authority's budget for 24-25 delivers record police funding of £1.55 billion. It is an increase of £92.7 million when compared to the current financial year. It is for the SPA and the chief constable to allocate this budget according to their priorities and their needs, and that should absolutely include the investigation of complaints that are made under the Heat Crime Act 2021. I am aware that some commentary in the act, as I have already said, is not really reflective or indeed accurate of the measures in the act, which was passed by a majority of this Parliament. The act does not stop freedom of expression, however. It makes unlawful the intention of stirring up hatred against a personal community for particular characteristics, as the law already does for race. Pauline McNeill. The First Minister has reiterated several times today that the Heat Crime Act, which comes into force on 1 April, must deliver what Parliament intended, that people must not be criminalised for expressing their opinions, and I agree. Some organisations are still concerned that legislation will be used maliciously to silence legitimate opinion, and it would be helpful, First Minister, if the Scottish Government would engage with those groups. Does the First Minister agree that how the act is interpreted by the police is key, and how they are trained is key, and that the resources are crucially important? Does the First Minister understand my concerns that the police are not properly resourced but crucially properly and adequately trained to implement the act, as it was intended? We agree on that. It could risk criminalising innocent people and further stretching police resources, make the act work and make sure that there are full resources to ensure that what this Parliament intended is delivered. I know that Pauline McNeill takes the issue of tackling hatred very seriously. It is something that she and I have worked on over the years in many different guises. Let me try to give some assurance to Pauline McNeill and those she is raising concerns on behalf of. First of all, I make the point that I made already to Douglas Ross that there are multiple freedom of expression safeguards within the law. There is explicitly a freedom of expression safeguard within the legislation. There is, of course, a reasonable person defence, but there is also, of course, the fact that the legislation has to apply with the European Convention of Human Rights in article 10 being particularly important. There is a triple lock of safeguards that are already there. On how the police then enforce the act—let me again try to give Pauline McNeill some assurances—police officers since 1986, virtually my whole life, have been effectively policing and enforcing the law and stirring up hatred for crimes in relation to race. Now the threshold for the new offences is higher than the racial stirring up offence, but they have been doing so since 1986 with virtually zero controversy. I have got every confidence that they are able to do so for the new offences that are being brought into law in just a matter of weeks time. In terms of resourcing and training, I will reiterate the points that I have already made. We are providing record funding for Police Scotland in relation to the next year's budget. In training, I again refer to the points that have already been made by Police Scotland in the public domain, and I have every confidence in their ability to train officers for this act when it comes into force. I am very pleased that the act will be coming into force, because I believe that it will give people the necessary protections at a time when we are seeing hate crime far too pervasive in our society, far too prominent in our society, and being peddled by some within previous generations of society. The First Minister will be aware that the Police Scotland hate crime website explicitly stereotypes young working-class men from constituencies like mine and his as most likely to commit a hate crime. Does he agree with me that publicly demonising this disadvantaged group already heavily impacted by negative interactions with the criminal justice system and disproportionately damaged by addiction and other challenges will neither assist them nor aid efforts by many community groups and others in my constituency of work to create opportunities for them? While the Conservatives were shouting down Mr McKee when he was asking his question, I think that it is a legitimate point that when it comes to any marketing, any awareness campaigns that are done, it is exceptionally important that there is no stigmatisation of any communities whatsoever. Let us just stick to the evidence and the facts in relation to those who are victims, and indeed anybody that is a perpetrator of hate crime. Let us do that in a way that does not stigmatise one or other community and certainly does not pick communities against each other. The entire point of the hate crime act, and indeed I think that all of our endeavours or most of our endeavours in this chamber around tackling hate crime are around so that we can have a more cohesive society as opposed to one that pits one community against another. I agree with Ivan McKee that we should focus on tackling stigmatisation, stigma, wherever it exists in our society. He is also right to highlight that many organisations and agencies are providing opportunities to our young people, whether it is the work of Skills Development Scotland, national training programmes and apprenticeship programmes, and many others that are supporting our young people during these challenging times. Thank you, First Minister. In the time that we have available for constituency and general supplementaries, I call Liam Kerr. Very grateful, Presiding Officer. Devastating figures this week revealed that people can be waiting up to two years for audiology assessments at NHS Grampian. The chief executive, Adam Caldwells, laid the blame for that squarely at the door of this Government, which under funds of service and fails to properly workforce plan. How precisely does this Government intend to drive these waiting times down? When will the people of the north-east see results? First Minister. First and foremost, when it comes to long waits, I reiterate what I have already said here, that anybody is waiting far too long. Of course, that is not acceptable. We are working hard to recover our NHS services. In terms of Grampian, NHS Frontline boards will receive increased investment of almost £558 million, a real-terms increase of almost 3 per cent. NHS Grampian is seeing a £46.6 million increase in its investment. That is the decisions that this Government is proud to take in very stark contrast to the Conservatives in England. We are investing in our NHS at a time when they are choosing tax cuts for the wealthy over investment in public services. Babies across the UK face delay in treatment for the debilitating genetic condition spiral muscular artery, because no newborn screening programme exists. I recently met two impacted families who want to know why the majority of European countries screen for SMA, yet we don't. It makes a real difference to the lives of newborn babies. Does the First Minister agree with me? Given that it now appears likely that there will be a UK screening pilot for SMA that Scotland should be included? Will the First Minister meet me to discuss work undertaken in Scotland to prepare for such a pilot, including identifying potential partnership funds to deliver it? I recognise the urgency that families in Scotland feel around the issue for those affected by spinal muscular atrophy. It can be absolutely devastating. I share the desire for any action that would prevent that. The UK National Screening Committee is very much in the best place to evaluate all the evidence, and I welcome the in-service evaluation that NHS England is carrying out. I hope that that will bring us closer to a decision. Discussions are on-going about the potential for a Scottish specific study or for Scotland to participate in the ISE and the in-service evaluation. However, there are a number of factors that must be worked through before a final decision can be reached. Of course, I am always happy, as is the health secretary, to meet Bob Doris on this very important issue. That concludes First Minister's questions. The next item of business is a member's business debate in the name of Douglas Ross, and there will now be a short suspension to allow those leaving the chamber and public gallery to do so.


The OPEX Leadership Network brings together experts in the packaging and processing industry to drive operational excellence and keep North American manufacturing strong. Through open dialogue between consumer packaged goods manufacturers, original equipment manufacturers, and suppliers, the OPEX Leadership Network provides a forum where the best minds come together to identify and solve common, non-proprietary operational challenges and develop best practices and innovative solutions to the real-world context of manufacturing. The OPEX Leadership Network offers a robust library of downloadable operational solutions, guidelines, and checklists developed by industry, for industry, and free for all to use. Our offerings are designed to help you improve every aspect of your manufacturing operations, from solutions designed to help the industry grow and engage its workforce with worker safety and engagement best practices, to fostering operational excellence, including overall equipment effectiveness and allergen checklists, to identify ways to maximize efficiency and lower costs with our request for proposal, factory acceptance test, and total cost of ownership guidelines. Improve your operational excellence by downloading all of our solutions for free today.


Good evening and welcome back to Byline. This is a public affairs show here at Amherst Media and as you know we began last year by focusing on our new town government. We're trying to help people understand the new charter and how it was playing out in our government. And from time to time we have guests on the show who are not in the government but who are doing things that are related to the government and that's one of those things we're doing here in this show tonight. So two of the pillars of our town charter are civic engagement and transparency. What could be more transparent than broadcasting live the meetings of our publicly elected officials conducting their business. And so we have our executive director from Amherst Media Jim Lesko here today and he's going to be talking with us about the impacts of both federal and state action on our local cable stations all across the country the state and right here in Amherst. And I'll just preface it by saying that from my time in the legislature what I learned pretty quickly was that most of the regulation most of the rules and most of what happens around cable is governed at the federal level. States do have a little bit to say about it but not all that much. And as we know in our own community periodically a contract has to be negotiated with a provider and one of the pieces that it's on the table in those negotiations is what are we going to do to support our community access television. So with lots of stuff going on in Washington I think that's where we should start Jim because over the few years that we've had this new administration they've taken a new attitude to cable and the relationship between cable entities and companies and the local community. So why don't you help people understand how that all works. Okay well thank you Stan. I think if we step back for a moment for those that might not know how the funding occurs then I can speak to it it makes more sense. That each locality has an option when they have a cable provider whoever that may be come into them and saying we'd like to use your public rights away that's your telephone poles your viaducts to deliver our services to your community residents. The towns have in cities have had the opportunity to negotiate on the behalf of the citizens to get something back for that right away. And in the past one of the things I think we should point out is Amherst media to the best of our knowledge is the oldest nonprofit 44 years in the country doing this kind of work through cable companies money coming through the town to the organization as a nonprofit. We're the very oldest or among the oldest. I believe we are either the oldest or second oldest. Or second look at that. So we're way up there and the Amherst should be proud of the fact that there was people here back in the mid 70s that said this is an important issue about transparency about access to media technology which no one had TV cameras in the day we didn't have what we have. What comes with that package is a town and city could go up to five percent or less but up to five percent of the revenues based on the cable revenues the total cable total and that includes their sales or rentals there's a lot of different line items in that but so it's based on a subscriber base. And there's a fee that's passed on to the subscriber let's be honest it's not a tax but it's a fee and only the subscribers are actually paying back into this service that is being provided it's both educational use of equipment it's about the ability for anyone to have their voices heard to come in and be heard it's a real early on attempt from the mid 70s to say hey the big three networks shouldn't be the only ones talking on TV and then people were very fearful of cable coming in saying hey we don't care about your local news we want to feed you with what's happening in LA or what's happening somewhere else. And so a lot of the mayors and people like that were very up in arms originally around cable so this was a way of checking back into that. We here have just signed a contract in October of 2016 I believe it's only finally signed another and it's a ten year contract so you can get up to ten years we are getting the full five percent and we also you can negotiate for what's called capital money and capital improvement is equipment basically and that's really very important the other thing they should know is in massachusetts there's 250 ish communities that have public education in government what's normally called K. And that's out of 351 cities and towns so it's two thirds and that's pretty good. Some of them do multiple cities and towns like Plymouth has a number of towns that they serve that's right outside of them so I haven't done that breakdown but there's coverage pretty much everywhere except for those as you know the very very tiny little towns right which but even a lot of them get get coverage sure now with broadband being built out into the hill towns it's a chance for them to get more. So to move into the federal so we've always relied on all of us and when I say Amherst media it's everybody else it can be even municipally run public education government you know some towns split it the town or city runs the government the schools might run the education and the public has an element but in our case we run all three channels we're small town. The federal government has kind of left it alone they tweaked it in 1984 the cable act of 1984 but they they just improved upon it with some of the technological changes okay what I loved about the original rules was that they a cable provider could not come into a town or cities they were only going to go over to the rich community they had to show you a map and say how are you going to build out over the years to reach every home that every home has an opportunity to plug in they don't have to plug in they have an opportunity so while you're negotiating you do what's called in-kind services too and that's where this gets into the federal change at the FCC the Federal Communication Commission recently August of 2019 it's a splitboard there's three very pro cable commissioners and there's two that I would say have a very pro cable but they're also a consumer protection worried about the losses that's occurring with so three watching out for the companies and two are watching out for the people pretty much it can go down the line yeah three to two and unfortunately a couple those people voting for the cable companies were Obama appointees so I mean it's not necessarily down the line of politics partisan yeah very so what happened in August of 2019 was the FCC made a decision to give cable the right to take in-kind services and I'm going to explain what in-kind services can include discounts to the elderly veterans or the services that schools and your your governmental buildings your fire your police your town your your city government in schools are all connected what's called the internet internet i-net excuse me institutional network so we call it the i-net so they're saying all of a sudden the FCC says you know what cable you can take that in-kind and put a value to it and if you put a value to it deduct it from what you pay in your fees and when we heard that we said well who's going to say what the value is in the company said we will ourselves so it's a in-house way of looking at the fees that are getting charged to the subscribers it's not out of revenues that the companies are once again going to be able to grab it coming back out the other end and saying well you know we love offering you stand this reduction for your your elderly reduction but we're gonna have to make it up the difference on the discount from that revenue from the franchise fee so that little change of that that language could impact and will impact every access center across the country and it could be in the millions depending on some of the New York City some of the large city ones this could really hurt them but even more so the smaller ones like ourselves we're currently under three hundred thousand dollars a year here so if that's your overall budget that's our cable revenue budget that's your cable revenue okay that's down you know considerably in the fiscal year 2018 to the fiscal year 2019 we lost like 9% of our funding from cable and a lot of that has to do with what's called the the cable cutting right more people are taking from streaming they're saying I don't need cable anymore I'm gonna hire so the subscription pool is dropping it's drop as a result of fewer subscriptions there's a loss of revenue in addition there's a loss of revenue because of how they're calculating the in-kind they will if the FCC stands and we fear that this new rule could take its effect in the spring by the springtime by the time it triculates your reduction in revenue has been driven by the subscription rate not by this rule but this rule would be compounded held right it'll compound absolutely so hopefully how long how long before you know if that's gonna we were estimating well it's been challenged we have we belong to a national organization alliance for community media which have filed a suit they're getting a hearing in the sixth district court I believe St. Louis and we're trying to get stay we have the National Association of Cities the mayors League of Mayors Natoya National Association of Government and I can never remember the full acronym a lot of organizations are backing this and saying they can they too do not want this to happen this is going to devastate local programming and as you pointed out it's not just our coverage as important that is of government but it's also that the people that normally don't have a way of expressing themselves the artists the people of regardless of their income level or the language a lot of churches are shown across the country get a chance to go on the air for free through cable access so you know it's it's got this huge impact so what happened is luckily in Massachusetts our good friend senator Markey who when he was in Congress was on the telecommunications committee of one of his areas of specialty it is it is and we're very likely leading voices in that area very very lucky that he was had made it is a point to try to intercede this to interject and change the legislative the language back in the cable act back to the way it was so getting rid of that in kind change back to the original that franchise fees can only go to monetary fees not in kind okay and so he was joined by representative Anna a shoe I believe is how you say her name from California and she's been very very good in a very short period time they got 22 so cosigners on at this time as you say a lot going down in Washington and and you know and they're keeping their their their they're keeping themselves really in the mix of all the other things that are happening other than the impeachment as important as that is so we're hoping that the alliance community media and the organizations that I belong to here in Massachusetts mass access of mobilizing people mobilizing citizens and our government our local government to respond there will be a life's community media setting up an online platform for people to sign a petition I will make sure the community knows about that and letters are important the FCC when they say we just received a hundred thousand letters or something to that nature they that's a lot for them people don't normally come up out of the woodwork on that those issues so the legislation that they filed what would it effectively do what is it going to say and what would be effective it be it says so little it just puts the language back in the way it was so basically it overrules the the bureaucracy and puts it into law which then means the bureaucracy can't skirt it they have to follow that and so you'd be going back to the status quo actually be maintaining because it hasn't yet been through the that was the argument upfront well it also hasn't been resolved in the court so right there's a stay presumably and therefore they can't implement it right so you haven't gotten the hit yet not yet and we're you know this just came out this is evolving as we speak I'm sure I'll get a phone call today that says yeah you missed this point but it's it's really a lobbyists parade over the next six 12 months as they try to get this piece of legislation through because the cable companies are going to oppose it who else is going to oppose it you mentioned who will be supporting you who else are you going up the telecoms because the telecoms are in there in the industry I mean you're looking at Verizon really you don't think of them as much of cable but they still do provide some services but it's really that over the line streaming that a lot of them and don't forget companies like Comcast who were under right they bought NBC for a reason that was a broadcast distribution production and bought Universal Studios for the same reason production and distribution they bought Hulu very early on as a streaming component for their materials Netflix is all of a sudden making movies these people are using the same lines as of the other people that the cable has to pay us the times it's so they're all going into the they're all going into all aspects of the telecom business same thing happened with banks and insurance so everybody wants to be in the insurance business of the bankers went into the insurance business and there's a big fight that's constantly going on between those two industries because the lines get blurred so back to cable you're you if everything goes well in Washington you'll be able to block that change the change of the in kind which would really take resources out of every community television station in the country immediately if it was implemented but as you said who else will be up against this it'll be all those companies I just mentioned Netflix and Amazon and these are monsters that's your biggest current threat at the federal level is there anything else that's that you guys are worrying about before we focus on what we can do at the state level well the federal level is always a challenge you know because this administration it is truly more than ever the corporations have a lot of access and they're reading their their papers and implementing so when we get the support of the Congress specifically and senators like Warren signed on and also Bernie Sanders signed on and you know a number of four of the candidates that are running for president signed on to the Markey Bill in short no and you know Massachusetts were the most inundated state in the country that I mean as you pointed out almost every city and town is covered so anybody that represents Congressional or even in the state here knows the importance you yourself used it back in the day to be able to talk to the citizens of what's going on in Boston and keep in touch so we're following it closely on the national level we will ask people to get involved and sign the petitions and maybe some letters I think getting the town to constantly realize the citizens that we do not take out of the tax revenue it's always been one of those things where you get taxes why aren't you doing this that's not the case and I think the second thing we're about to talk about is the mass access bill which is up in front of the house so that is going to be dealing with another issue continuing the issue of streaming and loss of revenue as we pointed out that 9% we lost recently okay so we really the mass access bill if I can get into that right now is being championed by Paul McMurtry McMurtry McMurtry that second hour throws me out McMurtry he owns a movie theater oh nice up in is it land or somewhere like that I don't remember which town but it's in that region and he has an arts background and it's an art cinema type place like Amherst the equivalent of an Amherst cinema so mass access which is our statewide organization advocacy group that we belong to has worked on legislation that it's looking at basically looking at digital entertainment okay like and and seeing it as a something that really needs to be dealt with because that's the loss revenue that we just mentioned right that that digital entertainment's coming across the same poles that cable has to pay for to use in the localities but the other entertainment streaming coming in is not so it's not a level playing field by any means and you would think except for those that own both that they would be on our side of doing that like you know let's get some of that money so what came up was this idea of putting a fee on on that service that the state would implement and what what I really was amazed at how many representatives and senators signed on at this moment if there's like over 85 and that's a fact for a fast track this is started early fall and so you know because we're down there constantly talking about HD the need for high definition and cable and other things there's a relationship that we have with a lot of the representatives so this bill is really looking at charging a fee that the state can collect and and create a distribution network if you will that would look at the state getting 20% of revenues we returned on this twice a year billing and 40% to the municipalities and 40% to media access centers so it's a revenue generating for everybody it's not just a media access center way of trying to get money for ourselves it's also we know the towns and cities with prop two and a half and everything else that are under everyone's doing overrides and and and trying to figure out how to deal with these huge capital improvement that there's a need for new revenue and this is an opportunity to really look at this as a way for the town and cities across the state to receive quite a bit of revenue at the same time everyone I ask an Amherst media is so important you know it's too bad cables dying well what are you going to do to save it what are you going to do what kind of funding mechanism are we going to put in place that guarantees another 44 so is this a new idea or in place in other states it's in place and that's a good question I was surprised to hear how many states have already started programs like this that included diverse states and from Florida Minnesota Ohio Pennsylvania it's almost like 12 states either have something in place or have something in motion quite a few cities on their own have done so in Colorado and I believe in Illinois so the dozen states it's already law in those states or it's law in some of those states some and it's still a proposal and others yes and so help us with the the math here so I have a $20 subscription to a streaming service a month so I'm paying $240 a year on that did I do my math correctly yes so I've got a $240 subscription over the course of the year approximately how much if the proposal goes into a 5% would be 12 5% so we're going to pay $12 and of that 40 percent is going to come here so about eight eight dollars will be based on population so I mean they have a formula that they're going to create so it'll be it's not going to be a purse subscription headcount in my town it's formula across the state more like a cherry sheet approach okay and I think that makes it a little bit more equal you know because your cost you know what the in millions the total no I know the industry recently went to a hearing that was held down at the state house and their estimate oh they were saying hundreds and hundreds of millions and we don't think it's that high necessarily think it's tens of tens of millions yeah I really I haven't I don't have the numbers to crunch so you know but I would think with a number of colleges in Massachusetts alone if you're if you're looking at it that way then you're looking at a lot of people on those individual accounts so I mean I think it's a proactive way to deal with this other countries have done this South Korea has it as a statewide tax a country wide and Canada different provinces have implemented it and you know it's India even has done it which is a huge country for that kind of you know need but we're really saying like if you really expect the services you're getting no matter where you are but let's say in Amherst and you can if you're watching us lose 10 percent based on cable cutting and it continues to maybe go down to five per year or you're going to eventually see us not be able to present the way we present and cover what we cover and and I like to say we're a hybrid in a very small town and with the it's not just government it's the ability to bring in experts and people in issues that are not you know just Amherst based but the people that we bring in and connecting points and in other things like that that the community connections in children's programming we do a lot that just you won't be able to do mention connecting point that's WG no I mean yeah community connections community connect okay I just didn't know whether you were also rebroadcasting some shows from there very very hands-on to their own stuff I would like to see us go into a regional distribution of using each others and that's another thing to come but the other aspect is if we as I mentioned to you before we came on the air we're losing print media everywhere in the country everyone's bemoaning the fact you pick up the paper it's cost more and it's fewer pages we've lost hundreds you know thousands of people have lost jobs in the industry the affiliates as you and I grew up in this area that 2240 and three they actually used to come out and cover town and issues that were you know they're nowhere to be found covering any of the issues unless it it's a big party at UMass or something you know it's not they're not here so you're left with the access centers who are covering local government to give you gavel to gavel now that's not the perfect way of watching and getting your news but it is a way of knowing and keeping an eye on what government is doing and your judge your your show here is doing that and helping people understand the complexities that they're behind this right so we're part of that but more importantly is that loss of the education the access by people to equipment that wouldn't normally have the access to learn a lot of our interns are from the colleges have gone on this has been a great opportunity for them to to go out into their communities or to get jobs in the businesses so I mean there's multiple things that we do it's an economic development engine in many ways in the final couple of minutes might be helpful for people to understand generally your budget you mentioned 300,000 that comes from the cable system as a result of the negotiated agreement and we have a contract that going a few more years and eventually they'll sit down and renegotiate but right now it's about 300,000 a year and assuming that the federal government doesn't take away the next 10% with this new policy so what are the other sources of revenue by category and just rough figures so we can build it up in our minds and understand what it takes to run a quality local cable access station well we're allowed to as a nonprofit to do for production production for profit you know and so we we do a lot for the community the colleges will get asked will we cover a lecture well so we'll charge a small fee for that or of TEDx of Amherst College we've done for a number of years at a higher rate we need to do more production that what we're set up to do that can generate some income in here to help balance our sheets you know one of the things that comes up you know we're trying to get a new facility that's costing money and in those meetings at the local historic district people keep saying we love what you do but what if you go under and you don't you lose all your funding what's your building going to be well I would think that you turn on that if we're so wonderful how you all going to help what are you going to do to pitch in and hire us or to donate money or to help us move so we're a combination of for service paid for services donations and membership at the moment and does the town provide any direct funding so the services that involve putting the select board sorry the town council on on your site that is absorbed as part of your normal operating budget yeah that's under our contract very specifically what we have to do under that and that's understandable we're getting the money's getting given to us for a very specific but we're also in the source of that revenue though is the cable subscribers exactly that we don't get anything from the town there is no line item for us in that budget that's what I thought but I just wanted to make sure so you must you must be doing reasonably well on your production services that you that you sell you're not really in much competition with anybody around here there's independent people yeah they're in companies and we have to make sure we're not you know that really competing with that fine liner under undercutting too much but you're allowed more these days than in the past as a non-profit to create funds so we want people we like to have shows like yours underwritten we're starting to talk about that it's like many stations across the telecommuny access centers have underwriting but I mean as we move forward can we bring the journalists from UMass and can we start expanding and giving this community more coverage that it deserves there's so much going on up here in the area that really is worthy of that kind of coverage great well thanks for coming on and explaining a little bit more for the us of us who don't know a whole lot other than how to put it on and watch it how you actually put it together and pay for it so thank you for joining us and thank you for joining us and we'll see you again soon on another show


The International Mother Language Day is observed every year to promote linguistic, cultural diversity and multilingualism. This day recognizes that language and multilingualism can advance inclusion and sustainable development goals, focusing on leaving no one behind. These years' themes set by UNESCO focuses on using technology for multilingual learning, plus TV Africa's UNROSIG or HACC Hasmore in this report. Language plays a vital role in development and in ensuring cultural diversity. It is estimated that over 400 languages are spoken in Nigeria, with major languages, Hausa, Yoruba, Ibu, Fulfidi and Ibibu, among others. Sadly, there seems to be a threat to traditional languages and Nigeria is not an exception. It is quite common to see young Nigerians who cannot have simple conversation in their mother tongue as globalization takes the centre stage. I don't speak English when I'm at work, but if I'm at home, I don't speak my language. I speak my mother tongue often, especially if I'm with my people, or if I'm with any of my tribe or person. But the situation whereby I am not with them, I don't speak that language. I don't speak my mother tongue except in my house, or except I see a friend or anybody that speaks the same language with me. So most likely I do English all day. I'm director of research and studies at the Nigerian Institute of International Affairs, IFEM Ubi, helps on this year's theme, which focuses on advancement of languages through technology. Every language is supposed to have characters, you know, an accent that helps to pronounce the words.  The sense of the language itself for technology to be, you know, for us to leverage technology in making this language more accessible in terms of people learning these languages, you know, through, say, multi-media technology, learning this language through the 21st century technologies like the computer and the internet and all that. Ubi insists Nigerian education system must be standardized with a nationally accepted language. For me, you know, it's going to be sounding funny in a way. You see, the pigeon English is something that has bind Nigerians together.  The only national language that is binding on the pigeon English. In a country where the lingua franca is the English language, the question is, how can the wide gap of local languages and English be closed? Perhaps a conscious effort from the home front may go a long way. Hello. Hope you enjoyed the news. Please do subscribe to our YouTube channel and don't forget to hit the notification button so you get notified about fresh news updates.


This is the OTP presented by Farm Bureau Health Plans, plan on paying less for the coverage that you need with Farm Bureau Health Plans. Get a quote today at FBHP.com. Matt Miller from ESPN joins us here on the OTP. Matt, there's so many things that I want to ask you about, but I feel like I need, before we get into the football stuff, you know, we need to go all the way back to the beginning because you're from Joplin, Missouri. That's right. We're working for a CFL team there. How do you get from that to ESPN being one of their main draft analysts? A lot of luck. It was a lot of luck and being in the right place at the right time. I went from, you know, working for CFL and AFL teams to a little company called Bleacher Report was starting up and needed writers.  And I applied at Bleacher Report in 2010 and like the rest is history. So it's been a crazy 13 year ride from coaching semi pro football and working for, you know, $50 a scatting report for the CFL. But it's been a lot of fun. And in 2023, during the draft in Kansas City, you were able to be a part of ESPN's draft coverage. What was that experience like? Oh my gosh. I mean, literally a dream come true. Not just to be, you know, on ESPN sitting next to Mel Kuiper and Lewis Riddick covering the draft before it to happen. And, you know, close to your hometown, you know, my family, I didn't know they were going to be there. Were they surprised?   And it's like, I have 30 seconds before I'm live on TV. So like, I can't get emotional, but it's like, it was such a great moment to have that. So it was, it was great. That's incredible. And you write just all of the things draft related. And one of the main things that you do or that I consume a lot of is the mock drafts, of course, everybody loves a good mock draft. And when people are putting those things together, what is step one? Where do you start? Yeah, I mean, you have to have a good foundation of team needs, scheme fits. You have to have a good foundation of where players are ranked. But I think a good mock draft relies on information. You know, it's not what I would do. It's what rank Carthon is going to do. And so you have to have those connections. Maybe it's not always the general manager, maybe it's not always the head coach, but those connections to say, like, hey, where where are you guys leaning? Or hopefully they can help you kind of complete that puzzle of, you know, and maybe we're looking to pass rushers or maybe we're looking at offensive tackles. And then I can kind of do the rest of the work and say, okay, well, this is the offensive tackle who might be there. This is the wide receiver who might be there. So it's having those that you got to be organized so that you know, all right, here are the players who should be drafted in that range. Here's what that team actually needs. Here's maybe the player profile that they like, and then you can connect the dots a little bit. Well, and having that experience in the CFL and the AFL, you're able to probably have a lot of sources or connections. There's so much overlap now. Oh, no, absolutely. And that's a nice way of saying I'm old in this business now, right? I appreciate that. But it is, you know, over time, when I started, I was in my mid 20s, which is what a lot of area scouts are in their mid 20s. So I think I was approachable in that way because we're about the same age, you know, and it was a minute easier. And so it's been fun to watch those guys, you know, come up through the business at the same time that I had been and be able to keep those connections. So here in Indianapolis at the scouting combine, there's been a lot of conversation about the offense about quarterbacks, wide receivers, the offensive line, everybody's very excited about all of those things. So of course, I would like to talk about the defensive side of it. Oh, there we go. We'll flip it. Yeah, I would like to talk about those players, those position groups, give them some love. Is there a defensive position group that you are really excited about watching this week? Yeah, I think the corner position is always fun because those guys are really fast. You know, that's a lot of fun to watch. But also, I think we're still trying to figure out who is who in this class, you know, I think, Terry Arnold from Alabama is one of my favorite players in the entire draft. So I would say, okay, he's corner one. But who's next? You know, is it Quinyan Mitchell, who had a great senior bowl? Is it Ines Rakes draw from Missouri? Is it some like Kool-Aid McHistory from Alabama? So I think that's what makes this a really important week is getting all those players together and being able to evaluate them side by side and try to, you know, break some of those ties in your rankings. I know that the defensive line position is something that has been talked a little bit because some say there's a lot of depth there. Some say there's a pretty big drop off. What is your evaluation? No, I think there is depth, but I do think there is a drop off as well.  There's Byron Murphy from Texas who's going to go pretty early. And then there's a drop off and we're waiting to see, you know, does someone like Jersey Newton from Illinois or Tevandre Sweat from Texas, do they take that next step and get into maybe the top 40 picks? So the combat is going to be huge for figuring out those tiers and to find out where those drop offs are. But I agree, you know, defensive end, we might see five go between pick 10 and pick 32, but then we could see that that pretty steep decline. Is there a position group, especially on the defensive side of the ball that you are exceptionally excited about in terms of maybe being able to earn a little more respect for that group? Is there one that maybe has the ability to make some money this week? Yeah, I mean, corner is obviously but linebacker everyone and I would even say, you know, what is one of the weakest positions in this draft linebacker? It really is just not a super top heavy linebacker class, but players like Edger and Cooper from Texas A&M is I think he's going to hear junior Coulson from Michigan, Cedric Gray from North Carolina could all, you know, not only earn that respect, but also earn a lot of money here this week as they move themselves up. Alright, let's open it up. We can talk about the offense now too, because that is where a lot of the stories are. And that's where people are really excited. And the quarterbacks, we know that there are a lot of guys who aren't going to be working out, especially some of those top names. Who are you excited to watch? Yeah, I would say JJ McCarthy, you know, especially a quarterback JJ McCarthy, because as you mentioned, we're not going to see Caleb Williams, I see Jadon Daniels, we're not going to see Drake May. This is such a huge opportunity for JJ McCarthy to do what CJ stroud and anything Richardson did last year, which was tell people tell evaluators. This is who I am as a player. This I am as a prospect. I'm not afraid of the competition. I'm going to go out here and throw and show, you know, that I belong in the top 10 or the top five. So I think this is a big week for McCarthy, especially the quarterback spot. But this is a loaded wide receiver class, as I'm sure everyone is telling you all week. So when it's when it's finally time for those guys to work out, I think a lot of people are going to be sitting up in their seats a little bit. An interesting position that Marvin Harrison has taken is that he's not working out at the scouting combine. He's also not going to be having a pro day. How unique is that decision? And do you think it is to his detriment? I've never so again, 13 years doing this, I've never heard of that before. But I kind of applaud it because I think, especially in the messaging. Now, if you were a quarterback, we would say no, I like I need to see you throw in person. I need to see you move in person. We need to put you through a workout that is different than what you did in college to kind of break some of your comfort zones. Your wide receiver, you've dominated for two years, like I can watch, I can see everything you've run every route that needs to be run at Ohio State. I think it's also I love the message that he has come out and said, I'm preparing to be an NFL player, like my attention the next four months will be on being the best NFL wide receiver I can be. Instead of like, let me train to be a track star for a couple months.  And then I got to be worried about private workouts. So if you need a 40 hour dash to like Marvin Harrison, Jr. I don't know. It's tell you, I would just watch his tape, especially now we have GPS timing on these guys. So you can get a feel for his speed just by checking out the GPS time or again, just watch him play in the big 10 the last years. A position group that has been talked about very little here in Indianapolis is the running backs. Yeah. Um, is that because they are not very good? I would hope no. But we really just it's been crickets when we talk about running back. Yeah, I think the free agent running back class is a big part of it. You know, a lot of people are trying to figure out that domino first of Saquon Barkley and Josh Jacobs and Austin Eckler. Like what happens to those guys, Derek Henry is in that mix. So you got to let that domino fall. But I also do think to your point, it's just there's not the talent this year that there was last year with Bijan Robinson and Jameer Gibbs. This year where there is a little bit of a drop off Jonathan Brooks from Texas would have been the first running back taken probably still will be but suffered an ACL in November. And so that is kind of a little bit of a hit for this class. Is there somebody in that group who can make some real money this weekend? Oh yeah, Jaylen Wright from Tennessee. Absolutely. I'm not pandering. I promise I'm not pandering to the Tennessee crowd. But he, I mean, when you watch him on tape, he is explosive. He's strong. This is the type of event where a player like that can really shine. Take this entire combine experience. Everybody who's going to be participating. Who are you the most excited to watch go through this process? Yeah, I roam a dune's day from Washington because I mean such a breakout year the last two years at Washington at wide receiver. And you know, like we said at the quarterbacks, Malik neighbors Miller. She was not running Marvin Harrison's not doing anything. So I think a dune's day has a huge opportunity and just as a football fan, he's my favorite player in this class to watch. So it would be fun to watch him actually work out too. Matt Miller, thank you so much for taking some time to hang out with us. This has been great. Great. Thank you guys. Appreciate it. Seat Geek is now the official ticketing partner of the Tennessee Titans, whether you're buying or selling tickets to Titans games or any other live event in Nashville. Seat Geek is the place to do it. Seat Geek, the new official ticketing partner of the Tennessee Titans, so Titans fans can fan. Delaney Walker joining us here on the OTP, Amy Wells, Rhett Bryan. Funny thing about the NFL scouting combine.  This is how it happens. Well, yeah, you when you scream my name, I got scared. I was surprised. I'm like, who knows me in here? No, I was coming to look for you guys actually to come see what y'all was doing. You know, I haven't been in here this week yet, so I thought I'd come in here and make my presence known. And you did. Yeah. And you have. So what are you doing this week in Indianapolis? I'm here with the Legends coordinators pretty much. I am a mentor for the Titan group. I follow them this whole week. I'm pretty much just a ball of information for those guys. If they have anything they want to ask me about experiencing the combine or just what's to come next. You know, that's what I'm here for to give them that information. And to be honest with you, this group of guys, they're great. They're wonderful. Because sometimes you would think because they get NIL deals that they're a little ahead of themselves, but these guys are actually very respectful and they want the information. How do you relate to those guys or have these conversations with those guys? Because the NIL component is a very real thing.  Some a lot of money. Yeah. And it has to influence the way that they're coming in because they have the staff already kind of they have people that they've been working with. So some of those things that for people like you who came in people before really this year or last year, they had no experience in that world. And now they're kind of coming in these established brands has to be hard to kind of maneuver leading guys through that. Right? Yeah. You know, we actually the legislative community actually talked about how to deal with these guys that are getting these deals that are making millions of dollars before getting to the NFL kind of seem in that, you know that I'm bigger than what you think I am. I'm already made a million dollars like you can't tell me anything. But we haven't seen that. And that's that's actually a good thing because I would say this is probably the first year where we have a lot of guys that's coming into the draft with NIL deals. But they all act like they still hungry. They still want it. And I like to see that. That's the that's the exciting part. And hopefully it stays that way because, you know, again, they will get more money as the year goes. But as long as these guys stay humble and want to learn and want to be a part of something great. I'm fine with the deals. But again, you just got to adapt to what you're working with nowadays. And I think they see me as an older brother that's not too older than him. So it works out for me.  Some of those memories of combine experiences. You get the shakes or something. You know what? I always get nervous when I get I don't know why because I'm not doing anything. But maybe it's because all the coaches that I've been and been around. I'm going to get to see my fellow media folks. I'm going to get to see. It's just I think I'm nervous in that aspect. But it's changed so much. The combine that it don't even feel like it's the combine to me here. It's like feel like we're in a YouTube. Like I don't even know what they call it. But it's like a YouTube sensation where everybody just filming. You got cameras everywhere. You just got it's just a lot going on. It doesn't feel like when I came to like when I came we didn't have no workout gym. We had to do everything on a rug. We stayed in a train. We did our formals in a train. Like we didn't come across to the stadium.  We didn't have that. So yes it is different in the aspect. But I think that's what happens. The NFL evolves the players evolve and this is what we start to see. It's like a social media out outrage. And that's what's happening. What do you know about this tight end class? Have you followed these guys? Have you watched some of their I've been watching a few of those guys. I feel like this class you know it's it's some top guys in there right now couple. I would say it's about three top guys that can go either first round or third late late second round. Yeah. But we'll see you know I'm not really sure just talking to them.  They just got to put them numbers up and I feel like they've done they done well on film. Now it's just what they're going to put it with numbers they're going to put up out here to give them an edge. Can I ask you can I guess at the who the three are that you're talking about because obviously Brock Bowers Georgia leads the class. Yeah he number one. He's different right. He is different. He's put on a he's put on a clinic. So he's kind of what the NFL is involving to with the type of tight end he is. He can catch passes. He can run routes. He can also block if you have to put them in a backfield and play full back. He can do that as well. So I feel like he's he's pretty much NFL ready at the moment. Jitaven Sanders University of Texas is who I would have at two. That's number two is number two. That's who the star is on. And again he had another phenomenal great season performed his butt off again. He's got that pro style tight end where he can catch passes. He can run route. He can block. He can be the move guy. And I think that's that's pretty much what the league is looking for is guys who can be able to be movable and play multiple spots. And he's one of those guys that could definitely improve his stock this week. I mean that's what everybody is trying to do. But Brock Bowers listen. We know he's big. He's strong. He's fast. Whatever. But that's a guy that could do that. And then the third guy I would say it would be Jaheem Bell from Florida State. Am I right there? I like him. I actually got to sit in a formal with him. And the guy is genuine. He knows football. He want to play football. And to be to go to Florida State and what they did to turn around that program with the guys that they had. He was a he was a big reason why that happened. And in NFL you want guys like that to help young quarterbacks. You need a guy that you can trust that's consistent that make plays. And then explosive on his feet. So he's one of those guys I think that if he performed at a high level here he may move up the draft board even more than what we think. See he's done his homework. Delaney Walker. 82 never lets us down. I was not expecting to see you and now I'm just blown away by the wealth of knowledge. Well I'm around these guys. Your work with the legends community what else does that entail? Uh so with with them we help guys transition out the NFL. So pretty much we help guys get line of duty medical exams. We help guys get on if you want to do the bill wash internship. If you want to go to any type of book book count boot camp casting we can get you guys in that. So we just try to find resources that guys can't get. And you call me. And if I can't answer it I will find a person who can answer it and get the right information to you. So what we do is just try to help guys make that make transitioning out the NFL easier for guys because it is very hard to transition out the NFL. It ain't like any other job where you get paid millions of dollars and then retire at 34. So it's a way we know it is very difficult. We we've seen the numbers that a lot of guys get in trouble at this point. So we just try to make it easy for them to transition and try to find another job or some type of income that can help them until they get today retirement. Why is that something you're so passionate about? I mean because I'm one of them.  So it's difficult on them. They still trying to figure out what's next or what's going what's going to happen when I pass how I'm going to leave money to my family. So it's very important because I'll be one of those guys at one point and I just want to make sure that I leave a mark knowing that I try to help and change what the culture was. How important is it to have someone like yourself to talk to these guys? Because obviously this program's been around for a while. You've had guys who came before you to help you through the way. Does it give more credence? You're really able to listen. It's like Delaney's done this. I know who Delaney Walker he's done this. He wouldn't leave me wrong. I need to listen up.   Damn 14 years but tell me how you did it.  Like yeah man let me let me tell you this is what I this is what I did. This is how I did it. I took care of my body. I get my treatment. I made sure I was at the facility before everybody to take care of my body before we go to the practice. Just just to hear them guys want to know is it sometimes it like brings it makes me happy because you know that's what we hear for I want to give you the knowledge to make sure you successful in this league because we need this league to stay running. This is what pays our bills pays our mortgage and without them we won't have it. So we got to keep these guys strong make sure that they can play this game and make sure that this game last. So I try to do as much as I can and give them as much information as possible whoever wants it. But like I said all my guys been wanting the information. I literally just left the noble practice facility talking to the guys giving them information on how I stayed stayed healthy and not didn't have any leg injuries and we talked about stretching and stuff like that. So I mean it's big and I'm excited that these guys want to learn for Matt Miller and Delaney Walker our surprise guest. Thank you for listening to this edition of the OTT.