ut our position on the record and for the record make it clear what is in the bill, I should say that I can give, of course, Ms McNeill the assurance, and indeed, Mr Cole-Hamilton, that it is our shared intent not to criminalise where an individual has made a genuine mistake or has a reasonable excuse, and again, to be clear, the term reasonable is a term widely understood across our courts and justice system. I remain firmly of the view that those amendments from Ms McNeill are unnecessary. Our policy is clear. We will treat people fairly, with dignity and respect, but we cannot be naive Social Security fraud is a risk and public funds must be protected, not least so that they are available to give assistance to those who are generally entitled to it. Section 39 makes it an offence to provide false or misleading information with the intention of obtaining assistance that the recipient is not entitled to. The offence already requires intent. There is no reason to add the word knowingly as amendment 81 would do. Section 40 makes it an offence to fail to notify a change of circumstances in breach of a duty to do so, if and only if, the failure results in someone receiving assistance they should not, and the person has no reasonable excuse for the failure to notify. What that means is that if an individual claims to have a reasonable excuse, the legal burden to prove it is not a reasonable excuse falls on the prosecutor. Before a case even gets anywhere near a prosecutor, there will of course have been an agency investigation. If a person has a reasonable excuse, they can give it then and explain any other mitigating circumstances. Those factors would be taken into account before officials concluded the investigation and where a genuine error had happened, then the matter would rest there. Where there has been a genuine error and it goes to the fiscal service, the fiscal service is unlikely to prosecute because they apply a case marking test that asks whether prosecution would be in the public interest. And even if someone were prosecuted, having a reasonable excuse will mean that they are exonerated. Ms McNeill's amendments to section 40 and section 41, which are similar, risk making the offence so difficult to prosecute that nobody would take the risk of prosecution seriously and open up the system to intentional fraud. Finally, we come to section 42. That allows a senior figure in an organisation to be convicted of an offence committed by the organisation if the criminality can be attributed to the officials and I quote, connivance, consent or neglect. Amendment 81 would remove the element of neglect. Section 42 is worded in the usual way for a section of its kind. Examples can be found in many other acts of this Parliament. And I have to ask, why should a company director not be held personally responsible if he neglects his duties, tons of blind eye and allows a company to commit social security fraud? I think a director in that situation should have a case to answer and I therefore do not support amendment 88. All that said, I recognise that a consistent approach must be taken by agency staff in reporting cases for consideration of prosecution. And I'm happy to put on record that detailed guidance and training will be developed for our agency staff. This will complement the code of practice on investigations that the bill already requires. The code will set standards of conduct for investigations and explain how we will ensure during investigations that a person's dignity is respected. It will be consulted on so that Ms McNeill and others can see what it will provide and will be able to contribute to its development. For the reasons that I have given, I cannot support Ms McNeill's amendments to this group. I would invite her not to press them, but if they are pressed, I would urge that they are not agreed. Nothing more to add, Presiding Officer, except that I'll be seeking withdrawal of them when they're moved and not moving the others. Thank you. Ms McNeill wishes to withdraw amendment 81. Does anyone object? No one objects. And Ms McNeill does not wish to move 81 to 88. Does anyone object? Does anyone wish to move any of those amendments? No. Very good. Thank you. I call amendment 89. In the name of the minister, already debated. Minister to move, please. Moved. Thank you. The question is that amendment 89 be agreed to. Are we all agreed? We are agreed. And I turn now to group 16. Can I call amendment 90? In the name of the minister, grouped with amendments as shown in this particular grouping, minister to move amendment 90 and to speak to all amendments in the group. Thank you, Presiding Officer. My amendments 90 and 91 are technical amendments to the upgrading provisions in section 44A. They clarify that the duty to consider the effects of inflation will apply to current rates of assistance but not to rates that may remain in legislation for events that have happened in the past. The best start grant is an example here. For a time, there might be both an older and a current rate prescribed in regulations. The older rate applying to bursts that have happened but for which an application has not yet been made. The older rate will already have been reviewed and it would serve no purpose to review it again. Amendments 12, 13 and 14 in the name of Ben Macpherson would commit the Scottish Government to increasing any relevant figures in the funeral expense assistance regulations to take into account the impact of inflation. At present, that is expected to affect the flat rate element of the payment that has been capped by the DWP at £700 since 2003. We have already committed to widening eligibility for funeral expense assistance to reach around 2,000 more people per year at an estimated cost of £3 million. Although there are significant pressures on the Scottish Government's budget, I recognise that the value of the capped element of the current funeral payment has eroded over time. I will therefore support Mr Macpherson's amendments so that there is no further reduction in the value of this part of the payment to bereaved families. Amendments 139 to 141 in the name of Mr Griffin seek to adjust the calculation of the carers allowance supplement to take account of inflation. Carers allowance supplement already provides an increase of 13 per cent in 2018-19 to support for carers significantly more than inflation. That represents an additional investment of over £30 million per year. I estimate that Mr Griffin's amendments will cost a further £30 million over the next five years, which will need to be found from within the Scottish budget. However, I am happy to make that commitment in recognition of the vital role that carers play. I move amendment 90. Thank you very much. I call on Ben Macpherson to speak to amendment 12 and the other amendments in the group. Thank you, Presiding Officer. When passed this historic bill we'll successfully transition and deliver the 11 benefits devolved under the Scotland Act 2016 and that will undoubtedly make a meaningful and important difference all across our country. One of the many important differences that this bill will make will be the delivery of funeral expenses assistance. That will replace the UK Government's funeral payment providing critical financial support to people at a very difficult time. Funeral costs have risen significantly over the last 10 years. That means that individuals and families are more likely to experience a financial shock as a result of having to pay for a funeral, especially where the person who has died has made little or no provision for the cost of that funeral. That can push people into unsustainable debt, which can have a negative impact on the already difficult grieving process and on mental and physical health. The Scottish Government has already undertaken a number of actions working with stakeholders to alleviate funeral costs, and I'm absolutely aware of that, including measures in the fairer Scotland action plan and the funeral assistance plan. The delivery of funeral expenses assistance under the new social security system has the potential to build on previous progress. An important way to enhance that would be to up-rate funeral expense assistance for inflation going forward. That is, of course, not just my view but also the view of many others, including citizens advice Scotland. Presiding Officer, as drafted, the bill currently envisages upgrading carers assistance, disability assistance and employment injury assistance, all of which I very much welcome. If past amendments 12, 13 and 14 in my name would add funeral expense assistance to that list, making sure that in the years ahead funeral expense assistance would keep pace with inflation, keep up with funeral costs and deliver critical financial support to people at a very difficult time. I believe that amendments 12, 13 and 14 are important. I'm grateful to the minister for her support and would welcome the support of other MSPs. Thank you very much, and I call on Mark Griffin to speak to amendment 139 and the other amendments in this group. Thank you, Presiding Officer. We'll be supporting all amendments in this group. We welcome the Government's substantial movement on this issue, while it's always been their policy intention to provide up-rating to disability assistance until Christmas, the position has been that up-rating should not be in the legislation. That is a welcome change and we want to support that and improve on what the Government have offered. At stage 2, I amended the Government's amendment to afford carers the same protection that they enjoy under the UK system. At stage 2, I also raised a discrepancy with the carers supplement that the formula at section 47 would mean that ministers will pass on the UK Government benefit freeze to carers. At amendments 139 to 141, I'm seeking to rectify that. Briefly, Presiding Officer, a link to Jobseekers allowance means that the supplement will be frozen. The minister would be required to, as part of their up-rating processes, determine what the inflated value of the combined supplement and underlined carers allowance should be and so ensure that the higher amount is paid. As I explained at stage 2, without that adjustment, the discrepancy would mean that the Scottish Government would save itself £5 million in 2019-20, while carers would lose out in real terms just a year after that very, very welcome boost of which the Government has to be congratulated for of 13 per cent. I welcome the minister's support for those amendments and the fact that the Scottish ministers will take full control over carers allowance to iron out at this anomaly when full competence for this benefit is taken on by Government. Thank you. Thank you very much, and I call Alison Johnstone. Thank you. Scottish Greens will support all amendments in this group, but I would like to put on the record that we regret that there is no commitment to upgrade all benefits in line with relevant costs. This was a debate that we had, and I lost at stage 2, but we will continue to ask the Government to pay the closest attention to this. We cannot, we simply cannot, have a system that suggests that it is based on dignity and respect if people don't have enough money to have a reasonable standard of living. I really would urge the Government to continue to look at this. If living costs increase and benefits are frozen as they have been, that will make life incredibly difficult for people. The benefit freeze has taken £300 million out of the pockets of 700,000 of the poorest people in Scotland, and I really do think that a social security bill should upgrade benefits automatically. Can I ask the minister to wind up and to press or move press or withdraw amendment 90? I will wind up formally, Presiding Officer, and press the amendment. The question is that amendment 90 be agreed to. Are we all agreed? Yes. We are agreed. Can I call amendment 91 in the name of the minister, minister to move? Moved. Thank you. The question is that amendment 91 be agreed to. Are we all agreed to? Yes. Thank you. Can I call amendment 12 in the name of Ben Macpherson, Ben Macpherson to move or not move? Moved. Thank you very much. The question is that amendment 12 be agreed to. Are we all agreed? Yes. We are agreed. Can I call amendment 13 in the name of Ben Macpherson, Ben Macpherson to move or not move? Moved. Thank you very much. The question is that amendment 13 be agreed to. Are we all agreed? Yes. We are agreed. Can I call amendment 14 in the name of Ben Macpherson, Ben Macpherson to move or not move? Arweinyd? Ael olduğunu ond os Amænt 14 waith ag� Coleg Wich arweinydd wnaethol liatolol. Rwyf i mi, yna Yn 17, mae arweinydd nhw amendment 138 i niw ym Georg Fyng 동안 yn 142 a 143. Ael nhw Arweinydd nhw Yn 138 i niw ym Georg Fyng痴 felèr Minister that would put in place the mechanism to top up child benefit by £5 per week and give effect to the Give Me Five campaign call. It follows the announcement before Easter that the Government will now pursue the delivery of an income supplement to boost the low incomes of families and lift children out of poverty. That announcement is welcome if not overdue, that being short supply for over a year and for the children suffering in poverty now, will have to wait until 2022. I want to touch on some of the points that I made at stage 2, but are helpful to the full chamber, because marks such there are few options open to the Government and that it is only the top up of child benefit that can deliver in the immediate and short time. Last year's Child Poverty Act confirmed that this Parliament refuses to just turn a blind eye. The time for acting on those sentiments, however, is now. In the face of the transition to universal credit, the benefit freeze and further austerity, we can and we should set a different path. Inflation may now be falling but the weight on family weekly budgets is still too much to bear. Only yesterday, the Trussell Trust published new data that showed 170,000 people had to ask for a food parcel last year, showing just how much families are struggling. With child benefit losing its value for another year, that would assist over 500,000 families struggling from the impact of a Tory Government. More importantly, 30,000 children lifted out of poverty instantly. I predict that, by the time of the next pollyrode elections, one in three children will be in poverty. A key to the Give Me Five campaign's work is the recognition of the near universal uptake and eligibility criteria of child benefit, making that the most appealing option to have the most immediate impact. Indeed, the commission noted in recommendation 23 that the Government must consider, in a quote, the greatest financial impact alongside other relevant factors such as cost and complexity of delivery, take-up rates, income security and potential disincentives to move into work or increase earnings in order to identify the most effective option to impact on child poverty. Alongside that, the complexity of topping up the means-tested system, which is going through a period of huge transition, is beyond belief. That alternative, topping up child tax credit, would also require the Government to top up universal credit and income support for the medium term. The model impacts based on 100 per cent take-ups are of no use when a 100 per cent take-up remains an impossibility in the medium term. The complexity not to mention the risk to any supplement by endorsing the Tory shambolic universal credit system is enormous, and the Government itself has cautioned against it. Finally, I heard comments at stage 2 about this amendment cutting across the budget process. I said then, as I say again, that I and my colleagues behind me would happily ride roughshod over the Scottish Government's budget if doing so would lift 30,000 children out of poverty, and I would do so every single day of the week. Until next year, at least the parents of 200,000 or so children in poverty will have no idea when they will get the support that this Government now wants to commit. For that reason, I press amendment 138, the only proposal on the table to lift 30,000 children out of poverty. Alex Crawl Hamilton is followed by Alison Johnstone. Thank you, Presiding Officer. The Liberal Democrats certainly have a lot of sympathy with the motives behind this group of amendments, but unfortunately we cannot support it. We attended many of the stakeholder events around the suggestions for this campaign. I certainly agree that universality has its place in the extension of benefits to vulnerable families, but our anxiety is that the taper up to the threshold of which child benefit is paid, if that represents the spectrum of need, we would rather see that money concentrated at the sharper end of that taper. We think that there are better ways of doing that, considering the number of very affluent families that would receive such a benefit. As such, with regret, we cannot support this group of amendments. Alison Johnstone The Scottish Government supports the principle of universality when it comes to higher education. I welcome that. It supports this principle when it comes to prescriptions. I welcome that. I cannot think of a more important area in which to support that principle than making sure that children in Scotland have enough money. This Parliament is committed wholly to closing the attainment gap. Children who are going to school, who have not had the best breakfast, who families are struggling to heat their homes cannot attain to the level at which they might expect to. I think that this is a very important amendment and one that I wholeheartedly support as do the Scottish Greens. The child poverty action group tells us that in 1989 it was realised that child benefit was worth less than it had been in the 1950s, and John Major's Government chose to slowly restore its value. That process went on, and progress was made. However, that benefit has been decreasing in value consistently since 2010. It is not worth what it was. All we are looking for is a very sensible measure to restore some of that value. I wholeheartedly support the Give Me Five campaign, and I would ask colleagues across the chamber to do so too. On 28 March this year, the Scottish Government's tackling child poverty delivery plan was published. It sets out a clear commitment for a new income supplement for low-income families to tackle child poverty. Of course, I recognise the rationale behind proposals to top-up child benefit by £5 a week, but to deliver it would cost at least £200 million every year, and yet only £3 out of every £10 would go to low-income households. What is more, the top-up would have more limited effects on lifting families out of poverty than other options set out in the Poverty and Inequality Commission advice, which we asked them for. That is why I urge members to oppose these amendments today. We want to effectively target children who are living in poverty, and we will look at all measures to do so, but the proposals to top-up child benefit do not do that. The Institute for Public Policy Research conducted modelling earlier this year, and its clear conclusions reflected in the Poverty and Inequality Commission advice, where the increasing child benefit is not the most effective way of reducing child poverty. The commission also rightly gave its expert independent advice that we should not only consider the most effective use of resource, but we should also give careful consideration to deliverability and to being able to get the money to those who needed it as quickly as possible. It is a false premise—if I can finish that point—to put before the chamber that passing the amendment will instantly see a £5 top-up, because the whole question of deliverability within our social security powers, as Mr Griffin and his colleagues well know, is part of a planned, very careful and incremental programme to ensure the safe and secure transfer of benefits for £1.4 million. Mr Griffin may be happy to say that he would ride roughshod over the Scottish Government's budget process. Actually, he would be riding roughshod over this Parliament's budget process, and that is not something that I would countenance. Our income supplement will demonstrate our commitment to reducing child poverty and that funds that are used to best effect to reach those families most in need. I urge members to oppose those amendments today. I am Colin Mark Griffin to wind up and to press or withdraw amendment 138. The point has been made repeatedly by members who oppose this method that there are better ways to spend this money. What are those better ways? Where is the amendment that is going to lift children out of child poverty in this bill that stands up against a £5 uplift in child benefit? The arguments against the policy are universal, and not all money goes towards families in poverty. I do not receive any child benefit for any of my children. No member in here receives any child benefit for their children. It is not completely universal, but we do not hear any arguments against universality. As Alison Johnstone pointed out when we talked about tuition fees and prescription charges, the amendment should be something that I would expect that the Government would be able to wholeheartedly get behind, given its previous support for universal benefits. The minister has also raised the low-income supplement, and I will welcome the debate around the policy choices when it comes. There may be an option that the minister puts on the table in two, three, four years' time, but the option on the table right now is to increase child benefit by £5. No other option will lift 30,000 kids out of poverty right now. I ask members to support that amendment. We move to the question on amendment 138. The question is that amendment 138 be agreed. Are we all agreed? We are not agreed. We will move to vote, and the member must cast her votes now. This is a one-minute vote. The result of the vote on amendment 138, in the name of Mark Griffin, is, yes, 26, no, 97, there were no abstentions. The amendment is therefore not agreed. I call amendment 139 in the name of Mark Griffin. Mark Griffin, do you move or not move? Move. That is moved. The question is that the amendment 139 be agreed to. Are we all agreed? Yes. We are agreed. I call amendment 140 in the name of Mark Griffin. Mark Griffin, do you move or not move? Move. That is moved. The question is that amendment 140 be agreed to. Are we all agreed? Yes. That is agreed to. I call amendment 141 in the name of Mark Griffin. Mark Griffin, do you move or not move? Move. That is moved. The question is that amendment 141 be agreed to. Are we all agreed? Yes. Maengволim onion, 142. Maengwolim onion Maefa Ryfannaid. Maefa Ryfannaid 142 defnydd. Ang opinions ond. Maefa Ryf Wirth入 eyebrow ingest sefydliad i 32 f coats o fzyćgliwy. Maefa Ryfanaid 142 aip ti er ر candidates IYs. Maefa Ryfanaid 142 aip i yr unws business ons. That is moved. The question is that amendment 143 be agreed to. Are we all agreed? No. Were not agreed? We'll move to a vote. Members may cast their votes now. The result of the vote on amendment number 143 in the name of Mark Griffin is yes, 26, no, 96. There were no abstentions, the amendment is therefore not agreed. I turn now to group 18, and I call amendment 92 in the name of the minister, grouped with the amendments as shown in this grouping. Minister to move amendment 92 to speak to all amendments in the group. The amendments in this group are about housing assistance. Section 48d already provides for regulations to be made allowing councils to deliver housing assistance. Amendments 92 and 93, in my name, would extend that power, allowing councils to also deliver short-term assistance where it is to be given as a run-on of housing assistance. Amendments 119 to 122 are a response to the announcement by the DWP that they have abandoned their policy of denying support for housing costs to some 18 to 21-year-olds receiving universal credit. The DWP may well have dropped that policy because it has failed to realise significant savings, but I nonetheless cautiously welcome that U-turn. Amendments 119 to 122 alter schedule 8 so that ministers are not obliged to make housing assistance regulations to mitigate the effects of abandoned DWP policies. The amendments cover the U-turn on 18 to 21-year-olds and also future-proof the bill for the day if that ever comes that a UK Government drops either or both their bedroom tax and benefit cap policies. To be clear, the amendments only remove the duty on the Scottish Government to provide housing assistance to mitigate those DWP policies if and for so long as the DWP is not pursuing them. I can assure members that the existing mitigation scheme for 18 to 21-year-olds will remain in place for as long as it is required. It is regrettable that the Scottish Government and local authorities have invested both time and funds over the last year in mitigating a policy that was always both unfair and unworkable. I wish that the UK Government had listened to the sense that we spoke at the time and that this inconvenience and waste could have been avoided. I move amendment 92. The question is that amendment 92 be agreed to. Are we all agreed? We are agreed. Can I call amendment 93 the name of the minister to move? Move. Thank you very much. The question is that amendment 93 be agreed to. Are we all agreed? We are agreed. I call amendment 132 in the name of Pauline McNeill, which was debated earlier with amendment 124, Pauline McNeill, to move or not move. That is moved. The question is that amendment 132 be agreed to. Are we all agreed? We are agreed. Turn now to group 19. I call amendment 144 in the name of Mark Griffin, in a group on its own. Mark Griffin to move and speak to amendment 144. I move amendment 144. That amendment seeks to place in law a requirement on ministers to bring forward regulations under section 30 of the Scotland Act, which ensure that payments of universal credit are automatically split between both members of a couple, allowing an opt-out should a couple wish to retain a joint payment. I am pleased that amendment has achieved a broad coalition of support from organisations, including the CBO, One Parent Family Scotland, Advocar Poverty Alliance, Scottish Women's Aid in Gender and the National Association of Welfare Rights Advisers. The amendment transposes the restrictions included in the Scotland Act and requires the regulation to follow a set policy objective to automatically split the payment. Those split payments can be requested under the current system, they are massively underused and underpublicised. Now, the focus of the work and pension select committee split payments are getting the attention that they deserve. Last month, the EHRC released research that universal credit single household payments to couples had contributed to a drastic shifter income from women to men as a result of the introduction of universal credit. As I indicated at stage 2, the policy would follow that proposed by the minister's colleague Philippa Whitford. At Westminster, Ms Whitford is pursuing a member's bill to automatically split payments, but was just last week told that this is not supported by a callous Tory Government intent on maintaining the single payment mechanism within universal credit, a system criticised by the United Nations. In the consultation on social security, there was overwhelming support for universal credit to be split between the members of a household from 99 per cent of organisations and 78 per cent of individuals. 74 per cent believed that payments should be split automatically. That would aid gender equality in the Scottish social security system by promoting financial autonomy and help to protect women and children from financial and domestic abuse. As much as I would want it to, the amendment does not require ministers to rush to establish a split payment scheme and removes the timescale that is included at stage 2. The amendment rightly requires the minister to continue her consultation with the DWP. That is in itself a requirement of the power in the Scotland Act. In recent question responses, the minister said, a year after the cabinet secretary first promised progress in this area that officials are discussing with the department for work and pension the feasibility, operational and cost implications of these different policy options. To date, we have not been told of the progress of these meetings and discussions, and I would appreciate it if the minister can say when they started and what stage they are at since clearly the DWP officials that we had at the Social Security Committee, unfortunately, were not able to. I am, however, thankful to the minister's discussion with me on the matter of split payments. I am content that she too wants to see split payments delivered and the precise commitment on whether she wants a choice to split or automatically help women and their children. I hope that she can give the support today by supporting amendment 144. I support the introduction of automatic split payments. The situation that we have at the moment, with a joint payment unless otherwise specified, is problematic on two levels. Returning to a single male breadwinner model is damaging and regressive in general, but it is particularly dangerous in the context of domestic abuse, where financial coercion is often used as a tool by perpetrators. 85 per cent of domestic abuse survivors who spoke to the Charity Women's Aid said that the act of applying for split payments could anger their partner and make the abuse worse. The Scottish Government is in on-going discussions with the DWP on how it can introduce automatic split payments in a way that is both technically feasible within the IT systems and financially viable and justifiable for the Scottish taxpayer. This is clearly a complex and time-consuming task. At last week's social security committee meeting, a DWP representative in answer to Mark Griffin reiterated the complexity of the issue and stated that there is no timetable for when an agreement might be reached. That delay and complexity could, of course, be avoided if the UK Government could be pressured into fixing the issue at source. There is also another far more important reason for calling on the UK Government to fix this issue at source, and that is that domestic abuse does not stop at the border. That is an issue for all women, and the best outcome is not the Scottish Government negotiating an exception from the rest of the UK, but one where the UK Government fixes the problem at source for the whole of the UK. For both reasons, for the complexity of negotiating an exception and the importance of the issue to women across the UK, I urge Mark Griffin and his colleagues to redouble their efforts on pressuring their UK colleagues to call on the UK Government to fix this issue at source, and they can, of course, do that, not least by supporting the private members bill that was published last month by my Ayrshire colleague, Philippa Whitford MP, which calls on the UK Government to make split payments default. That would be the best outcome for women across the UK. Alex Cole-Hamilton, to be followed by Alison Johnson. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I am very grateful as are those benches for Mark Griffin bringing this very important amendment forward. I served for three years on the ministerial task force on violence against women, and I am absolutely committed to this as a policy shift, because financial dependence is used as a tool of coercive control in abusive relationships, and that is a very important step to eroding that dominance that men who abuse their partners can have. I am absolutely grateful to Mark Griffin for bringing this forward and assuring the support from those benches. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I feel that, sadly, this is more of the same thoughtless, mindless attack on women that we have seen so often from Westminster. We know that 70 to 85 per cent of cuts are being targeted at women, but that level of cut cannot be accidental. Who in this day and age would introduce single household payments? I really think that that is a serious concern. There is a lot wrong with universal credit, and that is just another aspect that is not fit for the times in which we now live. In 2013, as in gender and the other organisations that have contacted us on this important issue, the United Nations Seedaw Committee found that the universal credit single household payment poses a risk of financial abuse of women due to power imbalances in the family, particularly if payment is made to an abusive male spouse. It is incumbent on us to do everything that we can to change that. I absolutely agree that the best thing that could happen is that we get rid of the system across the United Kingdom. However, how long is it going to take the United Kingdom Government to take that action? Although we have a devolved Government, I think that there are times when it is incumbent upon us to take those UK policies and improve them as quickly as we possibly can with the knowledge and experience that we have here. Fundamental change is required on this issue, and I will be supporting the amendment for us. I do not believe that there can be any doubt of this Government's commitment to use the remaining flexibility that we have with universal credit to introduce split payments. We have been clear on that, talked about it and made that commitment publicly, and we have been working with the DWP for some time now to do that. However, the fact of the matter is that this is a reserved benefit, and universal credit is a reserved benefit. Therefore, the delivery of split payments to our household has to be negotiated with the DWP because, at the end of the day, they are the ones who will deliver that or not. We have continued to have those discussions, but, as members will be aware—not least members in the Social Security Committee—we had an agreement with the DWP about the abolition of bedroom tax at source. We had an agreement around a date about the abolition of bedroom tax at source. The DWP, under pressure for other priorities that they considered more important, has now moved that date back a year. I make that example, and I draw members' attention to that, because, although I am prepared to support this amendment, the chamber needs to be crystal clear that I can bring forward regulations but they cannot be enacted without the DWP's agreement. That negotiation is complicated and technical and will involve the Government paying the DWP to deliver that split household payment. I concur completely with what my colleague Ms Maguire said. Not only does domestic abuse not stop at the border, but the way to resolve that properly is to continue to press the UK Government with all of the members in the House of Commons, our own benches and Labour benches and others, to come together and press the UK Government to introduce that for the United Kingdom from which our members and our women in this country will benefit. In the meantime, we will, of course, continue those discussions. I will support this amendment, but I want, once again, for this chamber to be absolutely clear. It is not at our hand to deliver this. That is a consequence of the Scotland act, which members in this chamber are not on these benches, but others absolutely definitely support and would not like to see us have any further powers. Of course, if we had all the powers over social security, we would not need to be having this debate at all. I thank members who have spoken in support of the amendment to give Ms Maguire an absolute assurance that members of the Labour Party in this chamber and in Westminster will be redoubling our efforts to see the solution that we are proposing across the whole of the UK as the ideal solution. However, in the absence of any movement from a seemingly uncaring Tory Government who wish to perpetuate a system where women are put at risk of financial domestic abuse, it is right that we take the action that we can hear. I ask all members to support the amendment in my name and to redouble their efforts to implement the amendment across the whole of the UK. The question is that amendment 144 be agreed to. Are we all agreed? Can I call amendment 15 in the name of Mark Griffin? Already debated with amendment 41, Mark Griffin to move or not move. That has moved. The question is that amendment 15 be agreed to. Are we all agreed? We are agreed. Can I call amendment 94 in the name of the minister to move formally? The question is that amendment 94 be agreed to. Are we all agreed? Can I call amendment 95 in the name of the minister to move? Thank you. The question is that amendment 95 be agreed to. Are we all agreed? We are agreed. I call amendment 147 in the name of Jeremy Balfour, already debated with amendment 72. Jeremy Balfour to move or not to move. That has moved. The question is that amendment 147 be agreed to. Are we all agreed? We are agreed. We turn now to group 20. I call amendment 96 in the name of the minister, grouped with the amendments that are shown in this grouping. Ministers to move amendment 96 and to speak to all the amendments. Thank you, Presiding Officer. Amendments 96, 97, 99 and 100 in my name increase the level of parliamentary scrutiny for certain regulations from negative to affirmative procedure. The Government undertook to make these changes in its response to the delegated powers and law reform committees stage 2 report. The regulation making powers affected are the powers to identify people that the Scottish Commission on Social Security can require to provide it with information and the similar powers about information sharing by and with the Scottish ministers. Amendment 19 from Pauli McNeill removes the ability of the commission to decide that there are types of proposal that it does not need to consider. I said during stage 2 that the Scottish Government was happy to remove that power from the bill and I am content to support Ms Neill's amendment. Amendment 101 from Mr Tomkins is to ensure that the proposals that are sent to the commission for scrutiny under section 55A are sent in the form of draft regulations. As that has always been our intention, I am happy to support it, as I am happy to support amendment 102 from Mr Tomkins. Amendment 145 lodged by Ms McNeill proposes that all regulations made under the bill, no matter how minor, with the sole exceptions of commencement and ancillary regulations, should be subject to additional scrutiny by the commission. That is a position that I oppose. I believe that it is an odd position for Ms McNeill to be the one that is moving this amendment. During stage 2, she was reasonably, I thought, particularly anxious that the commission should not be over mighty relative to the Parliament. However, the amendment that she is now pressing reflects a view expressed by the child poverty action group that any regulations not subject to scrutiny by the commission will be subject to no independent scrutiny at all. The implication is either that the Parliament is incapable of effectively scrutinising regulations or that it lacks independence. I do not accept either of those. To be clear, those regulations that the bill does not require to be put to the commission will still be scrutinised by the Parliament in most cases through affirmative procedure. The purpose of having a commission of experts on social security is, among other things, so that the Government and Parliament will receive expert advice on complex matters of social security policy, the interaction between the Scottish social security system and the UK system and so on. Just because regulations are made under a social security act does not necessarily mean that they raise issues requiring social security expertise. For example, the issues that will be raised by regulations under section 43 conferring investigatory powers are justice matters. Regulations under subsection 2 and 5 of section 48C are about data sharing. The Parliament is well able to scrutinise regulations on those matters and a wide range of others. It has been managing that for coming up to 20 years. If Parliament wanted the commission's help particularly, the bill allows it to ask for a report. That is as it should be. The Parliament is in control and can take advice from whomever it wants. I therefore urge members not to support amendment 145 and move amendment 96. I call Adam Tomkins to speak to amendment 101 and the other amendments in the group. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I am grateful to the minister for her support for amendments 100 and 102 in my name. I support all the amendments in this group except for amendment 145, and the reasons for the Conservatives not supporting amendment 145 are identical to the reasons that are just articulated by the minister. I call Pauline McNeill to speak to amendment 16 and the other amendments in the group. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I welcome what the minister said on amendment 16, so I will address amendment 145. As the bill stands, there are important regulations, for example on applications and decision making on overpayment and fraud that do not need to be referred to the new commission. The amendment places a duty on Scottish ministers to refer proposals for regulations that are not already covered by section 55 to the newly established Scottish Social Security Commission. The commission may or may not decide to prepare a report, but it established a light-touch scrutiny process, and this procedure will allow for an expert independent scrutiny of often complex secondary legislation. Just to outline the potential to impact on individual rights, entitlements and the experience of the Scottish social security system, the commission's discretion as to whether a report is necessary will ensure that scrutiny is provided in an appropriate way, without encroaching unnecessarily on the Scottish Parliament's time or the time and the resources of the commission. The functions that would be affected by amendment 145 that are not currently covered would be the form of applications, functions of the commission itself, the period of redetermination for an application, the time period that ministers are allowed to make in determination, rules around lifetime awards, automatic payments, investigation making powers, and particularly to enter and search, as well as creating offences, top up at all the powers and rules around them, carers supplement as to who is a qualifying person, power to repeal, carers supplement, information sharing, naming new persons and persons who they can share with, DHB, discretionary housing payment rules and who the commission can extract relevant information from and the numbers that make up the commission. It is quite a long list of issues, but I do not currently require to go to the commission and on the balance I felt that these the commission should have the opportunity to prepare a report should it so wish. Thank you very much and I call on the minister to wind up in this group. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. I will be brief. I am only going to concentrate on amendment 145. There is a presumption behind that amendment that no commission scrutiny equals no scrutiny at all. That is not the case. This Parliament has a critical role, which it has developed with some expertise over the years to scrutinise, and the bill gives the Parliament the power to ask the commission for advice if it so wishes. I would urge members not to support amendment 145, but it will incur unnecessary delay in some instances in terms of regulations that we wish to move quickly on, in which I am sure that the Parliament may support us in that, but it will always be down to this Parliament to determine whether those regulations are approved or not. The question is that amendment 96 will agree to. Are we all agreed? We are agreed. Amendment 97, in the name of the minister, to move. Thank you very much. The question is that amendment 97 be agreed to. Are we all agreed? We are agreed. Amendment 98, in the name of the minister, is already debated. Thank you. The question is that amendment 98, agree to. Are we agreed? We are agreed. Amendment 99, in the name of the minister, Minister to move. The question is that amendment 99 be agreed to. Are we all agreed. Oherwydd, mae geninydd ein defnyddio spiesart ddeifir i ein cyflwylliann remembered sd amser, ond rwy'n credu rwy'n credu i prifnwyrau pwysig, a'u gwneud o'r swyddfaeth hwnnw eenf All-weil agriad? Rwy'n credu i'r rwm yn agriad. Óu'r hynny, dweud i'r cystalau pwyllian o Eisteddfol yn cydwyr wladau Pwyllian Mwgnyll, ond rwy'n credu i'r cystalau Pwyllian Mwgnyll yn cydwyr. Rwy'n credu i'r cystalau pwyllian o Eisteddfol yn cydwyr wladau Pwyllian Mwgnyll? We are agreed. I call the amendment 145 in the name of Pauline McNeill, already debated. Pauline McNeil to move or not move. That is moved. The question is that amendment 145 be agreed to, are we agreed? We're not agreed. We'll move to a division on this amendment, and this will be a one minute division. Members may cast their votes now. The question is that amendment 145 be agreed. The result of the vote on amendment number 145, in the name of Polly McNeill, is yes, 31, no, 91. There were no abstentions, the amendment is therefore not agreed. Amendment 103, in the name of the minister, to move. Move. Thank you. The question is that amendment 103 be agreed. Are we all agreed? Yes. We are agreed. Amendment 104, in the name of Jeremy Balfour, already debated with amendment 19, to move or not move. Move. That is moved. The question is that amendment 104 be agreed to. Are we all agreed? Yes. We are agreed. The question is now that amendment 104, as amended, be agreed to. Are we all agreed? Yes. We are agreed. Can I call amendments 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, all the name of the minister and invite the minister to move the amendments on block. Moved on block. Thank you. Does any member object if I put the question on block? No one objects. The question is that amendments 105 to 110 are agreed to. Are we all agreed? Yes. We are agreed. Can I call amendment 111, in the name of the minister, already debated. The question is that amendment 148 be agreed to. Are we all agreed? Yes. We are agreed. Can I call amendment 112, in the name of the minister, to move? Move. Thank you. The question is that amendment 112 be agreed to. Are we all agreed? Yes. We are agreed. Can I call amendments 113 to 123, all the name of the minister and invite the minister to move amendments 113 to amendments 123 on block. Moved on block. Moved on block. Does any member object if I put the question on block? No. The question is that amendments 113 to 123 are agreed to. Are we all agreed? Yes. We are agreed. That ends consideration of amendments. At this stage, members will be aware that I am now required understanding orders to decide whether or not, in my view, any provision of this bill relates to a protected subject matter. That is anything that modifies the electoral system in Scotland. In the case of this bill, no provision does anything of the sort. Therefore, the bill does not require a supermajority to be passed at stage 3. Now I propose that we just take a short break before we move on to the debate stage and we will resume at 5.2. We have come back in eight minutes time at 5.6. Suspended for a few minutes.


When you're first starting a research project, it can be tempting to jump into searching without a plan. But it's helpful to take a few minutes to think about your topic and your research questions first. What's the difference between a topic and a research question? That's what we'll cover in this video. Let's start by thinking about a topic. Your topic is the what of your research. It's the kind of thing that you would be able to explain in a phrase or two if someone asks you about it, like the relationship between mentorship and teacher retention. At the beginning of your project, your topic may be a little bit vague, but no worries. It will become more specific as you learn more about it. If you're not even 100% certain what teacher retention is, that's okay too. You will learn more about your topic during the search process. You can go ahead and start doing some background research on this topic, and after you familiarize yourself with the basic issues, you'll probably realize that you need to get a little bit more specific, both in your topic and in your searching. Here's where research questions come in. Research questions are those things that you're trying to figure out through your research. Basically, what is it that you want to know? In the example topic I just mentioned, there are many possible research questions. How do mentorship programs impact teacher retention? Why do some teachers stay in the profession while others don't? What kinds of mentorship programs have been implemented and what were their results? Each of these research questions addresses a different aspect of my original topic. The questions you choose to research will depend on the context and scope of your research, and you might not be able to research all of them for a particular project. In fact, as you seek to answer your research questions, your topic will probably get more specific as well. While an individual source may answer more than one of your research questions, it's unlikely that any single source will answer all of them, and that's okay. You'll need multiple sources to help answer the research questions you've chosen to address. For help developing a topic or research questions, ask your professor or a librarian for help.


Hi, my name is Greg Canarsa. I'm a six-year neurosurgery resident at the University of Maryland Medical Center, and I also did a year fellowship with the endovascular surgical neuro-interventional group here. It was an in-folded fellowship. I worked closely with the attendings here, Dr. Dheeraj Gandhi, Dr. Garov Jindal, and Dr. Timothy Miller. In that year, I had the chance and the privilege to do over close to 500 cases of all sorts, including diagnostic angiograms, but also intervention cases such as mechanical thrombectomies where we essentially unclog the arteries in an acute stroke. It's tremendously rewarding when a patient comes in acutely weak due to a stroke and you're part of the team that can unclog that artery and the patient, it seems miraculous, can move there that whole side again and talk again. As well, we coiled ruptured aneurysms. We stopped acute bleeds at all sorts of wide variety of cases of huge diversity, but most importantly, it's a great team here, the attendings, the nurses, the techs, everyone who works here is part of a team and I really loved it the whole year and we got to help a lot of patients and there's really nothing I would change about it. Working with the attendings was given graduated autonomy as I worked with them. We worked together and learned more and more. So ultimately, I think this is a great program. I think pretty much anything that's done in this field is done here and most importantly, the people are what matter and I wouldn't trade anything for the year I did with them. I'm Gaurav Jindal, I'm one of the interventional neuro radiologists here at the University of Maryland. I had the privilege of starting here about nine years ago now. I was coming straight out of my fellowship program at the time and when I began here, we had a fellowship program. It was in its infancy and I soon after starting became the program director and a few years later, we pursued ACGME accreditation of the fellowship and I'm proud to say that we're now one of only seven programs in the country that are ACGME accredited and we garnered accreditation in 2016 and we're in good standing with the ACGME since that time. I've had the privilege of training probably about a dozen fellows at this point including several neurosurgery residents who did an infolded fellowship year with us as well as graduating probably about five to six fellows since getting accredited and we have a high volume, well structured fellowship program and it's really come together nicely over the last few years to several years we have a rigorous didactic curriculum now which we have been working on for the past few years and really have honed in on that at this point which includes a monthly M&M conference, a journal club, case conferences as well as didactic lectures. We also have multidisciplinary meetings with our stroke neurology colleagues. Very recently we're doing that with our neurocritical care colleagues as well as our neurosurgery colleagues. I think some of the strengths of our fellowship program beyond being one of few accredited programs in the country are the high volume and great diversity of interventional cases that we do. We probably hit about a thousand cases per year. Our fellows routinely will get experience in three, four, five hundred plus cases in a year and in addition we have a great working collaboration with the other neuro services around the hospital in addition to great collaboration with our orthopedic colleagues, our ophthalmology colleagues our ENT colleagues, our trauma surgery service. I think you name it and we do it here when it comes to neuro interventional. Like many programs five to 10 years ago we were doing only a handful of interventional stroke cases per year. Now we are a regional leader in the number of strokes that we do and we may reach 200 stroke cases annually per year. We're doing almost that many brain aneurysms each year. We see a great number of trauma cases which come from our excellent trauma surgery hospital which is a part of the university. Our fellows, when they graduate they go on to great places both in academics as well as in private practice and I keep in touch with many of them still and uniformly they tell me what a great program that we have, what great experience, hands-on experience that they've gotten and I'm proud to see them move on with their careers and I'm happy to continue to keep in touch with them. So it's been a real pleasure to be the program director of such a large and great fellowship program over the last few years and I think we're just gonna continue to expand and grow. We've recently hired a neurosurgery attending who is trained in open vascular surgery as well as endovascular surgery and I think that'll only add to the program and to the educational and clinical experience that our fellows are so happy to get while they're here.


All right. Good morning cyber traders. Welcome back on this lovely Thursday Today's cyber expo day. Hopefully everybody's all registered. I just posted the link. We are starting at 12 o'clock All right guys, so make sure everybody's registering. Good to see you Mike Norman Greg Keith to see you grant one everyone on YouTube Bonnie good to see you and on Facebook. Good to see you all welcome back Let me tell you yesterday. We had the craziest stock ever I haven't seen a stock take off like this, but by the way this morning has been unbelievable this IMMP It was the first call out this morning Just want to bring up the announcement so you guys could see that yeah These are the morning watch list that I put out remember. We start early. I'll post that in The chat room again so you guys could see that It's why early bird gets the money and everybody here on YouTube. I'm just gonna post that up So if you do want to join us on YouTube and Facebook We start at roughly right before eight o'clock and the biggest stock that was on there was the IMMP If you were here exactly when you were supposed to you got you should have got in at five and guess what? 640 I'll take it. I'll take it thousand shares. Okay, you kick him butt right now on a buck fifty fifteen hundred dollars on the day You do that every day almost a half a million dollar salary, right? Over a quarter of a million of the 500 about three three fifty. I'll take it. That's why people love day trading So anyway, congratulations. I think a lot of you are pretty much done for the day, right? I think everyone's good Yeah, we're gonna talk about that Mike Dorsey That the the GLSI was just unbelievable.  So you could see it within the 30 minute Oh, that's not in the time frame 10 minutes. Okay, so 10 minutes. All right So here's a stock that literally hasn't gone nowhere in Several months right all of a sudden news broke out the stock was the most Sickest thing I've ever seen it just went from at one o'clock all the way up I hope like I do it a little bit better here five minutes here five minutes looks a little bit better Does it make four minutes? Yeah, you probably four minutes looks better. All right, so let's bring this up here So here's a stock that literally just went from just out of the nowhere ramping $27 shot up all the way to 42 like oh my god, that's unbelievable, but the stock was so crazy Volatile that you couldn't trade too many shares because remember I always tell you the motto buy less trade more, okay, and Stock lure it for $44 and it just can't get a halted and halted to a hundred and sixty dollars When was the last time you ever been in a stock like that? Okay? I remember last one was Kodak, but but this one and then Nicola was another one But this one I said I always tell you guys don't worry about we're gonna find another one And if you missed it, we'll do it. Yeah short squeeze tops was one of them. Yes. That was another one It was definitely Michael was definitely a wild one. Is it a short squeeze? Well, what else could it probably be? You know what happened short squeezes actually come to fruition because sometimes there's a very tight float in the stock And when there's a very tight float on that causes the volatility that you get remember if there's a lot of outstanding shares It can't do what it's doing. All right, this has to do because it's a very very tight float There's not that many shares outstanding and I'm just gonna I'm just good what I've been looking at what it is I could probably assume The stock was probably trained five maybe maybe ten times more than outstanding shares That's even out there. So that's probably what it was But uh, but it was a fun stock and it was a couple of the crazy ones too that we did pretty well Look like I told you I love Thursdays Tuesdays Wednesdays and Thursdays. I did pretty well in a couple of stocks. Let me just bring up xbox that one It's time for this one So that one had a really nice gap up and it just went from a dollar to almost six and then obviously then right around What I told you is usually done around ten o'clock and that's where it started retracing So that one also did well. What else have you had? Oh cruise in the pre-market. That was another one That would that move pretty nicely that one right from 650 to $9. That was a nice one. What else that we have the th TV That one also, you know, $14 stock right in the F You know at the end of the day. That was a great afternoon runner being ran from 14 to $18 Stock was only $11 stocks. It's not too long ago. So there was a lot of nice moving stocks Um that we're moving I think that's about it. Did I did I call them all out? I think I every cyber traders. Did I get all of them? Oh the oh, I've got the onct. I've got about that one too. That was another nice one That one moved from like four dollars to seven dollars Uh, I think that's about it. Right. I got them all Oh, uh gene Gene was another one yesterday going to the clothes.  I mean, I could uh, that one You could trade several thousand shares of it, but g also moved pretty nicely. It's been a great swing trade g e Uh, what else? What else was going down yesterday? Five serve was the other one. That's right. Five serve was the other one. That's right. Okay So that's yesterday. Don't worry about it The day has passed You know The best part about it is that when you come here, you see people, you know trading remember Um I don't tell anybody what to buy and sell I just teach you guys how to stop losing money and how to play the game That's why you guys are in the cyber group room and you're supposed to work together And you know for the ones that he had trial remembering and the people watching youtube love and facebook live The goal is is that you just need to see other people if they know how to make money You got to be part of a team part of a family. I keep repeating that over and over and over again You cannot do this yourself But when you see people that look at these things, this is how you actually this is what you want to trade because this is Where the action is and you know what you might not like the company. You might not like what they stand for You might not like, you know the the symbols, you know Or you might whatever it could be anything But at the end of the day We're traders and traders what we do is we're here to make money and the goal is to risk The least as much as possible with the high man reward So yesterday was a great day and I know a lot of you guys finished off Unfortunately for me I'm a little upset of myself because I I was done early and I didn't come in the afternoon And I you know, I kind of missed out on some of those some of those big runners in the afternoon But that's okay That's the beauty about it because I always get people asking you have to be here all day You don't you don't have to be here all day Um make your money and call it a day like you know what? IMMP You know what you're done for the day. You're done.  If you made your days pay, that's great. If you didn't make it Don't worry. You're the second shift and the third shift the fourth shift So let's go through a couple of stocks that I'm moving this morning That we're watching but uh, but I do want to repeat again Uh guys don't forget today Is the cyber expo? Okay Uh, let me just bring it over here. I just want to keep bringing it up So people can see it So if you have not registered the cyber expo starts at 12 o'clock Um, melissa, uh, tomorrow is going to be talking I'm going to pick up at one o'clock and then I got hubert senders three great speakers You're talking over maybe 50 plus years maybe even more of of edgy of Education there of history of people knowing over the years come in it Don't forget to join you post a link up there on youtube facebook Make sure you register and you know what you should be doing anything at that time anyway And if you can't make it don't worry. It's going to be recorded. Okay So, uh, we do this every month and don't miss out on it Now let's look at a couple of stocks So anyway, we got the immp that thing still looks pretty damn strong going into the clothes Which is very very shocking which actually what am I saying? I'm not shocked. That's normal. So strength, you know, Going into the open that means this thing could probably really pop And don't be shocked the stock goes to 10 and 15 and 20 that could happen You know what I mean, but we've got to follow the money So you got that one sspks another one that's going on the watch list another very inexpensive stock neil You just made 60 cents and seven trades. That's it trade, uh Buy less trade more. That's what that's what i'm talking about. Nice little trade there neil. Congratulations Nice little move right there also stock went from 13 to 15 in pre-market So the stock we've been watching going into the open POS I I'm going to put that on the watch list. Okay Even after all that chaos that happened Um, just remember to not trade a lot of shares this first of all as of today You know, if you just saw this at the first time unless you're a category unless you're a level five trader here at cyber trade University and you're averaging between a thousand to 2500 a day Please don't trade the stock. You can have fun watching it, but you know what you if you're new Don't don't focus on this because it's just going to distract you on something You could trade and you're going to lose a day of work and you don't want to do that Okay, so you always go back to our tape and watch it later another one. That's uh, that's uh that gapped up pretty big But she took a big hit. I don't know what happened here But i'm going to keep an eye on this utsi very cheap stock nice spread Got some great tier sizes on the level three right there another nice little mover That's gapped up about 51 CLRO another one that came up on my radar another stock of 20 1.6 million shares already traded Uh, she's got the only thing right here. She's testing resistance levels right of the august and september Which you could see on a long-term chart.  You always got to wait the first five minutes. Remember cyber traders You know when we start our commentary when we're in the trading room, we got to be very very careful on that Uh, what else I got going on here. What else I got the sspk That one also is going to make the watch list right here sspk at least this one's trending up a little bit. Um This is probably a category three stock that we trained you in in our in our Our beginner class So you could tell by the spread remember we keep repeating it and you heard me and josh talking about it yesterday Guys be very careful. The spread is the most expensive part of the trade, you know Just because you see a stock and like oh, it's only 14 dollars. It's a lot cheaper than trading, you know Uh pinterest or you know or an airline, you know or the adult airlines, whatever it is Don't it's not about the price of the stock That that that that could hurt you it's the spread It's the number one thing I was always taught to owe before you have a trader stock. So this one It's a category three. So be very careful of that one ebit. It's another one. I found this morning, but She's been a great swing trade But now you can see the stock gapped up it went from 30 to about 55 It went hit 61 but she's starting to trend down in pre-market So it doesn't look like she you know the momentum kind of died on this one The zk in I didn't do that one right this one level one stock I think everybody could afford to trade this one. It's inexpensive. It's thought up a lots of 17 percent You got some you don't have any big algorithms There is you could see right now right here though You could see right here that there's a 74 000 shares seller right there at the 260 which kind explains why it's having a tough time breaking This price right here. Okay, so I want to keep a close eye on that That guy gets done look for the stock to go higher remember follow the money follow the money follow the money and follow the money All right anything. I'm missing. I did not call out. I pretty much does it That's our list right now. We have that's going on pre-market anything else. Oh good. You want to welcome jeff Anyone else? I think we got a pretty got a list here. Okay. You got about you got about less less in About a little less than 15 minutes before the market opens up So in the meantime while you guys get ready for the open If you're watching us youtube facebook live just like us click us on the bottom If you want to join our trial you're more than welcome to do a week trial for nine dollars cyber group members If you're in the room remember wait for the first five minutes if you made your money already this morning You know what take the rest of the day off You know, maybe, you know, you put some christmas lights if you're celebrating christmas or jahonic, whatever it is You know, that's why this is what we do And uh, and that pretty much yes, and also air b&b is actually going public today We saw what happened with door dash. I didn't even look at door dash. I didn't want to need I was just curious what it was going to do Actually pretty pretty Insulted with door dash not to get changed the subject, but they charge restaurants 30% This they only make 20% on the deal. I mean, I don't know if that's true But 30% is ridiculous and you know good for them good for them. You know what people paying for it You know good for them But um, but there we go We got our watch list and and then like I said before we go don't forget to register for um Event today the cyber expo and just bring it up so you can see it again Here we go. Don't mind me. I got so many monitors So don't forget to register for today's event if you haven't done already We'll see you all back here at 12 o'clock. All right, and we'll we will be broadcasting this live on On youtube and facebook live. All right guys. Good luck. Everyone. Happy trading. Be safe We'll see you back. Uh, we'll see you back at 12 cyber traders Go fill up your coffee. Go hit the restrooms. Let's get ready for the open. Hopefully you have another exciting one Remember it is hump day, which is thursday. Good luck everyone


Hello and welcome to the session. In this session we discuss the following question which says if 8x plus 13y upon 8x minus 13y is equal to 9 upon 7, find x is 2y. First of all let's discuss one result about proportion which is component and dividend. According to this if we have four quantities in proportion that is a is to b is equal to c is to d then a plus b upon a minus b is equal to c plus d upon c minus d. So when we have a upon b is equal to c upon d then on applying component and dividend we get a plus b upon a minus b is equal to c plus d upon c minus d. This is the key idea that we use for this question. Let's move on to the solution now. In the question we are given that 8x plus 13y upon 8x minus 13y is equal to 9 upon 7 and we need to find x is to y. Let this be result 1.  Now in the numerator 13y and minus 13y cancels in the denominator 8x and minus 8x cancels. So further we get 8x plus 8x that is 16x upon 13y plus 13y that is 26y is equal to 9 plus 7 is 16 upon 9 minus 7 is 2. From here we have x upon y is equal to 16 upon 2 into 26 upon 16. Now 16 cancels with 16 and 2 13 times is 26. So now we have x upon y is equal to 13 upon 1. Therefore we get x is to y is equal to 13 is to 1. This is what we were supposed to find out. So this is our final answer. This completes the session. Hope you have understood the solution of this question.


Good morning everybody I'm Almost the last one here. Okay Got here pretty late last night, and it was full. Look a little go-kart doom buggy thingy over there. You see that? Interesting. Oh, what a good morning. This is all right. So Here's our load of white steel Usually the steel is painted like a dark gray, but they painted this steel white for some reason So you're gonna be able to see all the dirt on it But it doesn't require a tarp, so I'm not tarping it These little guys on the back here not gonna forget them It doesn't look like the paint job is exactly the best on these either Is what it is. So good morning. We're here just north of St. Joseph, Missouri We're headed up to Canada. This steel is going to Calgary, Alberta We're gonna swing past home on the way So we're going up through Emerson, Manitoba then across the Canadian West From there We're not gonna get home tonight yet. I'm gonna take her easy We got lots of time to get to Calgary in no rush whatsoever. So I'm gonna take her easy today. Let me stop for a walk sometime halfway through our day Relax Don't stress out too much and we'll be home tomorrow for the night until Saturday and then we'll start heading towards Calgary Thanks for joining us today. Don't forget to subscribe if you haven't already you don't want to miss a miss a vlog We're on what one thousand eight hundred and forty something right now Been making vlogs for quite a while So there's a lot to catch up on if you're new but you want to you can just start from here Hit that bell beside the subscribe button that way you won't miss it when I release my next one tomorrow And here we go So this trip is gonna be all about saving that fuel We got lots of time to get there and it's a very light load pretty streamlined much better than that Rick wall I was carrying before So let's see how good we can do I'm gonna be sticking to around about 60 miles an hour or 98 kilometers an hour 97 kilometers an hour We'll see what we can come up with. I think this should be a pretty good trip Why would you do that bud? I'm sitting there. It's just sitting there Okay, I gotta Can't get past him like it's going anywhere, but We are make a sudden lane change getting out of this line See what the This driver in front of me seeing that that loads not tied down either. He's trying to get the attention of that guy I don't know what that's gonna do getting his attention. He knows he didn't tie it down He entered the freeway knowing full well that he had three pallets of bricks on his trailer with no securemen Looks like a Commercial pull like a business pickup. I wonder if he's got his business name on the side of his pickup. I Can't get beside him though Nebraska Iowa and South Dakota through Sioux City here will be in South Dakota. We won't actually touch Nebraska But it's just across the river over there to our left Here we just got two states to go till we're back up in Canada won't make it there tonight I probably could make it there. No rush. I'm trying to say fuel But you know, of course when I get a good load like this and a lot of time when I can say fuel Of course, I'm I'm headed directly into a strong headwind. So It's kind of hard to say fuel when Mother Nature is Dragging you down working against you quite literally. This is Sioux City This is Sioux City. I other side of the line is Sioux City, South Dakota same city different states I'm not sure Sioux City spreads into Nebraska at all On that side of the river, but I'll be kind of cool. I won city three states Freeway through here for at least a decade in my life driven through South Dakota here or Sioux City Without there being construction right here ever. I've been driving through here for over 10 years They seem to be making progress when you look at what they're doing on the other side over there They seem to be making progress, but how is it taking so long? It's just a constant state of construction Providing jobs for these guys here. They got something to do Sioux Falls, South Dakota and it's time for a bath Pulled into the loves just on I-90 east of the I-29 just past Sioux Falls. I guess it's north of Sioux Falls Oh, we're gonna get in line here for a bath. Oh, it's so bright. Why am I not wearing my shades? Oh There we go too cool for school I do No, no, go Thought at least you'd think I was cool. No Say they got two bays here, so this should go pretty quickly. I don't know why we're idling wasting fuel We should go pretty pretty quickly Actually, I haven't stopped at this blue beacon before I've stopped at this truck stop a couple of times But it's usually off my route because I don't usually come by here that often because this is I go down the I-29 all the time right this that's the artery that leads up to Canada up to Manitoba and We will right pasture, but I don't always come on to the I-90 and it's about a couple of miles east yet I usually stop at the Flying Jade right on the I-29 so Not too often that I've stopped here But I saw the signs and signs work, you know The billboard said hey stop and have a truck wash. I said, well, that's a great idea. Thank you very much and here We are right diesel. That's my story Here comes the rinse. Oh It feels good. Oh feels good. Oh, I love bubble baths.  He just looks at it What's he doing, man? What you doing? You're getting us all wet, man. Aren't you old for this stuff? So many of them so many which one do I start with? Okay Everybody's out of my way they're ready for me to roll forward right on thanks bud Off we go now. Hopefully we don't get a rainstorm in the next day or two Really much appreciate it if the weather would cooperate And not screw up my good clean truck Yeah, we got about another six hours we can drive today. Yeah, we'll be driving into the night Used up all my break time already so any more breaks that we take will be coming directly out of our driving time for today That's okay. Like I said before we're not too big of a hurry That's why today was a good day to have to wait for a bath Oh, so I'm gonna took off that international spender there. You see that? Well, let's try not to hit the puddle. I just washed my truck How do I get out of here? Of course there's a casino right here. We're in South Dakota now Wait, wait, this is not the way out Why is that guy turning around? What do you what's that guy doing? Oh? He's going on to the scale. Oh, okay. That's Guess you got to do what you got to do This is the exit, right? Hopefully not just the entrance. No, this sign is facing this way says loves No drop trailers. Well, no worries. I took my trailer with me I think this is the exit anyway, I'm making it an exit. It's an exit now try to draw says it's an exit It's an exit Wait for one more car coming from our right there Come on. We got to keep heading north Meers take the entrance to the left on by 90 west Interstate 29 northbound South Dakota It's a Senex. This is exactly where we stopped Not last night at the night before It's about four hours to the border with Canada from here so I've got some this shipment I've got on me is kind of special I gotta Go and talk to the load broker at the border and stuff make some phone calls before I get there So it's a little different than usual this guy's got his high beams on behind me blinding me in my mirrors How dare you guys got his high beams on to I'm being blasted from both sides I got a guy with high beams behind me got this guy with high beams in front of me gonna blast them back Right in your face. How do you like it? Huh coffee cup travel. These are actually very nice travel plazas. It's a it's a franchise up in well It's out Dakota's where I've seen them the most Couple of really nice ones out here This road for 16 kilometers 16 kilometers Karen, how big do you think this truck stop is? We're not even on a road Just want me to do laps in here. What I want to go to bed. You can do laps yourself if you want I'm gonna park the same spot we parked in last time. I think way out in the back All by our lonesome all by our sails Oh There's like nobody parked back here today good good get good get good. Oh lots people parked over there See, I don't know what they're doing here. They got this instruction. They got this Excavator just hanging out.  Oh, I see what they're doing Clever clever because people would have fallen in that hole if they wouldn't have put that there guarantee it I'm gonna park with all these good people back here I'm just gonna roll past them slowly with my window down to make sure that they don't Actually, I just washed my truck. Do I want to park on the gravel?  Nope. Nope These guys will be quiet These guys are local drivers. They're just probably parked here for the night probably sleeping somewhere No, you took the last spot. Okay Well, we found a spot all by ourselves. Look at this diesel. Yes, no one little quiet neighbor over there Beautiful beautiful. So thank you so much for watching everybody. Don't forget to subscribe Hit that like button if you liked the video hit the down vote if you thought it was terrible If you liked it share it with your friends if you like the chances are they'll like it too If you hated it share it with your friends and make fun of me As long as they watch the video I'm happy with that. I'll see you tomorrow We're gonna get home tomorrow It's exciting just going home for the night Saturday afternoon or today's Thursday tomorrow's Friday the next day in the afternoon We got a move on move along towards Calgary