If people did not already understand, it is becoming ever clearer that the austerity politics—the reduction of and constraints on public funding in the United Kingdom—have an impact—[Interruption.] I do not understand why Conservative members are shaking their heads. That is a matter of financial fact. UK Government austerity is having a significant impact on public spending in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. That is a fact.

It would be good if Conservative members and others at least recognised that austerity has an impact on public services, including libraries. I and my colleagues will not cease pointing that out to the Parliament and the public, given that that is why people voted to get rid of the Conservatives and believed that change was coming with Labour—which, sadly, it did not.

Following the Smith commission, the Parliament received some additional powers—far less than what was promised 10 years ago in the lead up to the independence referendum.

We have used those powers to improve the lives of the people of Scotland. However, the last UK Government demonstrated that Westminster could block those powers at the drop of a hat. We know that the United Kingdom Internal Market Act 2020, breaches of the Sewel convention and interventions in devolved policies and spending are evidence of that.

There is now an opportunity for the current UK Government to address the damage that its predecessor inflicted. We stand ready to work with it to reset the relationship, and to protect and enhance the powers of this Parliament.

If I can finish this thought, I will, of course, defer to the member.

A devolution referendum was held in 1979 and then in 1997. We were also able to determine the UK’s constitution in relation to Europe in 1975. I was not there—I was still at primary school. That is a germane point about generations changing and new voters coming into society and also being able to have a say on big questions. As we know to our great cost in Scotland, there was a second European referendum in 2016.

I genuinely wish to impress on colleagues who have not embraced the point that I hope that all democrats in the Parliament agree that we should be able to decide and reconsider matters whenever we as a society see fit. Supporters of the union—I will give way to one of them in a second on this point—do not want independence. They wish to remain part of the United Kingdom. That is important to them. I recognise and respect that. However, in a multinational United Kingdom, there has to be a democratic route to a democratic vote. It should not be a one-off.

If—however we do so—we determine that we should have another vote, we should be able to do that. I encourage everybody to consider how we can allow democracy to flourish when, in fact, a democratic vote is being denied. Especially if there is a change of circumstances, we should be able to take a view on that. Brexit was most certainly a change of circumstances.

I thank Rhoda Grant for her question. The Screen Machine—which matters so much, particularly to our rural and island communities—is funded by Screen Scotland, which is funded by the Scottish Government. We support the retention of that vital lifeline cultural service to rural and island Scotland.

I commend Rhoda Grant for raising the fact that a fundraising drive is under way, and I encourage all members who are able to support and publicise the campaign to do so. As she did, I visited the Screen Machine outside the Scottish Parliament yesterday. I recommend that colleagues who have not yet visited it do so, because it is absolutely tremendous. I am seized of the need to ensure that the service remains in operation and that there is a replacement mobile cinema. With the help and support of colleagues across the chamber, I am encouraged that we can work towards that, which is a shared objective.

The Scottish Government’s long-standing position is that rejoining the single market and the customs union, at the earliest opportunity and as an independent country, represents the best future for Scotland.

Brexit has been and continues to be a disaster for Scotland. I have conveyed to the current UK Government that I welcome its intention to reset the relationship with the EU, and I have made it clear that we must do all that we can to reduce the harm of Brexit wherever possible. The Scottish Government will continue to advocate rejoining the European Union, given the huge benefits that that would bring, including access to the world’s largest single market and customs union—a customs union that is seven times larger than the United Kingdom.

I commend Douglas Lumsden for his question and the way in which he framed it. The difference between 12 per cent and 16 per cent might not seem much to people who do not understand how much that is worth but, as he pointed out, the proposed quota represents a 25 per cent underspend, which would have an impact on the television sector in Scotland that would not be welcomed.

Douglas Lumsden asked what more we can do. One thing that has become increasingly apparent is that, in addition to the fact that the Scottish Government, the Welsh Government, the Northern Ireland Government and our screen agencies are making the very same points that he has made, we are hearing voices from across Parliaments doing exactly the same thing. I commend him and colleagues in his party and in other parties who are making that point. The more people who make that point between now and final decisions, the better chance we have of getting fairness for spending in Scotland by Channel 4, which we worked so hard to secure in relation to spending in Scotland by the BBC.

Scottish Government officials and ministers are in regular contact with key stakeholders across the arts and culture sector as part of the normal business of Government. Such engagement has continued since the publication of the programme for government on 4 September.

I agree entirely with everything that we just heard about the importance of libraries for both individuals and communities. That is why—Richard Leonard heard my initial answer—the Scottish Government has committed the resources that it has committed to protect and support the provision of library services across Scotland. There is also an onus on local government to maintain provision—he knows that as well I do—and we need to work in partnership to ensure that we maintain libraries as a service the length and breadth of Scotland.

If Richard Leonard wishes to highlight any particular issues, I ask him to get in touch with me. Perhaps at the next vote on the Scottish Government’s budget he might wish to exercise his vote to support the resources that are being put into libraries.

I will tell you what, Presiding Officer, I am certainly not going to take any lessons on supporting public services from the party of austerity. It really does take a—[Interruption.] It really does take—[Interruption.] It really does take a brass neck—[Interruption.]

Kenneth Gibson is absolutely right: perhaps that will end the nonsensical claims to the contrary by some members of the Parliament.

With the limited powers that were handed to the Scottish Parliament under the Smith commission, the Scottish Government has made a real difference in areas where Westminster has not. Policies that Social Security Scotland administers, such as the Scottish child payment, are helping to keep an estimated 100,000 children out of poverty in Scotland.

There is a growing demand for further devolution of powers to Scotland in areas including employment rights, immigration and drugs law, based on the understanding that the Scottish Government can legislate only with the best interests of the people of Scotland at heart. The same cannot be said for Westminster.