Chamber and committees

That is part of our ensuring that the yard has leadership and a workforce in place to support the direction towards its being able to attract orders and operate competitively in international markets. That is what Government support for the yard is all about and the focus of our interventions will be to ensure that that remains the case.

Yes, and it also complements the work that the Scottish Government is doing on the Scottish child payment, for example. We are putting money directly into household finances, which enables families to spend locally, to have more control over their resources and to be better able to support their families. That is exactly the type of impact that will be felt in Christine Grahame’s constituency, as it will be felt in constituencies the length and breadth of Scotland.

Presiding Officer, let me correct what I said. I referred to Monday when, in fact, the meeting was on Tuesday. Regardless, I welcomed Mr Rowley’s participation in that discussion.

I confirm to Mr Rowley that the Scottish Government will be an active and critical player in the response at Mossmorran. Mr Rowley and I have worked together for long enough to remember our engagement on issues relating to previous industrial closures in the Fife communities that he has championed. We will have that again in this case, and we will work collaboratively with Fife Council.

Scottish Enterprise has a lot to contribute to the process, with many projects emerging from the work that has been undertaken on a preparatory basis in Grangemouth. That full intelligence will be available to the group at Mossmorran. I recognise that there will be resource implications, given all that is involved, and the Government will consider those as part of our budget process.

As I have already indicated, I am deeply disappointed that the energy profits levy remains in place. It is deeply damaging to the prospects for employment and opportunity in the north-east of Scotland. The Scottish Government is putting in place support to the tune of more than £120 million through our just transition and energy transition funds, which has been invested in the north-east to support the region’s transition. We will continue to be steadfast supporters of the transition in the north-east, supporting the communities as they face a very challenging situation that has been made worse by the preservation of the energy profits levy.

Let me set out to Mr Sarwar the choices that this Government made. We decided to prioritise the introduction of the Scottish child payment—we were the only part of the United Kingdom to introduce such a measure; nothing similar exists in any other part of the United Kingdom—and we used the resources that we have raised in Scotland to make sure that that could be delivered, with the result that child poverty is falling in this country.

Mr Sarwar talks about the increase in resources that are being made available. He is right: there will be extra resource funding of £510 million over a four-year period. However, the one-year increase in employer national insurance contributions in Scotland is estimated to come to about £400 million. There we have it—an average annual increase in our budget of £127 million, eaten up by an increase in employer national insurance contributions that was put in place by a Labour Government. [Interruption.]

The Government is giving consideration to the implications of the United Kingdom Government’s budget for the Scottish budget. However, this morning, the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government confirmed that the Scottish Government will not increase income tax rates or introduce any new bands.

The purpose of the review reports that have been undertaken for every maternity service in the country is to ensure that practices are actively challenged so that they can be improved. That is what is under way, and that is why the Forth Valley service has been inspected. It is, I think, the third inspection that has been undertaken. If we consider the example of Tayside, which was the first investigation, we can see that many of the recommendations that were made in relation to the services there have now been implemented, and that will be the position in Forth Valley.

Yes, I am happy to confirm that. The agreement that was reached with Unite the Union was announced by me a few weeks ago, and I very much applaud the collaboration that Unite has engaged in. It has been a partner of the Government in dealing with the situation at Grangemouth and a partner of the Government in dealing with the situation at Mossmorran.

I think that I picked up Mr Greer correctly as making the point that prior notice was given of the decision about Mossmorran, but I point out that it was not given to the Scottish Government—we had about a week’s notice. The United Kingdom Government knew about the situation for months, but it never sorted it, never fixed it, never addressed it and never intervened in the way that it did in Scunthorpe or any other situation in which it decided to intervene. That just goes to demonstrate that, when it comes to industrial closures under a Labour Government in London, there is one rule for the rest of the United Kingdom and one rule for Scotland.

As I indicated a moment ago, yesterday’s budget will have financial consequences for the Scottish Government’s budget. I welcome the decision to remove the two-child limit, which the Scottish Government was already planning to mitigate in March next year.

There will, of course, be consequences for the public. Their energy bills will not be cut by the £300 that was proposed by the Labour Party. Energy bills will still be, on average, £340 a year higher than the Prime Minister promised that they would be.

I am very sympathetic to the point about hospice costs. In July this year, £5 million of funding was distributed to support independent hospices to deliver pay parity for clinical staff with their NHS counterparts—that is the Government intervening to do exactly that.

What is difficult for hospices is when they get surprises, such as employer national insurance contribution increases, because those put up the costs of employment. Jackie Baillie raised with me the financial pressures, and, bluntly, that is where some of the financial pressures are coming from.

I very much want to do all that we can to support the hospice movement, for which I have enormous respect. The issues in relation to hospice care and palliative care are central to the human rights of individuals in our society. Jackie Baillie knows that my public position—this is a personal position and not the Government’s—is that I am opposed to assisted dying legislation, and I do not think that it is appropriate for the issues of palliative care and assisted dying to be in any way connected. They are separate issues. The right to palliative care for individuals in our society is absolute, and we should do all that we can to support the sector. The Government will certainly do all that it can in that respect.