Chamber and committees

That is why Scotland has an accident and emergency system that is the best performing in the United Kingdom and has been so for the past nine years—[Interruption.]

He wanted me to follow the tax-cutting agenda of Liz Truss. If I had done that, it would have been catastrophic for the country and the national health service, and I am really glad that I did not do it.

I do not want anybody to have to pay for cancer treatment, but I have to face up to the reality of the challenges that our national health service faces.

Let me just give Mr Sarwar a statistic. The rate of people self-funding for private healthcare in England is 66 per cent higher than it is in Scotland—[Interruption.] Oh, Jackie Baillie says, “But it is the Tories.” Well, we will give Labour-run Wales as a comparison: the rate is 13 per cent higher in Labour-run Wales than it is in SNP-run Scotland, so I say to Jackie Baillie that it is perhaps not a good idea to heckle me when I am in mid-flow.

What that all comes down to is the financial envelope that is available for the national health service. The Government is taking the hard decisions to increase tax in order to improve the amount of money that is invested in the national health service.

There was a day when the Labour Party supported us on that, but now it has deserted the pitch and run away. On orders from London, the Labour Party in Scotland is now voting against higher taxes on higher earners, because its bosses in London have told it to do exactly that. That will undermine the investment in our national health service, which is why Anas Sarwar has not a scrap of credibility when he tells me that there will be “no return to austerity” under a Labour Government. A Labour Government will have to make £20 billion-worth of spending cuts to pick up where the Tories have left off, so it will be continued austerity from Labour, and Scotland should vote against it.

The good news is that we are able to get services running back down to Stranraer in July. I am grateful to the Cabinet Secretary for Transport, ScotRail, Transport Scotland, Network Rail and South Ayrshire Council for the work that has been undertaken, because the problem has been a very difficult one. Mr Carson knows the ins and outs of the public safety issues involved in the fire at the station, and I have just answered a question from Mr Gibson on safety on the transport network, so we all know the realities here.

I will give consideration to Mr Carson’s proposal. Of course, such things always cost money, which we would have to try to find. However, if Mr Carson would care to write to me with any suggestions that he thinks would be helpful, I would be happy to consider them, along with the transport secretary.

That is the hard reality that is about to confront Mr Sarwar, who is shouting and muttering at me all the time during my answers. However, he cannot have it both ways; he cannot come here and demand that we do more when a Westminster Labour Government is going to propose to cut our budget because of austerity.

That is why the NHS is at the top of my list of priorities. On general practitioners, we have more GPs per head of population in Scotland than any other part of the United Kingdom, which are able to provide care to people in various parts of our country.

On priorities, I say to Douglas Ross that we can tell how Governments act by the resources that they allocate. This Government has taken the tough decision to increase tax on higher earners so that we can invest more in the NHS than was proposed by the Conservative Government in the consequentials. That tells us that the Scottish Government is giving the necessary priority to the national health service.

Mr Ross asked me about the question of independence, and I will answer his question very directly. Scotland would be in a stronger position to take greater decisions about investment in the NHS if we had the full powers of independence to use the resources of our country to create the best future for our country. I am proud to represent that position.

I regret the fact that people have felt the need to take recourse to private treatment. I have made it clear in my answers over several weeks that, particularly as a consequence of the increase in case loads because of the cancellation of procedures during the Covid pandemic, the presentation of demand on the national health service has increased. We are working to reduce waiting times and waiting lists to ensure that people get treatment at an earlier time than is the case just now.

I have to say to Anas Sarwar that he is on very thin ground when he challenges me on the question of private involvement in the national health service. I remind him of the comments of Labour’s shadow health secretary, Wes Streeting, who said that a United Kingdom Labour Government would

“hold the door wide open”

for the private sector in the national health service. He also said:

“We will go further than New Labour ever did. I want the NHS to form partnerships with the private sector that goes beyond just hospitals.”

What we have here is a classic example of what Anas Sarwar gets up to in public debate. He comes here and says one thing in Scotland, and in England his bosses are doing a completely different thing, which will have an effect on our budget here in Scotland. Anas Sarwar has already been caught out on that this week. It is not good enough for him to say one thing in Scotland and be contradicted by his bosses in London.

I was disappointed to read the statistics that came out this week. The loss of life from drugs in Scotland is truly devastating, and I express my heartfelt condolences to anyone who has lost a loved one through addiction.

The Government is working to tackle the drugs crisis by delivering the £250 million national mission to reduce the number of drug deaths and improve the lives of those who are impacted by drugs. The mission has led to investment in a range of measures to prevent deaths and reduce harms, including implementation of medication assisted treatment standards, widening naloxone access, increasing residential rehabilitation capacity and improving surveillance.

The emergence of new substances raises further concerns. However, for those who are affected by problem substance use and for those who work in the field supporting people every day, I reinforce our commitment to continue to do all that we can to reduce the tragic loss of life.

We will take forward the issue in dialogue with local authorities. As Mr Marra will know, local authorities act independently of the Government and they have to make their own choices. Nonetheless, he raises an important issue about the support that can be put in place and the need to ensure that the needs of children and young people are met in all circumstances.

As I draw my remarks to a close, I note that there will be material issues in the election campaign that are of significance on the question of whether, after the election, we have a UK Government that helps or hinders the work of the Scottish Government. I hope that we are in a position in which the work that—as I have set out—the Scottish Government is taking forward in its own areas of competence will be enhanced and reinforced by the actions of our United Kingdom Government. In that respect, I will be interested in issues such as whether we have to operate with the two-child limit in place, which is a significant impediment to the work that the Government is taking forward to try to lift children of poverty, as it drives poverty in our society, and whether there will be steps to introduce an essentials guarantee, which would lift a further 30,000 children in Scotland out of relative poverty.

There are important issues to wrestle with in the election campaign that will shape the way in which the Scottish Government is able to take forward its agenda. We cannot deny the impact of that agenda on our priorities in Scotland, and I have already set out to Parliament the cumulative actions that we have taken as a Government to ensure that we use our powers and responsibilities to the maximum in taking action to eradicate child poverty. However, we look to the United Kingdom Government to set a policy direction and a fiscal direction that would enable us to do more and achieve our objectives. We will, of course, engage constructively with the United Kingdom Government after the election to ensure that those issues are well understood in relation to taking forward the Scottish Government’s agenda.

I close my opening remarks in this first debate that I lead as First Minister by reinforcing to Parliament the Government’s commitment to the importance of eradicating child poverty, and by stating that the direction of the Government will be set to achieving that central objective.

I move,

That the Parliament agrees that eradicating child poverty is a national mission for the Scottish Government, the Scottish Parliament and society; welcomes the progress made in delivering the Best Start, Bright Futures: Tackling Child Poverty Delivery Plan 2022-2026, with spend benefiting children in low-income households increasing to an estimated £1.4 billion in 2023; recognises the balance of action required across the three drivers of poverty reduction, which are income from employment, the cost of living and income from social security, as well as the need to drive improvements in wellbeing and outcomes for children and families; warns of the threat that UK Government austerity poses to the action and ambition of the Scottish Government in eradicating child poverty; notes modelling that estimates that 100,000 children will be kept out of relative poverty in the current year as a result of Scottish Government policies; further notes modelling that estimates that a further 40,000 children in Scotland could be lifted out of poverty were the UK Government to make key changes to social security, including by introducing an Essentials Guarantee and abolishing the two-child limit, and calls on the incoming UK administration to work collaboratively with the Scottish Government and to follow Scotland’s lead in taking ambitious anti-poverty action.

Will the member give way?