Chamber and committees

That is a very important issue. I recognise the importance of individuals having access to insulin supplies. Procurement is undertaken on a United Kingdom-wide basis. I am not familiar with the challenges that Jackie Baillie puts to me about supply and circulation. I will look into that in the aftermath of First Minister’s question time, because it is critical that individuals who rely on that supply are able to obtain it. I will write to Jackie Baillie with an update later today.

I respectfully say to Mr Ross that there are challenges in relation to the work of Police Scotland. Police Scotland will take the necessary steps to investigate crimes where there is evidence to do so, and people will be prosecuted where there is a case to do so. That is what we would expect, and that is what we would expect in a system in which we have a 40-year low of crime as a consequence of the Government’s stewardship of police resources in Scotland.

The Government is taking a number of steps. In the past two years, we have invested more than £4 million to implement the actions that are set out in the violence prevention framework.

We work with a range of partners, including YouthLink Scotland, which Pauline McNeill referred to and which delivers our national No Knives, Better Lives programme. We also work with the Scottish violence reduction unit, which has a formidable track record on tackling knife crime and violent crime, and Medics Against Violence.

I do not say any of that to suggest in any way that there is not a serious issue that has to be confronted. The Government can take a range of measures and we can work with partners.

Over the summer, I met a brave young person who has been very much involved in the Daily Record our kids, our future campaign. I warmly commend that young person and the Daily Record for the work that they have brought forward. In that conversation, I committed to drawing together representatives of all political parties to reflect on what more we could do to tackle the issue. That will be taken forward. Knowing the deep interest that Pauline McNeill has in the subject, I would welcome her participation in that cross-party summit.

Mr Sarwar has challenged me on the Government’s record, and he has talked about facts, so allow me to share some facts with the Parliament. Between 2007 and 2024, the Government has been responsible for the construction of an average of 7,750 affordable homes each year. During that period, we endured the financial crash and 14 years of austerity under the Conservative Government. Of course, we now have the prolonging of austerity under the new Labour Government.

Between 1999 and 2007, when Mr Sarwar’s party was in charge of the Scottish Government—Jackie Baillie was a minister in that Government for a short period—and when money was so flush that the Labour Government left money in the Treasury kitty unspent, an average of 5,448 affordable homes were built each year. Just so that everybody hears that clearly, I repeat that, at a time of plenty, when the money literally could not be spent in time, an average of 5,448 homes were delivered each year by the Labour Party. Under this Government, the number is 7,750 homes each year, so we are getting on with the job.

I have raised with the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the Deputy Prime Minister the total stupidity and folly of presiding over a 62 per cent cut in the financial transactions budget. If Mr Sarwar would like to help Scotland in any way, shape or form, why does he not persuade the United Kingdom Labour Government to desert the Tory agenda and start investing in our country?

Mr Whittle raises a really important issue in highlighting the fact that individuals who are not on particularly high incomes and who may be just above the pension credit threshold, which is not very high—if my memory serves me right, somebody on an income of about £12,000 will be above the threshold—could be in the situation that he describes, in which they have very high energy use because of their physical condition and their needs but they will not be eligible for a winter fuel payment. That is why the universality of the payment to date has been important.

I am sympathetic to exploring what more we can do to help individuals, but I am sure that Mr Whittle will understand the difficulty that I face, given that we have had an abrupt removal of £160 million from our public finances, which prevents us from delivering a universal benefit, much as I would like to do so.

Emma Roddick has raised very serious issues, especially on behalf of her constituents in the Highlands and Islands where, as she correctly indicates, the hardship of the decisions that were made by the United Kingdom Government to end the universal winter fuel payment will have a particularly acute effect because of the habitual differential temperatures in the Highlands and Islands. I recognise those issues and the Scottish Government has raised those points with the United Kingdom Government. As Emma Roddick will know, the issue was essentially landed on the Scottish Government, along with a budget cut of £160 million.

The work that we are undertaking on the co-design of a social tariff is being taken forward by the acting Minister for Climate Action, Dr Allan. We are engaging with relevant parties on that work. The issue requires agreement from the United Kingdom Government and engagement with it, which we will pursue as a consequence of the discussions.

Yes, there is a housing emergency. The Government recognises that and is taking action to remedy it. A range of action is being undertaken to ensure that we improve the availability of accommodation through tackling the issue of voids. Further work is being undertaken to strengthen investment in the construction of new homes and the refurbishment of existing homes to be available for rent, and steps are being taken in the planning system to tackle the housing emergency. The Government is absolutely focused on building on its strong record of house construction to tackle the challenges that we face.

Obviously, this is an incredibly sensitive case. First, I express my sympathy to the Wilson family for the tragedy that they suffered almost 20 years ago. I share their frustration that the case has not been resolved.

Douglas Ross will know that there has been extensive intervention and investigation to try to identify who was responsible for the murder of Alistair Wilson. I very much welcome the fact that the Lord Advocate—who, as Mr Ross will understand, is the independent head of the prosecution service—has instructed that a fresh investigation be undertaken of the case.

On Douglas Ross’s point about the actions of the chief constable, he will, again, appreciate that the police operate with absolute operational independence from the Government. It would be inappropriate of me to indicate any opinion on the stance that has been taken by the chief constable. The matter is for the chief constable to address. Certainly, the First Minister should not indicate to the chief constable what actions she should take in relation to a live investigation.

I do not want, in any way, to create any sense that I am not sympathetic and empathetic to the situation in which the Wilson family find themselves. Alistair Wilson was murdered on his own doorstep, and his killer or killers have not been brought to justice. That deeply concerns me.

It is important that I place it on the record that Police Scotland has had formidable success in resolving cases of murder—some of them long in the past—because of improvements in investigative procedures and practices. Those have resulted in a number of people being brought to justice who had previously remained free, having committed some of the worst crimes imaginable in our society. Police Scotland focuses on resolving such matters. That is why I said in my first response to Mr Ross that I welcome the Lord Advocate’s instruction for a further investigation of the case.

Neither I nor the justice secretary have spoken to the Wilson family about their concerns. Mr Ross raises the fact that I have expressed points in relation to previous cases in my own constituency. I say to him, respectfully, that I did that when I was on the back benches; I was not First Minister. It is a very different matter when the First Minister starts commenting on live cases. I need to avoid doing that for the sake of protecting the constitutional separation of responsibility for operational matters that lies with Police Scotland.

I say to Mr Ross that I have every sympathy with the Wilson family. I hope that the actions that the Lord Advocate is taking, which have now been pursued by Police Scotland, will provide a resolution to their deep concerns.