Chamber and committees

Mr Findlay knows full well that the Government will set out its tax plans in the budget in an orderly and rational fashion. As a consequence of that, the Parliament will be able to scrutinise the Government’s financial provisions.

I reiterate the point that I have just made: more than half of taxpayers in Scotland continue to pay less than they would if they lived elsewhere in the United Kingdom. I am very proud of that fact.

I am aware of the incident that Mr Greer raises, and I have seen the comments from Sid Khan, one of the individuals who is involved in the situation. This morning, I asked officials from the Scottish Government to seek an update from the United Kingdom’s Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office, which was forthcoming. I am grateful for the information from the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office, which has informed us that it has lobbied the Israeli Government to respect the law and protect the safety of everyone on board. We will keep in close contact with the United Kingdom Government regarding the wellbeing of those on the flotilla.

In relation to the subsequent issues that Mr Greer raised about the actions of the Scottish Government, I set out in my statement to Parliament on 3 September the actions that the Government is taking, and I assure Mr Greer that those have been followed up by the Government.

There is a fundamental difference here, which is about the opportunity to access public services through digital means if individuals wish to do so. That is different from the mandatory proposition that is being advanced by the United Kingdom Government, which is, as my colleague Gordon MacDonald indicated, a distraction from the real difficulties that the Government faces. [Interruption.]

Before I answer Mr Findlay’s question, I express my horror at the attack on a synagogue in Manchester this morning. The attack came on Yom Kippur, the holiest time in the Jewish calendar, and my thoughts are with the victims, their families and all the Jewish communities in Scotland and across the United Kingdom. I record our thanks and appreciation to the emergency services and the first responders for the speed of their response.

Antisemitism is an evil that we must confront and stand resolutely against. I know that the whole Parliament speaks with one voice on such an important question. [Applause.]

I acknowledge the pressures that families face on household incomes. That is why, at the start of September, the Scottish Government took another step to assist families by abolishing peak rail fares for good. For instance, a commuter from Glasgow to Edinburgh will save in excess of £12 a day on their travel. That is just one example of how the Scottish Government is trying to support the household incomes of individuals.

Of course, one of the reasons why our economy has struggled in recent years is the effect of Brexit, which has made every single one of us poorer. Responsibility for that lies with the Conservative United Kingdom Government, which delivered the Brexit that it did.

Mr Findlay knows full well—[Interruption.]

As Liz Smith will know, I am familiar with those issues from my engagement as First Minister and as a constituency member with constituents affected by the issue. My thoughts are very much with the patients of Professor Eljamel. That is precisely why we launched the public inquiry that is now under way, to ensure that patients can obtain answers to their questions and that lessons are learned.

We fully expect NHS Tayside to consider all the facts and circumstances fairly and on a case-by-case basis, including when considering whether to plead that a case is time barred. The courts already have the power to allow an action to proceed out of time by overriding the time bar, if they see fit.

I associate myself entirely with the analysis of the situation that Pauline McNeill has set out. I welcome the commitments that have been made by Hamish Faulkner, who is the responsible minister in the United Kingdom Government. I have had the privilege of discussing these issues with Mr Faulkner and Mr Sarwar at the Palestinian embassy in the past couple of weeks.

There is a range of issues involved in this area, and many of us are concerned that Israel is operating outside the scope of international law. All of us have lived through a time in which there has been a rules-based system in the world and international law has been respected. However, we are living in a world now where that is feeling very frayed, and—Pauline McNeill and I will be absolutely at one on this—we have to return to a rules-based international system that will protect individuals, especially our citizens who have bravely decided to go to the aid of the Palestinian people. I commend them for their courage, I pray for their safety and I assure Pauline McNeill that the Scottish Government will do all that we can to work with the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, for whose assistance I express my appreciation, in trying to ensure their safety in the days to come.

In dialogue with the Funding Council, the Government is taking forward an approach with the University of Dundee—which I have repeated to Parliament on numerous occasions—that will protect the character and identity of the University of Dundee and its significance within the city’s economy and the regional and national economies of Scotland. The original proposals that came forward from the University of Dundee were unacceptable to the Government, because that test would not have been met. That is the test that the Government is applying.

There will obviously be the development of individual plans, and I appreciate the importance, necessity and urgency of clarity about plans. That is what the Government is working on with the Funding Council. However, I assure Mr Marra that, in response to its willingness to invest to support the university’s transition, what the Government is seeking is a university that will remain the strong asset to the city, region and country that the University of Dundee is. That is the test that we are applying to those plans.

The fundamental point at the heart of Roz McCall’s question is the importance of ensuring that patients who suffer a stroke can be provided with the rehabilitation and support they need to enable their recovery. When that is provided, in many cases, recovery is very strong as a consequence. The importance and urgency of the question are not lost on me. The steps that the Government is taking to ensure that we have a better flow-through of patients in our healthcare system are designed to ensure that patients receive the support that they require in hospital and, ideally, at home. Measures such as the hospital at home service are designed to assist in that respect, too, to enable the rehabilitation of individuals who have suffered health incidents such as a stroke. I will look closely at the application of the standards to ensure that the improvements that Roz McCall seeks can be taken forward.

Those issues have to be looked at as part of the consideration of the ID cards proposition. I note that, prior to the Prime Minister’s announcement, in the early summer, net support in opinion polls for digital ID cards stood at 35 per cent. After the Prime Minister announced the proposal, it fell to minus 14 per cent. It seems to be the case that whatever the Prime Minister touches turns to dust.