Chamber and committees

First, I associate myself with Mr Carlaw’s comments about Paul O’Kane’s hosting of tonight’s event. I welcome cross-party co-operation on this question.

In his members’ business debate last night—in which, as ever, Mr Carlaw gave the deep and solemn commitment that he has always given to the issue—he generously referred to the fact that I had taken part in one of the visits to Auschwitz by Scottish school pupils that are supported by the Scottish Government. He correctly indicated that the experience that I had that day will never leave me. I saw, too, the profound impact on the young people who travelled with me on that occasion. For me, that was an indication of the value of the investment that the Government makes in ensuring that future generations understand and appreciate the awfulness of what happened in the Holocaust, and of why those generations must be reminded of it.

Mr Carlaw has my unequivocal commitment that, for as long as I am First Minister, this Government will be a firm funder of Holocaust memorial education in Scotland. I see that as part of our obligations to the past and the future, and it will have my unreserved support as First Minister.

Those are important questions. As the Government’s “Bright Start, Best Futures” strategy indicates, the way to tackle child poverty is through a combination of measures, such as the provision of direct payments, as in the case of the Scottish child payment, or through the provision of employability support, childcare support or transport support, all of which are part of the Government’s budget proposals.

On economic inactivity, the Government is safeguarding funding for employability schemes. Given our confidence that the budget will be passed by the Parliament, as a consequence of our agreement with partners in the Parliament, we are able to give early certainty to employability schemes in Scotland, which they did not have last year, given the financial challenges that we faced. There will be much more certainty about the roll-out of employability programmes from 1 April, and the Deputy First Minister and the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government are giving such assurances to organisations around the country.

I know that Mr O’Kane is deadly serious about tackling child poverty, and he knows that I am, too. That is where I get a bit concerned about where parliamentary discourse has got to, because there is a budget to be voted for. Mr O’Kane wants employability support to be put in place for members of the public in Scotland, and so do I. I am going to vote for it, and I hope that he and his colleagues will, too.

I am familiar with those details and extend my sympathies to the family of Demi Hannaway. I understand the family’s concerns about the information that has been put in the public domain and am familiar with the fact that a complaint has been made and is being handled by the professional standards channel of Police Scotland.

The Crown reserves the right in all circumstances to review any new evidence in a particular case. It does that independently of the Government, so it would be wrong for me to prejudge any of that information. However, I will raise with the Lord Advocate the point that Claire Baker has made to me about the family’s desire for further investigation of the case, because taking that forward would have to be a matter for the Crown, given the circumstances. I give Claire Baker the assurance that I will do that as a consequence of our exchange today.

At the start of the week, I set out the Government’s focus, which will be on three key areas: ensuring that the resources are used to the greatest effect and have an impact in driving down waiting times and clearing treatment backlogs; reforming the system to deliver the right care in the right place; and making a long-term shift to prevention. We will accomplish that by providing the necessary policy direction, which I have just set out, and the resources, which will be included in the Government’s budget, with the biggest settlement for the health service. I am very pleased that we have parliamentary support for the budget, but it is well shown that the Conservatives are not part of the agreement to move the health service forward in any way, shape or form.

Here is some truth for Parliament. [Interruption.] In the years of austerity under the Conservative Government, the capital budgets of the devolved Governments and the United Kingdom Government were slashed. Why? Because of economic and fiscal incompetence by the Conservatives. That is what happened.

I am now going to deliver the national treatment centres. What has certainly not helped me—[Interruption.]

It would not be possible to spend more money on doctors and nurses if I followed Mr Findlay’s tax plans, which would cut £1 billion from public expenditure. That would be stupidity on stilts from the Conservative Party, to add to all the other economic chaos that it has created.

The Parliament will face a very simple choice in a few weeks. Mr Findlay wants me to prioritise the health service and make sure that investment is in place. Investment is in place, but the Parliament has to vote for it. What will the Conservatives do? They will vote against a record funding settlement for the health service. That tells us all that we need to know. For all that posturing from the Conservatives, they do not care about the national health service.

First of all, this is the first time that I have formally had the opportunity to welcome, in Parliament, the support that the Liberal Democrats have expressed for the Government’s budget and for the agreements that we have reached on policy priorities—which we have also reached with members of the Green Party and with the member from Alba. That is an indication of how Parliament should work.

Over the course of Mr Cole-Hamilton’s question, he was subjected to yah-boo behaviour, principally of the Conservatives, who have contributed absolutely nothing to, and have achieved absolutely nothing out of, the budget process. Those are their actions and conduct. The Labour Party is in exactly the same place—it has achieved nothing out of the budget process to date.

I say to Mr Cole-Hamilton that parties have to work together in the common interests of the people of Scotland. I welcome the collaboration that has taken place, because the Government is interested in delivering solutions for the people of Scotland, and not in coming here to posture, as the Labour and Conservative parties are doing. We are interested in doing the hard work to deliver for the people of Scotland. We will deliver a winter fuel payment for pensioners, and the Labour Party and the Tories will not support it when the budget comes to Parliament.

The law on freedom of information is absolutely crystal clear, and all organisations should comply with it and follow its provisions. If the matter is being looked at by the Information Commissioner, I will leave the commissioner to undertake its statutory duty.

I was deeply concerned by what I read in the CBI report on business confidence in the United Kingdom. In my regular engagement with Scottish business, I hear directly that the impact of the recent employer national insurance contribution increases at a UK level is a significant factor.

The Scottish budget for 2025-26 includes a raft of measures to support business and economic growth, as well as enhanced measures to attract private investment.

I have raised the impact of the planned increase in reserved taxation with the UK Government and I wrote to the Chancellor of the Exchequer earlier this month. The Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government has also raised the issue with the Treasury.

We have made clear the wide-ranging concerns about the impact that the change—which was introduced with no consultation—will have on Scotland. The UK Government seems determined to ignore those concerns, but we will continue to raise the issue and the impact that it will have on the Scottish economy. The Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government will raise the issue with the Chief Secretary to the Treasury next month.

It seems to me that that particular decision is having a damaging effect on the UK Government’s growth agenda. Although I am wholly supportive of that agenda, that measure is counterproductive to trying to deliver growth in the economy.