I thank the minister for prior sight of her statement. In it, she indicates that the Scottish Government has always taken seriously its responsibility to promote safe and connected communities, and that it will continue to support and fund organisations that are embedded in communities across Scotland and engage in ways that bring people together. Although the announcement of additional funding is welcome, local authorities are facing financial constraints as they deal with the influx of individuals.

What measures will the Scottish Government put in place to support local authorities; what discussion has it had with the UK Government about dealing with the number of refugees and asylum seekers; and what is its long-term approach to dealing with the number of refugees and asylum seekers, given the possible impact on local services?

The minister claims to be focused on international trade, yet Scottish exports to the rest of the United Kingdom are worth three times more than exports to the EU and the rest of the world. Why is the Scottish National Party so obsessed with grandstanding abroad, instead of strengthening the most important trading relations, which are right here with the rest of the UK?

To ask the Scottish Government what assessment it has made of whether its current above-inflation public sector pay deals have appropriate contingencies in place, in light of the recent rise in the consumer price index and reported concerns regarding inflation. (S6O-04976)

Does the cabinet secretary accept that prioritising above-inflation pay rises can fuel further inflation while, at the same time, draining funds from vital areas such as social care and capital expenditure? Consistently going above pay policy makes unions more likely to push for even higher settlements. Is it not time that the Scottish Government was honest about trade-offs instead of pretending that there is a limitless supply of money from the taxpayer?

You have touched on the difficulties with social care provision and integration joint boards. Of late, we have seen a large number of agency staff being brought in. Last week, a report came out showing that, over the past five years, about £300 million has been spent on that. In my area of Clackmannanshire, a huge sum of money has been required for agency staff. We are not able to provide the staff from our area and agency staff have to be brought in at an extra cost, which erodes things further. The financial pressures then become even more intense for your members and for the day-to-day workforce. They are pushed into that situation because there is not the staff, but demand still needs to be met, which means spending on substitute staff. That must have a knock-on effect; that impacts the process and your members.

You make a valid point about the respect for the role and the organisation. In the past, there might have been a certain perception of what it means to work for the council and what the role and responsibilities of a council employee were, and that is why both of you went into local government. However, that has changed. The demands that are now placed on council employees and the salami slicing of budgets over decades cannot have done anything but impact on the morale of the workforce that you represent. If there is a perception that people will not get job satisfaction in a role and will have a workload that might make them ill, why would they take that job?

Finally, you have touched on the comparison between corporate functions and front-line services. Sometimes those back-room or corporate functions have been seen as an easy option to lose, but the fact is that their loss has a knock-on effect on front-line services. Can you give us a little bit of flavour of how you think that sort of thing should be reformed or moved around? After all, the approach is not working.

Thank you.

We all understand that there is a need for workforce reduction and workforce planning to ensure that local government is effective and efficient. When it comes to the management of the council, elected representatives face budget pressures when the officials within the organisation say that, for example, there needs to be a 3 per cent, 4 per cent or 8 per cent reduction across the board. No department—leisure and culture, housing, health and so on—has had a budget increase in recent years, which makes it harder for the management of the organisation to manage what needs to be done, and elected representatives then have to deal with the processes.

I spent nearly two decades in a local council before I entered Parliament, and I have been here for a decade. In that time, I have seen even more erosion of individuals and processes, and you are confirming that today. When it comes to workforce reduction and workforce planning, what do you see as required in order to ensure that you are able to maintain and sustain service provision? You have already told me that departments, functions and roles have vanished because you do not have that workforce capacity or that planning.

Can I ask a supplementary question, convener?