 The next item of business is First Minister's Questions, and I call Douglas Ross. I begin by echoing the comments that we heard in this chamber earlier this week following the sad and untimely passing of our friend and Scottish Conservative colleague, David Hill. David died playing the sport that he loved for the Parliament team that he helped to set up, and I know having spoken to his parents, Roger and Sharon in the last couple of days, they are understandably utterly devastated and heartbroken, but they are so appreciative of the support they've received from parties across this chamber. I also thank you to you, Presiding Officer, and the Scottish Parliament team, who have not only helped David's family, but also his friends and colleagues that were with him when this tragic accident occurred. Yesterday, the Damming Audit Scotland report was published into this SNP Government's failure to build two lifeline ferries. Kate Forbes was put forward to respond in this chamber and to the media, but couldn't say who made the key decision to sign off this disastrous contract. First Minister, can you give a straight answer where your finance secretary could not? Which Minister gave the green light for those ferry contracts against expert advice? First Minister, can I also take the opportunity to express my shock and distress at the untimely and tragic passing of David Hill? It is a mark of the man that David was that he had such good friends right across the political spectrum in this Parliament. Obviously, when he died, he was doing what he loved most. I hope in time that that will be some comfort to his loved ones. I had contact personally with David's dad on Sunday and obviously offered all possible help that the Scottish Government can provide, but my thoughts are with Roger, with Sharon and with David's wider family and friends and, of course, all of his colleagues on the Conservative benches. To turn to the substance of the question, before I come directly to that question, let me say very candidly the problems with the procurement or rather the construction because it is not the procurement, the construction of these ferries which resulted in delay, cost overruns and a very negative impact on island communities is far from satisfactory and I think that is putting it mildly. The report that was published by Audit Scotland yesterday is entirely fair and justified. There are a number of complexities, but these are public contracts and therefore, of course, the buck stops with the Scottish Government. Pre-2019, these were issues around the quality of work and progressive work when the yard was in private ownership. Of course, since the nationalisation of the yard at the end of 2019, further problems have been identified, the cabling problem being the most significant and, of course, there was additional delay because of Covid, but we remain focused on the delivery of the ferries. Of course, the actions that the Scottish Government has taken have helped to secure jobs, the last remaining commercial ship builder on the Clyde and I think that is important. Turning to the specific question briefly, who was transport minister at the time in question is, of course, a matter of public record. That was Derek Mackay, but, of course, this is a Government and this may be alien to the Conservatives, I understand, but this is a Government that operates by collective responsibility. Ultimately, as with any decisions, whether I am personally involved in them or not, responsibility stops with me. In terms of the documents around that particular decision, many of those documents have been in the public domain for some time. They clearly narrate the issues with the lack of a full refund guarantee, but they also clearly narrate the mitigations that were put in place to reduce that risk. Those are documents that are in the public domain and are available for anybody to review. Douglas Ross, the finance secretary could not tell this Parliament or the media asking yesterday who was to blame, but 24 hours later the SNP's spin machine has spun into action and it is the fault of the disgraced ex-finance minister. Let me get this absolutely straight. The First Minister is claiming that she had no involvement. The Audit Scotland report confirms that SNP ministers were aware of the huge risk that this project carried on regardless. The Government she leads willingly decided to charge ahead against expert advice. The First Minister is now trying to blame Derek Mackay, and it all seems very convenient that the person who is getting the blame is no longer here. It was the First Minister's Government, her cabinet and her decision. Let me ask again, while she is saying that the transport minister took the decision, what input to that decision did the First Minister have through the Government that she leads? I am genuinely not sure if Douglas Ross listened to a single word that I said. It was him who asked who the individual minister was. I did not volunteer that information. It is a matter of public record who the transport minister was at the time of that decision. It is a matter of public record that that was Derek Mackay. I know that it does not suit the script that Douglas Ross prepared before he came into the chamber, but here is what I went on to say. I am going to repeat it again just to be absolutely clear. This is a Government that operates by collective responsibility, and I am responsible ultimately for all decisions that the Government takes. The buck stops with me. I have never tried to shy away from that on any issue. I know that that is not how things are done in the Conservative Government at Westminster, but that is how things are done here. Perhaps Douglas Ross might want to reflect before his next question on what I am saying here. I am ultimately responsible for all decisions of the Scottish Government. That is why, of course, I am standing here asking the questions, but on the substance of this issue. As I said, the documents are available in the public domain. The issues around, in particular, because this was a concern that CMAIL had expressed about the lack of a full refund guarantee, those concerns are set out in these documents, but so too are the actions that were taken to mitigate these risks. Government then comes to a decision on the balance of risk. The documents express the view that the current deal that has been negotiated with FMAIL is the best deal that can be achieved given the financial restrictions that the Yard is operating under. There were three key changes that were made. This is all set out in the Audit Scotland report. In case of the final payment, so that more money was being withheld, CMAIL would take ownership of all equipment, machinery and materials as they arrived at the shipyard, and FMAIL would require all major suppliers to offer a full refund guarantee. Those are the changes that reduce the risk and, of course, underpin the decision that the Government arrived at. I come back to the central point here. I am not defending the cost overrun of the delay around the construction of the ferries. It is completely unacceptable. At all points, the motivation of this Government has been to save jobs, save the shipyard and make sure that the ferries, albeit late, as a matter of deep regret, can be delivered. That is what we continue to focus on. The First Minister says that she takes ultimate responsibility, then throws an ex-minister, a disgraced SNP ex-minister, under the bus. If we are looking at ultimate responsibility from the First Minister, can she tell us why a key safeguard was removed that could have saved Scottish taxpayers hundreds of millions of pounds? Can she tell us, with her ultimate responsibility, why they started building the ferries when they did not even have a design agreed? With her ultimate responsibility, can she tell us why Fergs and Marine were given the contract in the first place? And with her ultimate responsibility, can she tell us why there is not going to be a public inquiry into this whole scandal? No, because we need this public inquiry, because Audit Scotland tried to get answers, but they couldn't. They said, and I quote, "...there is no documented evidence to confirm why Scottish Government ministers were willing to accept the risk of awarding a contract to Fergs and Marine despite Seamall's concerns. We consider that there should have been a proper record of this important decision." First Minister, this is one of the most reckless decisions ever taken by a Scottish Government so far, costing a quarter of a billion pounds of taxpayers' money. First Minister, why can't the body in Scotland charged with scrutinising public spending get a shred of evidence to justify your Government's decision? If Douglas Ross thinks that it is unimportant who the individual minister was and that, as I agree with, the buck stops with me, why was his first question asking me who the individual minister was? Clearly, he must have thought that it was important. I was not intending to come here and do anything other than accept full responsibility. Coming on to the questions and let me answer them one by one. On the decision to proceed and the lack of the full builders refund guarantee, that is what I have already run through. That decision was clearly taken on the balance of risk. Seamall had concerns about that, but a range of actions had been taken. I set out exactly what those actions were to mitigate those risks. The conclusion is in documentation that is publicly available that the deal negotiated was the best one that could have been achieved in those circumstances. The second question that Douglas Ross asked me was, why was the contract awarded to FML when it was the most expensive? Again, that question is answered in the Audit Scotland report. The review found that it was the most expensive. If memory serves me correctly, that was known at the time, but Seamall also assessed the bid as being of the highest quality. Overall, it achieved the highest combined cost and quality score of the seven bids. That was the decision taken at the time. Ministers are not involved in procurement decisions. On the question of a public inquiry, we have had a parliamentary committee look into the issue. We have now had a major Audit Scotland review, but as Audit Scotland recommends at page 7 on completion of the vessels, there should be a formal review of what went wrong with a view to learning lessons. The Scottish Government will consider what form that further review should take. We will consider that carefully and, of course, we will report to Parliament in due course. Douglas Ross is ridiculous. We are fortunate in Scotland to have two Governments and there is only one of them currently building ships in Scotland that actually sailed. That is because of this First Minister's record in Government. Fergs and Marine was the most expensive bidder, yet, as the First Minister has just said, it was chosen on the basis of quality. It was chosen on the basis of quality when ferries are two and a half times over budget. Hundreds of millions of pounds of taxpayers' money has already been wasted. There is a five-year delay at least, and there are still 175 faults with the ferries that are still being built. This is one of the worst public spending disasters since devolution. Who knows in SNP seeks at Scotland because all the evidence is gone? Audit Scotland could not get to the bottom of a number of points. The only scraps of paper that we have left about this disaster decision are the old SNP press releases that claim that they were saving Scottish shipbuilding. When you visited the ferries in 2016, were they painted on windows, not a sign that your decision was an absolute shocker? What Douglas Ross has demonstrated there is that he has not spent much time reading the hundreds of pages of documents that are in the public domain. There is one issue where Audit Scotland refers to a lack of documentation. That is a matter that the Government needs to reflect on seriously and well. However, there are hundreds of pages of documents that I have referred to many of them already, and they would bear some attention from Douglas Ross. The outset is a deeply regrettable situation. At the time that I visited the yard, it was in private ownership. Assurances were given about the completion of work and the problems that have led to cost-over-runs delays. Worst of all, a negative impact on our island communities is deeply regrettable. At every step, the motivation of the Government has been to secure employment, to secure the shipyard and to get the ferries completed. That is what we will continue to focus on. We will learn the lessons in the Audit Scotland report. We will make sure that all the recommendations in it are taken forward. Douglas Ross may think that it is unimportant to have saved 300 jobs and a shipyard. I think that those things matter. That is why we will now focus on making sure that that yard has a positive future. I start like others have by paying tribute to David Hill and send my particular condolences of course to his family and friends, but also recognise the wonderful tribute that Jamie Greene, who employed and paid to David, and my consolances to Jamie Greene, and in particular all our Conservative colleagues in this Parliament. David was someone who was respected across the political spectrum and he had friends not just that were MSPs but let's not forget the many staff that worked in and around this Parliament building too. Yesterday faced with the biggest fall in living standards since rationing, the Chancellor failed to present a spring statement that would make life easier for millions of families. He failed to introduce a windfall tax, he failed to put more money in people's pockets and he raised the tax burden on millions of families across the UK. He must have been taking lessons on missed opportunities from this First Minister. In her Government's budget, the First Minister had the opportunity to tackle the cost of living crisis, but just like the Tories, they failed. Giving households less than £4 a week in a council tax rebate, copying Risi Sunach's policy just won't cut it. Will the First Minister accept that the action that she has taken so far is not enough to confront this crisis? In the Scottish Government's budget, we doubled the Scottish child payment, game changing for families with children living in poverty. Memory serves me correctly. The Labour Party shamefully voted against that measure in the Scottish budget. On yesterday's spring statement, it showed a callous disregard for the misery that people are already facing and the misery that is going only to get much worse. Household incomes are about to suffer their biggest fall in more than 60 years. The Resolution Foundation has estimated that an additional 1.3 million people across the UK, including half a million children, will be pushed into poverty. There was nothing to help the poor and those on the lowest incomes. The most shameful thing about the chancellor's announcement yesterday is that he squiddled away money for pre-election bribes, money that could be spent right now to help those in desperate circumstances. His actions yesterday were disgusting. In terms of the Scottish Government's actions, we have limited powers and limited resources, but due to our wider long-standing policies, people here already pay less on average in council tax, less in water bills and less in rail fares. People in Scotland, of course, compared to south of the border, pay nothing for prescriptions, for ITES, for university tuition. In addition to the payment through the council tax, the £150 payment, we have taken the decision to operate devolved benefits by 6 per cent, and it is the failure south of the border to do that, which is having the biggest impact on low-income families. We have introduced, as I have already said, the Scottish child payment. We are investing in the Scottish welfare fund. We are increasing the fuel insecurity fund. We will continue to do everything that we possibly can within our powers and resources. Anybody who is serious about helping the lowest paid would be arguing for demanding powers and resources to be taken out of the hands of Rishi Sunak in his type and put into the hands of this Parliament. We welcome the doubling of the Scottish child payment, but it is a plan that predates the cost of living crisis. Over 270,000 children are not going to benefit, and poverty campaigners say that it needs to go further. The First Minister wants to obsess about power that she does not have. She has been in government for 15 years. She has power to use that power to change people's lives. That is what the job is for. Let us look at what she has done with the power that she has. She has copied Rishi Sunak's council tax rebate, filled to target support to those who are most in need, increased rail fares and put on water charges for Scottish households. We have published detailed plans on how to confront this crisis, but so far the SNP has not listened. Here is another meaningful action that they could take. Scottish Water is owned by the Scottish Government. It is currently sitting on a cash mountain of £428 million. Scottish Labour is calling for not just the freezing of water charges but a £100 rebate for every household in Scotland. Does the First Minister believe that this money is better off in the Scottish Water Bank account or in struggling families' accounts? The First Minister said everything that we can reasonably do to help, but Anna Sarwar said that the Scottish child payment doubling of course predated the cost of living crisis. That is of course one of the reasons why this afternoon, this very day in this Parliament, Shona Robison will deliver a statement accompanying our updated tackling child poverty delivery plan, setting out the further actions that this Government is going to take to lift children out of poverty rather than doing as the UK Government is doing, pushing more children into poverty. I am surprised that Anna Sarwar did not seem to know that. Yes, my party has been in government for some time, that is why in Scotland people do not pay for prescriptions, they do not pay for itests, they do not pay to go to university. It is why we have lower council tax on average than in England and in Labour-run Wales. It is why more people pay no council tax at all because we retain the council tax reduction scheme. Of course, we are using our powers. The doubling of the Scottish child payment is the principal example of that. We will continue to look at what more we can do. Anna Sarwar is right to continue to press us to do more, but he would have more credibility if he did not also back the retention of these powers over welfare, over public spending, in the hands of Boris Johnson and Rishi Sunak. Until he changes that position, I do not know that many people across Scotland are going to take him seriously. Anna Sarwar, that is simply not good enough. People are struggling right now. As per usual, the First Minister wants to make this a constitutional debate. I hate to break it to her. See whether you voted yes or no, your bills are still going up and you need help from this Government. The First Minister can take action to tackle the cost of living crisis. Let us look at the tragic stories from across the country last week. People stealing fuel canisters in the highlands, families turning down fresh vegetables from food banks because they cannot afford to turn on the gas kicker and people digging up their gardens to grow their own food because they cannot afford to buy it. That is why Labour has set out the actions that both Governments should take. A windfall tax on oil and gas giants to reduce bills by £600, the £200 as a grant, not a loan and here in Scotland a £400 support payment to support struggling families, a £100 rebate on water bills and a freeze on water charges and rail fares. That is real help, supporting families with over £1,000, a contrast to this Government's flagship cost of living policy, which would give families less than £4 a week. When will the First Minister understand that she has to do better than this? The policy is a Scottish child payment, which Anna Sarwar and his colleagues voted against when the budget came before this Parliament. We will continue to look at everything and anything we can do within the powers and resources that we have. Shona Robison will set out further actions when she delivers her statement this afternoon. There is real misery. There is a wave of human misery being experienced right now. It is only going to get worse on that. Anna Sarwar and I do not disagree and we will continue to do everything we can. I am afraid that there is a real issue at the heart of this. If you look at the Joseph Rowndy Foundation analysis that was published this morning, those in the lowest income decil are going to see their household incomes cut by almost 6 per cent. The main reason for that is the failure to operate benefits by more than 3.1 per cent. Where we have control of benefits here, we have uprated them by 6 per cent. The reason we cannot do that for the main benefits, like universal credit for example, is because we do not have the power. I am afraid that it is the same reason why we cannot impose a windfall tax to help with energy costs. It is the same reason why energy costs remain reserved. When it came to a choice between yes and no, Anna Sarwar encouraged people to vote no and because people voted no, those powers remain in the hands of Boris Johnson and Rishi Sunak. Until Anna Sarwar addresses that issue, we are always going to be limited in this Parliament in terms of what we can do. When is he going to wake up and realise that? A constituent of mine is a victim of historic forced adoption, whose concerns about confidentiality of victims responding to the Scottish Government consultation. She explains that filling in the responses is quite difficult for victims as it brings up a lot of emotion and it has a bigger impact on people filling it in. That could have a significant impact on the responses given and effectiveness of the consultation. What are the differences that the First Minister can give my constituent in all victims of forced adoption that any information that they give will be confidential and that they will not be identifiable from their responses? This is a really important issue. I also recognise that it is an extremely sensitive issue, so I want to thank everybody who has responded to the consultation so far. I appreciate that it takes a lot of courage to share deeply distressing stories like this. We are offering a private space for people to come forward to share experiences in complete confidentiality. I would like to reassure the member's constituent that participants can take part entirely anonymously and no data that could identify an individual will be retained. We also have a dedicated helpline in collaboration with Health in Mind to provide interim support to individuals who want to make a contribution. The same date for responses is 20 April and, following this date, all responses will be analysed and considered along with any other available evidence. Myrtle Fraser. Over the past decade, no fewer than four women have died, while patients on the Morden ward at Murray Royal hospital in Perth, while suffering acute mental health disorders. Today, the Courier newspaper reports that a fifth patient died on the ward in the same period, but their death and the circumstances have never been made public. First Minister, those patients were in hospital to keep them free from harm, but they and their families have been failed. Why is this happening and what is being done to stop it? Those are very serious issues where lessons need to be learned, they are learned by health boards and where necessary by the Government. I am not aware of the detail of the case reported in the Courier today. I will ensure that I become aware of that detail and I am happy to write to Myrtle Fraser when I have had the opportunity to do so. Jackie Baillie. Our Glass is a 24-7 helpline supporting older people and their families dealing with abuse and neglect. This is the first service of its kind that has just launched in Scotland as a result of a 46 per cent rise in elder abuse calls during the pandemic. Elder abuse is an under-supported and under-reported area, and given the shocking statistics, the Our Glass helpline will be a very welcome resource. Our Glass is funded by the Home Office to provide a service in England. Will the First Minister agree to meet Our Glass and consider providing support for this valuable service in Scotland? First Minister. Services such as Our Glass are very important. Elder abuse is awful and, of course, the pressures of the pandemic are understood by all of us. I am certainly very happy to have the health secretary meet with or talk to Our Glass to see what the Scottish Government can do to support them. Bob Doris. My constituents' families have, thankfully, safely made it to Glasgow from Kyve, including a 68-year-old relative travelling for a Ukrainian passport. They have asked me whether they are relatively qualified for the stationary travel scheme, something that I hope the First Minister can confirm. More widely, the First Minister, what steps is the Scottish Government taking to assist those arriving in Scotland from Ukraine or elsewhere to access of the services and settlements that they should have the right to receive at such a difficult time? First Minister. I am certainly very relieved and pleased to hear that Bob Doris's constituents' families have made it safely to Glasgow. I know that they will receive a warm welcome here. I would be happy to provide any detailed information on the support services that are available given their particular circumstances. Obviously, we have a proud history of welcoming displaced people and a wealth of experience from previous schemes. We are working with a range of partners to ensure that wraparound support is in place for all displaced people that are arriving here in Scotland. Those who come from Ukraine will have a right to work, access to social security benefits and public funds. We will be working to make sure that people are aware of that and get access to all those services. We are standing ready to welcome, I hope, significant numbers of people fleeing the situation in Ukraine. We were pleased that our super sponsor scheme that we had proposed to the UK Government went live on Friday. We have multi-agency efforts in place to provide support. What we need now is to see visas begin to be granted in significant numbers so that we can get more people to Scotland and give them the support that they need. Finally, let me take the opportunity to welcome, and I am sure that, on behalf of all of us, the Dniepril kids who arrived in Scotland last night. I know that they would all rather be at home in Ukraine, but while they are here, I think that it is something all of us want to do to make sure that they are surrounded by love, care and support. Megan Gallacher, can I just check with Ms Gallacher as your card in? Bear with us a second, there you go. On 24 February, the First Minister gave a commitment to explore Christine Grahame's suggestion that local authorities should not investigate their own complaints in cases relating to child protection. Therefore, does the First Minister agree that an independent national whistleblowing officer should be established for public bodies and does she agree that those who cover up child protection issues should be reported to Police Scotland immediately? I did give the commitment to Christine Grahame, as the member rightly said, just a few weeks ago. I hope that she will accept that the consideration of those issues is still under way, and I will make sure that, as part of that consideration, the proposals that she has made today are properly considered. To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government is doing to ensure that perpetrators of domestic abuse do not go on to re-offend. Domestic abuse is an insidious and dreadful crime. It has a devastating impact on victims and it is vital that perpetrators are fully held to account. In partnership with key stakeholders, we are implementing Equally Safe, which is Scotland's strategy to tackle all forms of violence against women and girls. This aims to prevent violence from occurring in the first place, build the capability and capacity of mainstream and specialist services to support survivors and those at risk, and also strengthen the justice response to victims and perpetrators. As a tangible example of that, we have committed to expanding the availability of the accredited Caledonian system to ensure that more male perpetrators of domestic abuse are directed to services that help challenge harmful behaviours, reduce re-offending and improve the lives of women and children. Pam Gossel. I thank the First Minister for that response. Growing up as a very young child, I watched victims of domestic abuse come to my mum's shop on a girls' street for help. But not enough has changed. Half of the 65,000 domestic violence incidents reported in 2020-21 were committed by re-offenders. Clearly, whatever the Government is doing right now isn't working, we need to work together to provide a true deterrent for the horrible abuse, so can I ask the First Minister, will her Government commit to do more on this issue and back my proposals to create a domestic abuse register? I mean, these are really serious issues and I want to ensure that we take them very seriously. On the specific issue of an offender register, obviously we keep the law under continual review. We're always keen and willing to explore any options to reduce crime and re-offending, so we would be very keen to understand the detail of that proposal and give it due consideration. Of course, all registered sex offenders are already placed on the sex offender register and, as such, must register with the police as part of those requirements, but I appreciate that that will not incorporate all perpetrators of domestic violence. Those things need careful consideration and I certainly undertake to give it that on the broader issues. It is definitely the case, and I think that this is something that should be welcomed, that more people now feel able to come forward when they are victims of domestic abuse or sexual violence and that is to be encouraged. Obviously, sentences for perpetrators are matters for courts and I think that it's important that we all recognise that, but there is a range of work under way to ensure better support for victims, to ensure that those who do commit these dreadful crimes do face up to the consequences of their actions and the Caledonian system that I referred to earlier as an important part of that. We're also doing more to invest in the support services that victims need and get so much benefit from, so there's a range of work under way, but on this issue I will remain, the Government will remain open minded to any further proposals that are put forward. To ask the First Minister what work is being done to extend the warm Scots welcome to Ukrainians arriving in the UK. We all continue to be horrified by the illegal war in Ukraine. We are ready to extend the warmest of Scottish welcomes to those fleeing the war. We've been working rapidly with a range of partners to ensure that displaced Ukrainians arrived at a place of safety and security. We've established welcome hubs at a key entry point to support people with what they need immediately on arrival, as well as to assess their medium to longer term needs. We're working with COSLA to provide accommodation as well as exploring all viable public and private sector housing options and offers from the public who have generously offered to open their own homes. Fulton MacGregor. I thank the First Minister for that response and for the on-going work of the Scottish Government in this area. I would also like to take this opportunity briefly, Presiding Officer, to congratulate my good friend and colleague Neil Gray on his recent appointment as Minister for Ukrainian Refugees. I think that this is also a very fitting appointment because, of course, our two constituencies have a richly feared history making up the wider Monklands area, and we've both been deeply touched over recent weeks by the feared magnitude of response of people in both Coatbridge and Christen. And their drain shots to this crisis and their tremendous willingness to support those seeking refuge. Can you therefore ask the First Minister, after the stress and trauma of escaping in a legal war, how will the Scottish Government ensure that the welcome hubs that she mentioned support displaced people from Ukraine to find peace and safety here in Scotland? The welcome hubs are a really important initial part of what we want to offer so they will assess immediate needs, they will take a multi-agency approach, assess those needs, provide wraparound support and that will include having trained staff on call to support people who are experiencing trauma. The welcome hubs will also be able to begin the assessment of longer term needs, including accommodation requirements. We now have the super sponsor route in place, which is in addition to the Homes for Ukraine route and, of course, the family route. We have the support ready to be provided here. The bit in the middle is getting the visa applications granted so that people can start arriving in numbers. I'll get an update later today, but yesterday the update I had was that there had been over 1,000 applications made through the super sponsor scheme and just under 1,000 I think in terms of individual matching. Obviously we're still improving data flows so there will be some uncertainty around those figures. What we need to see, though, is a significant speeding up of the granting of visa applications in order, as I say, that we can see people come here and start to access the support that we have ready for them on that multi-agency basis. To ask the First Minister what action the Scottish Government is taking to ensure that people are able to register with NHS dental practice and receive NHS dental treatment in the week of the Covid-19 pandemic. It's obviously a priority to ensure that patients are able to access NHS dental care. Of course, we've committed to abolishing dental charges in the lifetime of this Parliament, which will help to remove at least one of the barriers to accessing high-quality NHS dental services. To support patient care and access, we recently announced revised payment arrangements for dentists from 1 April, which will more closely link payments to the number of patients being seen and treatments provided. This multiplier funding arrangement will see additional investment in dentistry increased by almost £17 million in the first quarter of the new financial year. That comes on top of the 9 per cent planned increase in the budget for NHS dental services in the coming financial year and, of course, the support given during the pandemic of £50 million financial support for the sector and a further £35 million of PPE. I thank the First Minister for that answer. Many constituents have expressed to me that, due to the total lack of NHS provision in their areas, they are left with untreated dental pain and conditions, often missing check-ups that can spot life-threatening conditions such as oral cancer. Does the First Minister realise that she is increasingly not even overseeing a two-tier system? For many people across Scotland, dentistry is effectively privatised already? No, we continue to support NHS dentistry. In fact, we are investing more proportionately than we are seeing south of the border by about 40 per cent. We have about 40 per cent more dentists per head of population, per 100,000 of the population than elsewhere in the UK. There are significant challenges because of the pandemic. That is why we financially supported dentists during the pandemic and why we are taking action now to further support dentists. The multiplier funding arrangement that I referred to in my earlier answer is extremely important. It has been welcomed by many dentists. I think that the BDA has also welcomed the introduction of this. That recognises the importance of linking payments to numbers of patients and the treatment that is being provided. We will continue to ensure that we support NHS dentistry and that people have access to it. As I said earlier, removing dental charges will also take away one of the barriers that, traditionally, some people have experienced. I had my own experience with dental problems last week and I am not directly blaming the First Minister for that. Douglas Thane from the Scottish Dental Association said that decades of underfunding by the Scottish Government has created a toxic environment as dentists battle rising costs and inadequate fees paid by health boards. Can't the First Minister say that her current approach is endangering dental provision for those who need it most across Scotland? I said earlier on that the buck stops with me. I am afraid that that does not include Stephen Care's teeth problems. I am just hoping that the glue is working better today, but I think that I am going to move on because these are two important issues for such levity. Those are important issues. There are more dentists. If I look where Stephen Care's party is in government, the number of dentists per 100,000 of the population was 39.9. In Scotland, it is 55.6, 40 per cent higher. For this financial year, our government investing in core community dental services is 40 per cent higher. That does not remove all the difficulties, but it shows the foundation that we have in place here, which is why the additional investment that I am speaking about is so important, because it recognises the additional problems caused by the pandemic. We will continue to focus on supporting NHS dentists in order that people across the country can have the access to them that they have every right to expect. To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government's response is to the spring statement. Yesterday's spring statement was a missed opportunity on the part of the Chancellor to give families and businesses the support that they need now in the face of rising costs. It did show callous disregard for the poorest in our society. Despite the largest annual fall in living standards since the 1950s, as confirmed by the OBR, the Chancellor's decisions will mainly assist the better off and provide no real help to those in low incomes with ever more households left facing poverty. In contrast, the Scottish Government, within our very limited powers and resources in this regard, is taking a range of targeted steps, including doubling the Scottish child payment, uprating our devolved social security benefits by 6 per cent and extending our fuel insecurity fund. Brexit and the volatile costs of oil and gas are playing a massive role in the cost of living crisis, and there was no recognition of this Tory legacy in the Chancellor's statement. What's worse, there was nothing in his statement to help those struggling the most with the rising costs. With the Office of Budget Responsibility warning about the biggest annual fall in living standards since their records began, what can the Scottish Government do to build on what we have already delivered to tackle the cost of living, like free bus travel for young people, free school meals for primary school children and, as you've just said, doubling the Scottish child payment? It is absolutely right to point out the impact of the Chancellor's statement yesterday on the poorest in our society. The Joseph Rowntree Foundation has published analysis this morning that I would recommend that every member of this Parliament looks at carefully. The richest decile will see their incomes fall by less than 2 per cent. The poorest decile will see their incomes fall by almost 6 per cent. That is principally down to the failure to properly up-rate benefits. Given that the Chancellor had access to more money, the decision not to do that is disgusting and completely indefensible. I've already set out today the actions that the Scottish Government is taking. We will continue to look at further actions that we can take. As I said earlier, Shona Robison will set out when she delivers the tackling child poverty delivery plan later today some further actions that the Scottish Government will take. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. Further to the woefully inadequate spring budget from the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the fierce cost of living hike, does the First Minister agree that for those unfixed incomes, such as pensioners, many of whom became housebound in these Covid years during which heating costs will be devastating and with one of the worst UK state pensions they've got the worst in Europe? Anas Sarwar, for example, has to wake up to the position that without the power, over pensions and other benefits, mitigation has its limitations. Christine Grahame is absolutely 100 per cent right. We can't use powers that we don't hold in this Parliament. Where we do hold powers, we are using those powers, so taking action, game changing action to lift children out of poverty. We don't have control over pensions, but it is the case that we tend to talk about the invidious choices that in these circumstances people face between eating or heating their homes. There will be some people in the face of this cost of living crisis who cannot afford to do either. That is the reality. This Government will do everything that we can within the powers and resources that we have, but as long as so many of those levers lie with a Conservative Government at Westminster, we're going to see more of what we saw in the spring statement yesterday. Anybody who really cares about this would not just be arguing for, they'd be demanding these powers to be taken away from Rishi Sunak and Boris Johnson and put into the hands of this Parliament as quickly as possible. Millions of workers are facing a cost of living crisis that they didn't create. The People's Assembly have been organising mass demonstrations up and down the country to make it clear that workers can't pay and they won't pay for this crisis. Campaigners are calling for the introduction of a wealth tax on the richest 1 per cent, which would raise £14 billion a year to help tackle the cost of living crisis and invest in public services. Does the First Minister back this call? I think that we should see those who can afford it contribute the most, but just like a windfall tax, a wealth tax is not something that this Government has the power to do. If Labour wants to see these things happen in Scotland, they can't just talk about the ends that they want to see. They have to actually equip this Parliament and this Government with the means to do something about it. It's called making this Parliament independent. I'll take a general supplementary from Liam McArthur. The Scottish Government has informed Orkney Islands Council that the islands connectivity plan will exclude lifeline internal ferry services in both Orkney and Shetland. Can the First Minister please explain why her national islands plan does not appear to include the needs of all Scotland's islands? We have been discussing with the island authorities for some time the inter-island ferry services. We will continue to do that and I'll ask the transport minister to engage with Liam McArthur in more detail about what further steps we are able to take. That concludes First Minister's questions. There will be a short pause before members' business.