 That concludes general questions, the next item of business is First Minister's questions. Question number one, I have called Douglas Ross. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. This week it emerged that Ferguson's shipyard had received preferential treatment from this government and its agencies in its bid to build two ferries. FergusonPLER gave special access to a 424-page cheatsheet on how to build ferris. A cheatsheet literally copied page after page after page from. When they received partarel personal meeting and people involved in buying the ferries, they were the only bidder allowed to resubmit with a new design. design, something a former technical director of Kamac called completely wrong. Then, after the redline, they were the only company allowed to change their price. So First Minister, why did Ferguson's shipyard, then known by an SNP Government economic adviser and a prominent independent supporter, receive special treatment from your Government? Before I come on to the specifics, perhaps Douglas Ross wants to make his mind up what his allegations actually are. For months now, Douglas Ross appears to have alleged in this chamber and elsewhere, wrongly I hasten to add, that the Scottish ministers directed forced Seymal against its will to award this contract to Ferguson's shipyard. Today it appears to be the case that Douglas Ross is alleging that Seymal actually in some way collaborated with Ferguson's to ensure that the contract went to that shipyard. Perhaps Douglas Ross just needs to get a little bit of clarity about the allegations he is making. Let me turn to the specifics, Minister. Ministers are not aware of any impropriety in this procurement process. That said, ministers were not involved in the process. We were not cited on procurement documents or privy to exchanges between Seymal and bidders. However, the allegations in the BBC disclosure programme are serious allegations. I asked the permanent secretary to engage with Audit Scotland earlier this week about further investigation and I welcomed the confirmation from Audit Scotland that it will be looking at the substance of those allegations. Finally, on one of the specific allegations relating to the Seymal statement of operational and technical requirements, that needs to be properly investigated. However, as I understand it, there is no suggestion at all that it was Seymal that passed that document to Ferguson's. In fact, I think that the BBC suggested that that was a design consultant. Yes, those are serious allegations. They should be investigated in the normal way. In the meantime, we will continue to support Ferguson's shipyard in the work to complete the ferry contract. Douglas Ross The only conclusion that any reasonable person can draw is that the deal was rigged. It seems Nicola Sturgeon is the only one that saw the programme this week who doesn't think the deal was rigged. She's asking for clarity. It would be helpful for members trying to get clarity if all the information was available, rather than coming out as it did this week, because the documents that were finally revealed this week show that Ferguson had that cheat sheet. They got their answers whispered in advance and then they got to change the answers after the deadline. No other company got to do that, but we didn't find out any of that, none of it, until a leaked dossier was uncovered by investigative journalists. Nobody knew about the depth and breadth of the special treatment that Ferguson received. During lengthy investigations, neither Audit Scotland or a parliamentary committee got any of these details. Instead, we got secrecy. The public were kept in the dark. The Scottish Government's auditor was kept in the dark. This Parliament was kept in the dark. It's clear that there has been a cover-up by the First Minister's government and its agencies. So, First Minister, tell us, why didn't any of this come to light until now? First Minister, the Scottish Government has and will continue to fully co-operate with parliamentary investigations. As Audit Scotland has noted, it will fully co-operate with any Audit Scotland investigation. The clarity that I asked from Douglas Ross was an important one. People watching First Minister's questions will have heard him in previous weeks and months standing in this chamber and suggest that Seamall didn't ever want to give this contract to Ferguson's shipyard and that they were somehow forced to do so against their will by the Scottish Government. That was wrong, and I think that it has been evidenced that that is wrong. However, today, of course, Douglas Ross comes to this chamber and says to the contrary that Seamall somehow colluded with the yard to ensure that the contract went there. We will continue to ensure that investigations are supported. As I said, I asked the permanent secretary this week to engage further with Audit Scotland, and I welcome the statement made by Audit Scotland. This was a procurement process conducted by Seamall. Ministers were not involved, rightly and properly, not involved in the procurement process. The job of ministers was to save that shipyard from closure and save and support the jobs of the people that continue to work at the shipyard, and we will continue to offer that support. So by giving Ferguson special treatment in details that were only unearthed this week, it appears as if the Government has broken EU laws, and it may have committed fraud. But the First Minister thinks that this is no big deal. Just another SNP disaster, no-one should pay any attention to. There is nothing to see here. But this does matter. This does matter. It matters to the islanders who have been abandoned by this Government, and it matters because the price and the delays keep spiralling further. It emerged yesterday in a letter from Ferguson to a committee of this Parliament that the delays are continuing. Hull 802 is now going to be six years late, and according to Ferguson's, their total project budget was £125.5 million in March of this year, but now the maximum budget is £209.6 million. That's an increase of £84 million. In their letter to the committee, Ferguson said that they briefed Scottish ministers on this last week. So First Minister, what did they say to ministers, and will you confirm that the latest enormous cost increase is correct? Where I do agree with Douglas Ross is on the fact that these things matter, which is why I and the Government take them as seriously as we do. The information given to ministers by the new management at Ferguson Shipyard is the information that is set out in the letter that was sent to the parliamentary committee tomorrow, but if Douglas Ross wants to wait for the rest of the answer, he might get the detail he is requesting. Firstly, in terms of the delivery schedule, the target date for 801 has not changed. The target date for 802 is an estimated further slippage of one to two months on cost. Ferguson's has set out its latest estimate of cost, but this is the key point. Ministers have yet to properly scrutinise that estimate, so no decision has yet been taken about any further increase in the budget for the ferries. As that process of due diligence, which the Government has to undertake, is completed, we will update Parliament in the normal way. That is what we will continue to do, as we work to continue to support the shipyard, to support the completion of the ferries and, yes, to support the jobs that depend on that shipyard. That is the responsible approach to Government. Finally, I am not sure that Conservative Douglas Ross is on very strong ground today in talking about Government disasters. Given that answer, I do not think that Nicola Sturgeon will ever be on very strong ground speaking about ferries, because she is incredibly saying that the £84 million projected in the letter to a committee of this Parliament and spoken to her Government ministers a week ago is going to be scrutinised. That is basically the First Minister saying that it is going to be an £84 million increase for three months. I am not sure what scrutiny of these estimates is going to come up with other than saying that a three-month delay is basically costing taxpayers about £1 million a day, because that is what £84 million comes from. Of course, the First Minister told me in March of this year that she took ultimate responsibility for this deal and that the buck stopped with her. Let us hear her take ultimate responsibility for the great ferry scandal. Her Government agreed a deal for the ferries without agreeing a design for the ships. Her Government ignored experts who advised not to go ahead with the deal. Her Government waived a refund guarantee that is a mandatory requirement of these kind of contracts, and now it appears that the whole deal was rigged. The Government seems to have given special treatment to a political adviser and ally, and this looks like corporate fraud, and there is a stench of political corruption. But nobody has been sacked. The Government says that nobody is responsible and nobody is to blame. Just what happened to the First Minister, who used to have a monthly photo call at Ferguson Shipyard? The First Minister, who used to pose for pictures at the yard and shouted from the rooftops that it was one of her proudest achievements. Nicola Sturgeon was happy to take all of the praise. First Minister, when will you start to take the blame? Douglas Ross is now reduced to simply standing up and making up things that I have said in answers to questions. I will never apologise for the actions that this Government has taken to save the jobs of the people who work in Ferguson Shipyard. Perhaps, unlike counterparts in other Governments, I will always take responsibility for the actions of this Government. I agree wholeheartedly that this issue matters. It really matters. People out there watching right now will want to see me and my Government held to account on this. That is right and proper, but people watching this session right now are also terrified about the inability to heat their homes, the inability to pay their mortgages. We would like to hear each speaker when they are on their feet. Please continue. They are terrified about the security of their pensions, and all week they have heard Douglas Ross demanding that I match Tory tax cuts for the richest people in our society. Tax cuts that have already sunk the pound, crashed the mortgage market, brought people's pensions to the brink of collapse, forced the Bank of England into an emergency, bail out tax cuts that will force deep reductions in public spending. I think that people might have wanted to hear Douglas Ross explain why he thinks that the Scottish Government should emulate those policies. For the avoidance of doubt, we will not emulate those policies, but Douglas Ross' silence on his demand that we do so says everything about his poor appalling judgment. We have a Tory Government that is hell-bent on crashing the economy. Energy bills rising, mortgage payments growing up and the markets in freefall. In the face of this economic illiteracy and moral bankruptcy, Labour has a plan, a plan for a publicly-owned clean energy generation company and it will be established in the first year of a Labour Government. It took the SNP months to back Labour's proposals for a windfall tax. So today, will the First Minister back Labour's plan for a publicly-owned energy company to bring down bills, create jobs and deliver energy security? Yes, I am happy to give support to policies of that nature. Perhaps Anas Sarwar would want to back a situation where Scotland had the full powers that we would need over the energy market and access to borrowing that are necessary for us to establish an energy generation company of that nature. I am happy to support things that I agree with, but since we are on this ground today, here are some other policies that the SNP Scottish Government has introduced that perhaps Labour would now like to back. How about we see Keir Starmer and UK Labour backing a £25 per week child payment like we have in Scotland? How about we see Labour back an end to the benefit cap or the abolition of prescription charges or free personal care or the abolition of university tuition fees or higher health spending per head of population, more nurses and doctors per head of population? How about a rent freeze such as being introduced here in Scotland? If we want a swap of good ideas, I am happy to accept them when they come from Labour. Perhaps Labour needs to look at Scotland and start emulating some of what we are doing here. I am pleased to hear the First Minister back's Labour's plans on how times changed from telling Scotland that you are never getting a Labour Government again to now giving proposals to the next Labour Government. That is more that we can see. The First Minister wants to talk about her powers. In 2017, the front bench might want to listen to that. In 2017, the First Minister promised a Government-run energy company that would sell Scottish renewable energy to customers as close to cost price as possible, using the powers that they have, a promise broken. A Labour Government will establish a public energy company in year one and, after 15 years of SNP Government, we are told that we still have to wait. That matters. In January, the First Minister sold off Scotland's seabed on the cheap. If we had a publicly-owned energy company in Scotland, that would have been in the sands of the Scottish people and they would have had a stake. Instead, we have a ludicrous situation where Vattenfall, a publicly-owned company in Sweden, will profit more than taxpayers here. First Minister, why is it your priority and policy that our natural resources fund schools, transport and hospitals in Sweden but not in Scotland? First Minister, if we have a Labour leader in Scotland reduced to talking down the fantastic Scotland programme, that will just count as one of many reasons why whatever might or might not happen in the rest of the UK, Scotland will not be getting another Labour Government any time soon. Yes, we committed to a publicly-owned retail energy company. Covid unfortunately changed those plans. We will shortly set out our plans for the national public energy agency. However, if Anna Sarwar is going to come here and ask me those questions, surely he must know that to set up a publicly-owned generation company, that would mean powers for this Parliament over the energy market and access to borrowing that we do not have. If Anna Sarwar wants this Government to do that, then when is Anna Sarwar going to back independence and fill powers for this Parliament so that we can? Anna Sarwar. Here we go, here we go. The old slogan of talking down Scotland—I have been hearing Nicola Sturgeon shout that slogan since I was at school—is time to change the record, First Minister. For 15 years, we have had an SNP Government that has chased the headline but not done the work. They promised a national energy company now scrap. They promised 130,000 energy jobs failed to deliver. Remember, they promised the Saudi Arabia of renewables. Instead, they are selling off our assets on the cheap. This week, the people of Scotland saw change as coming with Labour—change with our ambitious plan to freeze energy bills, change to invest in energy security, change to create tens of thousands of high-skilled, well-paid jobs here in Scotland and change to get rid of the economically illiterate and morally bankrupt Tory Government. Even the First Minister must surely see that this is the change that Scotland needs. First Minister, Anna Sarwar says that he has been listening to me for years accusing Labour of talking down Scotland. That is probably true, but that is because I have listened for years to Labour constantly talking down Scotland. It is all they seem able to do. That is why Scotland decided to get its own back in Labour and start doing down Labour in electoral terms. I do not see any evidence of that changing any time soon. Of course, under this Government, we have a position where our net energy consumption is already provided by renewable energy sources. Scotland is leading the world when it comes to renewable energy, and Scotland is a shining example of that. In the interests of trying to find a bit of consensus today, I want to see the back of this rotten, corrupt, failing Tory Government just as much as anybody does. However, if it is going to be replaced at UK level by a Labour Government, then surely everybody has got a right to hope that that Labour Government will actually be a big difference to what it is replacing. Let me give another suggestion. Perhaps it could start by committing to reverse the Brexit that Scotland did not vote for. Labour, just like the Tories, is now a pro-Brexit party, regardless of the economic damage that it is doing. The fact is that, on Brexit, as on so many other issues, the only way for Scotland to reach its full potential is independence. Aren't we really seeing the benefits of independence right now? The sooner, the better. The First Minister will no doubt share my deep concern over research by KPMG, stating that the cost crisis is forcing three in 10 people in the United Kingdom to rely on savings to afford basic necessities such as food, shelter and fuel. Does she agree with me that the Westminster Tory UK Government crashing of the economy can only make this situation worse and that missing in action, Prime Minister, must ditch the policies from last week and think again? The issues could not be any more grave or serious. When we were having exchanges this time last week, it would have been frighteningly true to say that people were worried about being unable to heat their homes. That remains true this week, but people are now increasingly worried about the ability to keep their homes, given what the Conservatives have done to the mortgage market, what they have done to the value of the pound, what they are doing to the economy generally. People are terrified about the cost of living, about their mortgages, about the ability to keep their homes, about the security of their pensions. All that has come from a UK Government decision to borrow vast amounts of money to give enormous tax cuts to the very richest in our society. It is morally abhorrent and economically disastrous. I would call today in all sincerity if they do nothing else, then the UK Government should reverse its decision to abolish the top rate of tax and at least give a signal of some common sense returning to their approach to economic policy. Finally, I was, as many people were yesterday, critical of the fact that the Prime Minister was missing in action. Having heard her this morning and watched the market reaction as she spoke, perhaps we were all better off when the Prime Minister was missing in action than when she was actually out there talking about the disaster that she has inflicted on this country. A development on green belt space near Dintoker in my region is set to go ahead, despite being widely unpopular with local residents. Having been rejected by West and Bartonshire Council across Scotland as a whole last year, local councils were overruled in nearly half of the planning applications that were appealed to ministers. Does the First Minister truly believe that her Government has the interests of local communities at the heart when projects such as this can go ahead against their wishes? First Minister, we have a statutory planning process that allows local councils to take decisions but have measures in place for ministers to look at those decisions in certain circumstances. Clearly, this is a planning matter. I am not sure from the question exactly what stage in the planning process it is at, but just in case it is with ministers, I will not comment any further on the specific detail of the issue. The Scottish landfill tax amendment order was approved on 7 July. At the time the Government and Revenue Scotland advised that there was no financial implications for councils, no expected increase in tax. That appears to have been incorrect. Bar environmental limited, who have a contract with West and Bartonshire, Agile and Bute and Inverclyde councils for landfill, is increasing the cost per tonnage as a result of the order following discussion with Revenue Scotland. That will cost West and Bartonshire council £1.5 million extra alone and they simply do not have that money. Can the First Minister consider whether the order can be paused whilst this is investigated? Time is, of course, pressing and unless the Government can rectify the perceived error, the contract may end in a couple of weeks and rubbish will be piling up on the streets of West and Bartonshire. First Minister, Revenue Scotland operates independently of Scottish ministers in its role as our tax authority. It would not be proper for me to comment on what is an individual taxpayer dispute. I will ask the relevant minister if there is more information that can be provided and if so ask them to write to Jackie Baillie. What I can say is that it is our view that the recent amendment does not alter or expand the scope of Scottish landfill tax but provides additional confirmation by making explicit that particular landfill site activities are within its intended scope. The trust budget has unleashed chaos on households, but it is also threatened to renaig on vital protections for our natural world, developed over 40 years when we were part of the European Union. Scotland did not vote for Brexit, we did not vote for this catastrophic UK Government or their malicious and deeply damaging attacks on nature. The RSPB has called on the Scottish Government to do everything it can to ensure that our nature is strongly protected. Will the First Minister and her Government lead the fight for Scotland's nature? Yes, we will continue to support Scotland's nature or natural habitats. I support the comments of RSPB in the wake of UK Government announcements over the past number of days. I am deeply concerned about UK Government policies and the potential impact on the environment. I am even more concerned about the implications of Brexit that make it more difficult for this Government to insist on the highest possible environmental standards. It is the case that Brexit was done to Scotland against our will. It was done to the Tories. As I have said in exchange with Anna Sarwar, we no longer even have Labour promising to reverse Brexit. The only way for Scotland to get back into the European Union and to fulfil our potential in that regard, as in so many other ways, is to become an independent country. 3. Liz Smith To ask the First Minister what the response has been from stakeholder groups regarding the Scottish Government's proposals to introduce a freeze on right. Those measures have been welcomed by a number of stakeholder groups who recognise the huge pressure that the cost crisis is placing on households and recognise the importance of urgent action. However, in advance of our detailed proposals being published, we have also been carefully considering reasonable points that have been made by other stakeholders, including by landlords, including within that social landlords. We will continue to engage with all stakeholders as we continue to develop the detail of those proposals. I thank the First Minister for that response, but irrespective of our political views about the proposed legislations, which most stakeholders agree is both complex and controversial, can I ask the First Minister if she thinks that it is acceptable practice for this legislation to be pushed through this parliament in just three days when MSPs will only see the bill for an hour before it is due to be debated? Can I ask the First Minister to confirm whether it is correct that some stakeholders are being provided with prior sight of this bill before MSPs? No, I do not think that emergency legislation is ideal. I would rather that we were not in the position of having to introduce emergency legislation to protect people from the impact of rent increases. I also wish that we were not in a deteriorating cost of living crisis that has been caused and is right now being exacerbated by Liz Smith's party in government at Westminster. We have a duty to take action as far as we possibly can to protect people from that cost of living crisis and we will continue to do so. We are committed to working with the sector and we are having discussions ahead of any decisions that we are taking. I heard Patrick Harvie as I came into the chamber for First Minister's questions talking about a meeting of a short-life task and finish group involving stakeholders that met with officials on Tuesday of this week. Of course, we will continue to talk to stakeholders and Parliament, of course, will have the opportunity to scrutinise these proposals when it comes before us in the coming days. Emma Roddick, at social justice and social security committee this morning, we heard from Shelter Scotland who said that the recent short-term emergency measures in the programme for government to ensure citizens have the access to their right to a home are very welcome in the context of the cost of living, but that they wait to see the final detail. Can I ask the First Minister for her response to this important contribution? Well, I welcome that in both its parts. I visited Shelter Scotland on the day after the programme for government and heard directly from advice workers on the massive challenges that tenants are experiencing day to day and the urgent need to support tenants who are in difficulty and discussed in general terms the measures that we had announced. Of course, it is important that everybody scrutinises the detail and it has been important that we carefully consider the detail, and I know that Shelter Scotland will be one of a number of stakeholders who will do exactly that alongside members of this Parliament. Scotland's tenants union Living Rent continues to report rent increases on their members despite the First Minister's announcement of a rent freeze on September 6. What steps is the Scottish Government taking to ensure that every single tenant and landlord knows about the rent freeze and the moratorium on evictions and does that include writing to everyone who is affected? We will take all reasonable steps to make sure that there is high awareness of our proposals and of the law that, if Parliament passes it, is introduced. I will certainly consider whether we can take steps such as writing to people who are affected. It is important not just that we take those steps but that people are aware of them, so I think that that is a constructive suggestion and one that I will give further consideration to. To ask the First Minister what provision the Scottish Government is making to cope with the anticipated pressures on the NHS this winter. Recognising the challenge that this winter represents and the pressure that our health and care systems are under, the health secretary will be making a statement to Parliament next week, giving an overview of the wide range of work under way to ensure that health and social care services are well prepared for winter. Our vaccination programme is a critical first line of defence, protecting the most vulnerable and reducing staff absences. We are also seeking to maximise capacity across health and social care by expanding the workforce to manage expected demand. Public messaging is also crucial to ensure that people have the right advice and support to access the right care at the right place and at the right time. Christine Grahame I thank the First Minister for her answer. The disastrous economic policies of Liz Truss and the lady has indicated, which is not for turning, piles even more pressure and folk, facing terrifying energy bills, the pound is tumbling in value against both the dollar and the euro, so every import, including food, becomes even more costly. Spiralling interest rates will increase credit card and mortgage payments and economic tsunami except for bankers and the rich. Does the First Minister agree with me that there can be no doubt that pressures on our health services will directly increase as a result of those policies? Will she consider, in her winter planning for the health service, including in discussions, agencies such as mortgage companies, social landlords in the rented sector and citizens advice, for example, who will also be in the front line and may help to prevent some of the damage that is being done to our nation's health? First Minister I absolutely agree with Christine Grahame that she is completely correct to highlight those risks. I think that it is important to understand that the economic and financial crisis that is being created by the Tories right now will potentially become a public health crisis of the future and that will put significantly increased demand on our national health service, so it is important that we continue to work with the NHS and, indeed, with other partners, including citizens advice, to try to mitigate and to manage that impact. There is, of course, a more direct threat to the national health service for any Government that was to go down the tax cuts for the rich path. I was struck this week by comments from the former deputy governor of the Bank of England, someone who I think is a current member of the OBR, although I'll be corrected if I'm wrong about that latter point, but what he said was frightening. He said that the scale of spending reductions that would be required to pay for those tax cuts would mean effectively the end of the NHS, as we know it. That is why it is so vital, I think, that the UK Government reverses those tax cuts, but it is also why it would be so wrong for anybody to demand that the Scottish Government followed suit given the risk that it poses to the NHS and other public services. Paul O'Kane This week, it was revealed that hundreds of additional surge beds that were made available to health boards across Scotland last winter continued to be occupied. The vice-president of the RCEM, Dr John Paul Lockry, said that every hospital in Scotland just now is under the cost. That shortage is a direct consequence of the Scottish Government's own actions. Our hospitals have 4,000 fewer beds compared with 2010, and we know who served as health secretary in that period. It is simply unacceptable. We cannot normalise our NHS being in a perpetual state of crisis. What is the First Minister going to do to address this crisis, the crisis in staffing and capacity across the NHS, and to take action something that the current health secretary seems unwilling or unable to do? Most recent Public Health Scotland's annual figures show, in fact, that average staffed acute beds have increased compared to the previous year. We also have more beds per head of population than England does. There is huge pressure on our national health service, but we continue to support it through investment, recruitment and work with the national health service. To hear a Labour member talk about bed reductions in the national health service is a bit galling. In the last seven years or so of the last time there was a Labour Government in this Parliament, there was a reduction in beds of Scotland of 5,425. That does indeed include non-acute beds, but the rate of bed reductions—which, at the time, of course—was justified for many reasons, including reducing the length of stay in hospital, but many of those reasons still apply now. Labour should perhaps check the facts and check their own history before they make criticisms of this Government. To ask the First Minister what support the Scottish Government will make available to the reported 372 members of staff affected by the Argyll Wiggins paper mall at Stonywood and Aberdeen entering administration. This is an exceptionally difficult time for those being redundant at Argyll Wiggins in Aberdeen, and those affected are our immediate priority. They are already receiving support through our PACE initiative. A partner event is taking place in Aberdeen today, in fact, and a jobs fair has been arranged for 10 October. Scottish Enterprise has been working extensively with Argyll Wiggins. Unfortunately, conditions deteriorated, and despite everyone's best efforts it was not possible to secure a sale of the business. Scottish Enterprise is working with administrators to understand possibilities for the business going forward. The business minister is providing regular updates to local elected representatives. He has spoken with Unite the Union today and is speaking with the administrator this afternoon. Presiding Officer, it is now a week since the mill went into administration, and this is the first time that I have heard the First Minister mention it. When BiFab went into administration, the First Minister flew back from Germany. When Ferguson's went into administration, they nationalised the yard. When Michelin's and Dundee closed, Scottish Enterprise turned it into an innovation park. But when it's jobs in Aberdeen, you are nowhere to be seen and we're met with a mall of silence. So can I ask the First Minister when you're going to come up to Aberdeen to speak to the workers who livelihoods are in jeopardy and what steps have the Scottish Government taken to ensure that the mill can be saved or all those affected can find alternative employment because the loss of over 300 jobs needs more than the usual pace response? Of course, the actions that the member sets out in relation to other companies is regularly, as indeed we have heard just today, criticised by the Scottish Conservatives. But I really do think that the member on a really serious issue that I understand his concern about is doing a disservice to everybody affected here. The Scottish Government has been working principally through Scottish Enterprise since 2019, since it first became clear that the company was facing administration to try to find an alternative future and to find a buyer for that company. Despite all of those best efforts, that has not proved possible. That is deeply regrettable. But the Scottish Government and Scottish Enterprise, as I set out in some detail in my original answer, will continue to provide support to the workers and the ways that I have set out and will continue to do all that we can to understand what possibilities there might be for the business going forward. The business minister is always willing to speak to local elected representatives in these situations. That is as true here as it is in any other situation. I encourage the member—I am sure that his concern here is absolutely genuine for the workers involved here—to engage with the minister and the Government so that we cannot, notwithstanding our many differences, perhaps work together in their interests. I would like to put on record my thanks to the business minister for the call I had with him yesterday regarding the impact of the closure of the Stony Woodmill on my constituents. I would be grateful if the First Minister could provide a commitment that the Scottish Government and partners will continue to support all constituents impacted by the closure and join me in outright condemning the employment practices of the owners of the mill who have not consulted with the unions or employees and who provided no notice to workers of redundancies while locking themselves out of the workplace. Will she urge the administrators to engage with me as the constituent MSP to discuss staff redundancies as so far I have had no response? I absolutely agree with Jackie Dunbar. I will give her the assurances that she has asked for. I would also commend Jackie Dunbar for the work that she has done and continues to do on behalf of her constituents affected by the situation. The Scottish Government firmly believes that there must be meaningful dialogue between employers and employees to ensure at all times that workers are treated fairly. We are, as I have already outlined, committed to supporting all those impacted by the closure. Jackie Dunbar raises a really important issue about fair work practices. Employment law, of course, is a reserved matter, but it is our firm belief that a progressive approach to industrial relations and an effective voice for workers is at the heart of a fairer society here in Scotland. As I mentioned earlier, the business minister spoke with Unite Union earlier today and reiterated our on-going support through the PACE initiative and Scottish Enterprise. As I also indicated, he is speaking with the administrators this afternoon and will be emphasising the importance of engaging with all relevant stakeholders, including, of course, Jackie Dunbar's constituency MSP, and he will continue to update all elected representatives. To ask the First Minister how the recent fall on the value of sterling will affect the finances of the Scottish Government. Potentially disastrously, which is of deep and profound concern to me, and I am sure to everyone across the country. As the Bank of England had warned, even before the recent falls in the value of sterling, a falling pound will add to inflationary pressures in the economy. With inflation already at 10 per cent, the Scottish Government budget is worth already around £1.7 billion less than when it was announced in December. The latest devaluation raises the risk of more real-terms reductions, not just in the Scottish Government's budget but also for the incomes of already struggling households and businesses across Scotland. Of course, the spending cuts that will be required to pay for the Tories' tax cuts for the richest also have potential implications for this Government's budgets in the period ahead. In order, as a first step to restoring the UK's badly damaged financial credibility, the Chancellor should urgently reverse the unfunded and unjustified tax cuts for top earners. I thank the First Minister for that answer, and she will know, and it has been mentioned many times already today, that the IMF is openly condemning the Tories' UK Government over those reckless plans for tax cuts to the highest earners. A range of staggering decisions that will plunge millions into poverty and cause a public health crisis. I think that it is extremely ill-judged for the Scottish Tories to be demanding we replicate these tax cuts, which would lead to significant personal gains to themselves and their donors. At the expense of our citizens in crisis and our public services that they come to this chamber every single week to ask us to put more funding into. What is the First Minister's view? My view is that when Gillian Martin describes it as ill-judged for the Conservatives to ask the Scottish Government to emulate tax cuts for the richest that have sunk the pound and crashed the mortgage market, threatened people's pensions and forced a bail-out from the Bank of England, she is probably being diplomatic and polite. I think that people will listen to the Conservatives calling on the Scottish Government to deliver tax cuts for the richest and in so doing slash public spending for public services and wonder what planet the Conservatives are actually living on. What happened last Friday in the so-called mini-budget was economic vandalism and it was economic vandalism done knowingly and it appears to me deliberately. Gillian Martin rightly quotes the IMF extraordinary to hear comments from the IMF like that about a G7 country, but the comments from others are just as damming. The resolution foundation, the worst unforced economic policy error of my lifetime, we see the IFS talk about gambling betting the house, unfortunately the Chancellor was not betting on his own house he was betting on the houses of people across the country. It is disastrous and it needs to be reversed and not because of some political or ideological debate it needs to be reversed for the sake of the homes, the living standards, the pensions and the security of people across this country and it needs to be reversed now. To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government's response is to reports that police officer numbers dropped to 16,610 at the end of June below Police Scotland's full officer establishment of 17,234. Officer numbers fluctuate due to the cycle of recruitment and retirement. These latest statistics reflect the impact of Covid restrictions and also COP26, which reduced capacity to train new recruits at the Scottish Police College. They also reflect the impact of recent pension changes. It is important to note, however, that a further 300 officers were recruited in July, and they are not yet reflected in the statistics that have been quoted. On 2 August, HM Inspectorate of Constabulary in Scotland published its Assurance Review of Police Scotland's strategic workforce planning and recommended a focus on developing a workforce based on the skillset and mix that is required to meet current and future challenges for policing in Scotland. While the recruitment and deployment of police officers in Scotland is a matter for the chief constable, the Scottish Government will continue to discuss this and other recommendations with the SPA and Police Scotland. I acknowledge that the figures will fluctuate from week to week, but I see that the Scottish Government has asserted in a permanent reduction in police establishment numbers, which is around 600 officers. If that was not concerning enough, chief constable Ian Liffington is on record as saying that cuts to the police budget means that we are already seeing the impact of our service having fewer officers across a range of operational areas, including a responsiveness to calls from the public. I understand that that could be potentially up to 1,000 additional officers from our service, and bear in mind, First Minister, you will know that 80 per cent of calls to Police Scotland are not crime-related. Importantly, marking out the specifically distinct Scottish nature of our police service responsible for wellbeing, there I hope that she will defend. I asked the First Minister, is she concerned about the chief constable's comments and the effect of brutal cuts in police numbers? What will the First Minister take to ensure that the resilience of the police service and our police officers can do their jobs? Actually, I plead with her to recognise that, unlike other forces in the UK, police services in Scotland have a distinct nature, and we should never accept losing that. First Minister, I lead a Government that has worked throughout the entire time. We have been in Government to protect police numbers and to support our police officers and those staff who support our police officers. We will continue to discuss those issues in what is a very difficult context with the chief constable, Police Scotland and, of course, the Scottish Police Authority. We will always do everything that we can to support the wellbeing and resilience of our police officers. They do a fantastic job, day in and day out. In fact, let me take the opportunity to thank the police for the outstanding work that they did, of course, recently during Operation Unicorn. We will continue to do everything to support our police and, of course, our other public services. First Minister, though, it is incumbent on me again to point out the reality of the context that we are operating in. We are operating within an essentially fixed budget that has already this year been eroded because of inflation to the tune of £1.7 billion, and we are trying to give public sector workers the fairest possible pay increases. I am pleased that we were able to conclude a pay deal with the police. Those are difficult situations and force us into difficult decisions. We come at this with a determination to protect public services, but I would say to Pauline McNeill, as I would say to any member across this chamber, in those really tough times, many of which are completely beyond the control of this Government. If there are different decisions you think we should be making, then come and say that, but you cannot simply ask us to spend more money in one area without also saying where you think we should spend less. That is the responsibility that is demanded of Government right now, and I think it is the responsibility people demand of all of their politicians at this difficult time. Jamie Greene If the First Minister wants a suggestion, why does she stop spending money on independence white papers and start properly funding our police force who are seeing damaging cuts, breaking her own manifesto pledge to protect the police, to support our police and to protect their budget? It is shameful, First Minister. First Minister, I am not sure that anybody needs any more evidence this week of the financial, fiscal and economic illiteracy of Conservatives, but I think we have probably just had some more into the bargain there. The Tories, of course, keep coming and mentioning the money for an independence referendum, which, of course, would fall into next financial year, not this financial year. In this week of all weeks, it is pretty obvious to people why we so desperately need to be an independent country. We have a UK Government that Scotland didn't vote for that has already imposed Brexit on us against our will, a Brexit that is doing real damage to living standards and to the economy. A UK Government that has this week crashed the entire UK economy and the cost of that is being borne by ordinary people across the country. What has caused that crash in the economy? It is £45 billion of tax cuts prioritising the very richest people in our society. Independence is about getting away from that Tory incompetence, frankly getting away from that Tory immorality. The sooner the people of Scotland have the choice of independence, the better for all of us. That concludes First Minister's questions. There will be a short suspension before we move on to members' business.