 I will certainly ensure that that happens, and the point about local engagement is a good one, and that should also happen. Thank you. We move to First Minister's Questions. Question number one, Kezia Dugdale. To ask the First Minister what engagement she has planned for the rest of the day. First Minister, this morning I convened a meeting of the Scottish Government's Resilience Committee to discuss the on-going suspension of flights to and from Charmolshake in Egypt. My officials are in close contact with UK Government officials and will continue to be so. There are, we understand, currently around 20,000 British nationals in Charmolshake, and we estimate at this stage that at least several hundred of those are Scots. Transport Scotland is in touch with Thomson's holidays to discuss the support and advice that is being provided, and I want to assure the chamber that the Scottish Government will continue to liaise closely with UK Government colleagues to ensure that all appropriate support is in place. Later today, Presiding Officer, I will have engagements to take forward the Government's programme for Scotland. Kezia Dugdale. Across the UK, Labour will fight the Tory Government's attempt to cut tax credits. We want George Osborne to scrap his plan altogether. If he doesn't, this Parliament must act to protect working families. Despite days of protesting that it wasn't possible, yesterday the SNP Government finally admitted that we will have the power to restore money lost through tax credits. The Social Justice Secretary said that measures would be outlined after the autumn statement. Unlike their £250 million plan to abolish air passenger duty, we have no detail on how much the SNP are willing to spend to help working families. In fact, for weeks, the Deputy First Minister said that restoring tax credits was unaffordable. Can the First Minister confirm that? Does she agree with her finance secretary that spending hundreds of millions of pounds to make airline tickets cheaper is affordable but that restoring tax credits isn't? Let me set out the position of the Scottish Government. Firstly, over the next three weeks, we intend to keep up the pressure on George Osborne to drop his plans for tax credit cuts. Unlike Labour, who remember initially abstained in the House of Commons on this issue, the SNP have consistently opposed those cuts. I think that it is all too typical of Scottish Labour. Just when the pressure is building across the UK on George Osborne, they ease up on the Tories and attack the SNP instead. It seems, Presiding Officer, that old habits and old friendships really do die hard. We will keep up the pressure on the Tories to drop those cuts altogether. If they don't completely reverse those cuts, what we will do as a responsible Government is to bring forward credible, deliverable and affordable plans to protect low-income households just as we did on the bedroom tax. First of all, on the bedroom tax, Labour brought forward a plan that would have been illegal and unworkable. It was this Government that brought forward one that worked. I think that, frankly, it is a far better plan and it is far fairer for people who are affected by these cuts than back-of-a-fag-packet proposals from a party that knows it has little chance of ever being in a position to implement them. The First Minister forgets that it was a Labour Government that introduced tax credits. We will do everything we can to protect them, including using the powers of this Parliament. No matter what George Osborne does at the autumn statement, Scottish Labour is committed to restoring the money that is lost through tax credits for working families. We have made a choice. We know that it is affordable. We have costed it at its most expensive. We know that any concessions from the Chancellor will only reduce that cost. We think that it is more important than a multimillion-pound plan to reduce the cost of airline tickets. Order! Mr Dugdale, continue! Order! Last year, Mr Dugdale! Mr Dugdale! There are 6,000 families in the First Minister's constituency who rely on tax credits. They deserve a bit more than a vague assurance from the SNP that the Government will act. Can the First Minister confirm to those 6,000 families and the thousands more across the country? Will the Scottish Government's proposals ensure that, when the new powers are available, every single family will receive the same entitlement from the Government as they do now? Yes or no? First Minister! Let me repeat what I said in my first answer. We will continue to oppose those cuts at source, unlike Labour, when it came to a vote in the House of Commons, abstained on the issue of tax credit cuts. We will oppose the cuts, but if the cuts go ahead, we will bring forward a credible, workable, deliverable, affordable plan to protect low-income households. To Kezia Dugdale, the detail of this to families out there who are affected really matters. One of the details that matters most is how this policy would be paid for. Kezia Dugdale has mentioned air passenger duty as the source of the funding or a source of the funding for this. Let's put to one side for the purposes of today the fact that that money wouldn't actually be available if it was required to pay for the tax credits policy. Let's put that to one side and instead, Presiding Officer, consider this. The day before Kezia Dugdale announced the policy on tax credits, here's what she had to say about air passenger duty. In an interview in the Holyrood magazine the day before she announced her position on tax credits, she said that Labour will scrap the air passenger duty measure and we will spend that money on education. In the space of 24 hours, Labour managed to spend the same sum of money twice over. In all seriousness to Kezia Dugdale, that is basic incompetence and the people of Scotland, frankly, deserve better. We've known for some time that the public thinks that Labour is unelectable. I think that what we found out this week is that Labour thinks that Labour is unelectable. It's less here hard day, Presiding Officer, more laurel in hard day. Mr Dugdale, can you try and keep this brief and, First Minister, can you try and keep that next answer brief too? Presiding Officer, all of that from a party that's had three different positions on tax credits in the last 24 hours. Because if the last few days have taught us anything, it's that this Government needs to be held to account. Yesterday in the House of Commons the Prime Minister told working families they just have to wait and see what happened next. Today in this chamber the First Minister is saying exactly the same thing. Now I've listened to Nicola Sturgeon very carefully, I've listened to Alex Neil very carefully on the TV last night. Both have said that they will ensure that the income of those in receipt of tax credits won't fall. But that sounds a little like the Tory argument that higher wages will automatically make up the difference. So can I ask the First Minister again? Under the Scottish Government's proposal, will every single family receive the same entitlement from the Government as they do now? First Minister, I'm quite sure what it is that's difficult to understand. I don't yet accept that these cuts will take place because there is pressure building on George Osborne to reverse them. So I think right now that's where we should be united in making sure the pressure stays on the Tories. George Osborne does the wrong thing. We will come forward with credible proposals to protect low-income families. People around this country who are worried about their tax credits deserve more than slogans. They deserve detail from a Government that they know can deliver. I referred earlier on to Kezia Dugdale's interview in the Holyrood magazine. There was actually something else there that was illuminating. She was narrating a conversation with a Welsh minister. She asked him, where are you finding the money from for your big commitments? And he said, they would worry about that later. And Kezia said, I was quite impressed by the boldness of that. Presiding Officer, most people would be utterly appalled by the incompetence of that. I'll leave Labour in the lala land that they increasingly inhabit and get on with the job of governing this country in the interests of the people we serve. Briefly, Ms Dugdale. The truth is, Presiding Officer, that this is the week that the SNP's constitutional games came unstuck. Because after years of responding to every problem with complaints about the constitution, Alex Neil finally gave the game away. For this was the week that the SNP had to admit that the new powers heading our way can transform Scotland. The week that the SNP had to confront the fact that difficult choices will have to be made. So will the First Minister now give up the politics of grievance? Will she now look to the future of what is possible, move on from the past and just get on with delivering a fairer Scotland? First Minister? You know, there's one place in one place only in the UK where Labour can be judged on their actions, not on their words. And in Wales, which I referred to a moment ago, Labour don't even mitigate the bedroom tax. That's the reality of Labour in government. So I'll continue firstly to concentrate on forcing the Tories to abandon these cuts. You know the reason Labour won't do likewise. It's because in the words of their shadow chancellor last weekend, and I quote, the SNP is the real enemy. And there's the nub of this matter. Labour is not motivated by concern for ordinary people. It hasn't been for a long, long time. Labour is motivated by its tribal hatred of the SNP. While I think the enemy of working people in Scotland are the Tories, it's just a shame that Labour seemed to have forgotten that. Ruth Davidson. To ask the First Minister when she'll next meet the Secretary of State for Scotland. No plans in the near future. Pryddingh officer, earlier this week, a leading group of education experts led by Keir Bloomer, a former director of education, questioned this Government's plans to help pupils from poorer backgrounds. Its report concluded that it was not persuaded that strategies that will be needed for success are yet in place. Prydding officer, we all want more poorer pupils to be able to get the grades to go to good universities. That expert group says that the plans of the SNP are putting in place simply won't do that. Can the First Minister tell me why those experts are wrong? First Minister. I hope that Ruth Davidson, even if she doesn't agree with my policy, would accept that I have made very clear how serious I am about improving education in Scotland and closing the attainment gap. I read the report that she refers to with interest. I don't agree with every aspect of it, but I thought that it was an interesting contribution. I'm actually meeting the author of the report, Keir Bloomer, next week to discuss the report and how him and the other members of his team can contribute to Scottish Government thinking on this. We are serious about this. That's why already we have more than 300 primary schools across the country already benefiting from the additional resources of the attainment fund. It's why work is continuing a pace on the national improvement framework, which, among other things, for the first time in primary schools will give us the chance to measure reliably improvement in our education and the closing of the education gap. We are seeing evidence of the attainment gap in Scotland closing. It's not far enough and fast enough for my liking, which is why I'm determined that we go further and faster. I've said to Ruth Davidson before and I say it to everybody across the chamber. I'm open to suggestions. I always have been. I don't think that I've had any from anywhere across the chamber. There is no doubt whatsoever that this is a priority for me and for my Government and it will continue to be so. Ruth Davidson. I thank the First Minister for that answer, telling the chamber how seriously she now takes the attainment gap. She didn't, however, provide the full facts, because under freedom of information we have obtained the latest figures on the number of students getting three As at higher, which is one of the measures for getting into a good university, and it is not pretty reading. We knew that the SNP Government was not closing the attainment gap, but now from these figures we know that that gap between the richest and poorest students is actually getting wider. In fact, in four local authorities, not a single pupil from the least affluent homes attained three As in their hires, whereas a wealthier pupil is now seven times more likely to get three As than their more deprived peers. We will publish all of those figures this afternoon. The First Minister has said that she wants to be judged on her record. In education, her record is one of failure, and the experts say that her plans won't fix it. So I will ask her how bad do things have to get before we see the action that we need. First Minister. As Ruth Davidson knows, we are taking action and we will continue to take action. I am not standing here, I never have stood here and said that there's not more work to do. That's why we have taken the action around the attainment challenge that I've already talked about. We are seeing, in many respects, evidence of the attainment gap narrowing. In 2007, for example, 23 per cent of pupils from the 20 per cent most deprived areas got at least one higher. That figure is now 40 per cent. When you look at qualifications at level 5, the gap between the 10 per cent most deprived and the 10 per cent least deprived has fallen from 42.5 per cent to 26 per cent. Those are figures that evidence some progress, but it's not progress that is enough for me, and I wouldn't expect it to be progress that is enough for anyone. That is why we are putting so much emphasis on the attainment work. I can cite higher results. As I've said before, one of the problems we have is that we can't cite that evidence from earlier on in a child's school progress. The time that it gets to higher, if you haven't dealt with the attainment gap, then perhaps it's too late to do so. That's why the national improvement framework is so important, so that we can start dealing with this, not even in primary school, but in early years through primary school, so that we see the improvements later on in school careers. That's the emphasis that we are putting on this work, and I would hope that Ruth Davidson would welcome it. Willie Coffey. The First Minister will be aware of the announcement by Stuttgart-based mala engineering in Comarnock that more than 170 jobs are to be lost in the bearings finishing department of the business by January next year, and that the company plans to move that production to other plants in Europe, despite the renowned quality of the bearings produced by the Comarnock staff over many years and the solid performance of the company worldwide. Will the First Minister see what intervention might be possible with the company in order to try to save those jobs and help to prevent yet another job's body blow to the town? I welcome Willie Coffey's question. I share his concern at the announcement of possible redundancies at the mala group in Comarnock, and I'm sure that this will be a very worrying time for all affected employees. I can confirm that Scottish Enterprise has offered support to the company and will meet with senior management next week to discuss it. I can also confirm that our PACE team will meet with the company next week to discuss a tailored programme of PACE support for any employees who may be facing redundancies. The Scottish Government will take any action that we possibly can, and I know that the Enterprise Minister would be very happy to discuss it in more detail with Willie Coffey. To ask the First Minister what issues will be discussed at the next meeting of the Cabinet. Matters of importance to the people of Scotland. This week, the education secretary had an online Q&A. Not one person agreed with Angela Constance about the national standardised testing, and the international experts at the OECD warned that the risk of national testing was narrowing the curriculum and teaching to the test. One of the issues is league tables. The First Minister told me that she was against league tables, but she's told journalists that she's not going to stop them putting primary schools into league tables. If she doesn't want them, why is she going ahead and taking all the steps to allow them to happen? It may have escaped Willie Rennie's notice. I don't control the newspapers. Perhaps, if I did, things would be very different. For me, there's something quite reassuring here. On the one hand, I've got Ruth Davidson telling me that I'm not going far enough in school reform, and on the other hand, I've got Willie Rennie telling me that I'm going far too far in school reform. That tells me that we're probably in exactly the right place in terms of reforming our schools and how we measure the performance of our schools and the attainment gap. I stand by what I said. I have no interest in crude league tables that offer no meaning to parents, nor do I have any interest in a system that would encourage teaching to the test. However, I think that it is incumbent on me, as First Minister, to make sure that children's progress is being assessed in a way that better informs the judgments that teachers make about their performance, and that allows all of us to have a meaningful and evidence debate in this chamber and across Scotland about whether we are or are not making progress in closing the attainment gap. I think that that is absolutely the right thing to do. We'll continue to discuss the detail of our plans with teachers, with local authorities, with parents and with others, but I'm determined, as I said to Ruth Davidson, that we do make real progress on this and I'll push forward with it for that reason. Willie Rennie. The league tables are coming, and she's not convinced—she has not convinced—one single person that she's going to stop them. The OECD says of equal importance is consensus building amongst the various stakeholders involved. Professor Brian Boyd, who was a member of the curriculum review group, said that it was a retrograde step. Headteacher George Gilchrist said that it's a definite step backwards. The EIS said that testing would have a profoundly negative impact. The parent teacher council concluded that testing does not raise attainment. Why is the Government's approach to consensus building just to tell all those people that they are all wrong? First Minister, although I will tell Willie Rennie that he's wrong, we're not introducing high-stakes testing, we're introducing assessment that is carried out in most local authorities anyway in a standardised way so that we can use it appropriately. It's assessment that will help inform teachers' judgments about the performance of children. We will continue to work, as we are doing right now, with teachers and with others to finalise how we will make use of that information, how we will publish that information in a way that doesn't lead to crude league tables. Willie Rennie's twice mentioned the OECD. We should, in the not-too-distant future, get the OECD's latest report on the performance of Scottish education. I look forward to receiving that, and hopefully that will be a useful contribution to our own going work in this area. The area that I have said repeatedly and will continue to do so is one that I have set as a priority, and I will continue to treat it in that way. To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government's position is on how the UK Government's latest amendments to the Scotland Bill could impact on the governance of Scotland. I think that it's been quite interesting this week, is it not, that a bill that was claimed to deliver the vow in full when it was first introduced needed so many amendments to make it supposedly deliver the vow now? I think that the amendments improved the bill in some key areas, particularly the late amendment that was lodged yesterday by the UK Government. I think that it still falls far, far short in other areas. Of course, in terms of whether the bill delivers on promises made, it will be for the people to be the judge of that in the election next May. SNP MPs will propose further amendments in the House of Commons next week, including one to deliver real power over tax credits in their entirety, and we call on all members to support those. More generally, our priority now is to agree a fair fiscal framework so that we can get on with using those new powers for the benefit of the people we serve. The Scotland Bill goes nowhere near delivering on the Smith commission proposals, never mind fulfilling the vow. Does the First Minister share the view of a number of third sector organisations that the proposed devolution of the work programme, while Westminster retains power over sanctions, are incoherent and illogical, like so many other proposals contained in this bill? Yes, I do. Benefit, conditionality and employability, as anybody knows, go hand in hand, and they should have been fully devolved to the Scottish Parliament. Kevin Stewart is right to point out that many stakeholders called for that. I think that that is symptomatic of the approach that the UK Government has taken. The employment provisions in the bill do fall short of the Smith recommendations. There is no justification, in my view, for insisting that we wait 12 months before stepping in to help someone who is unemployed. The social security provisions in the bill are still notwithstanding welcome improvements, are still full of qualifications and constraints, including, most importantly, perhaps those in benefits sanctions. The sanctions regime has been shown to push people into crisis, and it is one of the main drivers of food banks, which is why we have been very clear that there is an urgent need for a full and independent review of the whole sanctions system. Given the shambles that we saw in this Parliament in yesterday's welfare debate from the SNP, the First Minister's colleague Mr Neill, confirming in reference to the Scotland bill and his desire to reverse-tax credits that, and I quote, I have to say, Presiding Officer, 10 out of 10 for sheer brass neck from Baroness Goldie. Baroness Goldie, let me remind the chamber, and more importantly, let me remind the whole of Scotland, sat in the House of Lords a couple of weeks ago and voted for tax credit cuts that will penalise low-income families. So, let me say, it will be a long time before I am prepared to take any lectures in this chamber from Baroness Goldie on the issue of tax credits. To ask the First Minister whether the Scottish Government will provide assistance to families who lose tax credits as a result of the UK Government's proposals. Well, as I said earlier, Presiding Officer, we intend to keep up pressure on the Chancellor to drop his plans to cut tax credits. If he doesn't do so, we will bring forward credible and deliverable plans to assist low-income families. This is in line with the approach that we have already taken to mitigate welfare cuts, including the bedroom tax, an approach that is backed this year alone by more than £100 million of investment. Can I say as gently as I can to the First Minister that this is not about her, is not about the SNP, is not even about the shambles that we witnessed from Alex Neil yesterday. This is about the 250,000 families that are set to lose £1,300 a year due to the Tory cuts to tax credits. Protecting income is not the same as restoring tax credits in full. Her careful language tells me that she knows this. So let's cut through all the words. I only require a one-syllable answer. Will the First Minister help working families and restore every penny lost through tax credit cuts? Yes or no? Jackie Baillie is right about one thing. This is about the families across Scotland who stand to lose tax credits. That is why they deserve better than game playing. They deserve from their Government real, detailed, credible, deliverable and affordable plans, and that is what they will get. It really is a bit rich for Jackie Baillie to stand in this chamber and talk about cuts to the incomes of poor families when just two days ago she pressed her button and voted to spend £167 billion renewing trident nuclear weapons on the Clyde. To ask the First Minister at what level the Scottish rate of income tax will be set. In a radical new departure, we will announce that in the budget. At the weekend, the Scottish Labour Party of Jeremy Corbyn announced its plans to raise taxes on the Scottish people. The Scottish Conservatives will vigorously oppose any moves to tax families or businesses in Scotland more highly than the rest of the United Kingdom. So where does the First Minister stand on this issue? Will she join with us and today rule out higher taxes on families and businesses in Scotland? Yes or no? You should advise your colleague, Alec Johnson, when you are encouraging me to join with you. You should not have him sitting and leering at me in that strange way that he has just done. It is extremely off-putting. Anyway, if I can recover my composure for just a second, we will announce our tax plans in the budget as most Governments do. I have to say that tax really is the last thing the Tories should be talking about right now. The tax credit cuts that we have been talking about today would effectively raise the tax rate for some low-paid workers to 90 per cent. Right now it is the Tories that are the party of high tax on low-income households. Perhaps Murdo Fraser would be better advised rather than, as I believe that he did yesterday, endorse George Osborne's plans, join his leader in asking George Osborne to reverse those cuts just like we do. I do think, First Minister, that Mr Johnson is not in the habit of leering in this chamber. That ends First Minister's question time. We now move to members' business. Members who leave the chambers should do so quickly and quietly.