 Thank you. That concludes general questions. The next item of business is First Minister's Questions. I intend taking both constituency and general supplementaries after question 2, so members wishing to ask such supplementary should press their request to speak buttons during question 2.I'll keep a note of members who press and may take further supplementaries from those members if we have any time in hand after question 7 and members wishing to ask a supplementary to questions, three to seven should press during the relevant question?" I called Douglas Ross. On Tuesday, Public Health Scotland revealed that 1,000 fewer people were admitted to A&E this week compared to the same week two years ago. The number of patients waiting for more than half a day to be seen at A&E is now 10 times higher. Covid has made things worse, ond there are bigger, longer-term issues in Scotland's health service. This Government failed to properly resource our ambulance service. This Government reduced the number of hospital beds. This Government did not plug the gaps in Scotland's NHS workforce. First Minister, which of the decisions taken before the pandemic do you regret most? First Minister, most important, since this Government took office, the number of A and E consultants working in our national health service has increased by 242 per cent. That is the investment in our national health service and in the workforce of our national health service that this Government has supported and will continue to support. Our accident emergency departments are working under intense pressure, as indeed is the NHS as a whole. That pressure has been considerably exacerbated because of Covid. The figures that we saw last week of just over seven in 10 people being seen within four hours within A and E is not good enough. It is important to put that into context because health services across the UK, across Europe and the world are struggling with this pressure in similar ways. If we look at the last month for which we have full figures available, performance in our core A and E departments in Scotland against the four-hour target was 79.5 per cent. That compares with 67.7 per cent in England and 60.7 per cent in Wales, so we clearly see pressure right across the UK. For our part, we are supporting the actions to allow our accident emergency departments to address that pressure and to improve waiting times. For example, that includes work to enhance discharge processes. It includes the redesign of urgent care. It includes the opening of additional bed capacity, strengthening links with social and community care to maximise the community response, enhancing evening and weekend working. We will continue to invest in staff and in the NHS overall, and we will continue to support the reforms that allow patients to flow through the national health service more quickly than is the case at the moment. I hope that, although we are not complacent about this, given the pressures that we are facing, we will start to see some improvement in A and E waiting times in the weeks ahead. Douglas Ross First Minister says that she is not complacent about this but spent her whole answer dismissing the fact that people are waiting more than half a day to be treated in A and E, and that is 10 times higher now than it was two years ago before the pandemic. We got the usual tactic from the First Minister to say, look at what is happening in Wales, look at what is happening in England. Nicola Sturgeon is Scotland's First Minister. She was Scotland's health secretary, and I would like her to take some responsibility for what is happening in Scotland's health service, because Nicola Sturgeon is hiding behind Covid, but it is not all down to the pandemic. Since 2015, more than 850,000 people have waited longer than the four-hour target time at A and E. Why has it happened? From 2015 to 2020, the number of staffed acute beds in Scotland has dropped by more than 2,500. The First Minister has finally agreed that the NHS is in crisis, but we need action now. The Royal College of Emergency Medicine said that we need 1,000 more acute beds. How many of those extra beds has the Scottish Government now identified? First Minister, I do not think that anybody listening to my answer would have heard me dismiss the pressure that the NHS is under in any way, shape or form. The reason I give some context is that, if we listen to Douglas Ross, he seeks to give the impression that this is simply something that is unique to Scotland and all because of the SNP. Our national health service is under pressure because of a global pandemic. It is important, not least in the interests of those working hard across our NHS, as we take the action to support them and to improve performance that we see in that wider context. Of course, we continue to ensure that we invest in staff in our health service. I said, perhaps not surprisingly, that Douglas Ross did not refer to this in his follow-up question, but since the Government took office, a 242 per cent increase in A&E consultants, we also see staffing across the NHS generally at record levels. We see the budget of the NHS at record levels. There is work to do to redesign how patients are cared for. That is why the redesign of urgent care is so important—to make sure that patients get the care they need and that our accident emergency departments and our most acute parts of the NHS can deal more quickly with those who need that aspect of care. On beds, we have seen a change in the profile of bed numbers way before the Government took office as the length of stay in our hospitals decreased. That is again a picture replicated across the whole of the UK. In the most recent time, we have seen a slight increase in the number of acute beds operational across our health service. The health secretary was meeting with our College of Emergency Medicine just today. I was discussing with officials yesterday how, for example, we will free up additional bed capacity through increasing the pace at which people who no longer need to be in hospital are discharged to more appropriate settings. There is a range of work under way in those very challenging circumstances to make sure that we support the national health service. That is why I will continue to focus on each and every single day to support those who are working so hard on the front line. Douglas Ross talked about her answers, the statistic about A and E consultants. Clearly, one of her many, many media advisers told her that this is the zinger. She used this answer on anything about A and E waiting times. That gives little comfort to the 850,000 people that have been waiting longer than the target time that she herself and her Government set for people to be seen in A and E. That is a crisis that is happening throughout the NHS. Capacity is down across the board. Let us take one alarming example. The country was shocked when it was uncovered that 200,000 women were excluded from Scotland's cervical cancer screening programme. Tragically, lives were lost as a result of that. Of all the services that should be returning to pre-pandemic levels, that is a vital one. New figures show that the number of cervical cancer screenings is a third lower this year compared to the same period in 2019. That cannot possibly all be blamed on Covid. Why have cervical cancer screenings dropped so dramatically when the NHS is supposed to be remobilising? First Minister, first of all, before I come on to the very important issue of cervical cancer screening, can I just complete the answer, because Douglas Ross did go back to himself in his last question on A and E. If Douglas Ross hadn't wanted me to state the fact that A and E staffing had increased substantially under this Government, then he shouldn't have asked me why we had not invested in A and E staffing. I am simply making the point that we are investing in staffing and in capacity in our national health service. The waiting times in our accident emergency departments are not good enough. I think that I said that very clearly in my first answer. Around seven out of ten in the most recent weekly figures being seen within four hours, that is not good enough, which is why we are taking the range of actions that I set out in my initial answer to support staff to improve that, and I hope that we will see improvements in that over the coming weeks. It is not good enough, and I will say that again, but again to give context, we continue to have the best performing A and E departments anywhere in the UK, even in these difficult circumstances, which suggest that the actions that we are taking, while they need to go further, are helping to support those who are delivering that care on the front line. We will continue to do that in the most difficult circumstances that our national health service has probably faced since its establishment. On the issue of cervical screening, the Public Health Minister, of course, has made two statements now to Parliament on the error that, again, goes back many, many years predates to this Government where some women were wrongly excluded from cervical screening. She has set out the audit work that has been done. She has set out the steps that have been taken to rectify that, to see women in those circumstances, to make sure that they are being provided with appropriate follow-up care. It is important that we continue to see that work through to give women the reassurances that they need. That is important, and I do not want in any way to underplay the importance and significance of that. Clearly, there are wider issues around encouraging women to come forward for screening, whether that is cervical screening or breast screening or any of the screening programmes. There has been an impact from Covid on people coming forward for routine healthcare, and that will include the screening programmes. We had a relatively short period where our screening programmes had to be paused. They are now operational again, and we want to see numbers coming through those screening programmes increase, and increase even beyond where they were before the pandemic. That is why we will continue to focus on that, on the importance of early diagnosis. All of us can help here by getting very clear, loud and consistent messages across to women and others who are eligible for screening to come forward for those appointments because those programmes are open and extremely important. The First Minister's answers all add up to a Government that is reacting to circumstances not one that is in control of them. They are scrambling about putting on sticking plaster over each new crisis instead of planning to stop them in the first place. They are only reacting when disaster strikes. We are short on hospital beds. We are short on frontline staff. We are short on leadership from this Government. The First Minister is once again hiding behind Covid and, as we have heard today, is deflecting to the rest of the United Kingdom. Is not it the case that the pandemic has completely exposed her Government's poor record on running Scotland's NHS? Is not it the case that this crisis that spiralled over the past few weeks has shown ministers constantly behind the curve? Is not it time that the First Minister and her health secretary finally got to grip of events? Two points about the pandemic. Anybody in this chamber who stands up and tries to pretend that the pandemic has not had an extremely significant impact on all of this is insulting people's intelligence and lacking credibility. Secondly, it is important in the midst of a global pandemic that Governments respond to circumstances, that Governments adapt and are flexible, and that is what this Government has done and what we will continue to do. I make no apology for making sure that, where there is a need, we are providing extra funding, where there is a need, we are taking new initiatives to help the health service cope with what is an unprecedented set of circumstances. Of course, it is true that we had pressures on our national health service before the pandemic, but again what Douglas Ross does not want to look at is the progress that was being made before the pandemic in tackling exactly those problems. If you take the waiting times improvement plan, which was published back in October 2018, the number of outpatients who were waiting for the first appointment had reduced by 21 per cent in the 18 months up to March 2020, just before the pandemic struck. The numbers who were waiting over 12 weeks had fallen by over 32 per cent. The number of patients waiting more than six weeks for a key diagnostic test had reduced by over 25 per cent. There were more inpatient treatments being offered than patients being seen. The point that I am making here, Presiding Officer, is that, yes, there were challenges. Those challenges were being addressed, real progress was being made. Douglas Ross says that no, they weren't. I have just given him the evidence of the facts. We have had for the past 18 months a global pandemic. We are still in that global pandemic. That is creating the most extreme circumstances for our NHS, so we will continue to take the action in common with Governments everywhere to support our NHS. We will focus on that job each and every single day. Last week, the health secretary told the public to think twice about calling an ambulance. This week, islanders on Islay and Collinsay were told to only travel in Scotland's ferries if it was necessary. Their service relies on a 36-year-old ship that is stuck in a dry dock undergoing repairs. Scotland's ancient CalMac fleet urgently needs to be replaced, so it should have been welcome news that a contract to build ferries for Scotland's island routes was progressing to the next stage, except that the Scottish Yard did not even make the shortlist. Instead, the contract will be awarded to a shipyard in Poland, Romania or Turkey. I applaud the Scottish Government for protecting Scottish jobs. It is just a pity that none of those jobs are in Scotland. So, First Minister, can you explain to us all how we Scottish Yard, supporting Scottish jobs and owned by the Scottish Government, failed to even make the shortlist to build Scotland's ferries? First Minister, before I come on to ferries, can I address another point? Anybody in this country who needs an ambulance should phone an ambulance. I am clear about that. The health secretary is clear about that. Obviously, if somebody needs a part of the health service that does not require an ambulance, they should phone NHS 24 or another part of the health service. It is not helpful, I think, for people in this chamber to misrepresent the position when people's lives are at risk. On ferries, of course, let us not lose sight of the fact that this Government has protected shipbuilding jobs here in Scotland, because without the intervention of this Government, Ferguson's would not still be open, it would not still be operational and there are hundreds of people currently employed at Ferguson's who would not be employed at Ferguson's. That is the protection of shipbuilding jobs that this Government has delivered. Of course, those are procurements that are bound by rules and regulations that Anna Sarwar is aware of. Ferguson's is on a journey back to recovery. It is focused right now, as indeed the Opposition has regularly called for it to be. First Minister, if I can just have a minute, I would very much like all Members to be able to hear the First Minister. They do not want to hear what this Government has done to protect shipbuilding jobs in Scotland. The focus of Ferguson's is making sure that the two ferries that are currently delayed are completed. The work that is under way at Ferguson's, I hope, will equip Ferguson's to compete for new orders and new contracts in the future. However, let us not lose sight of the fact that, without the intervention of this Government, there would be no Ferguson's shipyard and the hundreds of jobs that are currently dependent on it would not even exist. The First Minister says that the company that she owns is on a journey. People want ferry journeys, and that is what this Government needs to address. Saving the yard is one thing, but sustaining the yard is another. Launching a ferry with painted on windows, really is that the best we can hope from this Government. The truth is that the failure to deliver these ferries are the result of complacency and ineptitude on the part of this SNP Government. That a Scottish Government-owned company cannot win a Scottish Government contract to build ships is a national scandal that is now an international humiliation. This Government has no strategy to expand services, no fleet to meet Scotland's needs and no plan to fix the problem. The model is not working, it is not fit for purpose and must be replaced. There are 15 ferries in the fleet over their original 25-year life cycle. More than enough projects to keep Ferguson's in work and even expand our industry here in Scotland if only it was run properly. I ask the First Minister to raise her game, stop wasting taxpayers' money, halt the tender process, scrap steam oil and stand up for Scottish jobs. Maybe Anas Sarwar should raise his game and find one iota of consistency, because as we followed Anas Sarwar's advice, we would not have saved Ferguson's from closure. Here is what he was saying back in 2018, when he was warning about a risk that it might appear that we were taking decisions for political reasons, not purely financial or economic reasons. Anas Sarwar, I suspect, would not have saved Ferguson's, so we will continue to support the shipyard, we will continue to support the workers there and we will continue to do everything to make sure that it is in a position to compete for and win contracts in the future and to do that of course within the law and the constraints around procurement that apply. What I would say to Anas Sarwar, because this is what would have happened if he and his party had been in charge, a closed Ferguson's would not have been able to compete for or win contracts. We have kept to open and we are going to do the work to ensure that it is a success. I am not sure that using quotes is safe ground for the First Minister. Nicola Sturgeon likes to quote a long list of excuses, but let me quote Nicola Sturgeon in 2005 at First Minister's questions, talking about ferry contracts at Ferguson's. The First Minister must raise his game. Will the work go to Poland or will it go to Port Glasgow? Instead of covering in a corner in case someone in Europe gives him a row, he should take the decision and make it clear that if it is challenged in court, he will defend it. That is called standing up for the national interest. Nicola Sturgeon, in opposition, talked about the national interest, but in government she put Scottish jobs at risk. She delivers jobs for China, providing steel for the Queensbury crossing, jobs for Indonesia, supplying wind turbines and jobs for Turkey, Romania or Poland to provide our ferries. To quote Nicola Sturgeon again, what is it going to take to make her come down on the side of a Scottish industry, a Scottish shipyard and Scottish jobs, or is it the case that the only thing that the SNP is good at manufacturing is grievance? First Minister, there is always a sure sign that Labour is in deep trouble when they go back to the Queensbury crossing. I mean it is really desperate stuff. Yes, I did say that to Jack McConnell because back then Ferguson's was on the brink of closure and Jack McConnell wasn't prepared to do anything about it. I lead a government that saved Ferguson's from closure. And interestingly, if he'd gone on to quote Jack McConnell's answer, he'd have found that Jack McConnell told me that what Anna Sarwar is now asking for would have broken the law. So perhaps a bit of consistency. This government has saved Ferguson's. There are hundreds of jobs currently at Ferguson's that wouldn't exist but for this government. So compared to Labour, who always stood by and let industry go to the wall, this government's got a track record of standing up for industry and standing up for manufacturing jobs across the country. We'll now take supplementaries, and I call James Dornan. Thank you, Presiding Officer. First Minister, last week you have seen and heard the reports of the disgraceful anti-Catholic singing during the orange order marches throughout the city of Glasgow, including in my constituency of Glasgow, at that. At least three of their routes included marching past Roman Catholic churches, causing a great deal of distress and concern to the members of those parishes in the wider church in Scotland. Given those events, First Minister, would you consider the creation of a parades commission, similar to what already happens in Northern Ireland to take a non-partisan and independent look at the number and routes of such parades? Anyone old enough to remember the annual battles at Drumcree will verify the difference that the commission has made in Northern Ireland. Recently, we have shameful reports of Glasgow City Councils receiving death threats when any possible restriction of orange parades were discussed. I'm in no doubt that, just as in Northern Ireland, a parades commission would go a long way towards taking some of the heat out of the discussion of the parades. I'm sure that we can all agree that, if the parades are to go ahead, they should take place in a way that at least threatens or intimidates those of another faith or opinion. Can I thank James Dornan for that question? In regard to the specific proposal of a parades commission, yes, I'm happy that the Government gives that further consideration. I have already asked the justice secretary to consider what further action could be taken to maintain the important balance of rights between peaceful procession, freedom of speech and the ability of people to go about their daily lives without feeling unsafe and being free from harassment. I will ask the justice secretary to consider the possible creation of a parades commission as part of that. It is important to stress that peaceful public assembly and freedom of expression are fundamentally important rights. I know that we are all committed to upholding them, but it is also a fundamental right of any person and any community to go about their daily business without fears for their safety. I know that members will join me in unequivocally condemning all instances of anti-Catholic bigotry, which we have seen on our streets in recent times. There is no place for it in a modern Scotland and we must all show zero tolerance towards it. In terms of the specific proposal, I can confirm that we will give that consideration and we will report back to Parliament further in due course. During the Covid recovery committee session today, the panel of experts indicated that the case for introducing vaccine passports has yet to be demonstrated in the public domain and that there has been no effective engagement with those who will be most affected by their introduction. Given that the Scottish Government has committed to the committee and to this Parliament and that this evidence does exist and it will publish it, can I ask the First Minister when this is likely to happen? The regulations and supporting evidence will be published over the course of the coming days next week before the introduction of the scheme. We have published a paper this morning setting out further details. We see from countries across Europe that Covid certification schemes can play a part in helping to stem transmission and I believe that they will play a part here. No single measure is going to control the virus on its own but we need to have a range of targeted measures to keep transmission under control while keeping our economy open and that is what Covid certification is intended to do. We have engaged extensively across business interests and indeed with other stakeholders and we will continue to do so up to and indeed beyond the introduction of the scheme. Nobody wants to be in a position of having to impose any measures to deal with an infectious virus but unfortunately that is the position we are still in and therefore having proportionate and targeted measures I think is the right thing to do to keep people safe over this winter period. Pam Duncan-Glancy Thank you, Presiding Officer. Today across Glasgow many people cannot access libraries and get books in the way that I know the First Minister herself enjoys because the libraries and many other leisure venues are closed. To ask the First Minister what assessment the Scottish Government has made of the financial shortfall being experienced by Glasgow Life and other sport and leisure and library riders and whether she will commit to give the city the money it needs to get the venues opening and functioning again. First Minister, across the city of Glasgow the vast majority of libraries are open and available to people and where the small number of libraries that are not open there are reasons for that that I know the council has set out. We indicated some further financial support to councils to get and keep libraries open given the recognition, the very strong recognition of the importance of libraries in communities. In terms of the wider issues around funding for local government of course we are entering the budget process. The budget will be for the next financial year will be set out by the Scottish Government in early December as was confirmed this week. We will have discussions across the chamber about the budget as we always do. We will obviously have discussions with COSLA in terms of the local government settlement. We will as we have done every year in difficult financial circumstances be as fair to local government as we possibly can be and of course any member and indeed any party has the ability to come to the finance secretary and ask where they want to see more money allocated. All I would say is if they want to do that they also have to say where they think that money should come from so that offer is open to parties across the chamber. First Minister I refer to the joint agreement signed by the Scottish Government and organisations such as COSLA, the STUC and the Institute of Directors which states that no worker should be penalised if they are off work following medical advice relating to Covid-19. First Minister I have a constituent with long Covid and she is being pressurised by her employer so my question is does that apply to people who have been diagnosed with long Covid? Yes, in principle of course it does. I am not going to comment on individual cases because people's circumstances will be different but I would say the principles behind that statement should apply to anyone with any health condition. Nobody should feel pressure to go to work if their health says that it is not right for them to be at work and that applies in relation to people who have suffered Covid and given the nature of long Covid absolutely should apply to those suffering from that condition as well. Finlay Carson This week we learnt that SNP members of Dumfries and Galloway Council are threatening to oppose a joint bed with Scottish Borders, Carlyle City and Northumberland councils to win the city of culture status for the borderlands region. It is not entirely clear why other than the fact that it would involve both English and Scottish councils so while the First Minister confirmed whether she will support such a cross-border bed for the borderlands and if so what support can the Government make available to the bed team as they move forward? First Minister, first I will happily look at what the situation is. Often claims are made about the views of SNP councillors or councillors in this chamber by the Conservatives that perhaps do not bear all that much scrutiny but I do not know exactly what the circumstances are in this case and I am happy to look into that. I have been an enthusiastic supporter of borderlands initiative and I slightly regret some of the undertone of the member's question. There is nothing that could be further from the truth. I also think that it is important that we take all opportunities, particularly in those circumstances, to support culture and cultural initiatives. I would be happy to have a discussion with the councillor and ask the relevant minister to do so about what support might be available from the Scottish Government to support any bed. Obviously there will sometimes be differences of opinion but let us try to get behind any reasonable bed for something like this and, for goodness' sake, shy away from any claims about some of the motives why people might not be taking a particular position. Colin Smyth. Yesterday, the First Minister visited Presswick Airport, but the elephant in the room was the future of the airport itself. The chief executive of Edinburgh airport has said that Presswick is doomed, so more than six months after a preferred bidder was chosen. Can the First Minister tell us, is the sale of Presswick going ahead? If so, when and will that sale guarantee the existing jobs and the full repayment of the £40 million of loans? First Minister. It was very good to visit Presswick yesterday. It was actually quite a good news day. Presswick Airport, of course, set out the next details of its spaceport bid. I was visiting spirit aerosystems, which had just opened a new innovation centre. That is obviously a very important part of the aerospace cluster there, so it was actually a good news day in terms of Presswick, a part of the country, that is very close to my heart. In terms of the airport, it is the intention of the Government to return the airport to the private sector. That has always been the case. Obviously the process of doing that has been impacted by Covid. We will set out further details of that in due course. I will make a point that I made to Anna Sarwar in relation to Ferguson's. I think that it was right for us to keep Presswick Airport open. I think that it was right for us to invest to protect the jobs and the economic activity. Those are often the things that Labour in the abstract call on us to do, but when it comes to putting our money where our mouth is metaphorically speaking, Labour is just full of criticism. This Government again is the one that time after time after time actually stands up for jobs and stands up for industry. To ask the First Minister whether she will provide an update on the Scottish Government's work with the UK Government to create free ports in Scotland. The Greenport model is an adaptation of the free port model, which places strong emphasis on fair work and the move to a net zero economy. The Secretary of State for Scotland wrote on 6 September to confirm that the UK Government would not support green ports for Scotland and would not accept our proposals for higher labour or environmental standards as part of their free port model. All mention of green ports was to be avoided and reference to payment of the real living wage by employers benefiting from tax incentives was not to be permitted. Fair work and net zero are central tenants of Scotland's future economy and we are simply not prepared to see those commitments watered down by the Tory UK Government. So we will now progress plans to develop a green port model tailored to Scotland's economy, workers and communities. I thank the First Minister for that answer. The SNP refused to acknowledge the benefits of any kind of a port in Scotland for a long time. However, as a result of this Government's refusal to work co-operatively with the UK Government, it would appear that funding would only be available for one Scottish green port due to the increased operating costs of that model. Can the First Minister confirm if there will only be a single green port in Scotland and if not, where will the additional funding come from for the remainder? First Minister, we will continue to develop and set out our proposals on green ports. It was not about the SNP not being prepared to see advantages and benefits. We simply were not prepared to compromise on fair work or the environment. The question for the Tories has to be particularly if, as I am sure it is the case with the member, they wanted to see the free port model go ahead in Scotland. What in earth objection could they possibly have to fair work in environmental conditions being built into those? Perhaps that rather gives the game away. There is another aspect. It was crucial, obviously, that Scotland would have a fair allocation of funding to help to establish ports, but the UK Government's recent offer failed to even provide an equivalent to what it is making available to free ports in England. If the UK Government had been serious, all those issues could have been addressed, but that is up to them. We will continue to take forward our plans for green ports, with fair work and environmental progress absolutely at their heart. Pam Gossel. To ask the First Minister what action the Scottish Government is taking to support people on low incomes. We have taken a wide range of actions to support people on low incomes, investing around £2.5 billion just last year, including nearly £1 billion targeted to children. We are putting money in the pockets of hundreds of thousands of low-income families through the Scottish child payment and bridging payments. That is an investment of around £130 million this year. Around £500,000 low-income households will also receive a £130 pandemic payment by the end of October, an investment of £65 million. We have also increased the value of best start foods and the school clothing grant and will double the carers allowance supplement December payment. In addition, we have guaranteed the Scottish welfare fund budget at £41 million and committed a further £83 million for discretionary housing payments. Scotland is facing a perfect storm with surging energy prices for low-ending and the biggest cut to social security since the 1930s. The UN rapporteur on extreme poverty has condemned the £20 universal credit card describing it as a move that breaches international human rights law and is likely to trigger an explosion of poverty. Does the First Minister agree that the only way to protect the most vulnerable in society from devastating Tory policies is to become an independent country? I do believe that having control over tax and welfare, all the levers that other countries have at their disposal would be better for Scotland, and that is only possible if Scotland does become an independent country. In the immediate term, Mary McNair is absolutely right to talk about a perfect storm. There are significant worries about energy inflation, food inflation over the winter months, which threaten to plunge more and more already low-income families into poverty. To even be considering against the backdrop of that, the removal of £20 per week from some of the poorest families in our country, in my view, is unthinkable for the UK Government and lacks any basic morality. If they were not prepared to reconsider this before, surely they should do that now. It would be indefensible to take this money literally out of the mouth of children and to plunge more families into poverty. I would argue that not just keeping that payment is essential, given what many face over the winter, but looking at additional payments, as this Government has done through our pandemic payments. Additional payments by the UK Government to help people, for example, to deal with rising energy costs is what we should be getting from any UK Government that had any concern at all for the poorest in our society. To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government's response is to reports that incidents of spitting on police officers increased by 15 per cent in 2020 to 2021, compared with the previous year. It is utterly unacceptable for police officers or staff to be attacked or abused in any way. I fully support the actions of the police and, of course, our independent prosecutors and courts in dealing robustly with perpetrators. Our police officers have been protecting the public throughout the pandemic. It is disgusting that some have chosen to attack officers by spitting or coughing at them. Police Scotland has reaffirmed its commitment to tackling assaults, including through the chief constable's assault pledge. That pledge promises to help to reduce the impact of violence, improve the safety of officers and staff and provide appropriate support where it does occur. Jamie Greene I thank the First Minister. I think that the phrase that I used is absolutely correct. It is disgusting. It is vile attacks. It is also the trend that is rising that should worry us as well. It is no surprise, therefore, that six and a half thousand days were lost last year due to our officers being attacked and assaulted. That is a rise of more than 400 year-on-year too. The Scottish Police Federation recently wrote a letter to the Parliament's Justice Committee. I am afraid that content could not be more damning. It said that police officers have, throughout the pandemic, felt neglected and unsupported by Government. The impact on officer morale of that abandonment should not be underestimated. We have rising levels of assaults, rising levels of sick days and rising criticism from the front line. Surely we can do something about it. We propose doubling the maximum sentences for assaults on our emergency workers. Will you back us on this? Is it not about time that we send a clear message to our front line workers that we in this Parliament have got— A question, Mr Greene. The question is, will you back these proposals and let's send these workers a message? We've got your backs. I'm very happy to consider any sensible proposal. Sentencing is a matter for courts and for judges. Judges retain, even in short sentences, the discretion to pass the most appropriate sentence based on the facts of the case. That includes a custodial sentence if they decide that the alternatives are not appropriate. Statistics show that the proportion of people given community sentences for convictions under the Emergency Workers Act has remained very similar over the past 10 years. We will consider any reasonable proposal. Of course, this Government has supported the police throughout the pandemic, and we will continue to do so. I would express again my deep gratitude to the police for everything that they have done in these really difficult circumstances. Over the period of our time in government, we have also maintained the number of police officers above the level that we inherited when we have seen numbers of police officers decline considerably in other parts of the UK. We will continue to support our police in all possible ways, and I will end where I started by thanking the police for what they do and condemning in the strongest possible terms anybody who chooses to abuse or attack our police officers. As we all know, police officers have served a curnt during the pandemic in people's homes, in accident and emergency, in hospital and on our streets, working alongside other dedicated public service teams. As we have heard, they have exposed significant risks in their jobs. I wonder whether the First Minister has questioned the JCVI clinicians on why police officers will not be a priority for vaccination. I appreciate the fact that she said that it is a matter for them, but I wonder whether it is time to question why they will not be a priority for the booster programme, because it perhaps should be reconsidered in the light of the exposure to risk. We are clear as a Parliament and, as a Scottish Government, standing up for serving police officers facing those risks. In terms of the vaccination programme so far, the JCVI itself has set out its rationale. The benefits of vaccination are obviously greatest in terms of those who are at most clinical risk. That is why the prioritisation approach that was taken was based on greatest clinical risk and, of course, age, which is associated with clinical risk. In terms of the overall programme, all police officers will have had the opportunity to be vaccinated and any police officer who was in any of the higher clinical risk categories would have had the priority that flowed from that. It was important that we deployed the vaccine programme in the way that would best reduce the overall harm from the virus, and that is what we, in common with other Governments across the UK, have done. Those issues are possibly even more relevant when it comes to the booster programme, because the timing of a booster jag, the efficacy of the booster, will be increased if it is given at the right time after somebody's second dose. That is why the JCVI has recommended a six-month gap. It is really important that we follow the best clinical and expert advice, and that we as politicians do not try to substitute our understandable and often legitimate political considerations for the clinical advice that will determine the order in which people are vaccinated, so that the overall programme has the biggest impact on keeping the country safe. To ask the First Minister what engagement the Scottish Government has had with the UK Government and energy providers in light of the reported wholesale increase in prices. I am particularly concerned about the impact of rising costs on consumers already struggling with pressures on household finances, while the increased default tariff cap reflects underlying increases in prices and will provide some protection to consumers over the coming price cap period. Many households will be badly affected by price rises. We engage frequently with the UK Government off-gem energy suppliers and third sector bodies to discuss the energy system overall. The Cabinet Secretary for Energy has spoken with off-gems chief executive to raise our concerns, which of course build on wider worries over the effect of high transmission charges in Scotland. He has also met a range of suppliers and consumer groups. We have also written to the base business secretary highlighting our views and pressing for long-term solutions to maintain our energy resilience. It is also vital, in my view, as I said a few moments ago, that the UK Government urgently considers financial support for low-income households to prevent fuel price increases plunging more people into poverty this winter. Finally, I convene a meeting of the Scottish Government's Resilience Committee yesterday afternoon to discuss all of those issues. We will continue to meet regularly to make sure that the Scottish Government, even though most of those matters are reserved to the UK Government, is doing everything possible to help those impacted. This week, the Conservatives' own business secretary, quasi-quartining, has admitted that it could be a very difficult winter, with rising energy bills made a cut to universal credit. I would like to ask the First Minister what assurances, if any, has she had from the UK Government that people will not be forced to choose between heating and eating this winter? That will be the stark choice that many might face if appropriate action is not taken. I would not say that we have had any assurances from the UK Government to the effect that those choices will be avoided for everybody, but those are the assurances that we will continue to press for. I think that, for all sorts of reasons and in all sorts of ways—we have been discussing it already today in the context of the NHS—the winter period ahead is going to be more difficult than most of us will ever have remembered. It is incumbent on all Governments, it is incumbent on this Government to do everything that we can to support people through this and where issues are reserved to the UK Government. Many of those energy cost issues are then incumbent on the UK Government to do everything that it can to help as well. Two things that I have already referred to today—not going ahead with the cut to universal credit and considering additional financial support to low-income households to help them specifically with energy cost rises would be two appropriate things that the UK Government could do, and we will continue to press them to do them. 7. Rhoda Grant Past the First Minister, what steps are being taken to ensure that women who have endometriosis are diagnosed within a year? Reducing the time for diagnosis of endometriosis to under a year is one of the key aims in the women's health plan. Work is already being undertaken by the NHS Centre for Sustainable Delivery towards this. It is developing a pelvic pain pathway, starting with endometriosis. In addition, over the past year, endometriosis UK was funded by the Scottish Government to carry out research to identify the challenges to diagnosis in primary care and to the implementation of the NICE guideline on endometriosis. That is an important priority for many women across the country and one that we are committed to seeing real improvements on. 8. Rhoda Grant I thank the First Minister for that response. The women's health plan sets out a goal to reduce endometriosis diagnosis from eight years to less than a year in this parliamentary session. However, there is very little detail on how we plan to reach that goal, especially in our most remote, rural areas where proximity to services poses a unique challenge. Painters in Caithness are calling for a review of all women's services, including endometriosis, to highlight the challenges that they face. Will the First Minister listen to those campaigners and review women's services in areas that are distant from services such as Caithness? I am very happy to give that consideration. It is important to say that we have listened on the women's health plan, which is really important. We are the first country in the UK to publish such a plan. It sets out more than 60 different actions to ensure that women get the best possible health response right throughout their lives. A recent report from the UK all-party parliamentary group on endometriosis made some recommendations, which, of course, we will consider. They have already been considered in the context of taking forward the women's health plan. On the particular target around endometriotris, it says that it is a really challenging one. The average time for diagnosis right now is more than eight years, but it is right to target bringing that down to under a year. There is a range of things that have to be done to achieve that. The work that I refer to the Centre for Sustainable Delivery is doing around a pelvic pain pathway is an important part of that, but it is also doing more to understand what some of the barriers to diagnosis are, particularly in primary care, is an important part of getting the interventions right. We will report regularly against progress in the women's health plan and all its actions, but, in particular, we will do so. I would like to say at this point that there are a number of members wishing to ask supplementaries on the question. I regret that we are already over time and impinging on the next item of business, so that will not be possible today. I would very much like to enable more members to put questions to the First Minister at this session, but the length of some earlier questions and responses means that it has not been possible to do so today. I urge members to ensure that their questions and responses are as succinct as possible. That concludes First Minister's questions, and we will now move on to members' business.