 Onw'r next item of business is First Minister's Questions, and at question number one I call Douglas Ross. Thank you, Presiding Officer. This morning, Audit Scotland released a damning report on the State of Scotland's NHS. Felly mae'r cyfnodd y ffordd o'r cyfnodd y pwysig, oedd yn dweud o'r cyfnodd yn llefnodd o'r ramion o'r cyfnodd, oedd yn ni'n dweud o'r 3,500 a 40,000. Mae'n croes 11 oedd, cion o'r 2019, dweud o'r rhan o'r cyfnodd, yn cyhoeddiadau. Apos ymddangos yn yr echyfl gwrthau, ymddangos hwnnw, ymddangos hynny yn yng nghymhwyddu cyfnodd, yn gweithio i gael i ddim yn gweithio. So, why, First Minister, are things getting worse, not better? First Minister. First and foremost, let me say that we take very seriously the comments and the report by the Auditor General that was published this morning. There is simply no doubt or, indeed, attempts by us to downplay the seriousness of the challenges that the health service is facing, as it recovers. From what is undoubtedly the biggest shock of its 75-year gyda'r cymdeithas yng Nghymru, ac wrth gwrs, there are challenges for every single health service right across the UK. To answer Douglas Ross' question directly, we are still facing the accumulative impacts of the pandemic. People are still, for example, winter suffering from Covid. That has an impact not just of course on IPC within hospitals but also of course on staff who are able to perform elective care and treatments and surgeries. Those are common challenges. I accept that they are my responsibility here in NHS Scotland as well as the health secretaries. Those are common challenges right across the country. In fact, if I look at some of the latest data in September last year, it did show that Scotland there was 123 patients waiting per 1,000 of the population for the treatment time guarantee and new outpatient appointments. That is fewer than in England where there is 137 per 1,000 on the referral to treatment waiting list. In Wales, that figure is 245 per 1,000. My point of making is that, of course, there are challenges that Scotland's NHS is facing. Of that, there is no doubt. Those are common challenges right across the UK, and what we will do is make sure that we fund the NHS. That is why I am pleased that, in the budget that was announced by the Deputy First Minister last year, we invested a record £19.5 billion in our health service. Dr Shaws? That is an Audit Scotland report into NHS Scotland. Please, First Minister, focus on our NHS here in Scotland. That shocking 11-fold increase in people waiting over a year is, of course, against a target that should be zero. There was a target for March 2023 for people waiting over a year to be eradicated. Instead, it is now over 40,000. Audit Scotland says that the latest SNP targets to reduce waiting times are unlikely to be met. Those are Humza Yousaf's targets. It was his recovery plan. When he was health secretary, he said that this plan will drive the recovery of our NHS not just to pre-pandemic level but beyond yet another example of Humza Yousaf winging it. That arrogant claim now rings hollow and patients in Scotland are suffering. Humza Yousaf sent waiting times in the wrong direction. Will he now finally admit that his plan has failed? Here is what we have managed to achieve. I accept, of course, the way to go and I accept, of course, the recommendations of the Audit Scotland report. We have seen, because of the investment that we have made in national treatment centres, an additional 20,000 procedures through the investment in our national treatment centres. That is why we have seen an increase in the last 12 months and an 11 per cent increase in performed operation over the last year. That is why outpatients waiting longer than two years has fallen by almost 70 per cent. In-patient day patients waiting the longest have fallen by over 25 per cent. That is why we are investing over £19.5 billion, a record amount, in our national health service. What makes that recovery, of course, more difficult is a 10 per cent cut to our capital budget, which means that we have less to spend on capital health infrastructure. What makes that job more difficult, Presiding Officer, is that it has only been provided £10.8 million of health consequentials in the UK Government's autumn statement, enough for five hours of NHS activity. So, while the Conservatives rightly will ask questions about what further we can do, let me say that this SNP Government will invest in our NHS, unlike Douglas Ross's party, who is cutting the funding to the bone. Douglas Ross. It's not just the Conservatives that are asking these questions. It's Audit Scotland and, crucially, it's our constituents who are suffering. But, as usual, Humza Yousaf promised the world and delivered very little. Just like the ferries he claimed he would build, just like the hate crime act that he said would be a success, just like the trains that he promised to get to run on time. Audit Scotland says that it can't even fully measure how badly his recovery plan has failed because the SNP has not been transparent with the public. This is what they say. Updates against her range of the ambitions are absent. Humza Yousaf is covering up just how bad it's been. But the reason for this failure is clear from the report. Audit Scotland states that there is no overall vision for Scotland's NHS. No overall vision. How can Humza Yousaf and this SNP Government have no vision for Scotland's NHS? We will respond to the Audit Scotland report in due course, but let me say to Douglas Ross that, when it comes to the SNP stewardship of our NHS, it has seen record investment in our NHS of over £19.5 billion. It has seen resource funding more than double. Members have increased by more than 100 per cent since we have been in power. It has shown record staffing in our NHS of over 31,300 whole-time equivalents. There are more nurses in Scotland per head than in England. We have the best NHS staff anywhere in the UK. We have the best performing A&E departments not for one year, not for five years, but for eight consecutive years. We value our NHS staff. We are the only nation in the UK not to have NHS staff go on strike. When it comes to the challenges that our NHS is facing, undoubtedly facing—I am not downplaying them—this Government is making sure that we invest in that recovery. However, the difference between the Tories and the SNP is that we will invest in our NHS while the Conservatives are cutting it right down to the bone. There is no vision for Scotland's NHS, not my words but the words of the Auditor General for Scotland. They make it very clear that the lack of vision has not just happened because of the pandemic and the issues that our NHS faced. There has not been a vision for Scotland's NHS since 2013. They say, and I quote, that there has been no unified vision for the future direction of the entire healthcare system that has been published since 2013. Hamza Yousaf has no vision for Scotland's NHS. He has been asleep at the wheel like every other SNP First Minister. There has been a lost decade of leadership in Scotland's NHS. Ten years of stalling and delay has had dire consequences for patients. How long are people in Scotland going to have to wait for the SNP to get their act together? Investing in that recovery now. That is why, for example, those outpatients waiting the longest has reduced by almost 70 per cent. That is why inpatients waiting the longest have reduced by more than 25 per cent. That is why operations performed in the past 12 months have increased by 11 per cent. That is why, through our investment, we have created additional capacity for 20,000 procedures. That is why we are investing a record £19.5 billion in our NHS, despite the fact that the UK Government in its autumn statement provided a less than £11 million for NHS health consequentials. That is enough to fund five hours of NHS activity. I will take not a single lecture from Douglas Ross about investing in our NHS when his party is responsible for a 10 per cent capital cut in our budget that is deeply impacting our health infrastructure. Douglas Ross, I am afraid, is presiding over a party that has taken a hatchet to our public services, so, while they cut it to the bone, we will continue to invest in the most precious institution in this country, our national health service. We are in the middle of a cost-of-living crisis where too many people are struggling to make ends meet. At the same time, oil and gas giants are making record profits. British gas is a tenfold increase in profits in one year to over £700 million. BP is a £11 billion profit. Total is £16 billion profit. Shell is £22 billion profit. Why does the First Minister think that those companies cannot afford to pay more tax? A week after the P&J put Anna Sauer's face on the front page with his Labour colleagues and called him a traitor of the north-east, it is incredibly brave of Anna Sauer to come up here and say that he is standing up for the north-east. I, of course, travelled to the north-east this week and heard the palpable anger from oil and gas and renewable energy sectors and industries, who spoke about Anna Sauer's plans, the Labour Party's plans, which would, in their words, not my words, in the industry's words, risk up to 100,000 jobs in the north-east. How does Anna Sauer think that, in the midst of a cost-of-living crisis, throwing 100,000 workers in the scrap heap is going to help households up and down the country? So we absolutely believe in a windfall tax on energy companies. What we don't believe in is Anna Sauer's aggressive plans to raid the north-east so that they can build new nuclear power plants in England. So we won't allow it. We won't stand for it. We'll stand up for the north-east. Anna Sauer can't even stand up to cure Starmer, Presiding Officer. Anna Sauer. Thank you, Mr Sauer. Every time Labour has proposed a change to help working people, warnings have been made and they have not come true. In 1997, when Labour proposed a minimum wage and a windfall tax, they were warned that it would cost 2 million jobs. It didn't happen. It improved the lives of working people across the country. Humza Yousaf used to support Labour's windfall tax, but now he is siding with energy giants, making record profits, while today he is putting up tax for working people across this country who are struggling. Let's hear Mr Sauer. While Shell has brought in £22 billion in profit, energy bills have increased by 60 per cent and people are struggling to heat their homes. While BP makes £11 billion in profit, food prices are up 25 per cent and people are struggling to put food on the table. While British Gas sees a tenfold increase in profits, mortgages have increased by £2,000 a year and families risk losing their homes, why does the SNP believe that if you earn £28,500 you have the broadest shoulders and should pay more tax, but if you are an energy giant making billions in profit, you should pay less tax. First Minister, imagine taking a lecture about standing up for those in the lowest incomes from the man who has flipped-flop his position and now believes in lifting the cap on bankers' bonuses. Who would have thought the party of the few, not the party of the many? And it is astonishing that Anasawa has stood up in this chamber and called the energy industry liars. That is what he has done. Let me just say what offshore energy UK have said. They claim that Labour's proposals would lose at least up to 42,000 jobs and I quote, wipe out North Sea investment. Investment Bank Stifle has said that under a worst-case scenario, Labour's proposals would wipe up to 100,000 jobs out and put them on the scrap heap. So what you get with Labour's energy proposal is the worst of both worlds. You end up getting all the investment in oil and gas, which has been good for Scotland over the decades. That gets completely wiped out. Then what does Keir Starmer do? He dumps his £28 billion a year green prosperity fund. Scotland's energy should be in Scotland's hands because successive Westminster Governments have raided the north-east, have raided Aberdeen, have raided our oil and gas revenues and not a single penny has been invested back into the people of Aberdeen or the north-east. For that, Anasawa should stand up and apologise. I can't wait to present the choice at the next general election between the SNP and the Labour Party. Let's ensure that we can hear one another, Mr Sarwar. I can't wait to present the choice to the Scottish people to come to the next general election, because firmly the SNP is on the side of energy giants making billions and Labour trying to bring down people's bills and on the side of working people. But let's be clear what Labour's windfall tax on record profits of energy giants will be spent on. It will mean more jobs, lower bills, greater energy security and delivering a just transition for Scotland. It will mean investment in GB energy, a publicly-owned energy generation company headquartered here in Scotland. It will mean investment in our ports, in onshore wind, offshore wind, green hydrogen, carbon capture and storage, and strengthening our supply chains. It will mean creating 50,000 new jobs in Scotland. So isn't it the case that the Scottish people have a choice? The SNP increasing tax on working people while siding with the oil and gas giants or Labour creating jobs, bringing down bills and firmly on the side of working people? First Minister. First, I remind Anasawa when he talks about people in the midst of a cost of living crisis. He now has flip-flopped his way to being in a position where he believes on retaining the cap on the child benefits but wants to lift the cap on bankers' bonuses. It is utterly outrageous, and let me say to Anasawa that when I was in Aberdeen earlier this week, I cannot wait to go head-to-head with Anasawa in Aberdeen on the general election. In fact, he can debate the oil and gas industry and renew both of them in Aberdeen any and every single day of the week. Anasawa claims that the Labour and incoming Labour Government will make all sorts of investments. First Minister, just give me a moment. Let's ensure we carry on our proceedings with courtesy and respect. Anasawa claims that there will be a whole range and raft of investment from an incoming Labour Government. Of course, what is obvious is that the branch manager didn't get the memo that the £28 billion has been dumped, so not a single penny of that investment is going to be coming to Scotland. Successive UK Governments have taken £400 billion in today's prices and oil and gas revenue raided the North Sea as a cash cow, without investing a fraction of it back in the north-east and back in Aberdeen. With Anasawa's plans, he ended up with 100,000 workers on the scrap heap and no investment in our net zero ambitions. Isn't it about time that Scotland's energy was in Scotland's hands, Presiding Officer? Question number three, Maggie Chapman. To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government's position is on whether successive changes to national taxation policy in Scottish budgets will support the redistribution of wealth and help to sustain vital public services. In short, our changes to income tax in Scotland has made it more progressive. That approach means that we have an additional £1.5 billion to invest in 24-25 from income tax compared to if we had matched UK Government policy—something like Douglas Ross, of course—advocated at the time. That £1.5 billion being invested in public services to try and offset the huge impact on the availability of public spending by Westminster austerity. With further powers such as those that are needed to tax wealth effectively, we could do so much more to build on our progressive tax system and, of course, further protect public services here in Scotland. I thank the First Minister for that answer. We all have too many constituents struggling with grinding poverty for whom public services are a lifeline. I am proud that tax changes, which the Scottish Greens have championed, mean that that £1.5 billion more is available for those services. Tax changes, which mean that the better off pay more and the people on lower incomes pay less. Those promising tax cuts must be honest about what services they would cut. The STUC has argued—the First Minister has just recognised that Scotland can and should do more to use tax powers to redistribute wealth and make the case that taxation is a public good. Can I ask the First Minister how he plans to build that consensus for progressive taxation as a force for good? The Government is absolutely committed, as I have said, to progressive taxation. I thank the STUC and others for the contribution that they have made in the Deputy First Minister engaged with a number of stakeholders in relation to our progressive taxation plans. We will continue to have that engagement with stakeholders, including the business community and the people of Scotland around our progressive taxation plans. After poll, poll tells us that the public support and public service investment is backed by progressive taxation. When Douglas Ross stood up in this chamber and urged the Scottish Government to follow the disastrous Liz Truss budget, it needs to have the humility to say how wrong he was. When Anna Sauer says that he will cut taxes for the highest earners, he needs to be honest about what public services will he cut. His tax plans in the round will reduce revenue by £561 million. Will that mean that he will scrap the Scottish child payment? Will it mean that he will scrap free prescriptions? Will it mean that he will scrap free bus travel? Or, as his finance spokesperson hinted just this week, will they end up scrapping free university education? We will continue our commitment to progressive tax nation to the social contract in Scotland, which provides tuition fees for higher education, provides widespread access to bus services, free prescriptions and a host of other benefits, and will, of course, seek common cause with others such as the STUC who believe in progressive taxation. Colin Beattie The Scottish Government's progressive tax plans helped to deliver a strong social contract, ensuring additional targeted funding to protect people and our vital public services. Meanwhile, Scottish Labour's priorities appear to be elsewhere, seeming to indicate last weekend that they now support cutting income tax. Can the First Minister provide any update regarding what assessment the Scottish Government has made of the impact that this could have on Scotland's public finances and the Scottish Government's ability to fund public services? From the Conservatives, if we would follow their budget proposals, we would have £1.5 billion less to spend. We know from Anna Sauer's tax policies in the round that we think that there would be about £561 million less to spend and invest in our NHS, in our education, in our justice services and in social security. Anna Sauer has made the point that those earning, for example £30,000, pay more here in Scotland. They pay £94 a month more. For that, of course, get free university education. Get the most generous childcare offer anywhere in the UK. End up not paying a single penny for their medicines. Ensure that they get free personal and nursing care and a whole range of other benefits. That is why poll after poll shows that the public are supportive of progressive taxation if it is used, as we are doing, to invest in our public services. If Labour wants to continue to give people like Anna Sauer a huge tax cut, which will end up, of course, reducing the revenue that we have to spend in public services, it has to have the honesty to say what public services he will be cutting. To ask the First Minister regarding the delivery of the Scottish Government's recently published depopulation action plan, what will be different about this approach, which is described as local by default national by agreement, particularly towards the approval of new developments supported by local communities? The addressing depopulation action plan does set out the Scottish Government's strategic approach, aimed at supporting local communities that are facing population decline and a noticeable issue that the member has a significant interest in. Of course, that is set against the very devastating impact that a hard Brexit is having on a rural and island community. In terms of what the plan will do, it will deliver a whole new programme of work that will support and empower affected areas through funding, new research, enhanced partnership working with those local communities. We do acknowledge, as Fergus Ewing has said, the importance of local leadership and that communities are best placed to respond to their own challenges. Fergus Ewing, young people leaving Scotland for other countries forever for their lifetime, has been Scotland's tragedy and our shame. Therefore, will he, where there is a chronic depopulation problem, now agree that economic developments, which would bring major jobs and major community benefits, will henceforth be treated as developments of national economic significance? More than happy to look at that proposal. Of course, when planning applications are called into the Scottish Government, the whole range of factors are considered. Of course, the natural environmental impact but also the economic impact is important. I will not comment on any specific live application, but Fergus Ewing is absolutely right. If we want to retain our young people, we have to ensure that we create the economic opportunities, we have to ensure that we invest in the housing that we are doing through our affordable housing supply programme in our rural communities and we have to ensure that we invest in the connectivity that we are also doing as well. Fergus Ewing makes some very important points, but what is devastating our rural communities undoubtedly is the hard damage that has been called by a hard Brexit foisted upon Scotland against it very well. Housing was mentioned 114 times in the depopulation action plan, yet homes for Scotland were not consulted on the plan, nor were they even aware of it, despite being advisers for housing to 2040. Does the First Minister accept the failure to properly consult the sector on this plan as a huge misstep, and what action will he take to rectify this? We engage regularly with stakeholders. If there has been an omission, of course, I am more than happy to look at that, and I will ask the appropriate minister to do so. I go back to the point that I made to my response to Fergus Ewing. Housing in rural communities is absolutely essential when it comes to retaining and indeed attracting people to rural and island communities. We published our rural and island housing action plan, which was published in October last year. It sets out a wide range of action that we are taking to support rural and island population. That includes continued investment in affordable housing and, of course, 10 per cent of those affordable houses being in rural and island communities. We continue to support communities through our rural and island housing fund to bring forward housing where they wish to do so—up to £25 million, of course, from the affordable housing budget over the next five years to support housing for key workers in a whole range of other action, which I am happy for the housing minister to write to Pam Gosol to give her confidence that we take seriously the issue of housing in our rural and island communities. To ask the First Minister whether the Scottish Government still has a policy of a presumption against any new oil and gas licences? Oil and gas continues to play an important part in Scotland's energy transition. Our focus is on meeting energy security needs, reducing emissions in line with climate goals and ensuring that just transition for workforces is north of the oil and gas resources inevitably decline. As part of that approach, our draft energy strategy and just transition plan consulted on a presumption against licencing of new exploration of oil and gas. We have never proposed a position of no new licencing at all. Unlike the Conservatives, we are not ignoring the scale of the climate crisis that is befalling our planet. We will work with the energy industry to accelerate that transition to net zero where we can. Presiding Officer, the First Minister makes one trip up to Aberdeen and then masquerades as the saviour of the oil and gas industry. He must think that the people of the north-east are buttoned up the back. He is against Cambo, he is against Roseback and his Government still has a presumption against any new oil and gas licences. Will the First Minister tell the chamber today why he is in favour of importing more oil and gas, stopping new investment, which, as the First Minister knows, means throwing away thousands of livelihoods on the scrap heap? Of course, if Donald Ross knew what he was talking about, he would know that the vast majority of oil that is extracted from the North Sea gets exported overseas, Presiding Officer. But what is clear to me, what is clear to the people of Scotland, what is clear to the people of the north-east is that Westminster is not working for Scotland for decades. The Conservatives have been telling the people of Scotland that Scotland's oil is running out. Now, all of a sudden, they are pretending that it is going to be lasting forever. Successive UK Governments have used the north-east as a cash cow, squandering £400 billion in today's prices of oil and gas revenues. Whether it is the Conservatives or Labour, whose policies, of course, can end up throwing 100,000 workers on the scrap heap, Westminster cannot be trusted with Scotland's natural resources. It is high time that Scotland's energy was in Scotland's hand, so we can ensure cheaper bills, so we can ensure that we unleash the economic potential of the Green Revolution and, of course, that we can help to tackle the climate crisis. I welcome the First Minister's visit to Aberdeen this week and the engagement that he has had with the oil and gas sector. I ask the First Minister if that engagement with the oil and gas sector will continue, particularly regarding retaining and increasing the vital investment needed to deliver a just transition following the deeply concerning warnings that Labour's aggressive plans for the North Sea will put 100,000 jobs at risk, which is really serious for my constituents in Aberdeen, the north-east and beyond. Many of those in the north-east of Scotland will have just seen the fact that Kevin Stewart is standing up for his constituents, not using Scottish Government figures, but using industry figures that say that Labour's plans could risk up to 100,000 jobs, and we will hear Labour laughing, laughing at Kevin Stewart, laughing at the people of Aberdeen and laughing at our oil and gas workers, who, of course, have done an incredible job for Scotland over decades and continue to do an excellent job for Scotland. Let me reiterate what I have already said in previous exchanges, is that we support, in the SNP, a windfall tax. Of that, there is no doubt. What we do not support is aggressive plans by Labour, not just to increase that windfall tax, but of course to raid the north-east so that it can pay for new nuclear power plants in England. That is unfair. That is not acceptable. We believe in accelerating that transition to net zero. The oil and gas workers, who are incredibly skilled, and who have incredible expertise, will be absolutely vital to that trust transition. I can promise them that, as long as the SNP is in government, we will protect them from those damaging plans by cure stammer, by Labour, which would end up seeing them thrown on the scrap heap. To ask the First Minister what the Scottish Government's responses to the analysis by Citizens Advice Scotland, suggesting that over 660,000 people are experiencing mental health problems due to increasing household debt. The Scottish Government remains deeply concerned about the impact of the cost of living crisis, especially on those who are already struggling with poor mental health and money worries. We know that that is leading to far more people seeking advice and support, which is why we support free welfare debt and income maximisation advice services, with funding of over £12.5 million allocated this year. Mental health remains a priority, and we have supported overall increases to mental health spend over the years. Through our 24-25 budget, the Scottish Government and NHS boards will continue to spend an excess of £1.3 billion for mental health. More widely, recognising the pressures on household budgets, since 2022-23, we continue to allocate around £3 billion a year to policies that tackle poverty and protect as far as we possibly can people during the on-going cost of living crisis. Paul Sweeney. First Minister, people increasingly have nowhere to turn when their mental health deteriorates. Patients in some health boards are waiting over 1,000 days to start psychological therapy, and one in four consultant psychiatry positions are vacant. What is his Government's response to cut £30 million more from the mental health budget, despite already being £180 million adrift from the target? First Minister, when will your Government start to take the crisis in mental health seriously and reverse the proposed cut to mental health funding in the budget? Let me just correct Paul Sweeney on some issues in relation to our funding. We have a good track record on spending on mental health. That has been in the face of 14 years of austerity under the SNP. Mental health spending by NHS Scotland has doubled in cash terms from £651 million in 2006-07 to £1.3 billion in 2021-22 up by almost 100 per cent. Expenditure on CAMHS rose from £88 million in 2020-21 to £97.6 million in 2021-22. Of course, we have had challenges in the budget that we have just announced, but we have ensured that we are doing what we can to invest in mental health. What I would say to Paul Sweeney was right to reference the citizens of Vice Scotland report earlier, the cost of living crisis is undoubtedly a source of deep mental health anguish for too many households up and down the country. We will continue to invest in that. What is worrying, of course, is that Paul Sweeney's party believes in retaining, for example, the two-child limit. The person who is likely to be the next chancellor of the UK has promised, and I quote, to be tougher than the Tories on benefits. Through our actions, we have lifted last year an estimated 90,000 children out of poverty, so the Scottish Government will invest in helping people with debt, reducing the cost of living. However, how much better would it be, if we did not have to continue to mitigate the worst excesses and harm of Westminster, but instead took all the decisions about Scotland here in Scotland? First Minister outlined how increased funding for discretionary housing payments, for example, the impact on mental health issues in Scotland, will help to make up for the chronically insufficient UK housing benefits funding and how we in Scotland maximise support for low-income households here in Scotland. Willie Coffey makes an exceptionally important point. The damage done by the UK Government's three-year freeze to local housing allowance has been considerable, with an estimated £819 million that has been lost. That coupled with the cruel bedroom tax policy is undoubtedly causing great harm indeed. While the Labour Party is failing to offer any change to those devastating policies, the Scottish Government will take action. We are investing an additional £6 million in discretionary housing payments, bringing the total to more than £90 million to mitigate all of those cuts. That is helping more than 90,000 low-income households to pay their rent and to keep their homes. We move to constituency and general supplementaries, and I call Jackson Carlaw. Thank you, Presiding Officer. Will the First Minister join me in offering his congratulations to my constituent, Henry Wuga? Henry escaped the Nazi Holocaust, travelling from Nuremberg to Glasgow in 1939, at the age of 15. Here he met his wife Ingrid, also a survivor, as a consequence of the Kindertransport, an event that was celebrated in the film One Life starring Sir Anthony Hopkins. Tomorrow, Henry turns 100 years of age. He has made a remarkable contribution to this country. I have tabled a motion supported by Paul O'Kane and Kirsten Oswald, MP, to tabling a similar motion in the House of Commons. Will he join me and I hope that the chamber in offering him many happy returns? I wish Henry Wuga a very happy 100th birthday. Indeed, I have written to Henry myself personally in order to pass on my personal congratulations to him. Jackson Carlaw is right. Henry Wuga is an absolute inspiration. It was just a number of weeks ago that Jackson Carlaw and I—many members in the chamber—were commemorating Holocaust Memorial Day. We heard very powerful testimonies from a number of those who were either survivors or families of survivors of Holocaust and, indeed, other genocides. The work that Henry has personally done over the decades in helping to remind and inform people of the horrors of the Holocaust, which should never ever be forgotten by any of us, is truly an inspiration for each and every single person in this country. I want to pass on my congratulations. The best wish is, of course, for his birthday, but I want to put on record my appreciation, the Scottish Government's appreciation. I think that the whole country's appreciation for the incredible work that Henry Wuga has done, particularly in reminding us of the horrors of the Holocaust and saying that we should never ever forget them, reflect on them and, of course, work together to ensure that we see peace right across the world wherever we see violence, wherever we see discrimination, be it here at home or, indeed, abroad. Jackie Baillie Scotland's NHS is directionless, risking patient safety and on the brink of breakdown. Not my words, Presiding Officer. That is owed at Scotland's assessment of the NHS under the SNP. In a devastating critique of the Government, it points to a health service at breaking point with extreme overcrowding and long waiting times threatening patient safety. It accuses the SNP Government of having no vision and calls for fundamental reform. The need for leadership is clear, but it is absent. After 17 years of decline under the SNP, what reforms will he bring forward to save our NHS? Of course, we will bring forward. Reforms in the health secretary will detail that. That will work with staff to ensure to see what we can do, particularly in the preventative space, to see what more we can invest so individuals don't have to go particularly to secondary care and primary care, but particularly secondary care, where we know there's intense pressure on our hospital sites right up and down the country. However, in 17 years, let me remind Jackie Baillie, of course, that we have record staffing in the NHS. We have record investment in the NHS. We have the best-paid staff in the NHS. Of course, we are the only country in the entire UK that has not lost a single day to strike action. I stand to be corrected, but I think that today there are junior doctor strikes in Labour-run NHS Wales, Presiding Officer. We'll continue to invest in our NHS. We'll continue to invest, most importantly, in the people who run the NHS—our nurses, our doctors, of course all of the NHS, the gender for change staff—who do an incredible job, and we promise to continue to work with them for the best possible outcomes for patients across Scotland. Thank you, Presiding Officer. First Minister, this coming Saturday will be two years to the day that Russia launched an unprovoked, brutal and illegal invasion of Ukraine. Putin's conflict still rages on. Hundreds of thousands of soldiers and civilians have been killed and maimed with vast areas of Ukraine in many of its towns and cities, devastated with millions displaced. Scotland opened its doors and hearts to Ukrainian refugees, but the war also costs energy price rises and economic shocks. What assessment has the Scottish Government made of the impact on households affected by poverty and the cost of living crisis of the on-going war against Ukraine? What message of solidarity will the First Minister send to the Ukrainian people, particularly the 26,000 who now call Scotland home? I'm very grateful to Kenneth Gibson for raising this remarkably important issue. I'll be joining others as I expect across this chamber on Saturday to commemorate that and reflect on the two-year illegal invasion by Russia into Ukraine, which we condemn in the strongest possible manner. We continue to be shocked. We continue to be appalled at the violence and the humanitarian crisis that is unfolding and continues to unfold in Ukraine again because of Russia's illegal action. Scotland stands by Ukraine, we stand for democracy, we stand for human rights, we stand for the rule of law at home and indeed abroad. We offer our unqualified support for Ukrainian sovereignty and we wish a speedy victory for Ukraine and a resolution that has to not just restore peace but ensure Ukrainian sovereignty, democracy, independence and territorial integrity. Since the war against Ukraine began, over 26,600 people sponsored by an individual in Scotland or the Scottish Government have arrived in the UK as of 22 February this year. I'm proud of how Scotland and the people of Scotland have responded to this humanitarian crisis. I'm grateful to all those who have opened their homes and their hearts to displaced Ukrainians who are fleeing the war and so long as those who have fled the war and come to Scotland for as long as they want to call Scotland their home, they will always be given the warmest welcome possible. The appearance of Clare Ingalls has spent more than two years desperately trying to get answers. Ian and Fiona still don't know why her killer was in five separate bail orders and they've now discovered that social workers tried to warn Clare about her violent new partner but no one answered the door and 72 hours later she was killed. A council review failed to answer critical questions and I'm not putting the first minister on the spot, this isn't about party politics, this is about violence against women but I urge them to please look again at Ian and Fiona's request for a thorough and independent review. I will genuinely look at that request again and see what further we can do in terms of any further independent review into this case. I can completely understand the deep sense of grief and anger that Ian and Fiona are feeling. Russell Finlay will know that I wrote to the Lord President, the Lord Advocate on the issue and I passed on those responses to Russell Finlay earlier on. Many of the decisions that were taken at the time would have been for the independent judiciary to determine on the questions and potential failures that Ian and Fiona Ingalls have articulated in relation to local authority action. I will look at what Russell Finlay has asked me to do and I will consider what further more we are able to do and if there is anything further that we can do in relation to an independent review and I'll revert back to Russell Finlay directly. Michael Marra This week, teachers in Aberdeen told the BBC that they were scared to go to work because of rising violence in schools. A recent survey carried out by the EIS in Aberdeen found that nearly 40 per cent of teachers had been physically assaulted by a pupil. Those statistics should shock us all, and they demand action from a Government that has taken its eye off the ball and allowed this problem to grow and grow. Scottish Labour is clear that we must take a zero-tolerance approach to violence in our schools. Can I ask the First Minister exactly how much violence is he prepared to tolerate before he acts? Most people will unfortunately see that this is an issue that Michael Marra was choosing to politicise and create as a partisan issue. As always, in his suggestion somehow that having a slogan about zero-tolerance will suddenly make the issue better, I'm afraid, is a complete failure of credibility on his part. What I would say is that we are working with the teaching profession because there are very serious issues that are being raised by teachers up and down the country. We take those issues extremely seriously. The Cabinet Secretary for Education has hosted a number of summits, again with educational professionals and teachers, in particular to see what more we can do. We've commissioned, as Michael Marra will probably know, behaviour in school, Scottish school research in order to establish the true picture, the evidential basis at a national level of teachers and support staff's experience of behaviour in publicly funded mainstream schools. The results of the 2023 research highlighted that most children and young people are well behaved in class in schools. It also tells us about that level of disruption that exists. It is clearly not good enough, and we are working with our partners in local government to bring forward a joint national action plan to drive improvements and to ensure that Michael Marra is kept up to date. Thank you. That concludes First Minister's questions. I seek your advice and understanding orders chapter 9, following the publication today of the stage 1 report of the national care service. The chamber has agreed a few weeks ago that the stage 1 debate should take place next Thursday. Members will know of my long-standing commitment to a national care service. Indeed, it is over a decade since I first proposed this, so what is currently happening troubles me immensely. I therefore seek your advice on two counts. Firstly, the conclusion of the report seems manifestly contrary to so much of the report's contents. Page after page of criticism appears to be ignored. It also appears that evidence given by the third sector and independent providers and those with lived experience is also ignored. Let's hear the member. The party whip has been imposed to get the bill over the line. Secondly, there is a question of the integrity of this Parliament's processes. Let me explain. Substantial changes are being made to the bill following a deal between COSLA and the Scottish Government. No evidence has been taken on this as it came too late in the process. It radically changes the governance of a national care service. I would be very grateful if we could hear the member. The reason I am asking is that I cannot address a comment or a contribution or a point of order if I cannot hear it. This is caused considerable disquiet in the care sector. Committee members of all political stripes have been trying to get the Scottish Government to bring forward their amendments so that they can be subject to scrutiny before stage 2 starts. They have written to, they have spoken to the minister, but the Government says no. One of the committee members even sought agreement to share the target operating model, which would have provided a direction of travel for the amendments. This, too, was refused. I am concerned that the Government does not yet have any amendments. Otherwise, why would they refuse to share them with the committee so that members can do their job and scrutinise them properly? There are unfortunate examples in this Parliament where the perception is that the committee did not do their job in scrutinising legislation. We should not let that happen again, as it is the integrity of this Parliament that is also at state. Can you, Presiding Officer, advise if there is an opportunity for the committee to reconsider their report in light of the arguments I have made and what would be the appropriate vehicle to achieve that? It is fair to say that I did not pick up all of the members' comments, so I will refer to them and refer back if required. However, I can confirm to the member that under the rule that she refers to, under 9.6.1, any member may by motion propose that the bill be referred back to the lead committee for a further report on general principles of the bill or on any particular part of the bill before the Parliament cites whether to agree to them. I seek your guidance on the appropriate conduct of members of this Parliament and your powers to safeguard members of the public, our staff, visitors in general, to be able to enter and leave this Parliament. Last night, members of the public seeking to enter this Parliament were obstructed and intimidated and all of that was orchestrated and trumpeted by a member of this Parliament, a Scottish Green MSP. That is surely an acceptable conduct for a member of the Scottish Parliament, to seek to prevent members of the public entering their own Parliament. I ask for your guidance on the following. What actions will now be taken in the light of last night's events to secure safe access for the public to enter their Parliament at all times, and what action will be taken against the member who I believe has brought disrepute to the Scottish Parliament because not only did he plan and conduct the obstruction and the demonstration, but he claimed responsibility for it. He sought to shut down this Parliament. We all believe in freedom of speech and the right to protest, but the right of the people of Scotland to come safely and securely into their Parliament and leave their Parliament when they choose to do so must also be safeguarded. I am not aware of all the circumstances that Mr Kerr refers to, but it is absolutely clear, I am sure to all of us, that the security of all building users and our guests is paramount. I can confirm that I am aware that there were extremely difficult circumstances last evening and that all our scheduled events were able to proceed. I am certainly grateful to our staff and to police colleagues who made that possible. I can assure all members that our procedures are very much kept under review and they are adjusted to where that is appropriate. I trust and I hope that we can all trust that, in your consideration of those issues, you will get a high priority to the absolutely essential role that the right of peaceful protest plays in our democracy and in the life of our Parliament. I have commented on the points raised. I am absolutely sure that all members here assembled understand the importance of the right of protest but also of the importance that we place on the rights of all building users and staff to do so securely and safely. We will now suspend this item of business before we move on to members' business. I will allow a moment for the gallery and the chamber to clear.