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


to compiantly handcuff the arrestee on the ground without further incident the subject was a black male age 21 there was one officer involved in this verbal direction given empty hand controls and handcuffing techniques the officer received multiple abrasions to their hand and wrist and the arrestee injured their elbow the next incident is a mental health suicidal male with a firearm collars stated she had just broken up with her boyfriend and that he was now in the bathroom with a loaded firearm threatening commit suicide during the standoff negotiations the subject was seen with a firearm negotiations were successful and subject agreed to come out of the residence officer provided lethal cover as officers took the male into protective custody and searched him to ensure he was not carrying a firearm this subject was a white male age 28 one officer pointed their firearm at the subject neither the officer nor the subject was injured the final incident is a misdemeanor arrest unlawful trespass callers stated they could see two individuals in a house they knew to be vacant with flashlights inside responding officers located two subjects inside the house the arrestee fret fled out the front door where the officer gave orders for the arrestee to stop at the arrestee attempted to flee the officer wrapped his arms around the arrestee and brought him safely to the ground where they were able to compiantly handcuff them and after after some initial resistance the second officer drew their firearm when the suspect suddenly opened the door and fled from the the residence then holstered his firearm and helped secure the arrestee uh the subject was a white male age 38 uh there were two officers involved one officer gave verbal commands and used empty hand control techniques the second officer displayed their firearm and used empty hand control techniques no one was injured in this incident and that concludes the use of force for the month of march uh thank you for that um any questions or comments uh Stephanie um two things uh my first question regards the case where a false claim was made by a woman are there consequences for that yes she would be charged with false reports and I and I don't know that specifically but I recall this incident occurring and having that conversation I would have to look at the exact incident to make sure that that was followed up on but there are certainly consequences to to making false allegations like that so I I'd like to be clear that there was a plethora of evidence at the scene and there was another individual present who made it clear that her false reports were recanting reports that she had made honestly and if you read into the incident there is an indication that the false report came because officers responded as requested and then swept to the location and I think there was a sense of concern that sweeping the location was actually going to result in an apprehension and that involved that included a recantation and then officers were and an insistence that the individual was no longer there at which point officers actually located the individual there thanks my other question really comment is the following for I think it would be very helpful to see a written report it's very hard to follow this and I you know I think we offered a template for kind of summarizing some of the demographic information but also I think a written report would really be welcome it might allow us to read it in advance and ask questions given that we have something written in front of us would that be possible yes I think that we can we can explore doing that and producing that I mean for us the issue here is the context it's not the the data or the way in which it shakes out it's the context of these incidents and the fact that each of them exists within its own universe as an incident with regard to a set of circumstances a set of justifications and parameters and whether or not those are appropriate that's absolutely a component of why we assess them yeah could I then I could follow up on that I appreciate that and the context is really helpful so when when you do a written report I mean it looks like DC Sullivan is reading from a document could we just see that because I do think the context is helpful and informative yeah I think I think you actually offered to post it tomorrow right Matt okay great awesome that that's good if we could see it initially rather than reading it I think he offered to to send it to everyone correct I did just because again this is not something that I created and so I was just going through it at first blush I see so I realized a lot of information and it probably would be more convenient to have a hard copy that you could reference thank you thanks Milo the floor is yours thank you so I also like the idea of having a copy email to us also posted to board docs and I do also I wouldn't want to replace having the information read during our meetings because I think it's important I think it's we have a lot of people in our community who don't really don't have a full understanding of the different situations that the police officers encounter so I think having it available to be continued to be read during the meetings and then also to be added to board doc is I think a crucial piece of community education thank you well taken point any further questions or comments with regards to the chiefs sorry the use of force or seeing or hearing any which moves us on to agenda item 6.01 which is commendations that have been received and for that I'll give it to Shannon. So I do have two gentlemen called and left me a voicemail thanking one of our corporals saying that he was very courteous and helpful and that he very much appreciated the officers help in returning his mountain bike that was stolen it had significant meaning to him as his father had given it to him and so he was expressing his thanks and helping the officer return his bicycle. This second accommodation involves several officers over several actually two different incidences the father wrote in to say that he appreciated the officers how the officers responded to seeing his son suffers from epilepsy and had a severe car crash this was back in 2019 he reports but that the officers had secured his personal items during that first initial crash the father stated then that they were concerned and had bought his son a bicycle who unfortunately suffered another epileptic seizure on his bicycle and had to be taken to the hospital for medical attention but that once again the officers secured the bike and all of his personal belongings and that they were returned to him when he was cleared from the hospital after his injuries and those are the two that came in last month. Awesome thank you for that. Moving on to agenda item 7.01 commissioner updates or comments time of the meeting if any commissioners have anything you want to say comment on or yeah I'm not seeing or hearing anything. I'm sorry this is Milo I was uh slow to hit unmute um I have a question uh question for the chief going back to um the we've talked about this before but I've not really felt that we've gotten a uh we've really got have not received what has been asked for so we had had that long discussion around the review of data and talked about specific data points that occurred during a certain type in certain times of day in the downtown area with specific officers and certain use of force um incidents that were occurring and we had asked for a strategic a strategic plan to address how these incidents might be able to be avoided but we got something else which was kind of a a long term overall plan but not a specific once again going back to a strategic plan to address that particular data point and it's really on my mind a lot because as we see um I was just reading today like UVM is doing a big Johnson and Johnson uh push for the students to get their vaccines you know we're easing up on restrictions as more people get vaccinated and just from your own words earlier about um you know expecting an increase in incidents you know we're going to look at the downtown activity starting to increase again so it would seem to me that it would be really important to to take a look at that right so I just wanted to bring that up again um ask you to look at that information again and you know see if you come up with a plan to address that um and I also think that it is something on the mind of the community um I was listening um and participating in the town hall last night and there was some interesting um things that you know came up related to you know someone talked about a feeling of needing specific trainer for you know staff staff in the the restaurants in the bars downtown that maybe we um you know they get a lot of training with regards to uh liquor laws and guidelines and things like that but additional training to assistant with you know interactions that you know can turn into fights within the bars outside of the bars I mean the officers who work the downtown corridors certainly have experience and I'm sure if you ask officers which bars do they think things you know tend to happen the most they're going to be able to say on the top of the head oh yeah this bar during around this time is where we're going to have problems right so um what what can be done to to attack that particular data point um so I'd really like you to think about that and I'd really like you to come forth with a plan to address it thank you this is all going to see your hand raised the floor is yours yeah I just wanted to add and share I know you're probably familiar with this from working downtown that BPD has in collaboration with DLC given cabaret cabaret training to bar staff for many many years and the BPD specific portion a lot of that is how to deal with problem patrons and then what the expectations are of the police department as far as calling it incidents and then what staff should do to avoid escalating situations but that's been going on for for many many years is there anything so that's good to hear um is there anything in terms of that current training um and actually let me ask if I may uh chairman have you had that training um in your other life uh my past life I'm hoping to go back to you very soon um if I recall I think we did something in 2012 it was so long ago though um that I can't really I can't really recall it but it was in 2012 we'd last did something I do remember about two three years ago maybe four years ago now it would have been back when the council roof was on the city council but they did a bison or intervention training type thing um with a couple of the box which I was offered to all bars only two showed up I brought one of us being one of them so there is things about there I don't know but I think it's not mandatory so it's like it's if your bosses want to do it and so so yeah um I hope that answers your question but yeah I I did that but it was god eight or nine years ago okay so um so there would seem then to be room for improvement so if it's not something that's mandatory maybe this is something that needs to be uh discussed between the department between the the city council uh between the business owners um to make it mandatory to make sure it um I don't think it would hurt for people to have refresher courses uh maybe update the subject matter uh so there seems to be just on this brief interaction uh possible room for um improvement with regards to that um and then that can certainly be something that's added in community engagement so that the public knows what's happening and then what additional um it's so hard because I haven't been on campus in a while I I generally when things are quote-unquote normal I'm on campus and I see a lot of things that the students are exposed to in terms of of targeting them for education um in terms of living in the community when they go off campus you know what what additionally can be done to to educate them right what can the universities do to really make students aware um because people have really felt I mean we all know we've all felt it this way you know everyone when people are I mean just that day on North Beach where just again everybody went crazy for a minute well as they all get vaccinated as everything's allowed to stay open later there's going to be issues that we'll have to deal with and I think that being proactive with education maybe asking the schools to do a little bit more and then maybe um engaging the businesses downtown a little bit more um would be helpful but yeah to really take a look at that how often is it offered um is it mandatory do the businesses require their staff to go through it at least once or once every two years or something like that um thank you uh sorry I said this is I'm sorry Landon first I've heard of you while and followed by DC Southern yeah just speaking to uh Milo's idea of having the UVM students obviously have some type of training I personally don't think that would really help the issue it's just there's kind of like I mean it happens everywhere you know it's a Friday Saturday night uh you know kids go out it just kind of happens and um it really is a bad position because Burlington is everybody comes to Burlington from around the state so it's not just UVM particularly obviously that is the biggest one but this is the place that all the kids go to no matter where so and then I also had a question why speaking of the North Beach incident why wasn't that broken up so uh that was an event that we learned of uh as as it was happening towards the end uh there were already there was already a tremendously large number of people down there and they weren't doing anything that was unlawful it's not unlawful to be in North Beach it's not unlawful to be out in public um certainly mask use is uh contrary to the governor's executive order but that's not an enforcement issue it's an engagement and education issue and while we can assume that there was perhaps underage drinking for example going on uh that's not something that is uh in a venue where drinking is permitted uh it is difficult to make engagement on underage drinking it's different when it's a house party a house party especially for example of high schoolers um but in an open-air environment where drinking is permitted as it is at North Beach that makes it a more complicated uh factor but um generally it had to do with the fact that it was there were well over a thousand people there prior to it coming to the awareness of law enforcement I know I know Sullivan uh GC Sullivan had a response to me though but I just wanted to say something real quick uh I mean a while ago if you had a single fire on the beach that was broken up by the police and considering that there was videos of a fight pit and other things going on I just speaking as a youth and somebody who is very connected to both the VHS and the UVM community a lot of kids are very angry because they put there it puts it's putting my graduation and others on the line because it's just not being enforced and UVM doesn't have the reach on the beach so who does and I'm pretty sure it was the police so DC Sullivan's hand raised yes no I just wanted to uh comment commissioner Grant had a great idea as far as mandating ongoing training I believe that it is a single requirement uh that DLC has that whenever anybody works in bars they need to go through that training preliminarily and so that training is offered in conjunction with DLC to try to capture as many of the bar staff as possible but it could be used to in association with the cabaret licensing the city could create a regulatory scheme where the employees have to go through some sort of ongoing training regime as a condition of receiving that cabaret license so I just wanted to comment that I think it's a very good idea I guess I also wanted to re-clarify um so we required by DLC to be trained I think like every two to three years uh to stay updated for like so we can like leave bartend but the only thing that's involved in that training is just like super basic it's like like it's basically dram shop laws and like over serving and things like that what we're criminally liable for by over serving it doesn't really involve anything about like how to like escalate anything in that regards it's strictly from a legal standpoint it was like over serving people um what I'm liable for if I over serve that person and those kind of things could that be expanded I think it absolutely should be but um yeah um that's something actually I'll I'll look into um any further questions or comments um for this agenda item which is commissioner questions or comments I'm not seeing or hearing anything um which brings us to next meeting agenda items um I'm gonna put on there revisiting um the Royal Police Commission uh there's just a couple things I want to codify that we're already doing right now um that so those so those practices just continue on to the future no matter the make love um um of the chiefs and us moving forward um with that I think technically we I forgot to adopt um agenda item 5.02 we only I think voted on amending things of that we actually didn't adopt it so I guess that we'll have to go to the next meeting um good because I think we only voted on I think technically we only voted on um just the amendments of that of about the body warm camera policy and we didn't actually move it okay um sweet so we did those amendments uh all that stuff I I propose that we adopt so how about for this I I propose that we adopt the the amendment sorry the policy with the amendments uh for Eileen to then I guess um work out with the the union to make sure it passes muster is that sound good sorry yeah you can propose that we you know propose that we adopt move that we adopt the amended um proposal in 5.02 or move that we advance the amended proposal so I thought I thought we approved that it's just uh the the entire policy I think has not been adopted to move forward with the amendment does that make sense right so that's that's the amended proposal yeah the you know with the amendments included okay uh sorry uh step you have your hand raised sorry I second the motion okay all in favor of adopting the amended body warm cameras camera release policy raise your hand to say aye that passes unanimously awesome so we have the revision the royal police commission for next meeting is anything else on the top of anyone's heads right now uh the training review an update on that yep training review um I guess tended also tentatively the next meeting will be on the 25th of May um that's the fourth Tuesday the Nancy Stetson's data reports should be ready by then also uh data person Nancy Stetson uh royal police commission and I guess nothing else I guess if anything comes up or anything we need to talk about please let me know and I'll add that to the agenda sorry Mila I'm sorry I've got one more thank you just what I was discussing just a strategic plan to address those glaring data points for the downtown area thank you okay add that to the agenda as well awesome uh and with that I think we have a couple things to talk about in executive session so um I guess for the record um we're gonna exit this portion of the meeting enter executive session and once that executive session is done there will be no actionable items and so the meeting will be done um it is 912 I desperately need to use the bathroom so I say we have to make a motion I I move that we enter executive session for the purpose of discussing disciplinary actions I second that motion in the discussion not hearing any all day with that raise your hand to say aye aye that passes unanimously um we're convening in eight seven so I'll see y'all uh seven minutes so we can be in seven minutes where that is 920 so see y'all then thank you to the public in


Personally, I'm not much of a go-to-the-gym kind of guy, but I gotta say, one of my favorite ways of exercising is with this VR game called Supernatural. It's an amazing workout experience where you flow and box to all kinds of great music alongside these trainers who really always just know what to say. They are uplifting and motivational and do a great job of keeping your spirits up, even if you're having a bad day. From top to bottom, the app is clearly made with a lot of care, and I can say without a doubt, it's worth it to get a VR headset for that very reason. A big shout out to the Supernatural team. You guys are awesome, and thank you for doing what you do.


Hello and welcome to Town Hall Meetings TV coverage of Town Hall Meeting Day 2024. This program is part of a series of forms we are bringing to you in advance of Town Meeting Day of Tuesday, March 5th. Town Meeting TV hosts forums with all candidates and covers the questions that you will see on your ballot, introducing you to the community decision makers, the community decision makers and connecting you with issues that shape your local community. You can also find your forms at cctv.org slash 2024 or at our Town Meeting TV YouTube channel where auto-generated captions are available. On tonight's program, we'll hear from candidates Rita Corey and Martine LaRocke-Gewick who are running for Burlington School Commissioner. Rita Corey is running Uncontested in Ward 1 and incumbent Martine LaRocke-Gewick is running Uncontested in Ward 4. Thank you all for joining us. We have prepared a list of questions for each of you and you will have 90 seconds to answer each question. If you're tuning in live, we also welcome your questions at<PHONE_NUMBER>. If you call in, we'll do our best to prioritize your question that we will screen calls to ensure that questions are not repeated. We ask that you share your name, the town you live in and the question be directed at the candidates, at both candidates, not just one in particular. Now let's get started with one minute opening statements. We'll start with you, Rita. Now, please tell us why you're running, how you're qualified to serve on the School Board and what will be different for Burlington Schools if you're elected. My name is Rita Corey and I'm running because I want to give back to the community. I went through the school system from K to 12 and I believe I'm qualified because I went through the school system, also went on to college, graduated and will be different if I was elected. I have a different outlook with going through the system, so different perspective. Thank you. Thank you so much, Skye and Corey, I'm so sorry, Rita.  This is my fourth term. I've been on the School Board for six years, I'm going into my seventh and I'm qualified because I've been in education as a teacher for most of my life. My two kids went through the Burlington School System. I'm actually Vice Chair of the Senate Education Committee in Montpelier at the state level and I'm a concerned citizen, which is really all it takes to be on a School Board. As someone who cares about kids, cares about education and wants to serve their community, that's what being on a School Board is all about. So I'm really happy to be here and happy to be running again. Fantastic, thank you. Now here's a question about the school budget. So do you support the school year's budget of $119.6 million and associated tax impact of 13.96% and how would you address the challenges facing, sorry, yeah, and how would you address the challenges facing the state education fund and impact on Burlington schools and taxpayers? So we'll start with the first question there. So do you support the school budget? I'll go ahead with you, Margin. Yeah, and do you want me to answer the subsequent question as well? Sure, go ahead. Sure, yeah, so I do support the budget. It is a big budget, but I can tell you, having worked closely with our superintendent and other folks in the administration, now we've really been careful about spending this year and we've basically level funded most of our programs. We're not adding anything new. We do, as most of you know, we do have the high school bond that is that we're starting to feel as taxpayers in the city for sure.  So there's that. In terms of the state education fund, you know, I'm getting a really interesting view of that just being in Montpelier and seeing the stresses that are put on that fund. It's not just paying for academics and for schools. Our education fund is now paying for deferred maintenance on buildings, which have, it's really become a crisis in our state. School meals and a lot of money spent toward making sure that our students have mental health supports along with many other programs that are necessary to keep our kids safe and able to learn. Thank you. And Rita? Yeah, I support the school budget. Although it has a large increase on taxpayers, I believe a new high school is needed instead of the downtown one. I think high school students deserve a real high school opportunity and experience. And part of the budget is to give, I believe, teachers a higher increase in wages. And that's a good way and opportunity to retain teachers back. And I'm not too familiar with the state education fund and what's really in it, so I can't speak much about it. Thank you. Now, the Burlington School District's current strategic plan identifies five priorities. Belonging and well-being, deeper learning for every student, reimagined high school, educators who look like our students, and relationship-based communities through restorative practices. Which of these are you most excited to work on and how will you do it? And we'll start with you, Rita. Most excited with the belonging and well-being aspect because when a student feels like they belong somewhere, they're happier, and they learn more, success is higher. And I will do that by speaking with others, communicating, showing your face, and just getting to know others. And Markine? Yeah, I just want to echo what Rita said. I think that belonging and well-being is incredibly important. We know that kids can't learn when they're under stress. We know that they can't learn when they're hungry, when they are having mental illness or other crises that are keeping them from being in a position where they can learn. So I think that's really important. I was on the strategic planning group that came together. It was a large group of community members who came together to work on the strategic plan. And I'm just so happy with the product that we ended up with. And I look forward to working on all of these priority areas, just continuing that work. I think our superintendent and all of our incredible faculty and staff in the district have really been working hard to focus on these, on these, each part of the, each priority in the strategic plan. And I just look forward to doing, continuing that. It's one way, the success of the strategic plan is one way that we can measure how well our district is doing and also how well our superintendent and his cabinet is doing. So I look forward to continuing this work. Great. Now, what would you say is the biggest challenge facing Burlington schools and how would you use your seat on the board to address this issue? And we'll start with you, Marjean. Yeah, that's a good one. So I do want to point out that whatever issues are facing Burlington, it's likely that there are other schools in our, in our state that are facing similar issues. So I would say having spent a chunk of my summer on a school construction aid task force, I really can't help but highlight the really horrible condition that many of our public school buildings are in. As a lot of you know, in 2007 there was a moratorium on school construction aid. So districts that used to get, you know, 30% aid from the state suddenly were no longer getting any help. So the burden really got placed on municipalities and taxpayers. And so what happened was districts, when they put out their budgets and people were voting on their budgets, they often had to choose between, you know, do we keep this teacher, do we keep this program, or do we fix this leaky roof? And so it ended up being this very, very difficult choice. And oftentimes voters and school boards chose keeping that teacher, that fabulous teacher that was making, you know, huge inroads with kids versus fixing the leaky roof because they weren't getting any help. So what's happened now is we just have hundreds of millions of dollars worth of, of issues that need to be fixed. So I can't help but highlight that as, as a really big issue. And it's one that Burlington is facing as well.  Thank you. Yeah, Rita. For me, I'll say probably I'll go with wages for teachers. Education is very expensive and it's hard to make ends meet and I believe the teachers get paid more. The retention rate will return and yeah, teachers are very important for education and learning and building, building, um, connection with students. Great. And about the students. So how can Burlington school's best support neurodivergent students, for example? I'll say, um, having one-on-one support in different techniques because different students learn different ways, maybe visual and things like that. Got it. Um, Martine? Yeah. It's incredibly important. We know that, uh, people learn in different ways and people have various strengths and weaknesses and neurodivergence is, is part of our tapestry of, uh, learners in our district for sure. There are a lot of things we can do. One, I have to come back to the physical space. I mean, again, that's really, really important. So as we think about what our schools are going to look like in the future, making sure that they are, um, you know, calm spaces, that there's natural light focusing on air quality and safety and making sure that our, our students feel comfortable and are, again, comes back to, you know, able to learn. That's really important. Um, yeah. And then of course, a lot of our, I would say all of our teachers understand how to differentiate their instruction to students in their classroom. That's been around for many, many years. So I would say just continuing that ability to, as Rita was saying, you know, teach differently for different students. And we call that differentiation and it's really important in the classroom. Right. Now, how can the school district ensure the safety of its students and teachers in our schools and in the community? Rita, would you like to start with that one? Um, I'll say continue having, instead of having, when I went and I saw the Umbrellton High School, they don't have police officers no more. I like how they have, um, I don't know what the term they call it now. School resources officers? Yeah, school resource officers. I like that because sometimes police officers are intimidating and hard to approach. And the resource officers, I see a lot of kids have good communication with them and easily able to talk with them. And I believe connections are important. Um, Markine? Yeah. I agree with everything that Rita said for sure, um, absolutely 100% public safety and focusing on that is really important. I also just think big picture, you know, one way we ensure safety in our communities is making, is by making sure that everyone is cared for, right? And that everyone has what they need to be happy and healthy. Um, we're seeing, I know I'm going big picture here, but as we see greater income inequality in our society, as we see, you know, addiction and homelessness in these big, big issues that we must focus on, you know, I also have to bring it back to the importance of education because education is preventative, right? When we look at educating folks, we think about giving people opportunities and giving them, um, you know, the chance to, to thrive in our society and we talk a lot about this American dream and this idea of an American dream, but it can't be achieved without an incredibly robust education system for everybody. So, um, you know, it's a symbiotic relationship for sure. Great. Now, um, how do you think that Burlington Schools can best support student mental health? And we'll start with you, Martín. That's a tough one. Um, I can tell you right now in the Senate, we're looking at a variety of bills. One is a bill that would ban cell phones in schools. We've had a lot of pushback on that bill, but I can tell you we've also heard from folks who really believe that social media and excessive cell phone use is, is detrimental to student mental health and well-being. So, we are weighing the pros and cons right now of that, um, but I really do think we need to continue to think about, um, the use of social media and the use of cell phones. Whether we, we have this ban or not, I think it's something that we all need to keep talking about. Um, again, you know, mental health is about well-being, wellness, good health, um, a secure environment to live in, um, so all of these things are, again, I keep bringing back the symbiotic nature of a healthy society. Um, and that is one way that we can support, um, mental health. I also, I just have to say, um, I recently read the Surgeon General's latest report, which is on low loneliness and isolation, and I found that really, really fascinating. I think students need more of an opportunity to get together, to be in a space where they can create, where they can have fun, um, and where they can be with each other off of their devices and just be, I think that's really important, so I want to focus on that as well. And, um, Rita, what do you think? I would say, um, great spaces where students feel safe and they can talk with each other and I'll also say, maybe like a gym, because the old high school had a, um, gym where students can go after school, work out, and I think fitness is a good opportunity and way to, um, build mental health and improve it. Now last year's standardized test results suggest that a proportion of Vermont students, um, proficiency in math and in English decreased during the pandemic and has not made significant improvements since. So how would you measure the success of the school district? And we'll start with you, Rita. I would say, um, I believe standardized test is not a good indication of success and I think a different, um, mechanism should be used to, um, measure it. I'm not sure what, but, um, that's what I think and yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Go ahead. Yeah. Hi. You know what? I, Rita is saying it really, really well. I think a standardized test should be one tool in a toolbox, but it certainly shouldn't be the only thing that we're addressing and testing, which seems to be something we do a lot is like we look at those standardized test results. Um, I think we should look at to our earlier point, I think that we both made mental health, uh, wellness, how happy our kids, how many extracurricular activities are they engaging in? Are they doing sports? How do they spend their time after school? Are they going home and sitting on their phones or are they engaged in their community? These are all things that I think we need to be looking at and, and using those as measures of success. Um, and then in terms of, yeah, the math and English scores, I just think, you know, the pandemic was just really set us back. I think we need to, um, shore up our resources and our energies and really put them, um, in places, uh, where we can make a big difference. There are a lot of bills in the Senate and the House right now that revolve around literacy. Um, so if some of those bills get through, I think we're going to be able to really strengthen what we're doing around teaching kids how to read. Great. Now, let's talk a bit about language access. So how can the Burlington School District meet the needs of students and families whose primary language is not English? And we'll start with you, Martine. I was, I had the privilege of knowing how to speak English when we moved to Vermont in 1972, so back in the, in the, in the old days. Um, so I can speak to this from a policy issue, but, um, I look forward to hearing what Rita has to say as well. I know that we have amazing, um, multilingual liaisons who do incredible work, not just with students, but with families. We have parent university which supports families and really tries to, you know, teach parents what it's like to raise a kid in the United States. I think these are very important tools that we have here in the Burlington School District. And Rita? Yeah, I think, um, School District does a good job. There's a lot of, um, translators for different languages. And also, they have an ESL course. When I came to America, I didn't really speak English, and I was part of that. And parents also have the opportunity to take English classes and learn through that. My parents took part of that. And yeah, I believe doing a good job, and you don't really need to improve it much. Great. Now, um, what do you understand to be the current level of morale in the district? And what, what is the role of the school, school board in retaining good teachers and support staff? And Martine, we'll start with you. That is such a good question. I think morale and climate has ebbed and flowed over the years for sure. And it's a really, really important issue. I feel as though when teachers and staff are energized about their job, when they love what they're doing, they show up to work and they're, and they're happy to be there. And I generally think that is the case for many of our educators in Burlington. We have incredible people who are so dedicated to our kids, to our, our families. And so I, I, you know, I want to give them all a shout out for sure. But yeah, you know, this is something we've talked a lot about on the board is retaining principals, retaining teachers, having the year after year stability is so important for student success. It's something that we need to work on, that we are working on, but it's, it's critical.  I mean, we had the pandemic and right after the pandemic, our high school closed. We had to move into an abandoned department store. I mean, this, it does put stress on our educators for sure and our, and our administrators on our students. So, you know, we're getting through it, but I think we all look forward to the day where we have, where we have a campus and a high school that is safe and healthy for everybody. Definitely. Thank you. Now, Rita. I believe our educators are really good working hard and our job and role as a school board is to reward them. As I said earlier, we have to try to find ways in the budget, increase their wages and a package for them somehow, some way. And I'll play a big role in retaining good teachers and support staff. Great. And, and now let's go on to any closing comments that you might have. So, Rita, would you like to start? Just happy to be here, give my view a viewpoint and thank you for having me. Martina. Yeah. Thanks. Thanks so much, Channel 17. I always like showing up and supporting you. I'll do wonderful work and it's so important to the success of our democracy to have small news outlets like Channel 17. So keep up the good work. I'm also really thrilled that Rita is stepping up to serve his community and serve on the school board. It's going to be great for all of us to have him closing remarks. You know, I, I keep saying the same thing over and over again, but education is absolutely critical to our democracy. It's critical to the success of our, of our kids who might not have all of the advantages that some folks in our country have. The system is generally rigged toward, you know, supporting privilege. And so those of us who might not have been born into privilege, you know, it's a, it's a harder, it's a harder road. And so I think education really plays an important role in trying to narrow the opportunity gap and narrow the achievement gap. And I think in Burlington we really strive to do that. And I just want to continue doing that work. It's critically important. Fantastic. Thank you so much, both of you, for coming out today. Now, and thank you for tuning in to Town Meetings TV ongoing coverage of local candidates, local budgets and ballot items. You can find this and many other forms at cctv.org slash 2024 or on our Town Meeting TV YouTube channel, and you can tune in onto our live election results show after you cast your ballot on March 5th. Contact your local clerk to find out how to obtain a ballot and to register and how to register to vote. In Vermont, you can register to vote on Election Day. Thank you for watching and sharing Town Meeting TV.