Labour increased taxes by £40 billion in yesterday’s Halloween budget—the biggest tax heist ever. Anas Sarwar’s party put up national insurance, whisky duty, inheritance tax and North Sea taxes. It brought in a family-farm tax, pension tax and VAT on independent schools. Labour has chosen to hammer workers and to declare war on business, but the Scottish National Party’s Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government described Labour’s budget as

“a step in the right direction”. [Interruption.]

Let us hear Mr Findlay.

If a £40 billion tax rise is just

“a step in the right direction”,

how much does the First Minister think the rise should be?

I have sympathy with the Labour Government in the United Kingdom in that it has inherited an entirely unsustainable set of circumstances in the public finances, because of the absolutely menacing agenda of the Conservative Government for 14 years. It is the ultimate deceit for Mr Findlay and the Conservatives to criticise those of us who must take difficult decisions to clear up the mess that the Conservatives have created.

It is nice to hear the First Minister defending Labour for shamelessly breaking its promises not to raise taxes on working people. The Office for Budget Responsibility has said that the vast majority of Labour’s national insurance rise

“will be passed on to workers.”

That comes after years of crippling SNP tax rises. Scotland’s taxpayers cannot afford and do not deserve more taxes next year—they need a break after years of the SNP swiping their cash. Is it not about time that John Swinney considered reducing income tax for hard-working Scots?

Russell Findlay misconstrues the remarks that I am making. It is up to the Labour Party to defend its position.

I will set out my analysis of the horror show that the Conservatives have inflicted on this country through their management of the economy for the past 14 years. It is an absolute horror show that the Conservatives have inflicted on our public services, on working people in this country, on people with any vulnerability and on anybody who is paying a mortgage. Every one of them has been punished by the incompetence of the Conservative Government. Mr Findlay—I know that he does not like this—was one of those who told me that I had to follow in Liz Truss’s footsteps. Thank goodness I never did that in any of my decisions.

I say to Russell Findlay that we have taken decisions to increase tax in Scotland because we wanted to invest in our public services. That investment has improved our public services to meet the needs of people in Scotland. We have faced the reality. If Mr Findlay wants to stand here and defend spending cuts to the people of Scotland, he is welcome to do so. I will not follow in his footsteps.

I tell you what, John Swinney has got some front. He is the man whose dirty fingerprints are all over the trams scandal, the ferries scandal, the Salmond inquiry scandal and the named-person scandal. How much have this man’s mistakes cost all of us? I am on the side of Scotland’s taxpayers, who want fairness and justice.

The same goes for Scottish business, which has been quick to cast its verdict on Labour’s tax-raising budget. The Scottish Hospitality Group, the Scotch Whisky Association, Offshore Energies UK and the NFU Scotland have all hit out. Labour has broken its promises to businesses. Will John Swinney keep his pledge, which was made in last month’s programme for government, to support Scottish business owners? Will he now act decisively to cut taxes on Scottish business?

It is part of my duty as First Minister to ensure that Parliament is properly informed about its history. That has been part of my duty since I have been here—since the very beginning.

On the question of trams, I did not want to spend a single farthing on the trams. I wanted to spend that £500 million on dualling the A9, but the Tories forced me to spend it on trams. [ Interruption .]

Let us hear one another.

It is so important that Mr Findlay does not do anything that might mislead Parliament, and it is part of my duty to correct his mistakes when he comes to the chamber.

When it comes to working with Scottish business, I am delighted with the engagement that the Deputy First Minister is taking forward in leading the Government’s approach to investment and dialogue with business. I look forward to discussing those issues when I attend Scottish Financial Enterprise’s annual event tonight in the city of Glasgow. I look forward to discussing the success of the financial sector in the competitive climate that we create in Scotland. That is what business will get from my Government.

I think that I have touched a nerve. [ Interruption .]

Let us hear Mr Findlay.

John Swinney protests his honesty, but let us not forget that the trams inquiry found that he was responsible for a “lack of candour”.

The tax burden on Scottish workers and businesses is far too high, but the SNP and Labour think that they are entitled to keep taking more and more, while Scotland’s public services get worse and worse. That drives the disconnect between politicians and people. John Swinney could go another way with the Scottish budget: the SNP could stop raising taxes and let people keep more of their own hard-earned money. Why will John Swinney not look to bring down bills for Scottish workers and businesses?

Mr Findlay is standing in front of me arguing for a reduction in taxation. The problem with what he and his colleagues bring to the Parliament is that that would involve a reduction in public expenditure.

That is not correct.

I am being told that that is not correct, so I will say it again, because that is what is involved.

If we reduce taxation, we must reduce public expenditure by a commensurate amount, because we have to balance the budget. Of course, we have done that for 17 continuous years as the Scottish Government. The problem is that Mr Findlay is talking about tax cuts. Every other day of the week, the Tories are demanding that we spend more money on various aspects of public services. When Mr Findlay talks about touching nerves, the issue is not that he has touched a raw nerve in me; the issue is the nerve of Mr Findlay, who comes to the Parliament calling for reductions in tax when he wants us to spend more. That takes some nerve.