 I call on the cabinet secretary, Fergus Ewing, to speak to and to move the motion. I am delighted to open the stage 1 debate on the South of Scotland Enterprise Bill, a significant day for the South of Scotland. Members will recall that, in May 2016, the First Minister announced an end review of the enterprise and skill system. We wanted to ensure that it was delivering effectively for the people of Scotland. One of the key recommendations of the review was to establish a new enterprise agency for the South of Scotland. The bill establishes that new body, an organisation that will focus on inclusive growth, supporting a diverse and resilient economy, an organisation able to respond to the different and distinct rural economy of the South of Scotland, an organisation welcomed by the South. I am proud to be the minister leading the bill through Parliament. I wish to thank the rural economy and connectivity committee for their careful and thorough stage 1 scrutiny and the other committees that contributed. The report fully supports the creation of a new enterprise agency for the South of Scotland quotes and supports the general principles of the bill and recommends to Parliament that it be agreed. The report goes on to make a number of helpful recommendations and observations about the detail of the bill, and I have offered a written response to the committee on those. I look forward to further consideration of their recommendations and points made today. We could not have got here without the support of those in the South of Scotland. Work has been informed by the people of the South of Scotland. We have listened to what they have said and have responded, and many people have offered their views. I am particularly grateful to the 268 folk who took the time to respond to our pre-legislative consultation. Almost 90 per cent of those agreed with our vision, and more than 500 people attended public meetings last year. The committee also benefited from 120 responses submitted in response to its call for views. Continuing engagement remains key as the legislative process, and we take forward work to establish the agency. I want to make sure that the agency is rooted in the south and driven by the south. My officials were in Gala Shields and Cacubrie last week, Presiding Officer, hearing from over 50 community representatives. I welcome the future events that the South of Scotland economic partnership will run later in spring and early summer, and those events will provide an opportunity for both individuals and businesses to continue to shape our work. Let me say a bit about the South of Scotland economic partnership. We establish it as an interim measure, while we are taking through legislation to establish the agency itself. The partnership brings together the public, private, third and education sectors to support activity across the area. In its first year, it is bringing a fresh approach to economic development, delivering strong stakeholder engagement and paving the way for south of Scotland enterprise. I look forward to this continuing over the next year as we move to the agency. I should like to thank the partnerships chair, Professor Russell Griggs, for his energy and his personal commitment. I should also like to thank his board. I welcome their deep understanding of the region's needs and their commitment to working with us to make a difference. I met with them at a 10-day board meeting, and I was thoroughly impressed by the diligence, imagination and energy that they have brought to their task. Finally, I want to recognise the contribution of the public sector partners and the support that they have brought. The partnership's activities have been shaped around local needs and priorities, responding to consultation with businesses and communities from across the region. We are supporting the work of the partnership with additional investment—£10 million this financial year and £12.7 million the next financial year. I think that I should express my gratitude to the gentleman on my right, the finance secretary at this point, to make this possible. That investment is supporting activity that would not otherwise have been possible, responding to the needs of the south of Scotland. We are investing in skills with over £6 million supporting the development of a learning network, making it easier for people to access opportunities. There are projects across communities in the south that help to build their economic capacity and future success. We are all aware of issues impacting on the economy of the south of Scotland. Its population is ageing, with fewer people of working age. Its young people are, in some cases, leaving the region and not seeing opportunities to return. Wages are low, with the council areas ranking 30 and 32 in terms of median weekly earnings. It is an area with many natural advantages that makes it attractive for residents, businesses and visitors. It is strategically well-placed and has significant land assets and energy resources. It has active further and higher education sectors and innovative businesses operating across the sectors. It is vibrant communities with a rich history and culture. The new agency builds on our commitment to the south. Our investment of £353 million in the Borders railway of over £32 million since 2017 developing school campuses, £275 million in the state-of-the-art Dumfries and Galloway royal infirmary, completed in December 2017, £133 million due by the end of 2021 to improve internet connectivity in the south. The biggest public investment ever made in a UK broadband project. Finally, a commitment of £85 million to deliver the Borderlands inclusive growth deal. The new agency will bring additional investment to the region. We have committed to funding it on the same per capita basis as we fund Highlands and Islands Enterprise, recognising the similarity of both remit and challenge. Oliver Mundell. I would be grateful to the minister if he was able to set out what the budget would have been this year on that basis to give businesses in the south of Scotland an idea of the type of investment that is coming once the final agency is with us. I might be my fault, but I am not quite sure that I understand the question that I have given the current budget of £10 million and the budget of £12.7 million for next year. I think that I want to move on. I will come back to it in closing, if the member wishes. The financial memorandum sets out more detail, which is the time for which I do not have to go into now, but the financial memorandum is there. It sets out the facts as to the process. It is fair to say that there was an agreement on the committee, so far as I recall. We hear shortly that the principle that governs our progress is that pro-rata funding should move to become at the same level as HIE over time, but that a new body needs to learn to walk before it can run. It will take some time for that to be implemented. That is all clearly set out both in the memorandum and in the evidence to the committee. That is broadly the right approach, but it is a fair point, and we will no doubt come back to it during the course of this afternoon. The bill will establish a new enterprise body for the south of Scotland. Our vision is for a body that will drive inclusive growth, increase competitiveness and tackle inequality within the south of Scotland through maximising the area's contribution to Scotland's inclusive growth, supporting a diverse and resilient economy, sustaining and growing communities, building and strengthening communities with joined up economic and community support, and harnessing the potential of people and resources, developing skills, promoting assets and resources, and maximising the impact of investment in the area. The bill is deliberately high-level and enabling. It sets out the overarching strategic aim of the body to further the economic and social development and improve the amenity and environment of the south of Scotland. It gives a few examples of the sorts of activity that the body could undertake, but does not suggest an exhaustive list. That approach ensures maximum flexibility for the new body to shape the activities that it takes forward and respond to the circumstances of the south. As well as setting out the aims of the new body, the bill makes provision for its structure and legal framework, ensuring that it can operate effectively. I want to touch briefly on some of the recommendations that are made by the committee. The committee recommended that we develop appropriate mechanisms to facilitate collaboration and co-ordination between agencies. The new agency will be part of the strategic board ensuring national alignment. We will ensure that the new agency works collaboratively with other organisations. The committee also recommended that the new agency carries out work to obtain feedback on its performance and effectiveness from communities and other stakeholders. It is crucial that the new body is accountable to local people. We are working with stakeholders to put in place arrangements to deliver this when the body is operational. It is important that we build on existing successful regional structures such as the south of Scotland alliance. As well as establishing the legislative framework for the new agency, we need to take forward work to deliver the new body. If Parliament agrees to present the principles of the bill today, that activity will increase. Our work here will ensure that we have a credible agency ready to assume its legislative functions on 1 April next year. The practical arrangements put in place will enable it to begin and develop its vision, building its capacity and capability from its establishment. If Parliament approves the principles of the bill, the appointments process from the new chair will ensure that the future leaders of the agency are involved in the decisions to establish the body. We will also ensure that the new agency is able to operate everywhere across the south of Scotland. That accessibility was a strong view expressed by those who contributed to the consultation. Establishing a new enterprise agency for the south of Scotland is a great opportunity to do things differently in the south. I will continue to work across the chamber to ensure that the legislation establishes a body that is as successful as it can be, helping to drive transformational inclusive growth, increase competitiveness, promote fair work and tackle inequality for all in the south of Scotland. I move that the Parliament agrees to the general principles of the south of Scotland enterprise bill. Thank you very much. I now call on Edward Mountain on behalf of the Rural Economy and Connectivity Committee. Thank you, Presiding Officer, and I am pleased to contribute to this debate in my capacity as convener of the Rural Economy and Connectivity Committee. The committee's stage 1 report was published on 1 March, and it made it clear that it fully supports the creation of a new enterprise agency for the south of Scotland. I am very grateful to the cabinet secretary for his letter of the 21st of March, which responds to the various recommendations in the report. It became very clear to the committee when it started its stage 1 scrutiny that there was a huge level of interest in the proposals from all sectors in the Scottish Borders and Dumfries and Galloway. The committee is extremely grateful to all of the organisation and individuals who provided oral and written evidence to inform our deliberations. As part of the evidence gathering, the committee held a formal external meeting and an informal workshop in Dumfries, as well as a discussion event in Galloway Shields. Those sessions were particularly well attended by a wide range of representatives of stakeholder groups and members of the public. Over 140 people attended the discussion events, and the committee is grateful to all those who participated, providing valuable input into the consideration of the bill. The committee's formal meeting in Dumfries was held in the evening to allow more local people to come along. Given that it was attended by over 60 people, the committee felt that that was extremely worthwhile. Overall, the committee heard strong support for the creation of the new enterprise agency. Over 80 per cent of respondents to the committee's online survey also agreed with the idea of a new agency being established. That sentiment was mirrored by a significant majority of those who provided oral and written evidence and those who attended the informal public meetings. After taking evidence, the committee itself was in no doubt that the creation of a new enterprise agency in the south of Scotland is required. It is clear that the area faces a significant number of economic, social and geographic challenges, which have not and are not being addressed through the current economic support mechanisms. It was overwhelmingly of the view that most of those who gave evidence or engaged with the committee that the new agency will help to support the enterprise and skills and the needs of the area and provide a vehicle by which to encourage economic growth. The committee commends the south of Scotland economic partnership for the significant consultation and preparation work that it has carried out. It is clear to us that it provides a solid foundation on which to develop the new body. Turning to the area, based on the evidence that it received, the committee has satisfied that the new proposals that the new enterprise agency should cover Dumfries and Galloway and the Scottish Border Council areas only. However, it also heard that views expressed that it should also perhaps be extended to cover adjoining local authority areas, where communities may face similar challenges to those in Dumfries, Galloway and the Scottish Borders. Although the committee did not believe that the area to be covered by the agent should be altered, it called on the Scottish Government and the Scottish Enterprise to ensure that those areas continue to have access to economic development opportunities that are appropriate to their needs. We welcome the cabinet secretary's commitment to supporting all regional economies as he has done in his letter. The committee also heard that it was important for the new agency to have sufficient flexibility to allow it to operate outwith its geographical boundaries and to collaborate with other enterprise agencies in order to fulfil its role. I welcome the confirmation in the cabinet secretary's letter that the bill will be drafted to provide for that. The committee also called on the Scottish Government to ensure that development of appropriate mechanisms to facilitate collaboration and co-ordination between the new agency and all of the existing agencies operating in the region. Building on the positive work already being carried out by the South of Scotland Enterprise partnership. We are encouraged that the cabinet secretary has asked his officials to explore this matter with stakeholders and will respond to the committee formally in advance of stage 2. Turning to powers and objectives, the committee acknowledges that the broad aims of the new agency set out in sections 5 of the bill have been drafted with the express purposes of avoiding a prescriptive approach and thus providing flexibility. However, in evidence at its discussion events, the committee heard that it would be beneficial to have those supplemented to cover several key areas. In response to that, it called on the Scottish Government to amend the aim of the bill to improve the immunity and the environment to the areas that are covered by the new agency in stage 2 to make specific provision in relation to the sustainable use of the environment. The committee further called on the Scottish Government to amend the aim of furthering the economic and social development of the South of Scotland to make specific provision in relation to the following. Encouraging the development of a sustainable economy, supporting the enhancement of transport networks and digital connectivity, supporting community land ownership and asset ownership, furthering fair work and encouraging the creation of a more balanced demographic. We note that the cabinet secretary is to further consider those recommendations. Turning to the location, the location of the new agency was a recurring discussion point. It was clear, however, that there was very strong support for co-locating it with other agencies where this is practical. The committee is of the view that this will bring significant benefits in terms of having a presence in and being accessible across the whole area, adding to the provision of a one-stop-shop approach, as well as being a more cost-effective approach in the establishment of this agency. As the cabinet secretary's governance, a clear message received by the committee was that getting the broad membership of the new agency right was very important. The committee agrees wholeheartedly with that and considered it essential that the board is made up of individuals with as wide a range of interests, skills and expertise and experience relevant to the south of Scotland as is possible. I welcome the cabinet secretary's indication that he will ensure that applications are encouraged from as wide a range of interests as possible. We looked at accountability and, considering the bill, the committee reached a view that the mechanism was required to ensure that there was genuine local accountability for the new agency in terms of its performance and its effectiveness. It has therefore called on the Scottish Government to bring forward an appropriate amendment to require the new agency to obtain feedback on those issues to inform the action plan and development process. I note that the cabinet secretary has stopped short of saying that he will do this, instead of saying that he has asked his officials to consider how that will be delivered in the new agency once it is operational. On finance, the funding, the committee considers the Scottish Government's intention to ensure that, initially, there is an equivalence in budget provided for the new agency and that of HIE to be an appropriate and proportionate approach. The committee also noted that the £42 million of funding for the new agency in 2022-23 would provide an increase in funding for the area. However, it asked the Scottish Government for an estimate of how much an actual increase in funding that would represent. I note from the cabinet secretary's written response that he will respond further to the committee on that particular issue. In conclusion, the committee looks forward to considering amendments at stage 2 that will further enhance a bill that has a high level of support among stakeholders and communities in the south of Scotland. As it stated in its stage 1 report, the Rural Economy and Connectivity Committee supports the general principles of the bill and recommends to the Parliament that they be agreed to. I am pleased to be opening the debate for the Scottish Conservatives this afternoon. As the constituency MSP for Galloway and West Dumfries, it is fair to say that the constituency that I serve is a vast one with 75 miles between Stranraer and Dumfries. The need for a dedicated agency recognising the unique needs of the south of Scotland region has been long overdue and today's stage 1 debate is a hugely positive step in the right direction for local people and businesses. In our 2016 election manifesto, the Scottish Conservatives highlighted the urgent need to replicate the success of the Highland and Islands Enterprise by creating a south of Scotland enterprise agency. Coupled with the recent announcements of the Borderlands growth deal, another Conservative manifesto commitment for the south of Scotland is now being delivered. The region stands on the cusp of a huge economic boost, which it badly needs. I am delighted that, in light of the increased Conservative representation in the region, the Scottish National Party Government has started to listen to calls from those benches and press ahead with creating the agency. The Borderlands growth deal showed the strength of the UK and the Scottish Government's working together with a total funding package of £345 million for the cross-border region. With the communities that I represent in Galloway and West Dumfries linking closely with the Scottish Borders and our friends and neighbours in Carlyle and Northumberland on a daily basis, that can only strengthen those yet not fully exploited economic and social ties. Indeed, the Borderlands partnership has described the plans as a game changer for the region and that will also apply to the new agency. It is important, however, that this chamber is aware that the economic facts for the south of Scotland and their stark. The business start-up rate in Dumfries and Galloway is significantly lower with only 31 businesses per 10,000 people compared to an average of 50 across Scotland as a whole. Even more concerning is the gross value added, a whopping 24 per cent lower than the Scottish average, while the median weekly earnings are also 10 per cent lower than the Scottish average. The lack of sustained growth in the south of Scotland has sharpened the focus on my region and in turn the need for a dedicated agency to support businesses in order for them to fulfil their potential. Constituents of mine are regrettably right when they say that the region is the forgotten corner of Scotland regarding the lack of action taken by this Government no matter what the issue is we're debating. Digital infrastructure, road infrastructure, rail infrastructure, health and education provision when compared to other central belt neighbours. The need for a boost in infrastructure and to help to provide the fertile environment for training in jobs in my region has never been greater. Creating that fertile environment for growth must be done in tandem with a taxation policy that will encourage people to live and work in the region. His claim that we don't invest in south of Scotland, is he aware that in financial year 2017-18, the Scottish Government spent more than £1,200 million in south of Scotland and the examples that I gave in the opening speech. Does he agree with me that the recent success of Scottish Enterprise, Scottish Development International, working with the Scottish Government and the local authority in finding a new investor to take over the pinnys plant in the shape of Atlantis pack illustrates quite the opposite of his arguments that we are not involved in active promotion of the economy of the House of Scotland? I thank the cabinet secretary for that, but if he was listening to it earlier I said that it's only now that the Scottish Government is stepping up to the plate and starting to deliver, and we're only getting party to the rest of Scotland, which has sadly fallen short on the past. At the moment, the policies that this Government is pursuing, backed up by the Greens, are hitting workers close to the border with higher tax rates than those living just a few miles away in Carlyle. We run the risk of having people working here but not wanting to pay the higher rate of tax, instead boosting the economies in not in Dumfries but in Carlyle. We have a great opportunity ahead of us with the agency in the borderlands, so it would be very disappointing if we missed out on the very best-talented individuals and businesses due to a misguided tax policy. I want to make some progress. We have at present cross-border organisations and individuals who live in Scotland and work in Carlyle. It's hardly fair that people doing the same job and earning the same salary have quite a different take-home pay. I'll give way to Maureen Watt. I thank Finlay Carson for giving way. Will he tell me why so many people want to come from south of the border to north of the border to live here, especially older people who find it a great area to retire to? That's a very interesting point to come and retire. I knew that the Scottish Government would counter with higher education, free education and free prescriptions on this side of the border. However, that's hardly relevant to the skilled workforce in the 25 to 45-year-old band, which is exactly the demography that we want to attract to fill new job creation in this area. In one case, a relatively high tax earner is paying thousands of pounds more in tax than an equivalent partner in the same income. Should he live south of the border and commute the short distance to Dumfries, how many other high earners across the whole of South or Settle Scotland might be thinking the same thing? I would like to point out just a couple of examples that I have already raised with the Scottish National Party Government and Parliament. Firstly, in June 2017, a stress to the agency must have an autonomous board similar to that of the Highlands and Islands Enterprise, because far too long we have seen an Scottish National Party Government that is obsessed with centralisation, which takes local accountability away and is heralded in attitude that central government knows best. Government does not have a monopoly on good ideas, one size does not fit all, and we need a local board with local accountability. I am delighted that the Cabinet Secretary shares that view. This time last year, as the finance secretary announced £10 million worth of support for the south of Scotland economic partnership, I raised concerns and surprised that vital sectors of the economy, including tourism and energy, had not been included in the headline priorities of that time. Covering such a vast region, we cannot afford for any sectors to miss out. What will be key to the agency going forward is transparency and accountability. I recognise the invaluable work and the consultations that the south of Scotland economic partnership has undertaken under its chair, Russell Griggs. However, spoken to many local businesses during that time, the interim partnership has been in operation. There is a clear sense of frustration at some of the process. Businesses have been unaware of where to or whom they can apply for funding or the reasons behind decisions that have been made in regard to their applications. Lessons need to be learnt. It is vital that business has a voice in shaping policy and giving their respective agencies a steer on where the investment may be best erected. It has always been a concern of mine and others that the Borderlands growth deal in particular has been council-led. I have to question whether there are enough people with a relevant readership that have had genuine business experience and the life at the coal phase. I therefore have concerns that there is danger of going forward having too much public sector and council involvement. Businesses local have no desire to see public sector and councils control all their plans. They want an agency and projects that support to be autonomous for many council decision makers. Businesses do not want to run the risk of being undermined or the agency being undermined and its striving for economic growth and investment. As the committee highlighted, going forward to the South of Scotland Enterprise Board must be made up of individuals, much like some of the individuals on the South of Scotland Enterprise partnership, who bring much interest, skills, expertise and experience as possible. We must encourage interest from individuals who will ensure that the agency will deliver on its full potential. Another note of caution that I would like to point out is that the vote in this Parliament two years ago led by the Benches, which defeated plans to take away Highlands and Islands Enterprise Board and replace it with an overarching management committee, with a sense of relief that those plans were defeated, allowing Highlands and Islands to retain its local identity. As my colleague Edward Mountain said during the debate, Highlands and Islands Enterprise is not broken, it works, so do not try and break it. All that said, the consultation process has given us a great starting point as we have progressed the bill through Parliament. Almost 90 per cent of respondents to the consultation agreed with ambitious plans for the South of Scotland and outlined things that the agency can build on that are already successful in the region, including tourism, land management, heritage and national capital, and our history as well as quality of life. In conclusion, I would like to stress that the Scottish Conservatives are full of support for this bill at stage 1, in line with the Rural Economy and Connectivity report. The region needs a dedicated vehicle that will help to transform growth and provide more opportunities for people living and working here, from Srinard in the west to Imouth in the east. What must happen now is a clear communication strategy so that businesses, colleges, universities and the third sector, including social enterprise, can be fully aware of the services that the agency is going to provide and how it will benefit from them, which was highlighted in the conclusion of the committee's report. It was also highlighted and gallous heels when the committee were in attendance that the agency must have a clear statement of ambition and resources, rather than simply creating a new agency and hoping that it works. We look forward to strengthening a bill even further to meet the needs of local people with amendments at stage 2 and stage 3 of the bill. After far too long awaiting period, we owe it to the South of Scotland to ensure that this piece of legislation can truly meet its demands. It is a privilege to open this debate on the South of Scotland enterprise bill on behalf of Scottish Labour and to very much welcome this piece of legislation. It is a decade since the Government abolished the Feast and Galloway Enterprise and Scottish Borders Enterprise, and I believe that, in hindsight, that decision will be seen as a mistake. It allowed more democratic accountability of those economic development functions that were subsequently transferred to local councils. However, when other powers were centralised to Scottish Enterprise, I believe that the remit and direction given to Scottish Enterprise from Government ministers meant the South of Scotland lost out. That is why, since then, I and many others have campaigned vigorously for better support for the South of Scotland economy. My first speech in this chamber in May 2016, I called for a radical change in the remit of Government agencies to deliver better support. I made this point in a quote from that first speech. It is simply unfair that a business in the Highlands and Islands can receive support, but, because the remit of Highlands and Islands Enterprise is different from that of Scottish Enterprise, the same business would not receive the same support because it is based in the south of Scotland. I have campaigned against that fundamental inequality for a decade, including the chair of Dumfries and Galloway Council's economy committee and the South of Scotland alliance. It was clear to me in those roles that the South of Scotland was a forgotten region and that the substantial economic challenges that we faced were simply not being addressed, such as chronic levels of low pay. It is a scandal that the hourly earnings in Dumfries and Galloway is £11.52 per hour compared to the national average of £14.30, making the region the lowest-paid in Scotland. There is also a real skills shortage in the area. Just over a quarter of the population of Dumfries and Galloway in the Borders are graduates, yet nationally that figure sits at more than a third. There is also low levels of productivity and growth. The gross value added per person in Dumfries and Galloway is 21 per cent lower than the national average, and it is 26 per cent lower in the Borders. As a result of that, in many other economic weaknesses, many of our young people simply leave the area because of the lack of high-paid, high-skill employment opportunities. That is given the region a real demographic challenge, with the working-age population in Dumfries and Galloway sitting at 59 per cent compared to a national average of 64 per cent. However, it is not just those challenges that are not being tackled. The opportunities, the strength and the potential of the area is currently not being realised. I am privileged to live in the south of Scotland. It is an area of outstanding natural beauty. It is historical and cultural heritage to rival anywhere in the country, but tourism, as important as it is to the region, is still in many ways untapped. There are sectors with a reputation for excellence such as forestry, energy, arts and culture and more, which offer real opportunities for the future but need better support to develop. We have a strong small business base. That has negative as well as a positive effect. When the area is hit by an economic tsunami such as the closure of pennies, it is difficult for small businesses alone to absorb the number of people looking for employment. However, the number of small businesses means that there is potential for many of those businesses to grow with the right level of support. A strategic location also means that parts of the region are just two hours' travel to 14 million people. That is 14 million potential customers in the central belt and the north of England. Crucially, there is a real community spirit, a desire and a real determination to make the south of Scotland better from the people who live there. That determination is one of the reasons why there is such a strong support in the area for the bill that is establishing the south of Scotland enterprise agency. Crucially, an agency that has that social element allowing businesses and enterprises to receive support does not simply receive from the existing Scottish enterprise model. Labour very much supports the bill and, when we vote later today, we will support the principles of the bill. We would like to see the legislation amended as it makes its way through the parliamentary process, making a number of significant improvements. First, we believe that the aims of the agency should be strengthened. We appreciate that the cabinet secretary says that they have been drafted to provide a high level of flexibility. We believe that more direction is needed, including the focus on inclusive growth and the recognition of the demographic challenges that the area faces. We also support the call from Community Land Scotland for the bill to include specific reference to community ownership. In its submission, it rightly highlighted the huge discrepancy across Scotland of the 560,000 acres of land in community ownership. Almost 530,000 are in the Highlands and Islands compared to just 800 in the south of Scotland, so supporting community ownership should be a key aim of the new agency. We also believe that supporting the enhancement of transport networks and digital connectivity should also be a key aim. I know that the cabinet secretary did not share that view when he gave evidence to the Rural Economy and Connectivity Committee, and he pointed out that other agencies had that role. You could say the same about the proposed aim to enhance skills. Skills Development Scotland could be argued to have that role, but I believe that ignores the leadership role that the new agency should have. I want to see the agency take the lead and bring people together to drive the change that we need to grow the economy of the south of Scotland. Improving transport and digital infrastructure should always be at the heart of that change. In creating the new agency, we also have an opportunity to embed values and aspirations right from the very start, including the principle of fair work. In its submission to the REC committee, the STUC rightly called for the bill to be amended so that the agency's aims included specific commitments on promoting collective bargaining and advancing fair work, as defined by the fair work convention. It is also called for proper workforce recognition on the board of the new agency. Changes to the bill, Labour fully endorses. If the new agency is to work effectively, it needs to be driven by and be accountable to the communities that it serves. That was an overwhelming message from the people in the south of Scotland in submissions to the Rural Economy and Connectivity Committee and when the committee visited Dumfries in Galashales. The attendance and engagement at those events highlighted the real support for the new agency. Given evidence to the REC committee at one of those events in Dumfries, Dumfries and Galaby council leader Elaine Murray noted in a quote, the new agency will be accountable to ministers but it does not say anywhere in the bill that it will be accountable to the people of the south of Scotland. In the same session, Professor Russell Gregg's chair of the South of Scotland economic partnership stated, in the end it is the people of the South of Scotland who should manage the new agency while a governing body runs it from day to day. The response to the committee of the Scottish Government said that they support the principle of local accountability. With ministers making decisions on the location of the headquarters, the first chief executive, the chair, the members of the board, the signing off of the action plan, the issue of direction, the principle is not very obvious in the legislation as it is currently drafted. I therefore hope that, as the bill goes forward, it will be amended to include a clear legal requirement for the new agency to consult and report on performance to the most important people. That is those with the biggest stake, the people of the south of Scotland. The new agency must be rooted in the south of Scotland. It needs to have the local membership, the budget and the powers that are required to deliver the real change the south of Scotland needs. It must be an agency that is very much for the south and from the south. I think that this Parliament is at its best when it is doing the scrutiny work in the committee. It is where we see the best collaborative work and there is no doubt to the report that we came up with, not everyone would agree with every word of it, but that is the very nature of it. We must try and find consensus. What there was unanimity on was that this was a very worthwhile piece of legislation and that is certainly the view of the Scottish Green Party who will be supporting the general principles tonight. I have heard now from a couple of speakers that the south of Scotland felt forgotten. If that was a perception and indeed that was the reality for people, it is certainly not the case now. I was a bit confused at the third speaker. I thought that Mr Carson had turned up inadvertently at the wrong debate, but after he completed a lengthy list of demands of the public sector and then said, and I think that I quote him correctly, too much public sector, I just realised that it was a usual Tory contribution. One of the things that was an issue and has been alluded to in a couple of the earlier comments was—I had it written down at the top of my page—where is the south of Scotland, because there was a lot of debate about the scope of the ball, as it were. The Hines and Islands Development Board, the predecessor of the Hines and Islands Enterprise, has the advantage of that it was the croft in communities that was very much abinding together. We did hear from representations from South Ayrshire and South Lanarkshire about the needs of those communities. Of course, it can have a community of interest as well as a geographic community, but, as we have heard from some of the speakers already, the border counties have a history of working together and the close association and long-standing links that they have with communities at the other side of the border, which are being strengthened at the moment, suggests in the committee that that was the appropriate scope of the agency. However, we did hear that there is scope, and, as happens with the Hines and Islands Enterprise, there is a common interest that exceeds beyond the geographic boundaries that support is given there. Indeed, in relation to this piece of legislation, the Hines and Islands Enterprise was assisting. When we were in Dumfries and I spoke to a great number of people there, people spoke about issues in Dumfries, just as people elsewhere. Everything is very local, and the measure of the bill will be how locals ultimately gauge it. There is a need for the agency. It was mentioned by one of the previous speakers that it was in the manifesto, and it was also in the Scottish Green Party manifesto. What the REC report said about it, there is no doubt that it is required. The creation is a very positive signal, and if one of the signals is that it is not a forgotten part of Scotland, then that will be very positive. I was very interested to know the existing arrangements with the Scottish Enterprise, and I would be very concerned if, in any way, this piece of legislation was letting them off the hook, so to speak, because they have albeit a limited role in the Hines and Islands, and I think that that is something going ahead that we will need to look at. The REC report said that the agency should enhance the current support landscape, and clearly that includes the Scottish Enterprise, rather than adversely impact on existing provision. We heard from the cabinet secretary that that was informed by the people of the south of Scotland. The convener talked about the huge level of support, and Colin Smyth talked about the community spirit that was there. We did hear about the south of Scotland economic partnership and the solid foundation that it put in place, and I think that credit is due to Professor Griggs and his team, because it was quite apparent from everything that we heard that they were out and about and engaging. The strength of the Hines and Islands Enterprise is its very much community links and the aspect of social responsibility, and I think that that is something that we will see an uplift on in the south of Scotland. I was very keen, as a proud Highlander and a representative of the Hines and Islands, that this is not a competition. This is not South Highlands versus Lowlands. We should all be very keen to ensure that any frailties in our communities are addressed. There are huge differences, not least in land ownership and the traditional patterns. That is what I would like to, in the very brief time left, talk about. Dr Callum McLeod, Community of Land Scotland, I felt, gave us an extremely interesting input where he said, and I quote one of the south's interesting assets, is land. Interesting because when compared to the relative amount of community ownership there is, in some way here I have the figures, 562,000 acres in community land ownership in Scotland, the vast majority in the Highlands and Islands, in Dumfries and Galloway in the Scottish border, 794 acres of land in community ownership. Community of Land Scotland argued that this would be one of the main barriers that lies in the cultural thinking and our thinking where opportunities lie. I recall the evidence that we received from Barbara Ellborn, Newcastleton and District Community Trust when she said that Newcastleton has recently taken on and established its own community assets. That ownership has engendered a feeling in the community to drive things forward. That is precisely what the legislation, I hope, will do in respect of community ownership, community transport and community spirit that has been alluded to. Of course, there will be a requirement for continuing engagement. It is very clear that there is a need to collaborate. I do not think that anyone wants to see duplication. That is why co-location is very important. That is not about a new shiny headquarters, it is about people sitting desks side by side and working for the benefit of the people of the south of Scotland. The challenges that are noted in our reports are the demographics, wages and fragile communities. They exist. They will remain, but they need to be built on. As regards the comment that I heard about young people—we are losing young people—there are verses in the Highlands and Islands, so that is to be welcomed. We will be supporting the general principle of the bill at decision time. I am pleased to be speaking in this debate on behalf of the Liberal Democrats. There is no doubt in my mind that there is a real need for a south of Scotland enterprise agency, one that is based in the south of Scotland for people who live in the south of Scotland. As an MSP representing the north-east of Scotland, I am somewhat jealous, if that is the right word, of setting up a new agency for the south of Scotland. I believe that such an agency for the north-east would be of great benefit, too. I have no wish to add to the cabinet secretary's huge workload, but perhaps it is an idea for a new Scottish Government bill in the future. The point about the new south of Scotland enterprise agency is that it does not replace Scottish enterprise but is complementary to it. However, this is perhaps where we need to look again at the way our agencies work together to achieve the aims that are being set out on the bill, and particularly look at the financial arrangements involved for each organisation that involves economic, social and environmental issues. Edward Mountain, our convener of our committee, said in his speech that he pointed out that the financial memorandum accompanying the bill anticipates a budget of around £42 million. During the committee's visits to the region, there was much discussion and there was in our evidence sessions as to whether or not this £42 million was new money and new investment for the region. It is a genuine point, and I am not trying to make a party political point, it is the general point that was raised by people that were giving us evidence that they wanted to know. When the cabinet secretary gave evidence to the Rural Economy and Connectivity Committee, he told us that the £42 million would indeed be the budget of the agency in year 3 and that it would be an increase in overall funding for the area. However, he was not able to say how much of an increase it would be. I do find this a surprising thing to say. I would have thought that if the cabinet secretary was able to say that it would be an increase in funding, he should logically, therefore, know what the funding currently is for economic development in the south of Scotland. Stewart Stevenson? Notwithstanding the line of argument that the member is developing, does he agree that if existing funding, the control of that, is transferred to an agency based on the border, there is some benefit in doing that? Mike Rumbles? There is obvious benefit, and I hardly concur with that. Again, I am making the point that I am trying not to be party political about. That is the point that the people that we were taking evidence from and the member was there. They were interested in knowing that it is just genuinely an increase in funding, because some of the people that were involved in the current funding want to know whether their budgets are going to be cut. It is a reasonable ask. The committee said in its report that, of course— I think that Mr Rumbles is making a fair point on that. I will revert to committee as I undertook to do so in due course. I will make the point that the Scottish Enterprise is the existing economic agency that is serving the whole of Scotland, other than the HIE area. Not all of its expenditure is geographically identifiable. Much of its expenditure relates to schemes that apply to the whole country. In order to compute the precise amount of money that is attributable from the Scottish Enterprise budget to the south of Scotland, it is necessary to make a portion of that part of its expenditure that is nationally based. That is one complexity. Another is that an awful lot of the expenditure, which totaled 1.2 billion over 2017-18, applies to economic development but has not actually been within the grant of Scottish Enterprise but from other agencies. In so many things, I am afraid, that Government is more complicated than perhaps we would like. I entirely accept what the cabinet secretary has said. I just hope that some work is being done to be able to give us an estimate when we get to the committee about this issue. If I can now turn to the issue of ensuring broad representation on the Enterprise board, which was also a particular concern for those people who gave us evidence on our visits to Dumfries and Gallus Shields. The cabinet secretary will be pleased to hear, and I was surprised by me, but I am sure that he will be pleased to hear that there was little concern over the fact that Scottish ministers would be appointing board members. People seem quite happy with that, but there was concern about exactly how the Scottish Government intended to ensure that there was a broad and representative board in place from the start. We were told that there were, for instance, 2,300 voluntary organisations of one kind or another in the region, which is a heck of a lot. How difficult it would be for just one person to represent such wide and varying organisations. Additionally, others said that they wanted the board to do things differently and that they wanted the new agents to address economic, social, environmental and cultural issues. If they did that, they would need to have grass roots accountability. I would like to ask the cabinet secretary exactly how he intends to ensure that he gets the membership of the board right. I know what his intentions are, but I would like to know how he intends to ensure it and how he envisages the board being accountable to the local people that they serve. That is not an easy thing to do, and I would appreciate more certainty on how that is going to be achieved. Presiding Officer, this is a good bill, and I congratulate the cabinet secretary for bringing it forward. It is one that the Liberal Democrats wholeheartedly support. We look forward to voting for the bill at decision time and examining in detail some of the issues that I have raised today when the bill returns to the committee at stage 2. I have kept just within my six minutes. As it is very typical, I have some time in hand today, so we move to the open debate. Speeches of six minutes, please, but I can allow extra time for interventions. I believe that the proposal to create a bespoke South of Scotland enterprise board was in the manifestos of not only the Scottish National Party at the last Scottish Parliament elections, which is probably why the consideration of this bill at committee has benefited from a large degree of consensus from the outset, not afforded to many bills in this place. I, too, would like to thank the Clark security official report and broadcasting and all who made the official committee meeting in Dumfries such a success and thank all members of the public who turned up there and to the evening meeting in Gala Shields and to the witnesses who came before committee. Their input was very valuable to our deliberations. The wide interest should remind this Parliament of how important it is for us to get out in a boot. We have already heard that the economy of the South of Scotland is unique and required its own agency, and that the South of Scotland requires more attention than it perhaps has had. That is notwithstanding the fact that the current Scottish Enterprise agency account manages 107 companies in the region, 42 in Dumfries and Galloway and 65 in the Borders. Over the past two years, it has spent between £3 million and £5 million annually in grants and services, supporting companies that are headquartered in the area or headquartered elsewhere but have operations in the area. We have heard comparisons with Highlands and Islands Enterprise and what they have been able to achieve, but the creation of the agency in and of itself is not a panacea, it is what it can do. Not everyone in the Highlands is satisfied with HIE, but it is based in the Highlands, covers the Highlands, is staffed by people who live in the Highlands and served by board members who have the interests of the Highlands very much at heart, and there have been many successes there. In taking evidence, I think that there has been a degree of confusion of the role of Scottish Enterprise vis-à-vis other agencies. Encouraging economic growth is the work of a number of agencies working together, whether it is Scottish Enterprise Skills Development Scotland, the Scottish Funding Council and local authorities. I am pleased to see that, in south of Scotland, they have been coming together and working together. There is, in some quarters, the notion that if Scottish Enterprise could attract a few big employers to the south of Scotland, all would be well. However, I hope that we have learned from recent history and indeed the current situation with Brexit that inward investment, while very welcome and Scottish Development International works hard on this in the global world, is that, where companies come to hear from outside, we must remember that they can locate and will locate anywhere in the world. It does, and those companies carry a degree of risk. I hope that the new south of Scotland enterprise board will be a catalyst of growth of indigenous companies and on the wealth of resources in the region. In other debates in this place, we have increasingly talked about embedding the rural economy in everything that we do. I think that this is absolutely vital if we are to recognise the huge contribution that our rural areas make to our country in terms of the provision of food and drink, including water, climate change, protecting our environment and so on. We have a great opportunity to do that within the bill. For example, it puzzles me, as a dairy farmer's daughter, that in an area like the south-west, with its abundance of grass and increasing concentration of Scotland's dairy farmers in the area, we do not see the emergence of companies like Mackies in the north-east and Graham's in the heart of Scotland. I know that we have great Galloway ice cream, but I am sure that there are opportunities in the area to develop and grow companies on the back of dairy products. Oliver Mundell. I thank the member for the point that she is making, and the importance of recognising indigenous companies. Does she recognise Rones Dairy, a number of cheese producers, Arla in Lockerbie in my constituency and the presence of Scotland's rural college and university, has been an example of where the dairy industry is doing very well in the south of Scotland? Maureen Watt. Yes, Presiding Officer, I do that. I said that we should build on that, but the fact is that too much of our milk still goes south of the border to be processed and to be made into other products. I am sure that, with a little encouragement and support from the new south of Scotland enterprise body and its partners, growth of similar enterprises is possible. We have seen from the National Council of Rural Advisers that the drive and ambition is there among our young people in agriculture and other land-based enterprises. We just need the catalyst and focus for that to happen. Similarly, with its huge forest areas in Dumfries and Galloway and the Borders, downstream activities are ripe to be developed locally. During our deliberations, mention was made of land ownership, and there is little doubt that, in the Highlands and Islands area, community buy-outs have been an opportunity for new thinking and new ways of working. Unlike Colin Smyth, I would like to see this developed and opportunities for that to happen in the south of Scotland. Tourism is also ripe for growth, as more and more people see Scotland as a great destination. I congratulate my colleague Emma Harper on promoting the south-west 300, not in competition to the north-east to the north-east 500, but as an enhancement to tourism in Scotland. That should be a catalyst for tourism attractions and accommodation in the south of Scotland to improve its facilities to attract more tourists to the region. Many see the ageing population as a threat, but I would rather see it as an opportunity, as many older people have significant disposable income. There are a number of areas where community enterprises are already building on that. Throughout our evidence taking and deliberation, I was very conscious that many businesses in the south of Scotland are in the low-wage economy. It is vital that more businesses pay the living wage and more, and that fair work is at the heart of what they do. That in itself will uplift the whole economy as those living in the area have more disposable income. In conclusion, I congratulate Russell Griggs on the basis that he has provided for the new enterprise. There are many in the south of Scotland who have a can-do attitude, rather than the woe or me attitude that we have heard from Finlay Carson. I am sure that the positive mental attitude that we have seen in the drive in the south of Scotland can be built on. I look forward to considering the bill further at stage 2 and further. Oliver Mundell, followed by Joan McAlpine. I am pleased to speak in today's debate and even more pleased if I may say so that we have arrived at this point. The recognition from this Parliament of the unique interests and needs of the south of Scotland has been long overdue, and in this 20th year of devolution it is pleasing to finally see a level of recognition from both the Parliament and the Government of the ambition of Dumfries and Galloway and the Scottish Borders. It is great, genuinely great and greatly appreciated to hear members from across this chamber talking up the potential of the south of Scotland. There is no doubt that the creation of this new agency, alongside the recently announced Borderlands growth deal, has the opportunity to reverse the economic fortunes of our region. In many senses, it recognises for the first time the unique cross-border dynamics in the area, and the fact that, for my constituents, what happens in Carlyle is every bit as important as what happens here in Edinburgh or, for that matter, Glasgow. In doing so, it says that a one-size-fits-all approach under values and under resources are communities and fails to capture the strength and potential that we have as a diverse nation. It also takes on board the feelings that many have in the south of Scotland that we are distinct from the central belt and that remote and rural is not a term that only applies in the Highlands or islands, recognising that devolution was never just about centralising decision making and that when it comes to those important decisions about the future of our economy, local and regional views and perspectives matter. Beyond the geographical, the other vital reason for the creation of the new agency is to ensure that we have a high-skilled workforce and opportunities for young people. Just as we struggle in other rural and remote parts of Scotland, it is clear that, in the south of Scotland, we have seen an exodus of young people and, without a vibrant economy that creates high-skilled jobs and opportunities and has its eyes firmly set on the future, we stand no chance of reversing that trend. Equally, we also need to ensure that the locally available skillset in so much as is possible matches with the needs of businesses who are there already and looking to grow and expand their operations. I do not want to spend too much of this speech focusing on the negative. That is a good news story. However, it would be remiss of me not to highlight to the Parliament and other members, as the committee itself has concluded, that there is a strong feeling in the south of Scotland that Scottish Enterprise has served our region poorly and has failed in some senses to meet the needs or perceive needs of the business community and local economy. The evidence that we received in the committee was that, although that was true in Dumfries, it was not true, and I am sure that I can confirm that, when we went to Galashios, because there were quite a number of people who were quite positive about Scottish Enterprise. Oliver Mundell, I certainly appreciate the input from the member as the constituency member for Dumfries. Naturally, my attention is focused and my knowledge is best placed on what is happening in my own community. There certainly is a feeling there that Scottish Enterprise is predominantly interested in large companies and in companies that create a large number of jobs and in a local, yes, certainly. By its nature, Scottish Enterprise is interested in larger companies because the business gateway, which has operated in the auspices of local authorities, serves smaller businesses. However, would Mr Mundell agree that the hard work of Scottish Enterprise and others contributed to the success that it welcomed in Anham, securing a promise of investment of £9 million and the secured future of 120 jobs? Is not that an example of success by Scottish Enterprise and very hardworking individuals working for that company who, I think, deserve a bit of credit? Oliver Mundell. I am going to take the member's point in the spirit that it has offered. My experience since coming to this Parliament is that Scottish Enterprise has failed to identify that young people were planning to leave the site in Anham. They failed to identify, in a timely manner, that there were problems in Dumfries at Penman engineering. They failed on a number of other occasions to get on top of the problems that companies that employ large numbers of people in the region were facing. They underestimated the importance of those problems. I think that most people living in the region recognise that it is our small medium enterprises that are going to be the engine room for growth. They are the people who are there already. They are the people who, when the south of Scotland has been unfashionable for Governments of different political colours in this Parliament across the last 20 years, have kept going, kept working hard, who are dedicated, who care passionately about our economy and who love our region. They are the people who need to be supported by the Government. That is a matter for council organisations with much smaller budgets and without the resources and expertise of an enterprise agency. Without that strategic overview across the whole region, it does not match up with the ambition that I feel for my region. That is why I am pleased that, albeit that the Scottish Government has come to share the view of those who have been campaigning for this agency for the past few decades. I think that today is about them. I want to pay real tribute to those individuals, because this is their prize for all their hard work. I think that we have got to not lose sight of that. For me, I want to see something that looks like Highlands and Islands Enterprise Agency. I think that we are coming late in the south of Scotland to the table, but that does not mean that we cannot get there. I would issue just one word of caution on that. Highlands and Islands Enterprise Agency has been around for a long time and I do not think that we can expect the new agency to immediately replicate that. I think that the biggest challenge that the new agency fits is one of expectation management. I think that people are really ready to see this step change. I hope that we can allow an agency and organisation to come together that can share our ambition to grow and develop and create an organisation that bangs the drum for our region and ensures a place-based approach that drives forward growth and ensures that our region is no longer forgotten. I am delighted to speak in this debate today and to welcome the new Enterprise Agency for the South of Scotland, and I welcome the committee's findings. I know in the debate so far that a number of comments have been made about the board of the future agency. I would suggest that people look at what is happening at the moment with the SOSET board, because that points to the direction of the future agency. The SOSET board has been appointed by ministers and we have some fantastic local entrepreneurs and social enterprise activists on it. People like Tracy Rowan from the family dairy business in Galloway and Amanda Burgower from Scottish Rural Action, and Professor Sir Russell Griggs himself, a resident of South Scotland. I regularly speak to members of the board, including Professor Sir Russell Griggs. In fact, only this week I raised a constituency issue with him and he got back to me right away on behalf of my constituent. He also outlined a little bit about the direction of travel for SOSET, which members would bear with me. I think that it would merit quoting, because I think that it was very encouraging. He pointed out that the consultation work that he did last year involves speaking to 90 businesses across the south, and he outlined some key themes that emerged from that consultation on how the significance of extra money that SOSET has are being spent. The first was supporting young people to learn new and different skills that they cannot currently access in the south, and that was key to the significant grant given to the colleges for that kind of learning. The second thing was focusing on growing enterprises in communities that have the ambition and desire to grow and create new businesses and help existing businesses. The third was an integrated public transport system that was at the top of businesses lists, and he intends to focus on that going forward. That is particularly important for young people accessing work in college. That gives an example of how, in touch, the current board of SOSET is, and I think that that bodes well for the future and the future agency. Since being elected to represent the south of Scotland in 2011, I have consistently raised the need to address its unique challenges. In particular, when I sat on the Parliament's Economy, Energy and Tourism Committee in the parliamentary session from 2011 to 2016, I was repeatedly reminded that many communities and businesses in the south felt that their needs required business support that was more tailored to Scottish companies. Those smaller companies may not grow in rural areas as fast as a company in the city, but they are often the linchpin of the community sustaining not just jobs, but schools, the high street and smaller businesses further down the supply chain. Those SMEs have found it hard to access support in the past, not just public sector support, but that challenge is accessing bank lending post-2018. That came up in the economy committee last session a lot. Again, that is another reason why a bespoke solution is needed. That is why I am absolutely delighted that the SNP is delivering that bespoke solution. It is focused on a community development approach that has been pioneered so successfully by Highlands and Islands Enterprise. Although the new agency will, of course, be by and from the south while taking the best of what we have learned in HIE, I am also delighted that we have the commitment from the cabinet secretary that we will mirror in the south HIE's capital spending per head. That is really good news. The south of Scotland, as has already been said, has a different and distinct rural economy with wide-ranging and significant opportunities. It is a really beautiful area and has played a long and important part in the history of the Scottish economy. It has nurtured our textile industry and our agriculture and forestry sectors are thriving. It has a growing tourism industry. Indeed, the new Seaside Scotland campaign by VisitScotland is another initiative that is happening in the region at the moment as a result of action by the SNP Government. I was absolutely delighted to host an event about Seaside Scotland co-host it with the colleague Rachel Hamilton MSP. I think that we can all agree that the level of enthusiasm there really showed that things are happening in south Scotland. That has got to be good for the young people of the region. As has already been said, support for the agency is echoed by people right across the south of Scotland. I particularly want to welcome the committee's finding that the new agency should build on the work of Scottish Enterprise in the south. I recognise what some smaller businesses say and, as has been said by other members, that the focus on high-growth companies has not always been appropriate for small family-owned businesses in rural areas. However, we should not take away from the fact that I also speak to large manufacturing companies in the south who are very happy with the support that they have from Scottish Enterprise. Just one example recently that I was able to help with an intervention was Jas P Wilson, a manufacturer of harvesting equipment for the forestry industry based in Del Bite. I have been working closely with the Government on developing the young workforce, hiring a lot of local apprentices and providing really high-quality jobs. I know that coming together with the banks and Scottish Enterprise has helped them to develop their business so that they can have a proper sales office in the company for their equipment, which does not just serve the forestry industry in the south of Scotland but all over Europe. It is a real example of an exporter that is being helped by Scottish Enterprise in the south of Scotland. I know that, speaking to the family that run that company, they were very keen that the level of expertise that they have appreciated at Scottish Enterprise is continued with the new agency, and I have absolutely no doubt that it will be. In conclusion, I know that we have to wrap up. I welcome the new agency, however I would say that it could not come at a more appropriate time given the challenges south of Scotland faces from Brexit. No new agency can be a panacea for that, but I wish it all the best, and I am delighted to support it in Parliament today. Claudia Beamish, followed by Alex Neil. I welcome the bill for the creation of the South Scotland Enterprise Agency, and I am pleased that, in its recent stage 1 report, the Rural Economy and Connectivity Committee has also agreed the principles of the bill. Although it is not a committee member, I am a South Scotland is in my region, and I have taken this issue very seriously for a very long time. I am very particularly happy to see that the REC committee has recommended amending the specific aim to improve the amenity and environment to be supplemented at stage 2 of the bill, to make a specific relation to the sustainable use of the environment. That recommendation is vital, and it is imperative that, at stage 2, this goes through, and I wish the committee well with that. With the further recommendations, I quote, for encouraging the development of a sustainable economy, supporting the enhancement of transport network and digital connectivity, and supporting community land ownership and assets ownership. I support those being taken through in the bill. Community land Scotland pointed out recently that the staggering figure that we have heard from other members today is that over half a million acres of land is community-owned in the Highlands and Islands. In contrast, Scottish Government estimates that a mere 794 acres of land in the south of Scotland during community ownership. Let us remember that Dumfries and Galloway and the Scottish Borders, which will take part in the new enterprise body, only form part of the south of Scotland, so it is a very low figure. Since the outset of the possibility of a new specific South Scotland enterprise agency, I have argued that the new agency must have a social and environmental remit. I am really pleased that the Wreck Committee has come to the same conclusion at stage 1. However, it is disappointing that those were not initially included in the bill and shows perhaps a lack of focus from this Government on those very important issues. One of the most important factors, as I have already highlighted and other members have, but I want to go into it in a little more detail, is the issue of land justice, which is very important to Scottish Labour. The community land Scotland state—this is a slightly longer quote, but I think that it really highlights the issue very well, so I am going to read it if people will bear with me, please. One of the most important factors in helping to nurture the growth of community land ownership in the Highlands and Islands was the creation of the community land unit in Highlands and Islands Enterprise in 1997. In the intervening period, it has provided invaluable technical, financial and capacity building support to community groups in terms of purchasing and managing land and other assets. A comparable service is vital for the south of Scotland to help to kickstart an expansion in community ownership that is similar to the surge that has occurred in such ownership in the Highlands and Islands over the past 25 years. I thank members for bearing with me while reading that. I do think that it is a very important point in terms of community development in the south. It is indeed happening, but needs more support. Last year, I met Professor Russell Gregg's—actually, in Clydesdale—to discuss the good work of the SOSEP, the partnership, which we are going through the consultation process that we are carrying out at that point, and discussed with him the need for better connected rural communities, which I am sure we can agree on across this chamber, where good quality education and jobs can be provided in the community. I was pleased to see the WREC committee's report addressing these issues in the purpose of the bill. Can I ask the cabinet secretary how the agency will also support co-operative development? That being across the sector is so important in my region and also the development of SMEs, something that I so often hear about as a big challenge, not just the starting up of them but the development of them. As my colleague Colin Smith has often argued, the tailored support that is needed. I recognise and welcome the assurances that were given to the WREC committee regarding the remit and boundaries of the new agency, that it will be flexible on working along its boundaries, as highlighted by John Finnie. Although it will be of no surprise to anyone in this chamber that the less well-connected communities along the outside boundary of the proposed agency feel left out, such as Asher and Clydesdale. I am aware that those issues are addressed in the WREC committee report, and I accept the reasons for the boundaries being what they are, being coterminous with local authorities. However, I would point out to the cabinet secretary that few people in Clydesdale feel closely connected to Glasgow. The idea that the Glasgow city region deal is somehow a replacement is not going to put many of my constituents in Clydesdale at ease. Therefore, I call on the Scottish Government to do more to support those areas through Scottish Enterprise, suffering the same real need for investment as the areas in the new agency geographical area, which are not going to get the same level of focus social remit report. I hope that the cabinet secretary can answer some of those concerns in his closing remarks. I support the principles of the bill as does Scottish Labour, and I welcome this important development for part of my region. Alex Neil, followed by Michelle Ballantyne. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I, like everyone else, welcome the arrival of this bill, and I think that the way it is is an excellent proposal. As you would expect from Mr Ewing, who is a great track record in bringing forward visionary proposals for the economy. There are a number of points that I would like to make that might differ from what other people have said. I want to concentrate on what the agency can actually do to galvanise the economies of Dumfries and Galloway and the Borders. We are not dealing with one homogenous economy in the south of Scotland, but we are effectively dealing with two regional economies, Dumfries and Galloway and the Borders. Both of those economies, in terms of their external communications, tend to orientate towards the north and the south and sometimes the west, in the case of Dumfries and Galloway and its connections to Northern Ireland, rather than to each other. One of the things that we need to do in Scotland is that we need to invest in future in cross-country investment in roads and infrastructure to improve the connectivity between the east of Scotland and the west of Scotland. Outside the central belt, the connectivity between the east and the west is much, much poorer than the connectivity running from north to south and south to north in Scotland. The south of Scotland economy would benefit from that. Brian Whittle will ask me whether I agree that the A77 from Ayrtist and Rasham will be dualled absolutely. Brian Whittle. I refer the chair to the answer that the member gave just a moment ago. Not saying that the Tories are always predictable, but there you go. No, there is a fundamental serious point to your, Presiding Officer. That is that the creation of this enterprise agency with the remit that it has is absolutely essential to the regeneration of the south of Scotland economy, both Dumfries and Galloway and the Borders, and to make it genuinely a much more homogeneous economy. It will only succeed in the long run if there is a major investment in infrastructure in Dumfries and Galloway—I will in a minute—Dumfries and Galloway and in the Borders. If you look at, just take one example, Cairn Rhine port, the single biggest port in Scotland. The A77 is, it is grace, south of Ayr. The idea that we could grow the Cairn Rhine to its full potential without dualling the A77 is just nonsensical. That is a prerequisite. It cannot be done tomorrow morning, but what I would suggest is that to support the work of this enterprise agency and the local authorities and all the key players, there should be a south of Scotland 15 to 20-year national infrastructure investment plan. That should foresee major road improvements. The A77, the A75, the A76 on the Dumfries and Galloway side, the A1 and the new minister's other roads in the Borders. That includes east-west connections, of course. John Finnie. I am grateful for the member for taking intervention. I would share his view about east-west connections, but would he acknowledge that, with four of the parties in this chamber committed to £6 billion expenditure on two roads, none of that is realistic? Alex Neil. I was told when it was the Cabinet Secretary for Infrastructure by officials that it was not realistic to plan to dual the A9 and dual the A96, we are going to have the A9 done by 2025 and the A96 dual between Inverness and Aberdeen by 2030, and it took an SNP Government to do that because it was promised for many years, but it never delivered. I thank the member for taking intervention. Given that there is going to be a review of the road infrastructure in South of Scotland published very soon, the member agrees that any identification of projects that are important to bring forward quickly, the whole project can be accelerated ahead of the national strategic transport review. Alex Neil. My view is very simple and straightforward, and that is to unleash the full potential of the South of Scotland economy both in Freeson gallery and the Borders. We need a major upgrade in infrastructure, primarily transport infrastructure. I have said that that has to be done over a 15 to 20-year period for the very reasons that Mr Finnie suggested, and that is that the resources are just not there to do it in the shorter term. If there are shorter term opportunities, then we should seize them as quickly as we possibly can, because without the transport infrastructure, economic development relies on modern transport hubs. It relies on modern infrastructure. If we cannot get that investment for modern infrastructure, we will not realise the full potential that can be delivered by this agency and more widely by the South of Scotland economy. The second point that I wanted to make is in relation to the remit of the agency, and Joan McAlpine touched on that. One of the major reasons why the HIDB and then HIE has been so successful in the last 54 years is because, unlike the SDA or Scottish Enterprise, Highlands and Islands Enterprise always had a social and community development remit. To regenerate our rural communities, particularly remote rural communities, we need that combined remit. I very much welcome the fact that the Government has given this agency the same kind of remit as was given in 1965 to the Highlands and Islands Development Board. The final point that I want to make is in relation to the role of this agency and where it can add real value. It seems to me that there are two broad areas. One is that there are many indigenous resources, the people, the land, to mention two, forestry, tourism in both Dumfries and Galloway and in the Borders, where the potential has come nowhere near being realised. If you like, the broad remit number one is where there are those existing industries and potential, let's exploit them much more to the full. The second one is that we need to grow much more of new high-tech type industries in those areas as well. If we are going to raise the wages, if we are going to raise the value added, if we are going to raise the business start-up rate, we need to be talking about the industries of tomorrow, and that means going into the tech area. Again, without going into too much detail, Presiding Officer, because I am just finishing, that is another area where both of those areas, Dumfries and Galloway and the Borders, have huge potential that has been grossly under-realised up until now. Michelle Ballantyne, followed by Stuart Stevenson. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I am pleased to be representing my party and my constituents in this debate on the south of Scotland enterprise bill, because, as has been mentioned, the bill seeks to set up a new public body with the aim of encouraging economic growth, business development and employment in the Borders. I declare an interest in the sentence that, 30 years ago, we came back to the Borders to do just that. We were greeted by an arrangement called the SDA, the Scottish Development Agency, which was basically a couple of men in a small building, a temporary building, and I have to say that they were excellent. They were persuasive, they were very helpful, they were very active, and we went on to build our business in the Borders, and it continues to thrive there. Over 30 years, we saw a lot of changes. We have seen a lot of changes with Scottish enterprise coming in, the remit of Scottish enterprise changing, and, as a member of the south of Scotland economic partnership during my time as a councillor, we had a lot of discussions around what we really needed in the south of Scotland, and we all agreed that, no matter who you were, whether you were there as a business representative, whether you were there as a political representative, the one thing that we all agreed on—we needed an agency that was south of Scotland centric. Someone who has understood what we needed, looked at what was going on, worked closely with enterprises small, medium, large and did not have a focus that was just about a national strategic interest. From a cross-party point of view, we are all going to support this, and as it goes through its various stages, I hope that the discussions that we have will be very much focused on what is best for the south of Scotland. The Scottish Borders and Dumfries and Galloway are regions with a particular set of economic challenges, and speakers so far have highlighted some of those. Therefore, it makes it particularly well suited to sustaining a local body that is dedicated to inclusive growth. I am very heartened by the amount of investment that has gone into the south of Scotland recently. That is by both the UK and the Scottish Governments. I hope that we will not get to a stage where we are arguing about who has done what and who is most important, because that belittles what is being done. It is really important that in the next decade we will see the borderlands growth deal and £150 million of funding dedicated to the Scottish Borders. I am hopeful that a south of Scotland enterprise will be at the forefront of assisting businesses and local groups with managing the investment, however it is allocated. There has been much made of the economic challenges that are facing us in the south of Scotland. I think that the new enterprise agency will be adept at highlighting local issues, but there are several areas where I particularly want to see a bit of a focus. One of the biggest areas of concern, certainly in the Scottish Borders, is digital connectivity. It is no secret that the Scottish Borders is lagging behind when it comes to superfast broadband roll-out. In fact, border access to superfast broadband is 10 per cent below the national average. As it currently stands, the south of Scotland enterprise bill does not include any powers over digital connectivity. However, if business innovation and competition are to be treated holistically by the south of Scotland enterprise, it would seem somewhat remiss not to mention digital connectivity among it. I appreciate that Cabinet Secretary for Rural Economy does not want the new agency to be lumbered with the expectation of solving digital connectivity problems for which it is going to lack the budget, but I am concerned that the lack of reference to digital connectivity will leave the south of Scotland enterprise hamstrung when trying to attract or assist new businesses, especially those who seek to break into the new technology industry, which Alex Neil talked about. I certainly agree with the member that digital and physical connectivity is, Mr Neil said, both absolutely key to economic development. However, I just wanted to point out that a sum of £133 million has been earmarked to improving connectivity and, in particular, access to superfast broadband at a level of, I think, 30 megabits per second under the R100 scheme. That is entirely separate from the work that the Scottish Government is doing in south of Scotland enterprise. I would have thought that everybody, including the Scottish Tories, would welcome £133 million investment in the south of Scotland in providing access to superfast broadband with the aim of doing so very quickly indeed. Michelle Ballantyne I think that the point here is not about not welcoming what is being done. We do welcome what is being done. That is the point about joining up the thinking around it and not putting it all into silos, because you cannot have enterprise development without digital connectivity embedded in that. There must be good connections and there must be a role for south of Scotland enterprise, who is trying to encourage enterprise, who are trying to attract and work with industry and new businesses that want to perhaps go into technology in terms of where it is sitting. If they are just having to talk about it and say, that is some other organisation that does that, I can tell you now, businesses will not be impressed. We do not want to have to go door to door to find out about each element. We want to be able to work with the local agency and the local agency needs to be able to cover all aspects. That brings me on nicely to my other point, which is about ensuring that the borders can cultivate, and Dumfries and Galloway can cultivate and retain a young workforce. Several members have already talked about the difficulties around that. The Scottish border certainly has an ageing population, with more than 65, accounting for almost a quarter of the border's residents. However, that will not be sustainable unless we can have young people there who are developing businesses who can support the provision of services. Combined with the high levels of outward migration for young people, it means that we have to work even harder in the south of Scotland to ensure that the young skill workforce is retained and that young workers find moving to the borders and Dumfries and Galloway an attractive prospect. For that reason, again, I am keen to see that the south of Scotland enterprise works with existing employability groups that are already active. If they do not, if they just set up a new line, we are going to lose the benefits of a lot of good work that has already been done. For example, in the textile industry, where they are developing their own training programmes because they are having difficulty attracting people, within agriculture, within the schools that are making good links, the rural college that is there, the rural university, the south of Scotland enterprise needs to become embedded with them, not come in again over the top. We need to ensure that we have that good connection, because, as we have heard already, we are in danger of creating too many groups, and therefore we do not work effectively. It is fair to say that we are all welcoming what has happened. We are all supportive of the general principles, but, as always, the devil will be in the detail. The real test will come when determining the organisation of south of Scotland enterprise, where it will be based and how it will be funded. The bill provides a real chance to shape the economic future of the south of Scotland, and to make the most of this chance, we need to create an agency with teeth that has the power and the connection that is necessary to support the south of Scotland, not just for now, but for the future. Most of the additional time has now been used up, so if I could ask those following to be a bit more careful about time, Stuart Stevenson followed by Rhoda Grant. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. As the committee proceeded with this bill, it was an absolute delight to have the opportunity to visit the south of Scotland. My personal connections with the area are extremely limited. My grandfather was married in Imouth on 2 May 1890, but he came from West Lothian and his wife came from Northumberland. I have no idea how that happened. My first visit was on 20 January 1952, when my father was preaching at the church in Letham. In the late 1960s, Maureen Watt may be interested to know that I had the first yogurt in my entire life while standing on the harbour at Kipford, while participating in the Scottish ok dingy sailing championships. I didn't do too well in the championships, but I did enjoy the yogurt. However, I think that there are a number of things that have come up in the debate. Alex Neil properly identified that the border area that is covered by the new agency is not simply one cohesive homogeneous area. We found, as a committee, that when we visited Gala Shields, we got a very different response to what was going on from that which we got from Dumfries. I will immediately say that Gala was substantially easier to get to. We got on the train, we went down to Gala Shields, we walked and got a taxi to the venue and we were able to return on the train in the midweek evening. Where is Dumfries? I think that if the committee had not previously realised the important need for infrastructure investment, the journey to Dumfries for me from the north of Scotland perfectly illustrated that need, I could not actually persuade myself that I could get back from Dumfries to Lynlithgow, where I have my house when I am here, in the evening, so I had to drive from the north of Scotland all the way round to Dumfries and then drive back to Edinburgh. That was a minor inconvenience on a single occasion for me, but for those who live and work there, it perfectly illustrates the need for investment. Travel is an important point where I think that there is a consensus of the need to do something about that. The new agency can take a lead in promoting that, working, of course, with the regional transport partnership. We have talked quite a lot about Highlands and Islands Enterprise. I think that it is myself and Kenny Gibson, who are the only constituency members who cross the boundary into Highlands and Islands, as well as being in the Scottish Enterprise area. In my case, 15 per cent of theirabouts of my electors are in the Highlands and Islands Enterprise area. It is quite marked when you are exposed to the two, as a constituency member, how different the priorities and modes of operations are. I think that we are right to look at the way that Highlands and Islands Enterprise operates as the model for the south of Scotland. It is quite clear that, in particular, the emphasis on social responsibility in social enterprises is very important. Highlands and Islands Enterprise make, in their documentation, they talk about supporting social enterprise and community-led development. I do not say that that programme should be lifted unchanged to the borders, but it certainly looks like something that is worth having a look at, because it seems that one is likely to be dealing with similar problems to those that were present at the time of the Highlands and Islands development board, then HIE. However, the Highlands area now has in Van Es, which has fundamentally been transformed in the 50 or so years since my wife left, because that is her home territory, and is now a very significant regional conurbation with strong economy, leaving a lot of the Highlands still in a place of needing support. Dumfries has no equivalent to in Van Es, but we might hope that the intervention of the new body might get us there. The way that Highlands and Islands Enterprise works is fundamentally different. It has a different account management structure that reaches much closer to community bodies and to small enterprises. There is no way that Scottish Enterprise is not focused on that. The fact that incomes are lower in the border areas is a key indicator of the need to do what is proposed here. It is important, too, that we look at helping communities to make their own decisions. That is something that Highlands and Islands Enterprise says that allowing community account management to help communities to identify and realise their aspirations. However, it is not centralised decision making in the Highlands to tell people what to do, and we do not want that model in the border counties either. Just a few words about the board. I think that it is very important that, when we look at the constitution of the board and the way that it works, it has strong lines of accountability from the board back to its communities and strong channels for input from communities to allow the board to be demonstrably responsive to them. That is quite different from the idea of a board that is representative. I actually want people with the greatest skills. I do want people who understand and preferable to live in the area that is concerned, but I want people who are not there simply as a representative but are there for the skills and can sustain accountability and responsiveness. I am happy to support that at decision time. I hope that others use it as well. Thank you, Presiding Officer. We in the Scottish Labour Party welcome this bill, and it has been a long time coming, but I truly hope that it brings to the south of Scotland the economic focus that it needs. I cover the Highlands and Islands and feel that we have a constant battle to be heard. Centralisation devastates our communities and sometimes government treats us with a degree of arrogance that we would normally expect from absentee landowners. I fight against that every day and put forward the case for my region. Imagine then my surprise when speaking to people from the south of Scotland that they are looking at us in the Highlands and Islands with envy and perhaps a touch of resentment. We have our own enterprise body, Highlands and Islands Enterprise, and although they have not had a focus on their economic needs and they often feel ignored by Scottish Enterprise, their needs appear poultry compared to large centres of population. Therefore, for them getting their own enterprise company is a step in the right direction. However, it must have the same powers and breadth as Highlands and Islands Enterprise. The committee seemed relaxed at the lack of compulsory purchase powers, but I am not. I believe that there is an advantage in holding those powers because the holding of them is as powerful as the power itself. In Scottish Enterprise and Islands Enterprise, I have never used their compulsory purchase powers, but neither have we measured the impact that holding those powers has. Does the knowledge that those powers exist bring people to the table? There are other powers that are omitted from the bill, and I would ask that they be added at stage 2, for example the power to enter land and the power to acquire information. Those powers are important in order to allow South of Scotland Enterprise to regulate those that it has provided support to. It is also important that South of Scotland Enterprise has the same social remit as Highlands and Islands Enterprise, because that allows them to take a more holistic approach. I believe that that is really important in rural areas. Working with communities is as important as working with big business in those areas. Community ownership also needs to be a priority for them. I noted, with interest, the wishes of the community, which were echoed by Community Land Scotland about the accountability of the board and who should select them. There has been a tendency by this Government to choose yes men on their boards when the very existence of Highlands and Islands Enterprise was challenged. There was not a squeak from the board, and I am pretty sure that that would have not happened in Jim Hunter's day. Therefore, I understand the wishes of the community to have their sale on who is selected and would ask the cabinet secretary to look at this and see how the community could be involved. Evidence to the committee also suggested the involvement of young people, and I believe that to be right, because we are talking about their future. Too many young people from rural areas are forced away from home just to access education and a career. If we are to build an economy in the south of Scotland, young people need to be at the heart of that. I would also like to see a commitment to 50-50 gender balance on the board from the outset. It is a new board. We do not have to wait for a transition, and I hope that the Scottish Government to start the way that it means to go on. We must also, as other speakers have said, see a commitment to fair work. Those who receive assistance and grants from the south of Scotland enterprise must commit to fair work practices. Although the new agency is very welcome, the Scottish Government also has tools at their hands to stop the economic decline and depopulation of rural areas. They have to step away from their centralisation agenda. That has done untold damage to rural areas, removing high-quality jobs and therefore having a disproportionate impact on those economies. It also disempower the areas when decision makers are removed to urban areas, and we end up with urban decisions because of that. The Government has taken forward a community empowerment act and an islands act, but its style of management flies in the face of those aspirations, and until they loosen their grip on power, we will see continued centralisation. Procurement is also at the heart of that. Centralised contracts have no protection for small and medium-sized enterprises. The Federation of Small Business reports that broken contracts, smaller business and Scottish procurement point out that, despite the Procurement Reform Act in 2014, small businesses are not winning any more contracts. The truth is that they are receiving far less. The number of small and medium-sized enterprise supply and goods and services to the Scottish Government is halved under the SNP. In a letter to Jackie Baillie, the finance secretary confirmed 1,502 SMEs supplied the Scottish Government in 20, 207, 208, but that figure has fallen to just 716 in 2017-18. Colin Smyth said that South of Scotland Enterprise hosts a large number of SMEs, and it is important that we support them, because they provide us with a far greater return. They have a vested interest in their communities and are much less likely to leave. It also means that they are likely to spend their money and procure goods in the same areas, and therefore this decline must be turned around. Those are things that the Government can address now, and that would have a disproportionate impact on the economy of our rural areas. I hope that they act on that now. I am very happy to be supportive of the bill. It is clear that HIE is highly thought of in the Highlands and Islands, and that was particularly seen when the suggestion was made that there might be some amalgamation of enterprise bodies covering the whole of Scotland. I agree that there is a need for a more joined-up approach to the whole enterprise and schools sector, but not going as far as amalgamation. I hope that the strategic board will give that co-ordination without the regional and other bodies losing their identities. There certainly seem to be a lot of similarities between the Highlands and Islands and the south of Scotland. Both are largely rural, are at some distance from the central belt, have seen young people drifting off to the cities and not returning, and have had difficulty attracting new businesses or growing existing ones. Therefore, I very much agree that there is a strong argument for a new south of Scotland enterprise body. I would confess that the south of Scotland can sometimes be overlooked by those of us in the central belt. If you say where in Scotland is there a big area with a sparse population, beautiful scenery and opportunities for getting away from it all, I think that many of us would think of the north first rather than the south, yet the reality is that all of these are true for the south as well. The committee carried out two visits to the south of Scotland, as others have said, to Dumfries and Gallashill's. I felt that those were very useful visits with good turn-outs at both. They were very engaged audiences with a real enthusiasm for the new agency. There were one or two folk who did question the need for a new agency with the risk of increased bureaucracy and money being spent on administrative costs rather than front-line services. However, my feeling certainly was that that was very much a minority. There were questions raised about how much Dumfries and Galloway had in common with the borders, and Alex Neil touched on that. It is true that there are significant differences. At least parts of the borders have a very strong link with Edinburgh and reasonably good transport, while Galloway is considerably more remote. As was said already, the committee was able to travel to and from our evening meeting in Gallashill's by train. That would not have been possible if we had gone to Stranraer. It is also true that east-west links across the south of Scotland are not strong, and many people may not think of it as one region. However, overall, there are a lot of common strengths and weaknesses, and it seems wise to have one agency for the two council areas. Another factor that was discussed was whether the new agency should cover a wider area than just the two councils. Clearly, there are similar challenges in South Lanarkshire and the south of Ayrshire, but boundaries have to be drawn somewhere, and I am afraid that they are often artificial. I personally am comfortable with the proposal that the new agency's boundaries will match the two existing councils. Concerning the existing work and profile of Scottish Enterprise, the people we met in Dumfries had little good to say about them, it has to be said. However, to be fair, the gathering in Gallashill's was more positive, with a show of hands indicating a dozen or so businesses that had involvement with Scottish Enterprise and most of them were positive. However, to be fair to Scottish Enterprise, I do not think on its budget that it can give the same level of personnel or financial support to a more rural area with smaller enterprises, as HIE can do to the Highlands and Islands, so fundamentally that is why we need this new agency. The relationship with existing agencies such as Scottish Enterprise was another question that came up several times. I think that there is a lack of understanding that SE has a national role for certain specific tasks but would not get involved on the ground in the routine work in the south in the future. Maybe there needs to be some work done on clarifying those roles. Link to that is the question of the strategic board. The board is not set up in statute and in many ways is still settling into its new role, so it is difficult to define too specifically what the relationship will be between the new agency and the board. However, I think that we can make some general assumptions about that and I agree that it is probably not appropriate to refer to the strategic board in this bill when it does not appear in other legislation. The comparison with HIE was an underlying theme throughout the committee's work on the bill and I said before that there were clear similarities between the north and the south. However, that raises the question as to whether the funding per head in the two areas should be the same. That is what the Government is proposing and the committee agreed with that. I accept that there may be some catching up to do because HIE has been in existence for five decades and the south of Scotland has not had that input. However, I have to say that I am not entirely convinced that funding per head in the south should be the same as for the Highlands and Islands in the longer term. Firstly, the distances in the Highlands are much greater and people are living in more remote areas. As Colin Smyth himself said, people in the south live within two hours of 14 million people. That is not true of the Highlands and Islands. Mr Mason is in his last minute. I am sure that we will discuss it with you and I am sure that this point will come up in the future. The other point with HIE is that it covers many islands that the south does not have. The islands act, which our rec committee dealt with, requires that we should take into account islands when making any decisions, including about funding. The fact that there are so many islands in the HIE area would suggest that they need higher funding. I find it a bit strange that HIE is to get no extra funding to take account of its islands. However, I also note that it is equivalence in the budget initially and presumably there will be a review in the longer term. In conclusion, I am delighted to support this bill, which will mean a third enterprise body to work alongside SE and HIE. Of all the bills that I have been involved with, I think that this is one that has probably had the widest level of agreement, so hopefully that will continue and we will see a real boost coming to the economy and wellbeing of this important part of our country. Thank you, Mr Mason. I call Brian Whittle to be followed by Emma Harper. Ms Harper is the last speaker in the open debate, Mr Whittle. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I am delighted to be able to speak in this debate today, because this is an important bill and debate. As we have heard today from across the chamber, the south of Scotland, and specifically the south west, has long been the forgotten part of Scotland when it comes to investment from the Scottish Government. The region certainly has its challenges with a low GVA against the Scottish average. Average earnings are 10 per cent lower than the Scottish average. I think that the business start-up rate is considerably lower than the Scottish average as well. Small businesses account for a greater share of employment and income compared to Scotland as a whole, with more people being self-employed. Yet it has so many strengths, not least being its own natural environment, the quality of life and its steeped and cultural heritage. Unsurprisingly, therefore, the sectors that are important to the region currently include tourism, agriculture, forestry and fishing. The south of Scotland enterprise agency potentially offers a fantastic opportunity for a long-awaited shot in the arm for the area. I want to focus my time on the Scottish Conservatives' call for the agency to have the flexibility to work outside of its geographical boundaries and to collaborate across agencies. I would welcome any commitment from the cabinet secretary in his summary as to the Government's position in that regard. The proposed enterprise zone is surrounded by three growth deals worth around £1.5 billion. We have the Borderlands growth deal, the Ayrshire growth deal, and the Belfast regional city deal. I include Belfast because it is directly connected by the port of Cairnryan, through which some £1 billion worth of goods flow, including about 45 per cent of the Northern Ireland exports. That is a significant investment that should be a key element of any strategy that aims to regenerate the region's economy. If the three growth deals had an element of collaboration, along with the potential of the proposed south of Scotland enterprise agency, real benefit could be realised. For a start, that investment, coupled with the business confidence that it might bring, would certainly go a long way to encouraging business start-up. Although that is an area in which Scottish Enterprise and SIB have expertise in helping to develop, their EIS and SEIS schemes, although evolving since I was last involved, can still significantly influence inward investment. Those schemes allow Scottish Enterprise to invest in a company and take a shareholding in a company under the same investment protocols as private investors. Not only do private investors get the confidence that a Government agency is backing a new start business with all the advice and expertise that they bring to the table, but they also receive significant tax breaks if they leave their investment with the new start company for at least three years. Along with their loans and grants schemes, Scottish Enterprise can help to ensure that there is appropriate funding for any new start or developing business, as well as giving them access to the very best of business advice. We need to encourage more would-be entrepreneurs, risk takers and job creators to consider the south of Scotland as a destination. I would encourage early interaction with the Scottish Enterprise to seek the help that they can give. I think that that is where the new enterprise agency can help to drive that kind of interaction. I want to return to Bill fast, if I can. I travelled across during the last parliamentary recess to meet with politicians of all political persuasions, as well as business leaders to discuss how both countries can increase the trade between them. After all, as we have heard today, the biggest port in Scotland, the third biggest in the UK is at Cairnryan, and it connects us with the Belfast harbour. Stena invested £240 million in Cairnryan on the promise by the then First Minister, Alex Salmond, that the crumbling transport infrastructure in the south-west would be appropriately upgraded. That was in 2010, and that promise remains unfulfilled. The horrendous state of the trunk roads, the A75 and A77, trunk roads that connect the Cairnryan ports with routes south to England and on into Europe, as well as into the Scottish central belt, is nothing short of a scandal. That is not mentioning the A76 as well. I know that Alex Neil has mentioned this as well. I gently remind him that, during the intervening time, he has been transport minister. I agree with him, but he had the opportunity to do something about it. What I did hear from the Northern Ireland port is that I will take an invention. John Finnie I understand the concerns that there are about infrastructure. Would the member recognise that there can be considerable benefit derived from the infrastructure that is put in place is rail rather than road as well? I thank the member for that intervention, and I definitely agree with that, and I am going to come on to that, because the rail infrastructure is important. What I did hear from the Northern Ireland politicians and business leaders is that they confirmed that the south-west infrastructure, or the lack of it, is having a negative impact on the Northern Ireland economy as well. We have only had an outline commitment of £30 million to build a long-awaited Mabel bypass still to be started, despite many assurances from the Scottish Government. That compares to the £3 billion investment that is proposed in the A9 upgrade. That is 100 times the investment that is so far proposed for the whole of the south-west of Scotland. What I would say is that we cannot look at developing and sustaining the economic prosperity of the south of Scotland through the prism of a new enterprise agency alone. Hence, using my time in this debate to focus on the absolute requirement that the new south of Scotland agency has that flexibility to work outside of its geography and to interact across the agency. Furthermore, I suggest that there is a big need to work across the portfolio. In conclusion, we agree in those benches that there is a great potential in the establishment of the enterprise agency for the south of Scotland. However, this is just one piece of a jigsaw, and I urge the Scottish Government to consider a much more holistic approach to addressing the long-term lack of investment in the south of Scotland and ensure its sustainable economic health. Emma Harper Last speaker in the open debate moved to closing speeches after that, Ms Harper. I am pleased to have the opportunity to speak in this afternoon's stage 1 proceedings of the importance of the south of Scotland enterprise agency bill. This bill is welcome and needed to benefit my south of Scotland region, its businesses, its people and its towns, villages and rural areas. I am pleased to have been involved in this process. I attended the Rural Economy and Connectivity evidence session in Dumfries at Easterbrook hall, and I attended various events for the interim south of Scotland economic partnership, having met its chair, Russell Griggs, as well as board members formally and informally to hear about the work that they have taken forward. I have also been able to support the south of Scotland economic partnership through writing to the Scottish Government about the positives and negatives to ensure that the new agency and associated legislation are strong. The stage 1 report from the committee states that the committee is in no doubt—and I think that we are in no doubt across-chamber today—that the creation of a south of Scotland economic partnership is required and that the agency that is now being debated is absolutely essential for the region. The committee supports the general principles of the bill and recommends to Parliament that they be agreed to. I know that the bill will be extremely refreshing for people across the south of Scotland, and I certainly hope that members across-chamber will join me in echoing those remarks today. I would like to start by giving some context as to how the idea of the South Scotland Enterprise Agency first came about. I remind everybody that, in 2016, the First Minister announced a review of enterprise and skills bodies across Scotland to allow the Government to better meet its objective of seeing a vibrant economy, and it was agreed in terms of reference for the review that it would have the objective of allowing for a transformational step change in performance for a range of economic outcomes. The review process identified several challenges facing the economy of the Dumfries and Galloway and Scottish Borders areas, and members have spoken about that already. An older population with an outmigration of young people, relatively low levels of productivity and GDP growth, transport and digital connectivity challenges—I will come on to that, because I think that it is really important—higher concentrations of low-paying, lower-skilled sectors and several fragile communities across the region, and relatively low levels of private sector investment research and development. I would like to highlight a few of those challenges that constituents and businesses across the region have conveyed to me that they feel are the main barriers to the region flourishing. The region has poor transport infrastructure, and, as members will know, that is something that I have lobbied the Scottish Government for in my time here, as well as other members across the chamber, bringing forward members' debates to highlight the need for greater investment on the main arterial routes, the A75, the 76 and 77, which connect South Scotland and Northern Ireland, as well as North England and the wider Scotland. That was highlighted quite eloquently by my colleague Alec Neill. Last summer, I hosted a meeting in Stranraer, which the Cabinet Secretary for Transport, Infrastructure and Connectivity attended. It was made clear at the meeting by businesses, including Sten and P&O ferry companies and different local action groups, that to attract investment, business and people to the region, transport infrastructure must be improved. That is imperative. I am therefore pleased to see that, in the committee's report, the request to look at transport infrastructure in addition to the South Scotland strategic transport review, the findings of which are set to be published soon, is part of the committee's asks. The cabinet secretary for a commitment that improving transport infrastructure across the South Scotland is a priority for the Scottish Government and will be part of the new enterprise agency's remit. In addition to those challenges, the Scottish Government's consultation recognised several strengths and assets enjoyed by the area. Those include a strong community spirit, characterised by a high degree of cohesion, resilience and commitment to the local area, a natural environment that provides a high quality of life, good place to raise a family and plenty of opportunities for healthy living. It is a rich and historical and cultural landscape, particularly important in developing the area's tourism industry. It is a good strategic location being relatively close to the north of England, the central belt and Ireland, as has already been described. Tourism and attracting tourists to South Scotland, as mentioned, is one of those strengths and is vital to the region. I agree with Oliver Mundell that across South Scotland we have many micro, small and medium-sized enterprises across many sectors, including food and drink sectors such as Galloway soup and Professor Pod's chilies, which I visited yesterday. We have the tourism and leisure from Lagan Outdoor Centre, Creama Galloway and the Galloway Activity Centre in Loch Ken, where activities for everyone to participate in is part of the remit. I would like to see the new South Scotland enterprise agency actively working to support the small and medium-sized enterprises and other businesses by helping to attract people to visit them and, ultimately, by improving the transport links for them. I would talk for hours about how the bill is so important but, unfortunately, I do not have enough time. However, I would like to congratulate all involved both with the work to get this stage 1 bill to Parliament as well as all those who have been involved with the interim South Scotland economic partnership. I hear what Mr Carson and others are saying about how people are feeling forgotten. That is what I hear too across the whole region. Many people's perception is that they feel forgotten. I ask Mr Carson to help to change that perception. The light is shining on the South of Scotland right now. Let's be positive and objective about promoting our beautiful region and work together for the benefit of the whole of our region. Thank you. I am sure that Mr Carson hears you. I will now call on Colin Smyth to close for Labour. Thank you, Presiding Officer. After years of work, today's debate brings us one step closer to establishing the South of Scotland enterprise agency, the region badly needs. Our agency that I hope will be locally led, embedded in the communities that covers and responsive to the unique needs and assets of the South of Scotland. I welcome the tone of most of today's debate and the widespread consensus from members across the chamber on the need for and the role of the new agency. That reflects very much the views of the people of the South of Scotland. In response to the consultation by the Rural Economy and Connectivity Committee on the Bill, 87 per cent of respondents agreed with the plans for a new agency. It is not surprising that there is such a strong appetite locally for change and a new approach. The new agency is not just an opportunity to improve the economic support that is available in the region but to encourage collaboration and develop a stronger voice to advocate for the South of Scotland at a national level. We need that new approach to respond to the economic challenges and to meet the potential of the South of Scotland. As we have heard in this debate, productivity in the area is almost a quarter lower than the national average and the business start-up rate is also below that average. Although the region has a flourish in small business industry with more than 11,300 enterprises, enough is not being done to support and grow those businesses. It is that type of support that needs to be tailored to meet our local needs that is simply not available at present. Wage in the region are also some of the lowest in the country and there is a lack of well-paid high-skill jobs being one of the key reasons for the continued outward migration of young people. We desperately need to retain, or maybe more importantly, attract more young people to the area. The key to that is ensuring that they have real career options locally. That means creating more high-quality jobs but also ensuring that the training education that they need is available locally. The region has also suffered due to the long-standing underinvestment in their infrastructure that several members have highlighted during the debate. I believe that the new agency should have a key role to play in advocating for and supporting better transport and digital connectivity in the region. Equally, the region has a huge amount of potential. There are thousands of businesses and enterprises in the area and a great deal of potential for growth if the support that they receive is genuinely tailored to meet their needs. A new agency can also take a holistic approach that provides not only economic benefits but social and environmental benefits. Highlands and Islands Enterprise has been effective in protecting both communities and their natural environment in their work and showing that that does not need to be in conflict with support in the economy. The bill is therefore a welcome step towards delivering that for the south of Scotland. It sets out a strong framework for the new agency. However, as Labour has argued in this debate and as the stage 1 report from the Rural Economy and Connectivity Committee sets out, we want to see improvements made to the bill to ensure that we have an agency that is rooted in the south of Scotland. That means building on the proposed aims of the agency to include tackling the demographic challenges that are facing the region, taking a leadership role, improving transport and digital connectivity, supporting community land ownership and furthering the fair work agenda. It also means amending the bill to ensure that there is proper local accountability. The agency needs to be led from the south of Scotland, and yet, as the bill stands, the board will answer far more to ministers in Edinburgh than it does to local stakeholders. How he thinks local accountability should operate in this bill? I thank Mike Rumbles for that point. I will come to that point in my closing comments. Crucially, though, it needs to be underpinned by a legal requirement for consultation and reporting back. However, I will set out exactly how I think that that could work. The first point that I want to make is that, in response to the committee stage 1 report, the cabinet secretary committed to bringing forward an amendment to ensure that ministers cannot issue direction to the agency without consulting first, which I welcome. However, the cabinet secretary did not respond to calls from the committee and myself for a formal mechanism to guarantee local input and accountability in the agency's action planning strategy that is underpinned by making that a legal requirement. I think that the Government needs to be clear about how we guarantee local communities' voices will be listened to and reflected. In response to Mike Rumbles' specific point, I think that that could be through, for example, a new regional economic partnership. It could also be through a regular South of Scotland convention underpinned by a programme of regular consultation by the agency and communities across the South of Scotland. The type of engagement that we have seen already from the South of Scotland economic partnership. There is also an opportunity to take advantage, for example, of the local authorities area committee structure to report at a local level some of the performance figures. That is what happens at the moment for Police Scotland. It also happens with the fire service. There are opportunities to take that forward, I think, for the new agency. However, whatever that mechanism is, I think that it is absolutely crucial that we have to make that a legally binding requirement for the new agency. We have also got to ensure that the membership of the board is genuinely representative of the South of Scotland reflecting key stakeholders from young people to proper workforce representation. It also must be gender balance, as Rhoda Grant rightly highlighted. A number of other important points have also been made by members in the debate. I want to briefly touch on them. There was a clear support for the boundary of the new agency to be Dumfries and Galloway and the Scottish Borders. However, there was a clear point made by Claudia Beamish that those areas on the periphery of Dumfries and Galloway and the Borders, such as Clydesdale and South Ayrshire, also have a role to play and a need, I think, for the Scottish Government and Scottish Enterprise to look at the level of support those areas currently receive to make sure that the economic development opportunities are made to meet the needs of those areas. The case of the new agency was also touched on and there was a clear view that it should be co-located with other agencies such as the council and have a presence in communities right across the two local authorities. Providing, if you like, that one-stop shot to businesses and enterprises seeking support. In many ways, the debate on this bill has focused on the mechanisms of the new agency. Ultimately, the real test will be what that new agency does from day one. There will be a lot of expectations and there is no question about it. When it does not deliver what we want it to deliver, I will be the first to highlight that, but what is important is— and that is your job. Thank you, you have finished. I am sorry. I now call—I now call—didn't mean to be rude there, Mr Smith. I just mean your holding Government account quite rightly. I now call on Rachel Hamilton, please, to close for seven minutes. Thank you, Presiding Officer. May I register my interests as a business owner in the Scottish Borders? In closing for the Scottish Conservatives, I want to thank the rural economy committee for their work in gathering evidence from across the south of Scotland and from the contributions that are made today, it is clear that this bill will be an enabler when it comes to economic growth and business expansion in the south. We look forward to the establishment of the enterprise. Some members have described the south of Scotland as a forgotten region. We have heard today that the south of Scotland desperately needs an injection of skilled workers, infrastructure investment and additional business support. I recently heard from business leaders at Borders business breakfast that I held and they are desperate for an agency to help deliver economic growth for the borders. That is to be encouraged because we have heard again today that many businesses must get involved in the process of engagement and that must be in parity with the public sector and educational establishments and the third sector. Many have paid tribute to the good work of Russell Griggs, including Joe McAlpine. In the rec report, Professor Russell Griggs says, we want to stop talking about business and talk instead about growing enterprises. It does not matter whether the enterprise is a community, a social enterprise, a small business or a large one. We want to see a culture of change through a new enterprise agency with an understanding that we give support to everyone who wants to help grow the economy. The Scottish Conservatives believe that the new agency could be a fantastic catalyst for entrepreneurialism and driving the local economy. John Finnie mentioned Barbara Elborn from Newcastle Community Council and Barbara and Greg Cuthbert are energetic individuals who recently set up a community fuel station. On the point of setting up and involving local communities, a lot of people, Colin Smyth, Vinley Carson and Mike Rumbles, feel that the new agency board must have members drawn from a wide pool of experience and must ultimately be transparent and open and accountable to local communities. Stuart Stevenson agrees that there should be strong lines of accountability to the community, along with strong skills. Perhaps we could get clarity as asked by Colin Smyth and reassurance from the cabinet secretary in his closing. Many Conservatives today have welcomed the Borderlands growth deal. Of course, that was one of our manifesto commitments. We want to see what the committee recommended, which is that the agency has the flexibility to operate out with the geographical boundaries of Dumfries and Galloway and the Scottish Borders. That will allow for greater collaboration with other enterprise agencies in order to make it a huge success given their proximity. Scottish Enterprise today seems to have been a bit like Marmite. Some believe that it has done a good job, but some believe that it has not. Many businesses I have speak to find access to funding complicated, and that must be addressed going forward. We should not see these barriers to funding, and we would like to see an agency that means obtaining funding and support is made a lot simpler. Whilst we recognise that the South Scotland Enterprise Agency will not solve all our problems, it may go some way to heal them. Many members today have mentioned low wage paying jobs, gender pay gap and the skills shortage right across the region. Those three issues are not unique to the borders, but they are definitely exacerbated in a rural area that suffers from poor connectivity, not only digital connectivity, which Michelle Ballantyne mentioned, but also physical connectivity, which Alex Neil and Brian Whittle mentioned. They drew attention to the importance of infrastructure and investment into transport infrastructure, in particular the A77, the A75, the A1, the A68 and the A7, I think that I might have missed off, but it is very important east to west. I believe that the campaign for borders rail, which is trying to extend the line from Tweedbank down to Carlyle, is effectively an east to west connection that would see the borders linked into the north of England, and then, of course, on into the west even further. I do believe that, however, the agency will be an enabler, not a disabler, and it has to be dynamic to suit the needs of the South of Scotland. Whilst we have heard many saying that it might be based on the model of the Highlands and Islands Enterprise, it is important that we recognise that the areas are distinctive and different to the Highlands. We share common challenges, of course, such as the lack of adequate infrastructure, as I have just spoken about. Michelle Ballantyne and Oliver Mundell have talked about attracting young people in the skills gap, and our demographics are very challenging and are becoming more so. The dependency ratio today, which I want to highlight, is 69 per cent versus 55 per cent in Scotland. That is for under-16s and over 65s respectively. We welcome Maureen Watt's comments about attracting retirees to the area. However, when set against the rising number of older people to maintain the working age population of today, we need at least 800 working age people per annum to move to the south of Scotland. That presents a real and growing problem and one that must be absolutely addressed with the agency. We must consider the skills development and the business growth alongside that, especially in tech, as Alex Neil highlighted. Finlay Carson talked about the poor business start-up rate in Dumfries and Galloway, and Brian Whittle told us that the medium weekly earnings are 10 per cent lower than the Scottish average. The GVA per head is 24 per cent below the Scottish average, creating, again, a unique set of issues. We need not only for the agency to create jobs through grants and businesses, but also to create high-quality jobs, and those will attract young people. Crucially, what we want to do is to retain those young people, and we want to grow a really vibrant and dynamic local economy. Many people mentioned tourism, and the Scottish Land and States emphasised the point in the evidence committee at stage 1 where they called for tourism to be a principal purpose written into the enterprise's action plan. Again, my colleague Finlay Carson called for that. Joe McAlpine talked about the new Seaside Scotland campaign, which is so important to attract new tourism businesses and to grow current ones. I really want to mention the gender pay gap. I was out of the room but caught that Rhoda Grant was talking about the need to encourage more women to live, work and start family in the area. We must address that, because Agenda gave evidence highlighting that. I am afraid that you have run out of time. I will sit down, but we look forward to the agency. You know that you will sit down. So much for the gender pay gap. You must sit down. You made your point. I call in Fergus Ewing, who is pleased to close with the cabinet secretary until decision time. I will endeavour to be in my very best behaviour. Thank you to all members for their contributions in this debate. It has been a largely positive debate and I very much welcome the cross-party support for the new agency. I am indebted to the committee, but all the hard work that has led up to the preparation of the bill and the evidence sessions that form part of the stage 1 process. Whenever I've visited the south of Scotland over some years as a minister, I've been struck by the enormous energy, success and vibrancy of people who are taking part in the life and business of the south of Scotland. I've never failed to be impressed by the sheer hard work, the energy, the good humour, the resilience of people that I've met and had the privilege to meet in the various responsibilities that I've had as a minister. That is in a whole range of areas, with forestry, farming, transport, manufacturing, textiles and tourism, but I do think that that potential has not fully been realised and that is why we are here today. I do accept that many members across the parties have said that there is a perception that the south of Scotland has not received the attention that it deserves. I bow to those who represent the area in that regard. It's not for me to contradict that, it's not. I've heard that that feedback has come from the consultation process. It's right that I have regard to that process, as Mr Finnie and others alluded to. I think that the level of wages and the gender gap problems are two of the most serious issues raised by Rachel Hamilton, Claudia Beamish and many others. We want to see that businesses can be as profitable as possible in tourism, where I know that Rachel Hamilton has spent her life's work. I believe that many businesses are hampered by a shoulder season. If, as we are doing in parts of the Highlands, we can extend the season to 12 months, you increase the revenue, the profitability and the capacity of businesses to pay the kind of wages that they would like to pay their workforce. Therefore, we should look at things in the round. Many businesses in the south of Scotland don't require or even want help from the Government. They do perfectly well in running their businesses very successfully because they're doing things, providing services and goods that people want. Not all businesses need or want assistance from the public sector, but those who do should be able to access it. That's why, when I was in Annan recently meeting Kehshav Bagat, the owner of the food processing company Bagat Holdings Ltd, I was delighted to acknowledge and praise the efforts of public servants in providing a bespoke overall package from Scottish Enterprise, SDI, the local council and Scottish Government, which had the result in persuading Mr Bagat and his family, who had the pleasure of meeting, to invest in Scotland, not in other locations, which they had considered, but in Scotland, in Annan, £9 million investment plan. That was, thanks to the hard work of Scottish Enterprise and the investment of a proposed £1.7 million in an RSA grant that will bring around 120 jobs into Annan with the potential for more. Those inward investments are very important to Scotland and to the diverse communities in the area. We've engaged widely across the south with businesses, communities and individuals. We want to ensure that everyone's voices are heard and meaningful engagement with those living, working and studying in the south remains a key component of our work. We will continue that engagement with young people and community representatives, something that you laid emphasis on quite fairly. The body will, of course, as is stated in the description of the aims of the bill at the current state, have regard to improving the amenity and environment of the south of Scotland. That is already in the aim under paragraph 5.1. Regarding accountability, sections 13 and 14 require the preparation of accounts of an annual report. Section 6 requires an action plan. Those are ways in which public bodies are held to account. They are also held to account through this Parliament. All public bodies can be summons to give evidence in this Parliament by committees, and Mr Mountain is nodding, because he has done precisely that. The Parliament is the ffocrum of accountability in Scotland, and it will remain so, but members are right that we wish further to explore how we can improve lines of accountability even further. Alex Neil made the point that has been one that has flitted through my cranium from time to time. One of the issues of the south of Scotland and Friesen Galloway is that there are connections with the borders to Edinburgh, particularly of Dumfries to the west and Northern Ireland, but the east-west Dumfriesen Galloway borders connections perhaps are not good. That led to his claim for rather a lot of expense of public money, but admittedly over a period of two decades, which was a bit of a relief to Mr Mackay. That was followed by many other members. We will consider that at stage 2, but I fully expect the new south of Scotland economic agency to give leadership on those matters, taking up Mr Smith's point. I thought that he put it as far as I could gather quite well when he suggested not that the body would have fiscal responsibility for budget responsibility for those issues, but it would have a say. It would take an interest. It would have an influence. It would have a leadership role. It would be part of their work to consider connectivity, whether it would be virtual through the internet, which is, of course, of increasing the importance, or of transport. Both road and, as Mr Finnie was at pains to remind us, more than once, rail. He is quite right to do so, and the success of the Borders railway has been one of the stellar achievements over the past while. I was heartened to be taking part in a debate, where I would not say that it was characterised by sweetness and light, but there was rather less discord than in some of the debates of taking part, not looking at anyone in particular. However, without wishing to spoil the sweetness and light, there is a serious job to be done in the remainder of the bill, whereas I have not had an opportunity to reply to all the points that are made, particularly to Mr Rumbles, Mr Finnie, Mr Smith and Mr Whittle, as I had wished. We will no doubt come back to those issues before the completion of the passage of the bill. I pay tribute to Professor Russell Griggs and all those who have played a part in the partnership that he has chaired. They have done a sterling job, and I cannot recall any example where there has been more public engagement leading up to the preparation of a bill before Parliament. I think that the members on the partnership bring a wide range of business experience of third sector experience of leadership in further and higher education and throughout the whole sector. The last thing that I would say is that the budget has, of course, exercised the minds of members quite rightly so, and we have had a wide range of views. Mr Mason indicated that there are arguments that we have not heard so much of with regard to budgetary priorities, but the overwhelming view was the approach that we are taking as the correct one, which recognises that there should be, in principle, parity of esteem between all citizens in rural Scotland, and that should have an influence. It has had in determining the approach that we are taking to our policy, but I think that I did discern that there is a consensus in the approach that we are taking so that we need to walk before we can run. It will therefore take time for the new agency to find its feet to be established throughout the huge area of Dumfries and Galloway and the Scottish borders to deliver and meet the expectations of the people of the south of Scotland. I am therefore delighted to preside over such a cheerful debate, Presiding Officer. Perhaps it is something to do with me, I do not know. I commend the bill to the House. Thank you very much, and that concludes our debate this afternoon. The next item is consideration of motion 15863 on the financial resolution for the south of Scotland enterprise bill. I call on Derek Mackay to move the motion. The next item is consideration of business motion 16577 in the name of Graham Day on behalf of the parliamentary bureau setting out a change to tomorrow's business. I call on Graham Day to move the motion. No one wishes to speak against the motion. The question is that motion 16577 be agreed. Are we all agreed? We are agreed. We turn to decision time. There are just two questions. The first question is that motion 16542 in the name of Fergus Ewing on the south of Scotland enterprise bill be agreed. Are we all agreed? We are agreed. The next question is that motion 15863 in the name of Derek Mackay on the south of Scotland enterprise bill financial resolution be agreed. Are we all agreed? We are agreed. That concludes decision time. We are going to move shortly to members' business in the name of Maurice Corry on financial scam prevention, but we will just take a few moments for members and the minister to ministers to change seats.