 Mae'r next item of business today is topical questions, and we start with question number one from Sandra White. To ask the Scottish Government what response it has received from the UK Government to the concerns that has been raised regarding people from Scotland being blocked from returning from overseas visits due to the United States imposing a travel ban. I am deeply concerned at the executive order signed by President Trump on Friday that it effectively bans people from a number of Muslim-majority countries from entering the US. On Sunday, I wrote to the foreign secretary urging him to make the strongest possible representations to the US Government about the effect the order will have on people who live, study and work here. The First Minister also raised the issue with the Prime Minister when he met at the joint ministerial committee in Cardiff yesterday. I have yet to receive a ministerial reply, but there has been communication at official level. The foreign secretary made a statement in the House of Commons yesterday saying that the UK has secured an exemption to the ban for UK passport holders, including dual nationals. It does not go nearly far enough. We know from cases such as that of Dr Hamisey Teary, a vet studying at the University of Glasgow, that the ban may affect many who live, work and study in Scotland yet do not have or hold a UK passport. We are still concerned about the confusion about how the ban applies and I am seeking clarification. More broadly, the imposition of a blanket ban on people on the basis of their birthplace, nationality or religion in the name of security is counterproductive and morally wrong. It risks exacerbating tensions between communities. It will undermine much of the work that the global community has been doing to tackle extremism. The United States has long been a place that has welcomed people from other countries, especially those fleeing persecution. We will press the US Government directly and through the UK to reconsider this action and adopt an approach that reflects the values of equality, tolerance, diversity and human rights and would seek the support of this chamber in doing so. Sandra White I thank the cabinet secretary for that very full reply and look forward to any further replies from ministers such as the foreign secretary and also the minister in Westminster. The minister has mentioned her post-graduate rep from Glasgow University and we know that she was prevented from returning to Scotland via New York. We must all give sincere thanks to women for ending all the people who donated moneys to enable her to return to Scotland. Although we all recognise that this is a fantastic gesture and it is most welcome, does the minister agree with me that the Westminster Government must condemn Trump's entry ban and work with the Scottish Government to ensure that this never happens again to people living and working in Scotland? Sandra White Clearly, the confusion and chaos that is evident across the world shows some of the issues that arise from this executive order and the immediacy of it. For an individual who simply goes on holiday not to be able to return home shows the extremism of this action. I would also commend the crowd fundraising for women for independence and the wider community support that the individual has received, not least from our employer, the University of Glasgow. We should all think very hard and deep about the consequences, not just immediately, of this action but what it says about the world that we live in today. Sandra White Cabinet Secretary, we all realise that this particular issue, while being supported fantastically while bringing Hamish back from the United States, is largely a reserved matter. For the most part, Westminster's domain. Will the Scottish Government make any direct representation to the US Government over this issue and, furthermore, make clear to the world that Scotland is a welcoming country, which values people who come here to visit, live and work and study regardless of their country of origin? Sandra White Yes, our intention would be to do that. It is instructive that the number of countries and Governments across the world have set out their views. Clearly, the UK Government has lead responsibility in relation to foreign relations but they do not have lead responsibility on morality. I think that the fact that so many of us view this as morally wrong means that we have an obligation to speak out. Holly McNeill Minister, would you join me in commending Glasgow University for being so quick to come out in support of its employee? Furthermore, would you also join me in congratulating the many Scots who were in the streets of Glasgow, Edinburgh and Aberdeen? It was very encouraging to see that people feel so strongly that this is a racist policy by the new president of the United States. Sadly, there will be more cases like this of the case of Dr Hamzi Tyari. I am sure that I do not need to get the assurance of the minister for an excellent statement today, but just for the record will she assure the Parliament that she will be ever vigilant in the weeks and the months to come for, sadly, many other Scots who may be in a similar position? Angela Constance Indeed, we need to be vigilant and alert to any cases. I think that the lack of clarity means that we do not know who will be affected and why. That is why we are seeking clarification on what exemptions may or may not have been secured by the UK Government and when. Does it apply to the UN last year from one of the listed countries that are also EU or Commonwealth passport holders? If you are French living in Scotland or you are in Germany or Iraq, what does that mean? I think that some of the issues, particularly around the suspension of the refugee programme and the Geneva convention, are very big issues that people want to have a greater understanding of, as well as the detail of some of the confused statements that we have. The first point about the University of Glasgow is that we live in a country in which civic Scotland, including our universities, is very, very aware of its responsibilities to individuals from elsewhere that are living in and studying in our country. They are of us and that is why I respond to them as part of that community of Scotland that responded so well. I was travelling back from Brussels yesterday and I saw the amazing pictures of people responding immediately to say loud and clear that that type of behaviour is not something that Scotland has as its value system and that we will join the rest of the world in speaking out. Ross Greer Many thousands of refugees who had expected at a sanctuary to be coming soon have had their hopes destroyed by this ban. We know that so many of them would be welcome here in Scotland. Today, the Westminster Home Affairs Select Committee published a report that was damning of UK Home Office accommodation services for asylum seekers. It described it as disgraceful. Following the vote of this Parliament a few months ago, will the cabinet secretary be able to update us on what representation the Scottish Government has made about devolution of such services to this Parliament and, short of that, what consideration of the Scottish Government has given to a public sector bid for the contract? Ross Greer Clearly, the Home Affairs Committee's report is very important and very instructive, and we have always made clear in terms of how Scotland deals in support with refugees from day one that that quality of support, whether it is in housing or otherwise, must be secured. I recall one of the first things that I ever did as a temporary convener of a committee of this Parliament was to ensure that the conditions of asylum seekers in Glasgow were subject to an initial inquiry by this Parliament back in, I think, 1999-2000. It was that time that the then boarders agency, the Predecessor, made sure that Glasgow had greater responsibility for accommodation for asylum seekers at that point. We now move on, and what have we learned in 17 years? I think that the lessons that Scotland learned many, many years ago in terms of how those coming to seek refuge in this country were treated stand as well today. I think that some of the issues and concerns that we have with the centralised control of support for refugees has meant that the responsiveness that we could and should see has not been secured. We will examine the committee report very closely. Dr Alasdair Allan, who has lead responsibility in some of those areas, particularly in relation to the Home Office, will look at that. Clearly, it is an impact that affects all cabinet secretaries with health and housing and other responsibilities as well. To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update following the meeting of the joint ministerial committee on 30 January. The meeting discussed the lack of progress to agreeing a common position on the triggering of article 50, which was the purpose of setting up the GMC European Negotiations Committee. Given that the UK Government has already announced its intention to trigger article 50 before the end of March, the First Minister stressed to the Prime Minister that the UK Government needs to intensify joint work on the Scottish Government's proposals and the proposals from the Welsh Government and Plaid Cymru. The UK Government must demonstrate how it will incorporate the devolved administration's interests into their negotiating position. On the issue of powers, the First Minister made clear that it will not be sufficient to guarantee the powers that are already devolved. We must see a clear indication in the UK Government that there will be a major transfer of powers to the Scottish Parliament once the UK leaves the EU. The Scottish Parliament is aware that the Scottish Government believes that should the UK Government persist with its plans for the hardest of Brexit and remain unwilling to incorporate into its position the needs of the devolved administrations, then there would be no choice but to give the people of Scotland an opportunity to have their say on the matter. That is why the next few weeks will be crucial in terms of demonstrating the intentions of the UK Government. In line with the written agreement between the Scottish Government and the Parliament on intergovernmental relations, the First Minister will write to the Finance and Constitution Committee to provide a summary of the issues that are discussed at the joint ministerial committee. Emma Harper I welcome the First Minister's commitment to intensify joint work on the Scottish Government's proposals and also note to her comments from yesterday that this is a process that cannot go on indefinitely. When does the Scottish Government expect a substantive response to those proposals? Does the minister regret that this has not been forthcoming ahead of the UK Government's decision to press ahead with its bill in the UK Parliament to trigger article 50? The First Minister Yes, I do regret that, but clearly there are events within the timeline that provide crucial moments. The next of those is most probably the triggering of article 50, of course presuming that the legislation introduced today into the House of Commons passes. It is absolutely essential that we have an intensification of the process and the run-up to trigger article 50, and that is a meaningful process that produces the compromise to the UK Government that would match the compromise that the Scottish Government has already offered. Emma Harper Speaking ahead of the House of Commons debate on the UK Government's article 50 bill today, I was surprised to hear Brexit Secretary David Davis describe the fact of a hard Brexit for the UK as a foregone conclusion or, in his words, a point of no return already past. Does the minister agree that such comments fly in the face of previous assurances given by the Prime Minister to consider carefully the proposals brought forward by the devolved administrations and perhaps typify the regrettable approach by the UK Government to just do as it pleases when it comes to Scotland? The First Minister Well, it is regrettable that such language is used today, considering that David Davis was present as I was at the meeting yesterday in which there was a clear agreement to intensify the process, and that is absolutely vital. If everything is a foregone conclusion, then there would regrettably be no point in having a process, let alone an intensification of the process. I hope that that was a slip of the tongue. I hope that what he was indicating was not an intention to refuse to listen, but I hope that he will be as good as his own word yesterday, which is to take part in the intensification of the discussions so that we can come to some positive conclusions, and I repeat positive conclusions that show that the UK Government is prepared to match the compromise that the Scottish Government has put forward. Adam Tomkins Thank you, Presiding Officer. In the handbook of EEA law, edited by Carl Bowdenbacker, the President of the FFTA Court, the following conclusions are defended. First, it is a major weakness of the EEA agreement that FFTA states ability to influence EU law to which they are subjected is extremely limited. Secondly, it is the complexity and sophistication of the EEA agreement that, in practice, it would be difficult for any state other than Switzerland to qualify for membership. Can I ask the minister if conclusions such as those that come from Europe's leading scholars on the EEA have been addressed in meetings of the JMC or indeed of the JMCEN? Well, I suppose that I should say if only. If only the UK Government actually thought in some detail about these matters and entered into debate, because there are responses that are perfectly possible to both of those. The first of those is to point out that we would be considerably weaker when we are not engaged in the single market. So this is not a question of saying that there would be a weakness. If we are not in the single market, there are huge disadvantages to Scotland, as the member will know having read this very important paper that we published last December. On the second point, nobody is understating the difficulties. The paper does not understate the difficulties, but I have to say that the difficulties of the UK position are also legion. This is not a simple matter for the UK. I am happy to quote chapter and verse of authorities who indicate that many of the things that the United Kingdom is saying will present enormous difficulties in negotiation. It cannot be one law for the UK Government and another one for the Scottish Government. The reality is that the difficult situation that we are placed in is not of our making, but we are still prepared to work exceptionally hard to get the best result for Scotland as part of the best result for the UK. What we need to have is an engagement in that process in the UK Government, the commitment of which was given months ago, but the process has not yet produced any results. That is why there is an agreement to intensify that process over the next few weeks. Lewis MacDonald Thank you very much. Can the minister confirm, in the spirit of the wider perspective that he has just elucidated, can he confirm the level of engagement around the Welsh Government's proposals at the meeting yesterday and, in particular, the bilateral engagement between the Scottish and Welsh Governments on that paper? I am fortunate to have a very productive relationship with the Welsh minister-responsal for these, Mark Drakeford. We met twice yesterday, first before the plenary session and again after the plenary session, and we agreed joint action to take forward the intensification. I spoke briefly to the Welsh First Minister yesterday, and undoubtedly the view that we all have is that the Welsh paper produced jointly between Plaid Cymru and the Government, and the Government, of course, includes a representative of the Liberals, is a paper that conforms very closely with our views and that there is clearly a community of interest in taking forward these discussions. Indeed, specifically at the JMC last week—two weeks ago—I made reference in my presentation of the Scottish paper to the fact that the process of engagement on that paper must now include consideration of the Welsh paper, a matter that was welcomed by the JMC and by the Welsh Assembly Government. I should also say that we recognise, for example, the contribution to this made by Sinn Fein before Christmas in the publication of a shorter document, but a document had indicated a desire for special status for Northern Ireland. So there is a widespread view that there is a requirement for differentiation in the UK position when it triggers article 50, and that is the key to the issue, to ensure that there is differentiation in the position. That is one of the reasons why the Scottish Parliament's discussion of the article 50 process will also be so essential, because it is important that members are engaged in the discussion of why the triggering of article 50 needs to take place, recognising the need for differentiation.