 The final item of business this evening is a member's business debate on motion 4407 in the name of Pam Gosel on congratulating Scottish universities on research excellence framework 2021 results. The debate will be concluded without any questions being put. I invite members who wish to speak in the debate to press their request to speak buttons now or as soon as possible and I invite Pam Gosel to open the debate for around seven minutes. I am honoured to be holding my second member's business debate on behalf of the Scottish Conservatives, celebrating Scotland's status as a world-leading research nation. I would like to start by thanking University Scotland and Scotland's rural college for sending briefings ahead of this debate. I would also like to congratulate St Andrew's University on ranking top of the guardians 2023 university guide and on being named Scottish university of the year in the times good university guide 2023. When I first submitted this motion, I was delighted to learn that around 85 per cent of research submitted by Scottish universities is considered world leading or internationally excellent in its quality. It is particularly impressive that every single one of Scotland's universities was found to be undertaking world-leading research. The research power behind Scotland's universities is immense and it is this that is driving force behind many policy developments that help to identify and respond to social economic challenges facing Scotland, the UK and the world. One such example is the joint partnership between Scotland's rural college and the University of Edinburgh, which retains its position as the strongest provider on agriculture, food and veterinary sciences in the UK. All 11 case studies submitted, eight of which involve SRUC, were considered world leading. Those range from topics such as refined greenhouse gas reporting to barley disease management, all of which promotes sustainable growth for Scotland's natural economy. It is all not only the UK that stands to benefit from Scotland's research contributions, but, as convener of the cross-party group on India, I have learned a great deal about international research collaborations. The University of Dundee, the University of Glasgow and the City of Glasgow College are all involved in the clean-up gunga case study, which involves mapping and monitoring water quality in the gunga. That research will make a fantastic contribution to the environment in India, but it will also create transferable knowledge that can be shared and learned from at home and across the globe. Let us not forget that research helps us through the pandemic and every day it helps cure diseases as well as identifying new ones. Research finds solutions to problems and problems to solutions. It is estimated that for every £1 million of public investment in Scottish University research, £8 million is generated in economic output. Whether that be through creating growth in emerging industries, job creation or attracting foreign direct investment, it is clearly an attractive area of investment. University of Scotland has a bold ambition to take innovation partnerships with SMEs across the UK to the next level. That is a necessary step for businesses responding to unpredictable or slow growth markets, but it is also a must for any sustainable economic growth. There is an appetite for Scotland's world-leading research capabilities, but we must be there to capitalise on them. We cannot let that be a missed opportunity. The SNP Green national economic transformation strategy claims to want to transform the economy, but that message has not been translated into action yet. There has been cuts to funding such as a 31 per cent real-terms cut in the research excellence grant 2014, since a projected 37 per cent real-terms cut to the teaching grant by 2024. And a 2,325 drop in funding per Scottish student since 2014. And it's with statistics like these that Scotland is losing its competitive edge on English universities. In contrast to Scotland, England's quality research grant is forecast to increase by over 10 per cent in cash terms between 2021 and 2023. Universities are increasingly being asked to do more with less. The university funding model is on its knees. It is set to more reliant on international tuition fees than on the SNP government, which is a high-risk strategy. But I believe that if the Scottish Government wants to see true transformation and growth, then they need to acknowledge that. We need to see investment. To lose our competitive edge in research and development would be to lose one of the most attractive areas of investment in our economy. In conclusion, despite our reining status as a world-leading research nation and financial constraints facing universities' risk-stunting growth, the SNP Government must find a way to not only support but to champion anacademic research. I, just like everybody else here in the chamber, am keen to work cross-party towards a solution. Going forward, I hope that the Scottish Government consider the asks from bodies such as Universities Scotland and look toward an economic return of such an investment, as the saying goes. There is no research without action and no action without research. Gossel, we now move to the open debate. I call first co-cab Stewart, to be followed by Stephen Kerr, for around four minutes. Thank you, Presiding Officer, and thank you to Pam Gossel for allowing the Parliament to reflect on the remarkable success of Scottish universities with this motion. In contributing to this debate, I would like to highlight the successes of the Universities of Glasgow, and Strath Clyde in particular, both located within my own constituency of Glasgow, Kelvin. Glasgow has been ranked 13th in the research excellence framework, rankings of 129 institutions and Strath Clyde 33rd. Those are highly credible performances, and both universities should be proud of their performance, achieved with intense focus and effort on the part of the staff, who we know also to have busy teaching timetables and student welfare responsibilities. The University of Glasgow's achievement is particularly exceptional, and I want to pay tribute to the university leadership team for its vision and commitment and to researchers who have delivered the result for the University of Glasgow and Scotland. Before the summer recess, I visited myself, the breathtaking new Mazzamdar Shaw Advanced Research Centre, known as the ARC. The new building is central to Glasgow University's research strategy. Moreover, the unique concept of creating world-changing research, which contributes to solving global challenges, is a huge credit to the institution and its academics. As you may know, the advanced research centre brings together over 500 leading researchers in a building specifically designed to break down organisational structures, facilitate collaboration and provide true societal impact. By housing such diverse teams within the same building, the ARC exposes individuals and researchers to areas and each other so that they can collaborate. It increases opportunities for interdisciplinary work on global challenges. It has exceptional features and accommodation, and I encourage everyone to go and visit it because the grand floor is open to the public at all times. The fact that the university has achieved this remarkable ranking while also delivering widening access to students from Scotland's most deprived areas and achieving a ranking of 19 out of 1,046 international institutions in the world for its positive impact on society in the times higher education impact rankings earlier this year makes it all the more impressive. Turning to Strathplides University, I would like to note the quality of Strathplides University's research and its impact, which has been recognised as the Scottish Government's significant investment in university ventures such as the advanced forming research centre and the continuous manufacturing and crystallisation. It is also reflected in Strathplides' leading role in national centres, including the National Centre for Manufacturing Institute Scotland and the Medicines Manufacturing Innovation Centre. In finishing, I want to sign just a wee note of serious concern. Brexit may not yet have dealt a hammer blow to research in Scottish universities, but we read earlier this year that one of Scotland's top cancer experts is considering moving a major research project abroad amid political turmoil and warnings that a Brexit-linked impasse over EU funding will starve universities of talent. In July this year, the Herald newspaper reported that Dr Payam Gamaj, who works at the Cancer Research UK Beatson Institute in Glasgow, warned that the UK's departure from the £80 billion horizon Europe programme is accelerating the UK's decline as a global centre for scientific excellence. He also said that development would significantly reduce Scotland's appeal to overseas researchers and stress that it was already proving impossible to attract applications from EU states. That is not what Scotland voted for. I would like to close on a note of hope that Scotland will return sooner rather than later to the EU's valuable, collaborative institutions and safeguarding the on-going excellence of our university's research input and output. We should measure what co-cab students have said against the actions of the SNP-Green Scottish Government. Before I get to that, I congratulate Pam Gosel on bringing this debate to the chamber tonight. This is the first time that I have had the privilege of addressing the chamber in my new capacity as our education spokesperson. As noted by Pam Gosel, there is world-leading research and development happening right here in Scotland. It helps Scotland and the rest of Britain to tackle social and economic challenges and much else besides the real challenges that we are facing in this ever-dynamic and changing world, which is why protecting and growing Scotland's research capabilities should be of utmost importance to everyone within this Parliament. The SNP and the Greens may talk in a way that gives the impression that they understand this importance, but the reality of their actions show us that they do not. Ahead of today's Education, Children and Young People's Committee meeting, the University of Scotland submitted evidence that said by 2024-25, the University's teaching grant will have been cut by 34.7% in real terms over 10 years and the research budget will have been cut by 41%. Let those numbers sink in. By 2024-25, our University's teaching grant cut by 34.7% in real terms over 10 years, the research budget cut by 41%. The Scottish Funding Council submitted evidence to the same committee, which highlighted that the average annual research funding gap in Scotland from 2015-16 to 2018-19 was £328 million. That is a gap of SNP-Green credibility when they talk about excellence in our universities and when they talk about excellence in our research capabilities. An analysis of UKRI, the UK Research and Innovations Industrial Strategy Challenge Fund, shows that only 6.5% of the funding went to Scotland compared with 44.2% going to London and the south-east of England. That is also a commentary on things as they are today. Collectively, this evidence shows that the success of research at Scotland's universities, highlighted by the motion, is not because of Scottish Government policy, but despite it. He refers to the amount of money drawn down through UKRI. Would he also reflect on the fact that universities overall win around 13% of the UK's project-based research funding with around 8% of the UK's population? Given the suggestion that he thinks that more money should be invested, where precisely should that money come from in the Scottish Government's budget? I am supporting the motion that complements and praises Scotland's universities' research capabilities and performance. However, I am saying very clearly to everyone's understanding that the SNP Scottish Government has much to answer for in its stewardship of Scotland's universities' research funding. I will, yes. Michael Manner, the minister in his intervention will be well aware that, in 2014, Scotland captured up to 15% of UKRI funding across the whole of the UK that is dropped by 2.5% in the interim period, exactly as a direct consequence of the funding gaps that Mr Kerr is highlighting. I am very grateful to Michael Manner for bringing those facts to the attention of the chamber. World-leading research and development spurs innovation, invention and improvements in the Scottish economy. In fact, it is only a few months ago that the finance secretary, Kate Forbes, brought to the chamber and launched a transformative plan for Scotland's economy. The truth is that, at the centre of that plan, are the centres of excellence in Scotland's universities, which will by and by create high-paid jobs, sustainable economic growth and a competitive advantage to Scotland. However, by cutting Scotland's research budget, the SNP is not only putting Scotland's world-leading research sector at risk, but it is cutting opportunities to create high-paid jobs in Scotland, and it is cutting opportunities to create sustainable economic growth in Scotland, and it is cutting opportunities to give Scotland that competitive advantage in a global economy. I will conclude by simply asking, is that what they call being stronger for Scotland? I do not think so. Rather than continuing with their financial cuts to research in Scotland and putting the sector at risk, the SNP should recognise the mistakes that they are making. Rather than continuing to cut opportunities, the SNP should be developing an ambitious plan that puts Scotland at the forefront of R&D within various fields such as pharmaceuticals, industrial machinery, computer technology, agriculture and green energy, and the funding that the Scottish Government provides must match the ambition of the plan. We cannot become complacent. I can see that I am testing the patience of the Deputy Presiding Officer. He thinks that I have taken enough time and I probably have. I will simply conclude by saying that Scottish University's research deserves better than it gets from the SNP Scottish Government. Thank you very much indeed, Mr Kerr. I now call Michelle Thompson to be followed by Martin Whitefield again for around four minutes, Ms Thompson. Presiding Officer, this place has a tradition of members' debates that are not overtly political, rather to focus on shared agreement and celebration of shared cross-party interests. That is what I intend to do in my short remarks. Scotland's universities have achieved so much that it is internationally excellent and world-leading, and that brings significant benefits for society. I have a very long active long Covid community group in Falka East, and the international study into long Covid led by the University of Glasgow, along with the World Health Organization, is likely to be of practical benefit to our understanding of the complexity of the condition. One of the characteristics of university research that is sometimes overlooked is the extent to which it involves working with others, as the University of Glasgow working alongside World Health Organization demonstrates. The University of Stirling in particular deserves great praise, not least because it is close to my constituency and many of my constituents have benefited from undergraduate and postgraduate studies. Indeed, some of the postgraduate research students contribute directly to its research excellence, and I know that their local MSP, Evelyn Tweedy, is disappointed that she is currently unwell in missing this debate. I want to note in particular that the university's institute of aquaculture is ranked first in the UK for impact, with 100 per cent of its research achieving the highest possible rating. It too has had huge links to other organisations in search of impact. The late Professor James Muir, after 30 years at the institute, moved to a post with the United Nations, and in one of his last international assignments he reviewed the Benguela current commission based in Namibia, a testimony to both his and the university's global standing. I also have a connection to Stirling University, in which regard I must point to my register of interests and my role as a director of the humanitarian organisation Revive campaign. We currently have two University of Stirling postgraduate students conducting research for us, one considering the impact of the war in Ukraine from a humanitarian standpoint and the other researching how humanitarian policies interact with the United Nations development goals. In so many ways, our university research capability has profound practical benefits for society, and as we look to the future, my contention is the role of university-based research will be of even greater critical importance. The world that we live in today is changing faster than ever before. Most of the scientific and technological changes have been reliant on university research and such changes have had impacts on both our wider social and cultural lives. In the future, research-based change will be even faster. The late Professor Tom Stonier, dubbed by some as the Professor of the Future, pointed out in the 1990s that in the last 25 years of the 20th century there will have been more people working in front-line research than the entire earlier history of the world fueling accelerating change. Things have continued to develop, making research the most fundamental need for any society with ambitions to make progress. Scotland needs to hold fast to her ambition and continue to invest in our university research base despite taxing economic times. Our very future depends on it. I thank Pam Gosel for bringing this motion before us. It is a great pleasure to follow Michelle Thomson's contribution, and I echo her final words of the importance of research for the future not just here in Scotland but for the future of the whole planet. It is in research where so many of the answers that we are desperately seeking, and indeed we sometimes shout about in this chamber, may well indeed be found in a possibly more rational location by those who apply their minds. However, the university research here in Scotland is of course world-leading. We have heard that. The million pounds that the Scottish Government invests in university research has generated a return of £8 million. Indeed, the return from UKRI funding is £12 million. The results for Scottish universities based on 21,256 research outputs, 8,675 academic staff across 18 institutions speak for themselves. We have heard about the 41 per cent of research that is four star, that is world-leading. The 44 per cent that is internationally excellent, three star, submitted across all areas, 50 per cent of research judged as world-leading or internationally excellent. This demonstrates the excellence across our country. What does that mean in the hard realities? For the Chamber's information, there are apparently 31,097 universities and higher education institutes across the world. The USA has 3,216 Australia, 190 Canada, 387 China, 2,565 across the United Kingdom, 280. However, what does that reality look like for people who get up in the morning and go out to work? Here in Scotland, Edinburgh University's research, world-leading, changed the age of criminal responsibility for us. Now we have the lowest number of young people in prison since 1972. At a UK level, Edinburgh research saved the NHS £2 billion across six years by improving stroke prevention around the world. The university research has saved a million children's lives from pneumonia, led to the banning of corporal punishment in schools and across several South American countries. Apparently, there are 175 million smartphones faster, greener and ready for the complex demands of tomorrow and 5G because of Edinburgh University. However, it is a reality, and it is a challenge, but I think that it needs to be addressed here, that the excellence here in Scotland is narrowing when compared with the rest of the UK, and there is funding pressures. Despite a sector-best performance, eight universities in Scotland saw their research funding cut in spring this year following the RAF results due to insufficient investment in the research excellent grant, the REG, as allocated by the Scottish Funding Council. Four of our highest performing universities saw their cuts of greater than £1 million. As Ian Gillespie, principal and vice chancellor at the University of Dundee wrote, well, where does this leave a university like Dundee? Midsized Scottish Research Intensive University? The answer, he said, is the squeezed middle. That group of institutions that, despite excellent overall results in RAF, including outstanding results in some areas, have received significant reduction in REG funding from the SFC. That is a challenge going forward. It is a challenge for this SNP-green Scottish Government because the challenge, as we heard from Michelle Thompson, is that we do not fund research. If we do not fund both applied research to move things forward but also the blue sky thinking that is needed, Scotland's future is looking grim. That is the UK's and that is the world because it is in our researchers, both the scientists, the engineers, the technologists, the whole teams that gather together to solve some of the hardest problems that we face and some that truly do sit around and think the impossible and make it possible, we have a very dim future going forward. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. Thank you very much, Mr Wettfield. I now call Michael Manner, the final speaker in the open debate again in around four minutes, please. Thank you, Presiding Officer, and thank you to Pam Gosall for bringing the debate to the chamber. It is right that we have the opportunity to celebrate the research culture and the outputs from our universities. It is an ancient but enduring strength of Scotland that Martin Wettfield has rightly highlighted, but it is something that we have to treasure and hold as a delicate treasure of our country. I am proud to represent a region with four, in particular, outstanding universities in Aberdeen, Robert Gordon University, University of Abertau and the University of Dundee. I want to make mention before I talk about projects or the general issues to the professional staff who work in the universities, frankly for whom the REF process, as they know it, is an absolute nightmare. It is not enjoyable process. It takes many hours to fill in complex case studies and to produce evidence to be assessed. We owe them our thanks for the fantastic standings that our universities are in and that we are all here tonight to celebrate. Those universities and those individuals do not do any of that alone. Research in universities is fundamentally a collaborative process. It is done with partners and other institutions both across the UK and internationally. We do not have to look further in what we saw in the Covid pandemic for the rapid production of vaccines within our universities when people can collaborate across borders. Some of the barriers to that collaboration were brought down, hopefully forever, in that process, in pre-print publications and rapid dissemination of the results of testing, so that we can have human benefit rather than intellectual property as a result of the outputs of our publicly funded institutions. In Co-Cab Stewart, it was right, I believe, to highlight Brexit. Brexit, in itself, has been a fundamental attack on that culture of collaboration. We should not walk away of dismiss the ideas. I do not think that anybody in this chamber would the challenges that that brings, the fact that access to the European institutions and their fantastic resource in different cultures of research, the barriers that have been put up to that as a result of Brexit. Brexit is about sharing knowledge, making sure that there is open access to that information. I know colleagues across universities whose careers have been fundamentally damaged by that process, who were funded through European funding and projects. It is a different track of funding, a different way, Presiding Officer, of gaining resource. To have that removed, I think, has ruined some careers in Scotland and right across the UK. Frankly, it is shameful that it has done so. The sooner you write in terms of full access to those collaborations, the better. In Co-Cab Stewart, I know that SNP members have to reflect on that, about not putting up barriers to collaboration. In the spirit of Michelle Thompson's point, in terms of not being too political, I will not go much further in that respect. However, if we are going to make sure that we have a continued collaboration, that has to be at the forefront of the minds of SNP members to make sure that barriers are not put up to how we work across those islands. I would also say that it does not serve this Parliament well not to highlight the challenges that we have. I know that the minister will respond to this in his closing remarks. We had this very morning at Education Committee the reflections of Professor George Boyle, the principal of the University of Aberdeen, who was drawing attention to the long-term trends of decline where we are. In the draft figures that we are celebrating today, English universities, Welsh universities and our UK universities have improved the performance at a faster rate than Scottish universities have. That is the challenging truth for us as a Parliament and as parliamentarians, that if we are going to safeguard that ancient and fantastic culture of research that we have in this country, we have to do better and we have to have a long-term and hard look at how we make sure that those trends do not scupper our universities in the years to come. Thank you, Presiding Officer. Thank you very much indeed, Mr Marra. I now call on the minister to respond to the debate for around seven minutes, please, Mr Hitler. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. Can I also begin by thanking Pangosl for bringing forward this debate by tabling the motion that she laid before? Part of this has been a very useful opportunity for us to reflect on and celebrate the many successes of Scotland's academic institutions and its research strengths. We know that we have a world-class research base here in Scotland and the new knowledge and insights that they produce are fundamental to our on-going recovery and growth. I can also add my congratulations as Pangosl did to St Andrew's in the news that he received in recent days. I thank members for their contributions. I will try to respond to as many as I can, but his contribution this evening allows me to welcome Mr Kerr to his new role as Conservative education spokesperson. I look forward to his on-going constructive contribution to discourse on all matters educational. I am sure that I can rely on him in that regard, but, returning to the subject matter this evening, the research excellence framework results that we saw recently fundamentally demonstrate that there is much to be celebrated in Scottish research. Our success does not just rely on a few institutions. Scottish university research is world-class right across the board. There is evidence of world-leading research in every single university in Scotland. That is something that we should laud and celebrate and make every effort to highlight. I thought that Martin Whitfield laid out some of that in detail, so I will not rehearse what he had to say, but I would absolutely. Because close here in Scotland, we have Open University Scotland, whose research is actually attributed to Open University as a whole, rather than the separate and distinct and resting in the Scottish figures. Indeed, I would reflect that the Open University in Scotland, which I have regular dialogue with, is a very much valued part of the landscape of higher education here in Scotland. I also want to join Michael Marra in acknowledging the, because we can talk about this in generic terms, the achievements of our universities, but all those achievements rely on the individual contribution of people working day in and day out in research in the various disciplines that they work in, so I want to join him in thanking those individuals. That research is allowing us, as a Nathan, to make significant breakthroughs when some of the biggest challenges and opportunities that we also face, Scottish researchers are driving innovations in the way that we treat cancer and the many other developing solutions that address the climate emergency and child poverty, they are bringing new knowledge that transforms our health care, technology, environmental sustainability and more, and, of course, they also played a critical role in reorientating and gearing much of the research activity during the Covid-19 period to make sure that we were responding to the challenges that we face. It is unsurprising, therefore, that the results show almost 90 per cent of our impact judged to be outstanding or very considerable. I should say to Cokab Stewart that I have been able to see firsthand how Scottish research changed lives at the University of Glasgow. When I visited the research into inflammatory arthritis centre with versus arthritis, I met the world-leading researchers advancing our understanding of the causes of rheumatoid arthritis, which would have no effects on more than 400,000 adults in the United Kingdom and 44,000 here in Scotland. That underlines the impact that it can have on people's real-life experience. It also speaks to the partnership approach that Michelle Thompson spoke of. I have seen examples of that world-leading research at all the various institutions that I have mentioned briefly. The minister has a tremendous responsibility because it is in his stewardship to see that the numbers that were quoted this morning from the University of Scotland about this real-terms cut in the research budget over 10 years or 41 per cent is reversed. Will the minister tell us what he is going to do to fight that much harder to make sure that this investment in Scotland's future is increased on his watch? I will come on to talk about the figures, but that was a reference to the recent research excellence grant awards. I should say that that has always been a competitive process. That has not changed and, by the nature of any competitive process, some may benefit more by that award than others. However, I would want to place on record that that model was shaped with consultation with the sector itself. I want to go back to the point that I was about to make, because both Cocab Stewart and Michael Marra spoke of the impact of Brexit. That is a concern to me. I want to assure all members that this Government is absolutely committed to making sure that there are no barriers to research and to underline that point. I was very happy to go just this morning to an event at the University of Edinburgh with Unah Europa, a coalition of European universities stretching across the continent, underlining the international approach that we have in Scotland. I reaffirmed that as an approach that I very much support and the Scottish Government values. In terms of the research base that we have—this speaks to some of the figures, because some have been banded about—what was not placed on record and enables me to do so is that, for all the points that have been made—I take them seriously—Scotland still ranks seventh amongst the OECD countries for higher education research and developed spend as a percentage of GDP. That is above the EU average, the OECD average and the UK average as well. We are continuing to invest nearly £300 million in research and innovation for this year. That is an increase from last year. We spent £3 million on our Salta research awards. Last year, it supported 200 projects between Scotland and Europe. That all contributes towards a wealth of research activity and enables them to leverage additional resources that enable Scotland to win around 13 per cent of the UK's project-based research funding, again with 8 per cent of the UK's population, as I mentioned a few moments ago. Scottish Institutions won around 12 per cent of the overall research grants and contracts from EU government bodies secured by the UK. Scottish organisations over the period 2014-2020 won €874 million from horizon 2020, around 11 per cent of the overall UK winnings under that programme. We are punching above our weight, just on that particular programme. If I am able to, I will give way to Mr Marra in a moment. That is a particular area of concern, because there have been suggestions about the concerns of the Scottish Government's investment. The concern right now is that we have a UK Government that is ready to take us out of the horizon 2020 programme, a programme that delivered nearly £900 million of investment from 2014 to 2020 above the UK performance here to Scotland. Do I have to give way? I can give you the time back, Mr Marra. Michael Marra. Thank you to the minister for giving way. I think that it is pointed about punching above our weight as well made. I made my intervention earlier about the declining trend in that regard. However, can I highlight the University of Dundee's performance in biomedical sciences, number one university in the UK, the whole of the UK for biomedical sciences, life sciences, that will drive the future of the Scottish economy better than any but Cambridge or Oxford? However, the question remains that, put by Professor Ian Gillespie, that performance was actually punished. That performance resulted in a cut to the reg funding to the University of Dundee. What does the minister have to say to those universities that performed outstandingly, astonishingly, in fact, and have had the resources cut as a result? I think that it is silly to talk about universities being punished. We have a competitive system where institutions put forward their work. It is assessed under the framework and grants are therefore awarded. What this has reflected is that we have seen an overall uplift in terms of the quality. We have said that it is something to be celebrated. I would have thought that Mr Marra would have wanted to join in that celebration. Let me conclude by saying again that I am enormously grateful for all the activity that is undertaken, the length and breadth of the country in our academic institutions. We should be proud of that effort. We should talk at every opportunity about that effort. There is so much work that is going on out there that is to be welcomed. I would encourage all members to get out to their local institution to see some of it for themselves. I can certainly tell you that I make it a core part of my activities to get out there and to celebrate all of Scotland's wonderful research through our academic institutions. Thank you very much indeed, minister. I can assure you and the chamber that I will be attending the UHI graduation ceremony in the coming days. With that, that concludes the debate, and I close this meeting of Parliament.