 The final item of business today is a member's business debate on motion number 113 in the name of Ian Gray on the closure of the Royal Bank of Scotland press and pans branch. This debate will be concluded without any questions being put. May I ask those members who wish to speak in the debate to please press the request-to-speak buttons now? I call on Ian Gray to open the debate and you have seven minutes, Mr Gray. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. I have to confess that, in my time as an MSP, this is not the first time that a bank has closed a branch in one of the communities that I represent, but it is the first time that I have brought that closure to Parliament in the form of a motion and by debate. The reason for that is very straightforward. The RBS branch in press and pans is the last branch. When it closes, and the closure is planned for August, there will be no banks in the town of press and pans. That brings home a truth that we sometimes think in here forget, which is that Scotland is not a country of half a dozen cities but much more a country of hundreds of small towns. We should guard sustainability and viability with great care. There are certain institutions in any town that make it viable—a school, a post office, a doctor's surgery, a police station and a bank. To lose the last bank in a community is a serious matter. Indeed, it is a matter that the banks themselves understand, because until recently they had an agreement that wherever there was a branch in a community and it was the last one, whichever bank it was that ran that branch, it would not close it. That agreement has been simply banned. It is because of the seriousness and the threat to the sustainability and viability of the community that the closure has provoked such a reaction in the town of press and pans and the county of East Lothian. That is why the local Labour Party, the press and pans branch Labour Party, have mounted a petition against the closure and have been out on the streets in front of the bank collecting signatures for some weeks now. It is also why the first signatory to that petition was one by Jimmy Ewell, who is the chair of the press and pans community council, who has also made clear their concern at the closure of the bank. I understand that those institutions that I listed in our community, schools, post offices, are largely public sector or, in part, public sector or once were public sector, whereas RBS is, of course, a commercial operation. I cannot deny the case that RBS makes that fewer of their customers are using branches directly with more customers banking online and so on, but they must understand that that does not mean that no one uses this bank branch. In fact, I have a number of experiences sent to me, all in similar vein. Here is one. Unbelievable experience in the bank this afternoon. Cues constant. Average waiting time 20-25 minutes. The reaction from the members of the public was amazing, with people constantly coming up and wishing us good luck with the campaign. A few old ladies were explaining to me that they do not have computers, so do not bank online. People opened the door and said, oh, hell, the queues are out the door again and left. That is not a branch that has no customers who use it. Those customers do not understand why they are now expected to go to RBS branches in Trinent or Musselborough, because those are communities that are not easy to reach and communities that have several branches of different banks themselves. They also are reluctant to trust RBS, because they remember branches close by in Port Seaton and Long Nidry, closed many years ago, and commitments that were made then about ATMs and alternative facilities that were not kept. Above all, this is a closure of which will not suit elderly or disabled customers. One of those who signed my petition made that very clear when she said—on my petition, the Labour Party's petition—that my aunt is disabled and cannot get any further than the press and pans branch due to her disability and panic attacks when she gets on the bus to go further afield. That local branch is needed for the disabled and elderly. Another said that work is a care worker with the elderly and the press and pans. They are all so worried and stressed with the thought of the bank closing since receiving the letters last week, their conversation is about nothing else. This is a closure that does not suit small businesses either. A number of those who work in small shops in the high street and press and pans have expressed concern to me because part of their duty when they close in the evening is to take cash to the drawer in the branch, which is just across the road, and deposit it there. They certainly do not want to be asked to get on a bus and travel to another town altogether while carrying the days' takings. Curiously, though, it is also a closure that does not suit children. One signatory to the petition said to me, I use the bank regularly to pay in my account and also my four-year-old son, who likes to go weekly and pay in his savings account book. He loves his weekly routine of banking for him and then lunch from the baker straight from the nursery, which he will miss if I have to travel to another branch. That, of course, is the nub of it, because that four-year-old boy is RBS's customer of the future, and he is one of those who is losing faith in that branch. This is a bank that spends time, often, trying to promote a very positive image. In another campaign that I am involved in with Grace Warnock of Gracie's Sign, RBS has been very supportive of that new sign for disabled toilets and has installed it in their own offices. In the end, it is the way in which they treat their customers, which matters. Those are customers of many years standing who are angry at this bank. They are angry, too, because they know that it is not so long ago that the bank looked to them as taxpayers to bail them out when they were on the point of collapse. They promised that they would return to doing the things that we expect our banks to do. One of the things that we expect them to do is to be there on our high street when we need them. That is why RBS should change her mind about that decision. I now move to speak to her. She is off four minutes, please. I have Bruce Crawford, who will be followed by Rachael Hamilton. I begin as a customary by thanking Ian Gray for putting down that particular motion. Ian put across the position in regards to pressing pans and the proposed closure of the bank. They are very effectively. As you might imagine, the story that Ian has just told is a story that can be told in the small towns as Ian described them in many parts of Scotland. Indeed, there are two banks due to close in my constituency—one in Stirling and one in Callander. It is not good that the one in Stirling is closing, but at least there is another Royal Bank of Scotland and other banks for people to choose. As far as Callander is concerned, it could have a real impact on Callander. I want to come back to that. I think that Ian is quite right to reflect on the fact that there is a reality out there about new technology, online banking and, of course, more and more young people. If I am still classed as young, I certainly do my banking online. I do not think that I am chronologically challenged that I cannot manage to achieve that still, but there are many who are a generation older than I am who are not as able to access online banking. I know that they have opened potential for post offices to be involved in some of the banking for the older people, but that is not what older people want to see in their own high street. Ian is right about the issue of small businesses, particularly with the cash issue at night when they close their businesses. There is a real security fear around some of the small businesses if they cannot properly have the cash that they raised on that day, taking care of them effectively. Obviously, that is about the bottom line of how the bank works and whether it can be a profitable organisation following some of the real challenges that it faced a number of years ago following the crash in 2008. If I am right, the shareholders in this particular bank are still a majority held much of it by the Government, and therefore the shareholders are actually the people themselves who are being affected by the closures, whether it is in press and pan sterling or Callander, which we have already described. One of the things that I have certainly tried to stress to the Royal Bank of Scotland is that there may be a bottom line issue. Yes, the market may be changing, but you have also got social responsibilities to the customers that you have served over a long period of time. In those communities where you have been operating, you have been taking financial resources out of that and using them for profit in your own way, so you have got a bit of responsibility back the other way in those communities. That is particularly true when it comes to the town of Callander. It has been a town in recent past that has had some challenges on its main street. I spoke to the bank and tried to persuade it. First of all, please do not consider closing this particular branch because of the potential impact on Callander as it is beginning to try to redress its place in the marketplace. I think that that was probably a forlorn hope for mine and I probably have a forlorn hope for Ian, but I have asked him to consider extending his life of the bank at least until the main street in Callander can potentially find a better outcome for itself. Now, Ian talked to other issues in the area of press and pans and what holds a community together. If we take the bank closures alongside issues such as lack of connectivity in some small rural towns in Scotland or the fact that public transport is becoming more and more of a difficulty for people in these small rural towns throughout Scotland, a bank closure actually becomes a really significant issue in their lives. However, I am really delighted that Ian Gray has provided that opportunity today to be able to speak on this important matter. It has allowed us to highlight not only just press and pans, but others will do this evening to highlight the particular challenges in their communities. I thank you for that, Presiding Officer, and I thank Ian Gray again. Rachael Hamilton, to be followed by Jackie Baillie. RBS continued with its savage cuts, closing down more branches on our Scottish high streets, this time in press and pans. Only in banking could a company post a loss of £2 billion and hand out £370 million in bonuses to staff, then continue with its ruthless foray of branch closures. Banks should think more about how their social responsibilities to the vulnerable stand and not about profit margins. I am not sure if anyone remembers back in 2010 when RBS pledged never to close a branch if it was the last in town. So what has changed? They say that low footfall is to blame and a significant shift to digital services. A large proportion of residents in press and pans are pensioners, and contrary to the belief of senior management in RBS, they are not all adept with an iPad. Over-the-counter banking should still be available to those for whom internet banking is not an option. Business customers are as equally important, requiring daily banking services and change orders for which the bank charges handsomly. Competition from out-of-town centres is fierce, and small shops and businesses require essential services to survive and compete. Sadly, a similar, irretrievable pattern of closures emerged in the borders with new town St Boswell's recently shutting, shortly followed by Earlston. There is no mention on the RBS website about lunchtime closures at the Melrose branch, but they still religiously continue to inconveniently take a lunch break, perhaps covertly but purposefully weaning its loyal customers from its services. I remember when my old man enjoyed a whisky at the kitchen table on first-name terms with his bank manager. He knew the business inside out. Banks have lost the plot, and I urge RBS to reconsider its proposals. That brings me on to another contentious subject regarding East Lothian. Service supply issues are not just a problem associated with banking in East Lothian. More than 10,000 homes are expected to be built by 2024. Concerns have repeatedly been raised by communities over the impact additional housing will have on the county's infrastructure. Fears that schools and doctors' surgeries will be unable to cope, as well as the potential of thousands more vehicles on the roads and overcrowding on the trains, topped by the on-going closure of the high street banks, is not acceptable. I would hope that the Scottish Government will set out their plans on how best to deliver this growth. It is important that residents of East Lothian receive the best possible deal on infrastructure and the implementation of a strategy that best mitigates the impact of this population growth. There is an underlying assumption that the A1 in East Coast Mainline can accommodate this growth. This is untrue. Both are already at capacity. Our local train services are full before they even reach Walliford, with car parks overflowing. A Bello have said that it will be years until the increased capacity to meet current demand. How can we have any confidence that they will be able to meet this demand? Peak time rail services between Edinburgh and North Berwick are woefully overcrowded, and we are still waiting for the long-over-G re-opening of East Linton and Rest and Stations and the dualling of the A1 trunk road to the English border. The pressures on East Lothian continue. Many residents require a car to travel beyond Edinburgh, yet the trunk road network is already grinding to a halt, and that is before the massive, cumulative, predicted growth of Mid Lothian and Edinburgh. Old Craig Hall, Sheriff Hall, City Bypass and Beyond all need massive amounts of investment and forward planning, yet nothing has been done to address that. I end by saying to transport Scotland and Scottish Government, do not fail East Lothian like RBS staff. I urge them to outline how they are going to address the infrastructure issues, and I ask Royal Bank of Scotland to reconsider their closure. Before I call Ms Bailey, can I remind members that members' business should address the motion in hand and that the minister will only respond to the motion in hand? Ms Bailey, to be followed by Bob Doris. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. Like others, I thank Ian Gray for securing this debate, because it is very clear that a number of local communities are affected by the latest round of closure announcements by RBS. Many of us will remember the television adverts that boast about the Royal Bank of Scotland's commitment to local communities. Forgive me for feeling just slightly bitter about that and wondering whether it breaches the trade description act, because that is clearly not the case. August seems to me the designated month for when those closures will happen. Light Preston pans and indeed calendar and sterling, the impact on my local community is centred in Alexandria. The proposal there is, of course, to utilise the post office and ATMs, or indeed, if people want face-to-face consultations, they need to travel four miles away to Dunbarton. However, accessible the bank attempts to make some of its alternative solutions, the reality is that this is about our towns and our town centres. I state for the record that the Alexandria branch, every time I have been in it, has been enormously busy. There is, of course, a UK Government protocol on branch closures, which all the banks signed up to last year. It commits them to finding suitable alternative provision for individual communities, to put in place alternative banking services where a branch is closed. I accept that they have tried to do this, but it is not adequate. However, it is the principal provision where they have to work with local communities to establish the impact of the branch closure prior to its closure. In my view, this has not been done. They have not been consulted in advance. The bank announced the closure of the branch and then said, we will talk to you about it. That is not consultation in my book, that is a fate, a comply, and I do not think that that is in the spirit of what was intended by the protocol. Local people have rightly been concerned, and let me just share with you two comments. Somebody said that I have been at a customer at their RBS Alexandria branch for over 10 years, and I doubt that I will ever switch to online banking because I do not even use cashline machines. I will introduce them to colleagues in the chamber after for instruction. Somebody else said that I have banked there since I was a child, and if it closes, I will be moving to another bank. It is not always suitable to go to Dumbarton. No consultation with clients, just a letter yesterday saying that it was closing and will be kept informed. However, this is so short-sighted because there are regeneration plans for Alexandria town centre. Some £6.5 million pumped into that local high street in Mitchellway, where the bank branch is situated. I simply note that the council has already invested just shy of £1 million to improve signage, which included improvements to RBS premises. The one thing that I know that makes me absolutely convinced that this is the wrong thing to do is not just the regeneration plans that are in place for that town centre, but the fact that RBS's actions have managed to unite the Labour group and the SNP group on Westin Bartonshire Council. Something that does not happen too often, but they have come together to urge RBS to think again, and I think that they are absolutely right to do so. Thank you, Ms Bailey. You do not sound very well. I now move to Bob Doris to be followed by Rhoda Grant. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. Can I start off as others have done in thanking Ian Gray for placing his motion before Parliament and making it available for Members to debate this afternoon and giving MSPs from right across Scotland the opportunity to put on the record our deep concerns about local RBS branch closures affecting our constituency. Our constituency is across Scotland. In Maryhill Springburn, there are two branches set for closure in Possil Park on 9 August and in Maryhill on 17 August. I recently met with RBS officials asking them to review that decision, and I will say more about that in a second. At that meeting, there were representatives from Maryhill and Somerson community council, from Possil Park community council, from Parkhouse community council, Lambhill community council, from NG homes representing the social housing movement within the constituency. Some of our councillors in Patrick Rady MP and apologies for many more, giving the whole range of individuals and citizens concerned about the closures. RBS have put on record their low usage numbers, but when I met them, when we met them to discuss this, I said to them, do you know how many people in the area actually have bank accounts in the first place? They did not have that information. I do not know if they knew that before they made their decision. I asked them if they knew how many people were actually connected to the internet in the first place. They did not have that information. They did not do the very basics to identify the impact, not just of those currently using RBS in Possil Park in Maryhill. However, I am just as concerned, if not more concerned, in areas of Possil Park, for example, where people do not have bank accounts in the first place and as RBS has been the only bank in town there, the only hope that it has access to mainstream financial services is that RBS wishes to take that away from them. That directly contradicts their own corporate and social responsibilities, because RBS talks about people finding themselves at risk of financial exclusion and being unable to access the basic financial services that they need for day-to-day living. One of the risks is that people can end up borrowing from payroll-owned companies or doorstep lenders, which pushes them even further into difficulty as they struggle to pay back high-interest charges. That is from their corporate and social responsibility document. I asked them, did they know the levels of indebtedness in those areas? Did they know how many people seek alternative lending arrangements such as payday lenders? They did not have that most basic information. Their decision was made on a basic business model irrespective of the corporate and social consequences, and now their consultation with Jackie Baillie outlined as mitigating the worst effects of that. That was deeply worrying. Other organisations also contacted me. I would like to put some of their concerns on the record as well. Rockhill Credit Union gave me a very detailed submission on why it will directly impact on their organisation for time constraints. I will not read through that. A local church leader spoke about how it will devastate the local community. I have to say that we actually did have a pretty constructive meeting, believe it or not, after all that in Pawsill Park in relation to trying to save the branches. We thought about alternative thinking and co-location of the branches with other organisations. We met a brand-new building that NGHomes is an anchor tenant and is run by jobs and business Glasgow. They have capacity to co-locate an RBS branch in there if they had that blue sky thinking. They said that they would consider alternative co-location options in both Maryhill and Pawsill Park, and other suggestions that we were keen to make. The thing is that they cannot possibly consider them by 9 August for Pawsill Park, and they cannot possibly consider them by 17 August for Maryhill. We insisted in continuity of banking services across the constituency, and RBS have pledged to go away and consider whether or not they will give a state of execution to Pawsill Park and Maryhill on the basis that we are coming with alternative solutions. The consultation was flawed, but the meeting was positive, and RBS will be listening tonight. I know where they will, not just in Pawsill Park and Maryhill, but we can give all our communities a state of execution, go back to the drawing board and to think again. I hope that that is something that the minister will go back here this afternoon. Rhoda Grant, we are followed by Neil Findlay. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I congratulate Dean Grahame on securing the debate as well. I understand that it is a big problem for his constituents in Preston Pans, and I share his concerns with regard to similar action by RBS, causing problems for my own constituents throughout the islands and islands. Most recently, in Campbelltown, Beaumaud and Scaranish, the branches were having their opening hours reduced. The two island branches are only open two days a week. Therefore, to access an alternative branch, it involves a ferry journey outwith its opening hours. The people in Campbelltown and Preston Pans, albeit not in islands, cannot easily access an alternative branch either. Those service reductions from RBS follow closures in branches last year in the highlands and islands in the Finver, Stromnes, Invergordon and Leibster. However, it is not just a problem with RBS, because many of the other high-street branches are doing exactly the same in following suits, such as the Bank of Scotland closing branches in remote areas. It is simply wrong that those banks are taking a wholly business-focused approach, ignoring the needs of their customers. Those same customers are the very taxpayers that bailed out those banks not so long ago. It is simply wrong that they now ignore their duty to repay that by cutting services rather than with a debt of gratitude. They cite internet banking as the reason for the reductions in services, because they tell us that it is reduced footfall. In my area, that is adding insult to injury, the places that they are targeting for those service cuts and closures are the places where internet access is patchy at the very best. Faced by unreliable internet service, non-existent branch banking, those areas are not getting any banking services at all. Add to that the needs of elderly people who are less likely to bank online, and they are more open to fraudulent scams by phone banking or emails from their own banks. Those are the most vulnerable in our communities and their needs are being ignored. If we are going to help to protect them, they need to have access to information and services from branches of their local banks. We might need to look at credit unions and how we support them to open branches in those small communities to allow elderly people and people who do not bank on the internet, and people who do not have bank accounts to access financial services. It seems to me that banks have given up the role in the community altogether and we need to look at alternatives of how to provide that to people. Banks have a duty to their customers, the customers that bail them out. It is time for the Government to act and intervene on behalf of those customers to try and stop those closures. The last of the open speeches is Neil Findlay. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. Rural Bank and the banking sector in general was going through mass evacuation from its branch network across the country. There appears to be a cull of branches going on. That cull is very clear evidence of a complete failure of planning and absence of managerial competence. On the one hand, we have a marketing strategy aimed at moving people away from branches and on to telephone and internet banking because, as well as being promoted as convenient for the customer, it cuts costs. On the other hand, we have a policy that, when it was launched, we pledged to stay open for business if we are the last bank in town. Since that policy was announced, we have witnessed bank after bank closed 600 since 2010, and many of those are the last bank in town. How on earth can senior banking executives have got it so spectacularly wrong? Is it not obvious that if you drive a policy that leads people away from banking in person to one where we use technology and rely on technology, it will inevitably run down the branch network? Promoting a last bank in town policy at the same time was either complete incompetence or a policy that deliberately sought to mislead customers and the public. RBS has never declared which of these is the case. In my region, many branches have closed, such as Falthouse, Armadale, South Gail, Tollcross, Royal Infirmary, Northbridge, Ballerno, Golden Acre, Newton Grange and more are planned at West Calder, Broxburn, Fairmailhead, Collington and Herriot-Watt. Indeed, there may be more. This is a bank that we control with a 73 per cent stake. I do not, as a shareholder in that bank, give my authority to close those banks. I hope that none of us do, because we are indeed the shareholders. Maybe the Conservative member who is here could have a word with the chancellor, because he has a bit of influence over what goes on in that situation. This is a bank that we had to bail out, where successive corporate failure has been rewarded, £17.4 million is awarded in shares to 10 of the senior management team, the chief executive on a salary of £3.8 million and £2.6 million worth of shares, and all the time public sector or indeed banking staff are lucky to get 1 per cent, reinforcing that view that there is one law for a certain group of people and another law for the rest. The closure programme is just another example of RBS's failings. There has been no discussion with loyal customers, no consultation, just corporate dictate from the boardroom, but they could do one thing to try and get their way out of things or try and gain some credibility with those communities. Of course, they could stop the closures or at least some of the closures, but they could also think about how they could give something back to the communities that they have profited from over the years. Where there is a desire to and where it is practical to do so, they could transfer the asset to the community, they could transfer the building to the community. That would at least go some way to doing something to reward those loyal communities. I have asked for that in my area and they have refused. The bank, despite closing over or around 18 months ago, still lies vacant. I think that this has been just another evidence of poor management by RBS and I think that the members of the public deserve much better. Bob Doris said in his contribution that RBS did not have the basic information on the numbers of people who would be bank accounts and on the number of people who had IT access. They do not have it because they do not care. They do not want to have it. They have a programme of closure and they are going to ram through this closure come what may. That is the reality of it. I have requested a similar meeting as he has. Unfortunately, I am still waiting on a reply. I now call Paul Wheelhouse to wind up the debate. Do you have seven minutes, minister? Thank you very much. I want to thank Ian Gray for raising today's motion. If I may, I am not sure if I have congratulated the Deputy Presiding Officer, Linda Fabiani, on her appointment since I have returned. I thank Ian Gray for bringing this motion before Parliament today. I think that it is an extremely important issue. The issue of bank branch closures is one that this Parliament has debated before. I appreciate that members have raised genuine concerns as Royal Bank of Scotland and other banks continue to close branches. Not only in Mr Gray's constituency in East Lothian but across Scotland, as we have heard. I am trying to do a rough tally and I apologise that this may not be accurate. In the current year, we have nine closures from Clydesdale bank, 13 from Bank of Scotland, eight from TSB and 13 from Royal Bank of Scotland. That gives a sense of scale as to the change that is happening at a local level. I am aware of a number of closures in both East Lothian and Scottish Borders, including the loss of historic branch in my own village, Aiton, which was hard felt locally. However, concerns have been raised again today about the impact of branch closures on our local communities and some very important points that were made by members. Many highlighting branches across the chamber have appeared to be busy when they have gone into them in recent times, so it is sometimes difficult for us to understand the business driver for closure of banks, but I will come on to that later. Banks have an essential role clearly in Scottish society, and members across the chamber have recognised that, but they are particularly important in our local economies. We all rely on banks in order to conduct our daily lives. The Scottish Government is absolutely clear that customers must be at the heart of what the banks do and the decisions they make. Ian Gray made a very important point about the Preston Pants branch being the very last one in the town. That is the particular significance in that particular community, but clearly that is also being experienced around the country. The decision that is taken by RBS to close those branches will have an effect on everyone in the local community, not least on the staff employed at those branches. Let us not forget that. Staff who have often, for many years, provided a much-valued service to their customers, and Ian Gray hit on the sense that there was a very much-valued branch in Preston Pants. I am not liberty to give details out, but I understand that there are no plans for compulsory redundancies, so that is at least something that is positive to take from the discussion. However, as Ian Gray identifies, there are commercial drivers, and we all accept that banks must address their long-term financial sustainability. RBS, in particular, is undertaking a process of restructuring to bring the bank back to profitability and ultimately to take the bank out of public sector ownership. In doing so, RBS has made clear that cost savings must be made, and unfortunately difficult decisions must be made. We understand that. However, it is clear from today's debate and from our previous debates that members do not feel that RBS gives sufficient weight to the views of customers and the wider community in deciding to close a branch. As Jackie Baillie has highlighted, there are concerns as to the engagement of local communities in communities such as Alexandria. Alexandria clearly is a community that could all afford to lose vital employment at this stage. The closure of a branch should be seen as a last resort and should only occur where customers, both personal and business, will still have ready access to the banking services that they need. Rhoda Grant set out in some detail where they would impact on rural areas, and I think that that was an important perspective. Where a decision is made to close a branch, there is a three-month period between announcing a closure and the closure itself. That has been agreed by the banks, by consumer bodies and by the UK Government, and set out in a branch closure protocol. RBS and other banks are clear that this 12-week period is a notice period, not a consultation period. However, this time can and should be used for genuine engagement with customers. Alternative arrangements should clearly be explained at any particular difficulties resolved where possible. There appears, as members have highlighted, to be no opportunity for customers and communities to influence the bank's decision. When a closure is announced, the decision has effectively already been made. It is, as Jackie Baillie put it, a fate of complete. That is a matter of great regret, I think, to us all. As Mr Gray highlighted in his motion, there is no doubt that many bank customers are increasingly using alternative methods to access banking services. RBS reports, for example, that branch transactions have declined by 40 per cent since 2010. Although online and mobile transactions have grown by more than 400 per cent in that same period, Bruce Crawford talked very effectively about the impact on older customers of perhaps the over-reliance that we have in looking at branch closures on online banking as a solution. RBS notes that only 9 per cent of their total transactions are now branch-based, down from 25 per cent in 2010. However, clearly, when people seek to go into a branch, they are often wanting face-to-face contact because they may have a more complex issue that needs to resolve. Indeed, that may be very important for them to seek advice and support at maybe a time of distress. As internet banking and increasingly mobile banking continues to grow in popularity, there is an inevitable impact on the number of customers who actively use a local physical branch. However, such solutions do not and cannot suit all customers. Not everyone has easy access to an internet or mobile banking—that was a point that was made by Rhoda Grant and others. Face-to-face banking is still considered essential by many customers, and a physical branch presence will continue to be a requirement for many years to come. Banks must therefore consider access to suitable alternative service provision in any decisions that they make about the delivery of branch services. As members have highlighted, disabled and elderly customers will be disproportionately affected. Small businesses and cash-generative businesses, including hospitality in other areas, might—actually might—and Rachel Hamilton will have for me. Neil Findlay I agree with me that it is absurd to pursue a policy of moving people on to the telephone and internet banking at the same time as promoting the last banking town policy. That, to me, is absolutely crazy. Paul Neil It is not for me to criticise the decisions about how banks go about their business in terms of promoting telephone banking or online banking, but I agree with the member that it is very important that they understand the impact of a branch closure on customers who cannot take advantage of telephone banking or cannot take advantage—they may not have a telephone for a start—but those who do not access the internet. The impact on those who are disadvantaged in a digital sense is absolutely essential to taking that on board. I listened with great attention to what Bob Doris was saying on that point, but I will give way to Mr Doris. Bob Doris You may actually answer the question, but you talked about a modal shift away from high-street banking for areas that possible part of significant deprivation. They have never made the modal shift from financially excluded to financially included. As the bricks and mortar bank is no longer on the high street, we are writing that area off for generations to come. Do you think that RBS should think about that before deciding to close a branch also? Paul Wheelhouse, we have some time in hand. Oh, thank you, Presiding Officer. I do believe that that is a very important point. I was going to return to that. I think that Mr Doris, in his speech, made some very important points about his own constituency. I commend him for the action that he has taken on engaging with RBS to discuss the impact on his local community. He is quite right. We face a big challenge in Scotland getting many people access to banking services full stop. That has obviously not helped if the only local branches that they may be physically able to access are being closed at this time. The banks perhaps are missing an opportunity, perhaps to customers that they would be gaining or not necessarily ones that would be high net worth individuals, but they are potentially customers that could be of value to the business going forward. I do regret that that does not appear to have played more of a part in their decision making process. I think that it was Bruce Crawford that was talking about cash generated to the businesses. I apologise to other members who may have mentioned that as well, but I think that that was a very important point, whether it is a local farmer or a local hospitality business, certainly in an area such as Mr Crawford's constituency, where many tourism businesses are taking a lot of cash on a day-to-day basis. They need somewhere where they can safely deposit that cash and know that it has been deposited as it is needed. RBS is maintaining its continuing to invest in its mobile van branches. Those are providing services in many areas where local branches have closed, as well as visiting communities that previously had no branch presence. However, that is very much a supply-led approach. It is not necessarily as flexible for consumers as a physical branch, because you can choose the time at which you decide to appear at the branch, not necessarily the time at which the branch is available to you. However, I do welcome the increased use of post offices as an alternative location for banking transactions, although clearly that network has also contracted in recent years and seen major changes, so it is not necessarily in a particularly stable place yet either. However, there are other providers of financial services in Scotland. The Scottish Government has long recognised the valuable contribution that is made by credit unions. I will touch on credit unions, but I will give way to Mr Doris. Minister, you mentioned post offices as an alternative, but a post office cannot open a bank account. It cannot set up a direct debit or a standing order, alter either of them, get loans advice or get mortgage advice. Post offices just do not cut it, do they? Minister, can you wind up fairly quickly? I will, Presiding Officer. I do not want to criticize post office network. I merely make the point that, as a fallback in the absence of a local branch, it at least does improve the access for people to be able to obtain the funds. However, I take Mr Doris's point on board about the services that are provided. However, there are other providers, including credit unions, who tackle financial exclusion of the kind that Mr Doris mentioned. I was pleased to see him make reference to credit unions in his speech. They provide vital financial services to a wide range of customers. However, as I said, I was very struck by his own intervention in relation to his own local branch, and I wish him success in that campaign. I appreciate members' concerns about the impact of those closures on our communities, whether it is the borders, as Rachael Hamilton said, or as Mr Gray said, and all across the country. I appreciate members' concerns. In my new ministerial role, I will have the opportunity to meet regularly with representatives from the banks. I certainly undertake that I will raise those issues when I have opportunities to do so with the branch and make sure that the banks are aware of the strength of feeling across the chamber today. I urge RBS, which Bruce Crawford, Ian Gray and Neil Findlay also pointed out, which is 71 per cent publicly owned by the taxpayer, to listen to and work with local communities and the representatives in ensuring that banking services remain readily accessible to all and meet the needs of the Scottish communities, and to ensure that it does not do harm to the common good in closing branch branches in remote and vulnerable communities. I hope that a positive outcome can come from discussions that Mr Doris will have with RBS regarding his constituency. Indeed, if Mr Findlay has given an appointment that there may be opportunities to look at alternative models and that the Government will be supportive where we can be of those. Thank you very much for your patience.