 The next item of business is the debate on motion 12457 in the name of Daniel Johnson on growing Scotland's economy. I invite members wishing to speak in the debate to press the request to speak buttons. I'd advise the chamber there is, as ever, a very little time in hand. With that, I call Daniel Johnson to speak to and move the motion up to six minutes. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I move the motion in my name. Today's debate doesn't need to be an argument. The Government could choose to be constructive to look at the issues that we face and to talk in serious terms about the powers that it does have around skills, around planning, regulation and about the infrastructure that our economy relies upon. Or they can choose to look the other way, or worse, stick their head in the sand. I would urge them to do the former because we need to focus on productivity. We shouldn't just be worried about the technical recession that we appear to be in now, but more importantly about the seven quarters of consecutive decline of GDP per capita at a UK level. Worse still, the evidence that would seem to suggest that Scotland is, if anything, underperforming this UK economy rather than being held back by it, because that would seem to be the indication provided by the CBI and Fraser Rounder Institute report, which showed that Scotland lags the UK on 10 out of the 13 measures that it set out. I am grateful to Mr Johnson for giving way, and I share much of his analysis of the CBI and Fraser Rounder report into productivity. Can he clarify what Labour stands now on income tax differentials? Do they believe that income tax in Scotland should be made equivalent to income tax in the rest of the UK, or do they have a different position? I thank my other Fraser for asking me an easy question, but what we have to do is look very carefully. Whether there are income tax differentials, we need to look at the costs of that and the impacts that it has. That is not the same thing as saying that we could move immediately to do so, but it is something that you need to pay very close attention to. I think that there is evidence and indication that the differentials are now hurting the ability to attract talent to Scotland. The second point that I would point is that, set out in the Fraser Rounder report, the proportion of businesses that are innovation active, which is 6 per cent lower in Scotland than the UK average, and in health, where 31 per cent of those economically inactive are on long-term sick compared to just 24 per cent in England. That is not an isolated report. The Ernst and Young regional economic growth report shows that Scotland's projected GVA, as well as our employment growth, is projected to be both slower than every other nation and every other region of the UK. The Scottish Government, with its significant powers to deliver economic growth, is no more concerned with pointing out what it can't do than focusing out on what it can. A year on from the so-called reset on business, I think that many businesses that I speak to feel that that relationship is stuck rather than reset. We hear new strategies time and time again, goals discussed but really very little in terms of delivery or implementation. We are now two years on from the Scottish Government's 10-year end-set programme, but what has been achieved? Indeed, Audit Scotland has already highlighted the gap in political leadership that is a quote from the report, with crucial governance structures not even established. Indeed, Ivan McKee, one of the people that was involved with that report in a recent column, said that the Government is chasing good headlines at the expense of economic policy implementation. I think that he is right. We desperately need a plan with a later-like focus on delivery and a Government approach that seeks to... Does Mr Johnson agree with me that it would be deleterious to the economy in Scotland if Labour further increased the windfall tax by 75 to 78 per cent and also even more damaging, perhaps, remove the reliefs that currently exist? In the short term, there may be slightly more revenue, but in the long term, in the 30s, there will be nothing at all. It will just start your investment. I understand that the member is concerned, but in the end we have a choice. Do we seek to tax the profits of energy companies or increase tax on hard-working Scots? I know what I would choose every single time. In our paper that was recently published on building a business case in Scotland, we set out three principles, having partnership with business, a plan for both business and Government to understand their respective roles, and thirdly, the convening power of government, where the Government must recognise its proactive responsibility of bringing parties together. However, I think that what we see from this Government is a failure to take seriously the powers and priorities that it needs to. For example, Berwick Bank, there is a very serious risk that this project, which potentially would give Scotland one of the largest offshore wind projects in the world, will be held back. The site still does not have Scottish Government consent that it needs. It needs that by April 16 in order to take part in the contracts for different auctions just next month. The decision has been on ministers' desk for 15 months. The uncertainty undermines investment and harms supply, so let's have decisions made in a timely manner where the Government understands its responsibility and the role it plays in economic development. Similarly, on Grangemouth, we see a lack of proactive steps. The cessation of refining in Scotland's only refinery, a key strategic asset, will cost workers their livelihoods and devastate the local community. The key to this is the hydrocracker, for the sake of £12 million investment. The site could be profitable enough for it to continue. What will Scotland take? Will it pull out the stops? Has it held the meeting, assembling agencies such as the Scottish National Investment Bank, Scottish Enterprise, with the owners and other potential investors, using its convening power to see what could be done pulling out all the stops to get that investment? Will it simply talk about economic factors, talk about a just transition but doing little to deliver it? It is clear that under this Government it feels that we are drifting towards a lost decade of low growth, with high taxes and declining public services. We desperately need a Government willing to harness the economic potential of Scotland and its people, a Government willing not just to set goals but to do the hard yards to deliver the actions to realise those goals. Scotland needs change, and Scottish Labour stand ready to deliver it. Thank you. Thank you, Mr Johnson. A gentle reminder to members who are looking to participate in the debate who haven't already done so to press the request-to-speak buttons. I call on Manny McCallan to speak to and move amendment 12457.2 up to five minutes, cabinet secretary. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I should like to begin by welcoming Daniel Johnson's timing of this debate. He is suggesting in his motion that Scotland is somehow lagging behind the rest of the UK. Of course, he does so, while the UK is in a recession, technical or otherwise. When Scotland is not, in doing so, I do fear that he is somewhat undermined his own arguments. However, in moving the amendment in my name, I want to use the time that I have to set the record straight. I will do so with reference to two key points. Firstly, that Scotland's economy performs well in the UK, but that the UK economic model is ultimately failed. That has been compounded by the pursuit of a disastrous Brexit and that, while Scotland remains part of this failed system, we will compare poorly to our European comparators. On that current performance, Scotland is the top-performing region outside of London in the south-east, with the third-highest wages and GVA per person in 2021. Since the SNP came into government in 2007, GDP per person has grown by 10.8 per cent in Scotland compared to 5.6 at UK level. Again, since 2007, productivity has grown at an annual rate of 1 per cent a year, compared with the UK's half a per cent. On inward investment, in 2022, we outperformed the UK and the EU average, with growth of 3.3 per cent in Scotland compared to 1.4 per cent growth in the EU, and a 6.4 per cent fall across the UK. This week, a key survey showed that private sector employment in Scotland has grown faster than any other UK nation. All of that is important to note. At the same time, more workers earn the real living wage in Scotland than elsewhere in the UK, and a near record number of workers are in payroll employment. Likewise, the gender pay gap and child poverty rates are lower compared to the UK. All of that demonstrates that Scotland's economy is one of the best-performing in the UK, and that the SNP Scottish Government has determinedly pursued fairness alongside economic growth. I am very grateful to the cabinet secretary for her way. I should not recognise that you need to look at those figures in the round. Those employment and wage growth come after we grew more slowly coming out of the pandemic. Does she recognise that the 10 out of the 13 measures set out in the CBI and Fraser van der report put us behind the rest of the UK? I want to say that I welcome the CBI's report and the work that I am able to do with them. I think that we need to take it in the round. I want to talk about the context, because what I have set out there has been achieved in the face of headwinds. Headwinds that, for me, like so many like me around Scotland, have characterised my whole adult life. Chief among them are the 15 years of corrosive austerity, which has relentlessly underfunded our public services and punished the most vulnerable in our society, and that hard Brexit that was pursued against the democratic will of Scotland and in the middle of a pandemic. On Brexit, research is now showing that the UK economy is 2.5 per cent smaller than it would have been in the EU. The OBR says that it expects the UK's potential GDP to fall by 4 per cent in the long run because of Brexit and, appallingly, despite that, and the very overwhelming evidence that Brexit is damaging our economy and should be reversed, neither the Tories nor Labour's supported returns either. I am afraid that I do not have time. Over the course of the past two years, we have seen the parties in Downing Street who are vying for Downing Street emulate one another. We have seen that in Brexit and, of course, we have seen it in their approach, Labour's approach to caps. Capping is now appropriate for child benefit but not for bankers' bonuses in their view. I want to use the time that I have left to talk about what there is yet to do, because Daniel Johnson is absolutely right that we cannot be complacent. We are working to deliver our vision for Scotland's fair, green and growing economy. We are doing this in a number of ways through our blueprint for entrepreneurial campuses, investing in our national tech-scaler network or launching the national manufacturing institute for Scotland. We are progressing on a Stewart's recommendations on support for women in business. We have strengthened conditionality through fair work first, and we are increasing funding for the green investment portfolio by £1 billion. I have had the chance to see that for myself. For example, I recently visited Perimol Farmer's £45 million investment in antibody drug manufacturing in Grain and Drouath. Of course, I welcome Sumitomo's £350 million inward investment into the Cromarty. Those are hugely exciting times, Presiding Officer, and this Government is seizing the opportunities before us. However, and I end on this point, it is well documented that it was the combination of the flexibility of independence together with access to the European market that were key components of the success of our prosperous Irish neighbours. Is therefore very clear that only as an independent country can we truly realise what this Government has long pursued under devolution, namely the true economic potential of this country side by side with the health, wellbeing and happiness of all who live here? I remind the cabinet secretary that Ireland's economic growth was based on slashing taxes to attract investment, which is the opposite of what this Government is doing in terms of its devolved budget. I welcome the debate on growth. Very well timed from the Labour Party in the very day we learned this morning that the UK economy grew 0.2 per cent in January and is climbing out of recession. Despite international headwinds affecting all major western economies, the UK economy has grown faster than any other major European economy since 2010 and is expected to grow faster than many of our competitor nations. I am very grateful to Mordo Fraser for giving way. First of all, we did acknowledge that 0.2 per cent is hardly an economic surge, but more importantly looking at those same GDP figures on a per capita basis that the UK's performance is well within the bottom third, if not the bottom quartile of the OECD. Mordo Fraser said to Mr Johnson that he needs to look for example what is happening in Germany in persistent recession and the UK economy is performing better than many of the benchmarks against which we would judge it. However, growth is important. We need growth. We want to provide secure, well-paid jobs. We need to generate the tax revenues that our public services depend on. I agree with a lot of Daniel Johnson's analysis, the CBI Fraser of Allander Scottish Providitivity Index. He referred to his stark messages about us lagging behind the rest of the UK on a range of measures. Stephen Leckie, president of the Scottish chambers of commerce and someone who has just been elevated to chair of VisitScotland, a very worthy appointment in which I think he will excel, said that Scotland's economy is stuck in a low growth cycle. He is correct, because since 2014, over the last decade, Scotland's growth has been on average one-half the rate of the UK. Had we grown even at the UK average over 10 years, that would have given us an extra £6 to £7 billion extra in tax revenues to spend on vital public services. The cabinet secretary in her amendment and in her speech, of course, referred to the numbers back to 2007. She is right in the period 2007 to 2014. Relatively speaking, the Scottish economy grew faster. Why? Because of the growth in oil and gas, the very sector of the economy that the SNP Government wants to see closed down, as indeed does the Labour Party. So she should not take too much comfort from that. The position since 2014 has not been encouraging. This whole question of the tax differential is mentioned in our amendment, because it is actually very important to this debate. Sandy Begby, the chief executive of Scottish Financial Enterprise, was quoted last month. I will if he is very brief. Given his remarks about the windfall tax, does he regret the decision by the chancellor to extend the windfall tax to £229? Yes, and we have made that very clear, but we still have a better offer in supporting the oil and gas than any other party in this chamber. Sandy Begby said that Scotland is becoming a dangerous place to be rich or create wealth. When somebody who is a senior business figure comes out with that warning, we should listen to it. It would be good to know exactly where Labour stands on this. I heard Mr Johnson's response to my intervention. He was hinting that Labour is moving towards a position of perhaps lowering income tax in Scotland. That would be a serious departure from what we have heard from his Labour colleagues over many years in this chamber, where they have persistently called for higher taxes on higher earners to fund public services. If that is a change in Labour's direction, that is very welcome, but I think that we need to get that clarified. Finally, we have the new deal for business, which is much promised. It is much welcomed by the business sector in Scotland, but it is now sadly disappointed because all that was delivered in the Scottish Government's budget was tax hikes, no passing on of business rates cuts, cuts to enterprise, cuts to trade, cuts to employability, cuts to skills, cuts to colleges and cuts to universities. That is why the business community in Scotland is looking for a lot more from this Government. I recommend to them our grasping with thistle paper. That is what is covered in my amendment to this debate, and I have pleasure in moving it. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. There have been a lot of talk about context this afternoon, and we should remember that the last 10 years have enveloped this country in chaos. Whether it was the independence referendum that had a direct impact on the business community and on our economy through to Brexit, Boris Johnson, the pandemic, but also that infamous Liz Truss budget, it has been a decade of political uncertainty. The economy has been undermined, but the Scottish policy context is important as well. If you look at the Scottish Government's industrial strategy, it has been based around in spending hundreds of millions of pounds on projects with very, very little return. You just have to take BiFab, for example, £50 million for nothing in return at all for the Fife or the Western Isles economy. If you look at the taxation policy, it has been incredibly volatile from proposing hikes in income tax to enforcing freeze of the council tax to hikes again in income tax. It is very difficult to read where this Government is actually going. It claims progressivity, but it never gives any indication as to when that ends. Regulation, where the legislation has been heavy handed, sometimes with good intentions, but heavy handed, overcooked and implemented in a cack-handed fashion. The effect is that, on the Scottish economy, it continues to be sluggish with productivity at a terrible state. It is lagging the UK, which in itself lags our competitors in the rest of the world. Business research and development lags the UK, and it is done for a long time and this Government has made no difference to business R&D and where GDP growth has been incredibly weak. That feeds through to public funds, which are available for public services. The country needs change in Westminster, but also in Holyrood and into the chaos, and a focus on practical steps to grow the economy. There are some real opportunities that we must maximise. After the far too large Scotland leasing round was sold on the cheap, the Scottish Government now has an enormous task to support the creation of the enormous supply chain that is required to exploit the potential and build the expert staffing capacity in Marine Scotland to grant the various permissions that are required. It can currently take up to 10 years to get a windfarn into operation, but it is far too long. If there is a bottleneck on licensing and if the supply chain is not developed here, the work and investment could go elsewhere, along with our energy security, much so after, and our climate change obligations. The stakes are incredibly high. If we turn to our universities, there is a major source of economic growth, especially through the talent that it produces and the excellent research that it conducts. That research feeds through to spin-outs, licensing and jobs, and growth. You can see it in our communities, yet because of the lack of support and investment, Scottish universities are attracting an even smaller proportion of the UK research funding. It continues to decline. The opportunity is slipping away from us. We need to make sure that we invest in our universities to keep that excellence. We also need to have a stable United Kingdom, with Scotland as part of it, for the finance sector. We saw through the independence referendum how vulnerable that sector was to the threat of independence, and we must therefore have an end to the endless production of independence papers that are causing a huge distraction. We are short of skilled workers following Brexit. We need to have an immigration policy that works for our economy. The short-term licensing scheme is overcooked and overdone. The regulation measures need to be smart and fit for purpose. Finally, on taxation, we need to have some certainty about it. I do not know where the Government is going on taxation. I think that many people are worried about where they are going. The progressive argument continues forever. It needs to have certainty in order to get investment in our country. Education and skills are key if we are to have a high-wage, high-skill economy that works for the people of Scotland. Right now, we have a skills gap across much of the Scottish economy. Our schools are struggling with increasing pressures, and our colleges limp along from crisis to crisis, with staff morale being reported to be at rock bottom. A survey reported of employers in 2022 by CIPD suggests a negative perception of schools by employers across Scotland. The report states that some of the most concerning findings are around the gaps in literacy and numeracy in the workplace that are linked to school education and are worse here in Scotland than in England. The survey also shows that 22 per cent of employers use further education colleges to deliver training, and 52 per cent do not offer any apprenticeships at all. It is crucial that the Government focus on education and address the issues of our schools and colleges. In January, the college minister told his chamber, and I quote, there is long-term issues with industrial relations in the college sector. He went on to say, I am intrigued by the fact that, although all sides recognise that, we have not yet been able to find a solution. Colleges are key to skilling up the workforce of the future and reskilling the workforce of today. It is simply not good enough that the Government stands back and watches, while the colleges bounce from one crisis to the next, the Government must take the necessary actions to ensure that our colleges can deliver for our economy and for the people of Scotland. No more excuses. We need action and we need action now. Also, I made the point and the debate last week that my concern is that the Government is so consumed by its singular focus on independence as the only answer to difficulties that we face in Scotland that our current place in the world is diminished purely because the SNP refused to believe that we have the ability to build a better country with the powers that we have. A case in point is the First Minister's speech in January, where he made the case for an industrial strategy for Scotland after independence. I would argue that it is ludicrous to suggest that independence is needed to deliver an industrial strategy for Scotland. I take the view that an industrial strategy can be put in place right now within the UK. As our Scottish futures paper from growth to good published in December states, we believe that what we are lacking is a more collaborative, simplified and focused joint-up plan from our two UK and Scottish Governments. It goes on to state on the economy. Our diagnosis is clear. We believe that the Government in Scotland is doing too many things on too small a scale and too many unconnected silos. Our prescription is for the Scottish and UK Governments to come together to agree a new industrial strategy for Scotland back in key growth sectors and places to drive up productivity and growth for all. To be clear, we need both the Scottish and UK Governments to come together to work together and to work with industry and trade unions to develop an industrial strategy for Scotland that will deliver the growth and prosperity that Scotland requires. I have a minute, so I will probably not take any interventions. I must confess that I read Labour's document, and if you will permit me, I have a copy here in front of me with interest, because I was looking for some ideas that we can always learn from others. It runs to about 30 pages, 10 pages, of which are photographs of many of Annas and Keir Starmer staring wistful into the middle distance. I do not know quite what they are contemplating. To be honest, it is pretty thin grill, and I will come to some of the specifics as we go through my contribution. First of all, it references Scotland's economic performance. One of the first always to highlight areas for improvement, as members across the chamber know, we can always do better. However, as the cabinet secretary has clearly outlined, we have lower unemployment in Scotland than the rest of the UK, and faster wage growth than the rest of the UK in Scotland last year. The best foreign direct investment performance outside of London, onshore exports growing at twice the rate of the rest of the UK post-Brexit. Less workers below the real living wage higher GDP per capita growth over the last period and higher productivity growth per capita in the rest of the UK. Better on the UK on many economic indicators, but, of course, that itself is a fairly low aspiration, and we need to do better with the full powers of independence. That performance, of course, better than the UK, did not happen by accident. There is a coherent set of strategies that sits behind it, including the national strategy for economic transformation, innovation strategy, our digital FDI export strategies and others. Of course, we can do better on delivery, but those actions that need to be delivered are clear. What does Labour's document say about the specifics? It calls for a simplification of the agency of landscape. You might want to have a conversation with High or Sosie if you have them in your sites. Economic performance in the Highlands and South of Scotland has gone much better than before, so there is a consequence of those agencies being in place. However, it tops it all by complicating the landscape further by calling for the establishment of a council for economic growth so that it is not even coherent within the Labour document. It calls for investment in ports. I do not know whether that is part of Labour's promised £28 billion commitment to green investment—sorry, no longer a commitment to green investment, so I do not know where that port investment is going to come from. It talks about ensuring that Scotland has a voice in the UK immigration system in pushing for EU waivers. I tell you something, if Labour was opposed to Brexit the way that we are, we might make more traction in both of those areas. It talks about exports in promoting a brand Scotland and working with partners, including the Aspera. I might not have heard of the Global Scott programme going from strength to strength, and the export strategy driving that export growth faster than the rest of the UK post-Brexit, as I mentioned. I would be interested in getting Labour's view on Scotland's international footprint or SDI in the Scottish Government office. It is something that the Tories are always keen to criticise. I would like to get in the closing remarks Labour's perspective on that. It talks about developing a single gateway for FDI. We have already got that. It is called Scottish Development International and it is delivering that success of Scotland performing best of all parts of the UK to the London and delivering foreign direct investment. It talks about supporting the sector to grow digitising SMEs and rolling out digitisation in the public sector. All the themes covered in the Scottish Government's digitisation strategy developed jointly and very powerfully with COSLA. Of course, the Scottish Fintech sector as a result of what has been done by Scottish Enterprise and the Scottish Government over the last number of years is one of the leading clusters, Fintech clusters anywhere in Europe. It pays tribute to one of the Scottish Government's strategy that was commissioned by the Scottish Government on the Logan review from Scotland's Scottish Government chief entrepreneur and talks about the importance of that. We will give him credit for recognising the value of some Scottish Government work in that regard. It makes a comment about learning from Silicon Valley. I would like to get the Labour Party's perspective on the minister, Mr Lockhead's visit to Silicon Valley, to learn from it, as Labour has identified that it should do, because all we heard from opposition members on that was criticism about its taxi fare. Ridiculous piece of nonsense. It is not understanding what we have to learn from others internationally. You must conclude, Mr McKee. I could go on and on and on, but one very brief conclusion. The tourism sector calling for a new tourism strategy will be news to the SDA who are working very thoroughly on Scotland Outlook 23, Scotland's national tourism strategy. Thank you, Mr McKee, at that point you must conclude. Brian Whittle, to be followed by Colin Smyth. I have to say that there was a bit of a spark of growing sense of excitement when I heard that the Labour Party business was going to split its time between health and growing the economy. Finally, I thought that the pennies were beginning to drop. They are starting to recognise that we need to tackle Scotland's poor health record if we are going to fully realise Scotland's full economic potential and that our consistently poor and declining health report card is the biggest drag on our economy. That spark was quickly extinguished when I read both of their motions. It seems that they are still to make that connection across portfolios to practically tackle the major issues that face Scotland today. Waiting times delayed discharge. Poor health outcomes in the preventable space like the drug and alcohol deaths and addictions. Obesity, type 2 diabetes, COPD, heart disease, 40 per cent of cancers and so on, leading to a high level of economic inactivity in Scotland's population. Last term, the health and sport committee determined that preventable health issues were costing the Scottish economy more than £30 billion. I would suggest that figure has continued to rise significantly since then. The problem, as in all portfolios, as we see time and time again, is that the SNP is only capable of firefighting the problems that they have created rather than developing long-term solutions. 17 years, so much could have been achieved in the preventable space with the major levers of health and education fully at the disposal of the Scottish Government. In just about every measure, the SNP has managed to create worse outcomes for the Scottish people. That is why I was encouraged last week with an announcement of £3 billion in the Chancellor's budget for health, tech and IT, especially around communication and collaboration, one of the most significant interventions that will lay the foundation for more efficient health outcomes. That brings me to education in this debate, the cornerstone of every portfolio, especially health and the economy. The educational environment can have such a huge implication on long-term health outcomes, which in turn deliver a boost to our economic development, not to mention positively impacting on things such as welfare and justice. I was with an electrical engineering company on Monday who told me that they cannot grow at the rate that they should and could, simply because they cannot recruit enough apprentices directly related to a lack of career guidance in schools. A salary for a qualified electrical engineer is in the region of £45,000. However, many of the opportunities that should be available to our students in the green and renewable space, that message and those opportunities are not filtering down to them. Colleges have the skill and the capacity. It is just not being realised leading companies to importing the skills rather than training Scottish students. In this short debate, I have only scratched the surface of what I would like to say. However, if we are in agreement that we need to grow Scotland's economy and properly invest in our public services, we have to be prepared to say where we will get that growth from. I would advocate that investing in education is investing in health. I would advocate that investing in education is investing in the welfare and justice system and as a key driver in tackling poverty and inequality. Finally, investing in education for all the reasons that are stated above is investing in our economy. Tackle education and health, both of which have been completely devolved to the Scottish Government for 17 years, and the economy will benefit. Cross-portfolio working, not this Government's strong point. If publishing plans, agreeing strategies or setting up advisory councils delivered economic growth, Scotland's economy would be booming. According to our Scotland future, we have had 60 plans on the economy over 80 on climate change in the past decade. Scotland's economy continues to lag behind the rest of the UK on 10 out of 13 productivity indicators from business investment to R&D spend. For this Government, it is about being seen to be doing something but not actually doing it. It is those areas that already have weaker economic indicators, often rural, often further from the central belt, that feel the impact of a Government where strategies have become a substitute for actions. Areas such as Dumfries and Galloway and the Borders, where the outward migration of young people is suffocating growth, where fewer people have higher skills than elsewhere in Scotland, and where GVA is consistently below the Scottish average, where poor digital connectivity is a barrier to new and existing businesses, with a lack of affordable housing limiting the retention of young people and the attraction of new talent, where poor and declining public transport is undermining access to services, jobs and education, and where the failure to invest in key transport infrastructure such as the A75 and A77 holds back not just the regions economy but Scotland's economy, where low pay is endemic as much as £100 a week lower than the rest of Scotland, and where limited access to workspace and business support means we are simply not fulfilling the huge potential, the immense economic talent, of the south of Scotland. Rather than take the action needed to revitalise and rejuvenate the region, ministers are continuing to take decisions that will hold it back. Take colleges, a key driver of economic growth. In the south of Scotland, there is a limited higher education offer, no standalone university, so further education pathways are absolutely crucial. However, the brutal 13 per cent cut in the skills development Scotland contract at Dumfries and Galloway College this financial year means a reduction in apprenticeship places in key sectors such as construction. Construction at a time, every week local businesses desperate to recruit, desperate to upskill their workforce, tell me about their acute labour and skill shortages. Borders College wrote to me recently warning of the blow to Borders businesses of the withdrawal of the flexible workforce development fund, which hundreds have used to reskill and upskill their workers. As a result of the cash cut of 4.7 per cent for next year, both colleges have told me they are working through scenarios that are likely to see the curriculum offer, the number of courses and the number of students reduced in their colleges. It is, Presiding Officer, the economics of the madhouse. It is not just colleges that are bearing the disproportionate brunt of those cuts. A campaign for a decade for a south of Scotland enterprise agency, I welcome the need of a sat on the committee that oversaw the legislation establishing that agency. Ivan McKee talked about its importance, but the stagger in 22 per cent plan cut in their budget will mean less support for businesses in the region at a time that we need to see more. I'll take an intervention on that. I just wonder if he's got the same concerns as I have about Labour's plans to rationalise and simplify the agency landscape, because that can only mean one thing. No, it can only mean one thing. Ivan McKee can mean several things. Most importantly, an end to the silo working that we often see across those agencies. We've got a whole raft of agencies that need to be working closer together to give businesses that one-stop shot that he failed to deliver when he was a minister, and this Government failed to deliver for 16 years in government. The last 16 years, this Government failed to use the powers it has to grow Scotland's economy. Never mind tackle the geographical inequalities that exist across the country, and they presided over low growth and low productivity. We need change, we need to simplify our enterprise agency. There's no question about that, given those businesses that one-stop shot. We need to recognise that our colleges are the key driver of tackling our skills shortages and not continue to cut their funding, particularly where higher education opportunities are limited. We need to learn from the shocking mistakes of the past by this Government and the drive to net zero that we ensure the growth in renewables is actually matched by a growth in jobs in Scottish businesses and Scottish courts, not offshored the way that this Government offshores those profits. We need to unleash the true economic potential in Scotland and our people, and that means in every single part of Scotland. I welcome Labour's acknowledgement about how well the country performs in its report building a business case for Scotland. When it states, Scotland has been an internationalist, outward-looking nation that has punched well above its weight across the UK and on the world stage. A recognition of what the SNP has achieved over the last 17 years, despite financial crash, Brexit and a pandemic. Thanks to the latest figures from the House of Commons library, we can detail how we have punched well above our weight. Take Scotland's GDP per head, a broad measure of economic growth. It's higher than Northern Ireland, the north-east of England, the north-west, Yorkshire, Midlands, east of England and the south-west. Before I forget, Wales, where it's Labour-controlled and GDP per head, is 17 per cent lower than here in Scotland. The employment rate in Scotland is higher than the Labour-controlled Wales, Northern Ireland and, again, higher or on a par with many of the English regions. Scotland is the highest median weekly earnings of any UK nation and higher than the UK itself. Compare that to Labour-controlled Wales, where the median weekly earnings for a full-time employee is 10 per cent lower. Since Labour's financial crash of 2008, productivity in Scotland has increased by an average of 1 per cent per year. That is not only higher than the UK's half a per cent per year but also of the OECD country's new U27 average. Analysis from the London School of Economics highlights that UK productivity is lower than in France, Germany and America. That gap is due to a lack of investment, capital and skills. On skills, Scotland is a highest percentage of the working-age population with higher education certificates at 50 per cent, surpassing the UK percentage of 31 per cent. A report from the LSE's programme on innovation and diffusion on productivity said, from a growth perspective, cuts to public capital investment in future years are particularly concerning. It goes on, the UK productivity problem can be summed up in three words investment, investment and investment or lack thereof. Yet the Tory spring budget delivered no additional capital funding for Scotland with a block grant for capital expected to reduce in real terms with a cumulative loss of over £1.3 billion by 2027-28. Scotland is also the only UK nation with a consistent international trade surplus in goods since records began. Here is just one example of where Scotland is outperforming the UK and being held back by Westminster. Electricity exports to the rest of the UK had an estimated value of £4 billion on the wholesale market. Yesterday, the boss of Octopus Energy said that switching to zonal pricing would give Scotland some of the cheapest electricity in Europe and would help attract businesses to Scotland. There is currently an opportunity to attract high-energy use companies such as data centres here, as there is a 10-year moratorium on building them in parts of London. By electricity policy is reserved, and as a result, we do not benefit from our abundance of electricity generation. Scotland's record of attracting foreign direct investment outpaces both the UK and Europe for the number of projects and maintains its position as the top performing area of the UK outside of London for the eighth year. Brexit has made it more difficult to trade with an EU marketplace of almost 450 million people, which we need better access to if we are serious about growing Scotland's economy. However, Labour, the Tories and the Lib Dems have all declared themselves Brexit years, and only independence will give us the opportunity to re-join the EU. It is quite clear to us that, when considering the economy, we need to be asking and answering questions about what our economy is actually for. As the Scottish Government amendment highlights on conventional measures of economic success, Scotland is doing pretty well compared to the rest of the UK, but the amendment also acknowledges that Brexit has done untold damage not only to our economy, but also to the people, the workers, the human beings that create value in the economy, that our economy is supposed to support. The Scottish Greens want our economy to serve all of society to create the context in which all of us can reach our potential. Such an economy must be based on care, creativity and co-operation, not just driven by the quest for profit. We all know that the GDP is a very poor, blunt measure for quality of life. It masks the inequalities that we see across Scotland and across the UK. Inequality of employment, education and income. Unequal access to basic necessities such as housing, health and social care. Those are caused by uneven development, unequal economic activity and unequal access to the economy. That is why Scottish Greens have long championed a radical transformation of our economy. We need to create a genuine wellbeing economy, not just the buzz phrase that it is in danger of becoming. Such an economy would be built on sustainable development and social equity, supporting long-term livability for people and planet. We cannot have healthy, happy communities in polluted and devastated environments. Our economy must prioritise sustaining and regenerating our natural resources, reducing emissions and protecting our life support systems. It should support regenerative agriculture and food production that enhances our natural world. It must make circularity and fair resource use the default. It should promote green infrastructure, including public spaces and liveable neighbourhoods. We cannot have social equity when our economy relies on the unequal distribution of wealth. To change that, we need to make our economy inclusive and democratic. We must take a pre-distributive as well as a redistributive approach, decentralise decision making, promote employee ownership through social enterprises, co-operatives and other employee-owned business models, empower communities and broaden community benefit, make ethical, socially and environmentally responsible practices the norm. Scotland can be a leader in such an economy, an economy that recognises global challenges and supports co-operation across national boundaries. I trust that the green industrial strategy will be a useful tool to help us along the path. We should consider more than just energy as part of our green economy. Caring and creative jobs, for example, are often very well aligned to green wellbeing economy objectives. However, it is essential that we have a strategy and do not leave economic transformation to the whims of the market or to Westminster. I want to address one final issue. Scottish Labour has stated that the Scottish Parliament has been too focused on social policy over economic policy, and I think that that is a bit rich coming from the party of devolution to design this institution without including powers over many of the economic levers that we would wish to have. It also points to a fundamental problem. Instead of seeing economic and social policy as separate entities, we must realise that economic, social and environmental justice are all inextricably linked, and that is why we must transform our economy. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I am pleased to be able to speak in today's debate. A strong growing economy is vital for jobs, for sustainable communities and for successful well-funded public services. I doubt that anybody here, perhaps the anti-growth Greens, would disagree with that. Others have spoken about the importance of economic growth more generally, and I would like to focus on my region, the Highlands and Islands, and more widely on rural communities. I will start with one of the key areas identified in the Scottish Conservatives grasping of this old policy paper infrastructure, or, as is too often the case, lack of infrastructure. Parts of my region still suffer from extremely slow, limited or entirely non-existent broadband coverage. That clearly presents real challenges for those looking to start or grow businesses in these areas, those who want to freelance or just work remotely. Of course, despite the endless promises of improvement, the transport infrastructure of the region is extremely limited. The A9 remains unduelled. The A96 now won't be duelled. Other major routes across the region are either in need of serious improvement or riddled with potholes. Our ferry fleet is getting older and increasingly unreliable, and the S&P's failure to act not only impacts on those islands and islands businesses and economies, but risks the very future of some. It is not just our islands. Over the summer, I visited the Arden and Merkin and spoke with local businesses and residents impacted by the disruption of the ferry service across the Coron Narrows. One bowed out of service entirely, the other is nearly 50-year-old backup, either limited or broken down. They were angry and frustrated because they saw footfall down at a vital time of year for visitors. They see administrations in Edinburgh and in Inverness offering no real hope of a resolution any time soon. Some of those I spoke to were concerned about people and local families and local businesses moving out of the area entirely. If we want vibrant communities and successful growing local economies, we need people to actually live there. Depopulation remains a real challenge in my region, and that is far from helped by the running down and centralising of so many local services. This Saturday, I will be in Fort William joining local people campaigning for a new Belford hospital, a hospital that is urgently needed that local people have been waiting almost 20 years for, which is now paused because of the Scottish Government's latest budget. Scottish ministers just do not seem that interested in the highlands and islands or in rural Scotland. The S&P Green's latest budget saw tens of millions of pounds of spending cuts from our rural affairs and islands budgets, and it included serious cuts to the budgets of Highlands and Islands Enterprise and South of Scotland Enterprise. Ministers have left councils with full responsibility for funding business gateway. Local councils are already cutting back on services because of years of squeezed funding from Edinburgh. How can this Scottish Government claim to be serious about boosting economic growth when it cuts millions of pounds of funding from the very enterprise bodies that are tasked with supporting businesses in large parts of rural Scotland, and which should be some of the key drivers of economic growth? But, of course, the S&P are not really interested in debating economic growth today. As their amendment makes clear, this is just another chance to pump some hot air into their deflating independence cause. They claim, as they always do, that independence is the answer to Scotland's woes—woes, of course, that come after 17 years of S&P economic mismanagement. What they won't admit is how much leaving the UK would cost Scotland, how much putting up a border between us and our largest trading partner would cost Scotland, how much the uncertainty caused by their confused position on currency would cost Scotland, or any of the many, many other questions that, despite decades to address, they have failed to come up with even remotely credible answers. The S&P's economic record has left Scotland as a high-tax, low-growth economy with crumbling public services. Just that they have no answers on independence, the S&P offer no real hope to Scotland for economic growth. No wonder that even many nationalists are jumping ship from this tired, failed party of division. It's worth noting that the Goldman Sachs latest report that the UK's GDP per head currently stands at only 4 per cent above its 2016 level, compared with 8 per cent for the eurozone and 15 per cent for the US. Proving what everybody living in Scotland today knows, the UK is the stagnation nation of the developed world. Just to address some of the points that were just made, it's worth pointing out on tax. Of course, the Tories will not acknowledge that the majority of people in Scotland pay less tax than their counterparts in the rest of the UK. The objective of that, I think, is because those that pay less tax are the lower paid, and they like to turn that on its head, which we see in their proposals. In terms of economic mismatch, we've got the highest ever debt, £2.65 trillion under the Tories. We've got the highest tax burden—I've only got four minutes—we've got the highest tax burden that we've had since the Second World War. That's what the Tories have done, apart from putting us back into recession once again, and apart from having the massive debt that I've just mentioned. We've also got the highest tax burden, and that's what the Tories do—tax and economic failure. I have to say that I'm absolutely astounded by the brass neck of the Labour Party trying to blame this on the Scottish Government, not least when they know full well, even if not from this Government and from their friends in the Labour-run Welsh Government, that much of those things are determined by what happens at Westminster. Mark Drakeford, the Welsh First Minister, we are in this position because of the mismanagement of the economy and public finances by successive UK Governments over the last 13 years and because of unfunded commitments made by the UK Government. They know what Labour cannot admit here, that it's because of the policies of the UK Government, whether it's immigration, whether it's Brexit and that's something that they support now as well, or the failure to properly fund public services, that the UK is largely responsible for this, and they can't admit that. For that reason, we can't take their debate seriously. It is not a serious attempt to discuss the economy in Scotland. It's superficial and it's spurious. There are no ideas, there's no willingness to acknowledge the wider context of the economic situation that we find ourselves in, and for Willie Rennie to talk about the independence referendum as being a break on investment, he perhaps forgets that Ernst and Young reported in that year that we had this spartling more than the best ever years of foreign direct investment in Scotland. That's on the record, and I don't know why I didn't want to acknowledge that. In fact, I tried to turn it on his head by saying that there was less, but it's patently the case that if we don't have the powers over corporation tax, over business regulations, immigration, trade or the vast majority of welfare and taxpayers, how can any of the devolved Governments be in any way responsible for those systemic issues that plague the UK economy? Indeed, I would argue that devolution is designed to keep it that way. For example, when the Scottish Government opts to differentiate income tax, HMRC is still responsible for collecting that tax and for all taxes set in Scotland. The block grant is then reduced, and it's no wonder that, in the case because the Scotland must be fully or even marginally financially independent, even if it was within the UK, then the UK Government, the Labour Party and the Tory Party would know that the game was up and the union would be over before you could say the words recession. Of course, there were five periods, five quarters under the last Labour Government of recession. We haven't heard that mention today. Of course, we can't forget the immortal words of the last chief secretary to the treasury under Gordon Brown. I know that they enjoy this, so let me just repeat it. Under Labour, after 13 years in government, there is no money left. They started the banking crisis, and they are going back to it. They want to lift bankers bonus cap. They don't want to lift the two-child cap or the rape clause. They want to look after the bankers and give them ever more money. We of course know how they treat Scotland the way they treated the McCrone report in the mid-1970s. They hide Scotland's wealth from Scotland, and that's the way to do it. Now what they propose to do is take more of Scotland's wealth to fund nuclear developments in England. The Labour Party is no friend to Scotland. It is no friend to the Scottish economy. It's proven time and time again that it's lied to Scotland and it's failed Scotland, not least as I say by saying that there is no money left. We want to see more regional management of economies under the Labour Party. Look at burning our city council, 20-odd per cent increase in council tax, hundreds of redundancies. That's what Labour mismanagement does. We should have a serious debate. We're not going to get from that Labour Party. The serious option for the Scottish economy is for independence to give us the full powers that we require. Thank you. We move to winding up speeches. I call on Liz Smith up to four minutes. Thank you to the Labour Party for bringing around this debate to the chamber, because I think that it is an extremely important one. The measure of GDP may be incomplete, but it matters hugely, and that is because of the other benefits that it brings, increased tax revenues and economic confidence to name just two. As Jamie Halcro Johnston rightly said, it's essential in terms of delivering better public services, raising the standard of living, delivering more secure jobs and investment, and of course it's the prerequisite to addressing our social ills and improving the wellbeing of the whole country. It goes without saying that the biggest challenge that we currently face is the extent of economic inactivity. Wearingly high rates, which obviously means that we are not making the best use of the skills and talents within our workforce. Willie Rennie was absolutely right when he referenced our universities. Colin Smyth and Alex Rowley were absolutely right when they mentioned our colleges, because they are essential to ensuring that we have the skills of those who are able to work. Therefore, the best policy prospectus that we can focus on is helping those people back into the workforce, preparing them for future jobs and on secure jobs and investment. That is why we were so critical of the SNP's recent budget, which cut the economy portfolio by 8.3 per cent in real terms, including to enterprise, to employability, to tourism, to SNIB and several other aspects of policy, which are absolutely essential to jobs and investment. Murdo Fraser referenced Sandy Begby in his remarks, and that is why they were so vociferous in their opposition to the recent budget. It is probably why only 9 per cent of Scottish businesses think that the Scottish Government is actually sympathetic to the concerns, and we heard some of that this morning for one or two members who were at the Scottish Tourism Alliance conference in Aberdeen. Let me come to this debate about tax, which is obviously a very big part of the debate about economic growth. I fully acknowledge that the overall tax burden has grown in the UK, and it is too high, but it is even worse in Scotland with the differentials widening and disincentives increasing, with some in the SNP acknowledging that fact. It is vital that there is a specific focus on making work pay and becoming more attractive. That is why the national insurance change was chosen by Jeremy Hunt instead of the income tax one, because the OBR predictions were that that could help 200,000 people back into work. That is very much something that we should be concentrating on. Can I just gently remind Labour in relation to the question that Murdo Fraser was talking about in the debate with Daniel Johnson? If they want to make themselves into the party of growth and lower taxes, it was the Labour Party that voted for the rates resolution in 2023, which ensured that there were further tax hikes imposed by the SNP, and it voted against a Conservative amendment just six months ago, which called on the Scottish Government to deliver a package of growth policies, including a competitive tax regime, less burdensome regulation and investment in innovation, entrepreneurship and infrastructure. I am not quite sure what was going on there, but I will finish on another issue. As well as taxation, another key debate about economic growth is about public sector reform—meaningful public sector reform—that will deliver future savings that we so desperately need. I come back to Jeremy Hunt's budget, which was mentioned by Brian Whittle. One of the considerably underreported parts of that was the £3 billion investment in the NHS to reform AI data use and streamlining IT. That is something that we should take very seriously, and the Scottish Government should be ensuring that we have policies similar. I welcome the debate. It is important for the Scottish Parliament to debate the future of Scotland's economy on a regular basis. We are at a pivotal moment in economic history. Decisions that we will take in the next few years will affect future generations and the future success of our economy. The Scottish Government is taking action to ensure that Scotland's economy reaches its full potential, despite the clear difficulties that have come as a result of the UK Government's handling of the economy and the aftermath of Brexit. I made a speech in London earlier this week, and I apologise because I have only four minutes, where he quoted that Professor Diane Coyle of the University of Cambridge recently wrote that, that investment in productive assets has been lower in the UK than in any other G7 country since at least 1990. The UK displays a remarkable and persistent level of geographic inequality with a very unhealthy and economically unstable reliance on this great, vibrant city of London, speaking in London, of course. We are doing this against the backdrop of our broken UK model and, indeed, Brexit. It is astonishing to have a debate on the future of the Scottish economy, where the Labour Party motion and the Conservative Party amendment do not mention Brexit. Of course, the document, like Ivan McKee, I've had it in Somnia on recent nights, has also read building a business case for Scotland, the Labour Party's recent document. The introduction from the Labour leader does not mention Brexit, does not mention it at all. Despite the fact that the OBR forecasts that the UK economy will be 4 per cent smaller as a result of Brexit, and despite the fact that, when I speak to exporters, they talk about Brexit, when I speak to small businesses, they talk about Brexit, when I speak to our high-growth sectors in Scotland, they talk about Brexit, when I speak to our universities and research institutions, they talk about Brexit, but not a word from the Labour or Conservative parties, but it's crucial to Scotland's economic future. I do apologise, there won't be one and a half minutes left. I always take interventions, but not when I've only got four minutes, so I do apologise. Against all that backdrop, Scotland is still the top performing region, outside of London and the south-east, with the third highest wages and GVA per person in 2021. Since we came to office in 2007, Scotland's GDP per capita has grown fast in the UK. Again, since 2007, productivity, which this debate focuses on, has grown at an annual average rate of 1 per cent a year in Scotland, compared with the UK's 0.5 per cent a year. On inward investment, we're outperforming the UK and the EU average. Of course, this week, a key survey showed that the private sector employment growth in Scotland last month was faster than any other UK nation or region, and we're investing in productivity in this country. The National Manufacture Institute of Scotland, the National Roboterium, the Missionless Scotland Innovation Park, the innovation centres, the Medicines Manufacture Innovation Centre, the Fraunhofer Centre for Applied Photonics, the Aberdeen Biohub, the Net Zero Technology Centre and, of course, the city and region growth deals as well. Not just all Scottish money and those in the public investment from Scotland, but also other sources as well. This is all, not all, mostly just the last few years, tens of millions—indeed, more than £100 million—worth investment, and that is to improve productivity in Scotland. That doesn't even take us into the debate over the role of AI, which the whole world is debating about increasing productivity with reducing workforces in all our countries in terms of the role that AI will play to ensure that we can be more productive, working less hours and, of course, the role of automation in relation to that as well. That's one reason why our high-growth sectors in Scotland are doing extremely well just now. You can look at industrial biotechnology or life sciences or fintech or a critical technology supercluster, which is quantum photonics and semiconductors and wireless. You can look at space, you can look at games, as well as other sectors such as whisky, wider food and drinking and, of course, the energy transition as well. You will see very good growth rates in many of those sectors in Scotland, because we are supporting them. As I close excellent article in The Herald today by Ian McConnel, his comment, and he says that there is cheering news on Scotland's economy, but some do not like it. We also realise that the Labour Party and the Conservatives do not like it, but there are good things happening in the Scottish economy at the moment, and we have to continue to support that and urge Parliament to back the Scottish Government's amendment. In order to have world-class public services, we need to pay for them. If we grow our economy, we can increase our tax take by having more people employed in good-quality, well-paid jobs. The more people we have working and earning, the more we have to spend on the services that are required. That is why the phrase, it is the economy stupid, gained such traction. If the economy is doing well, public services are doing well and people are doing well. Unfortunately, as Daniel Johnston pointed out, our economy is not doing well and with it our services and our people. Brian Whittle was right to tie health back into the economy because we know in low-paid areas areas of deprivation that they have a 25-year less life expectancy than in other areas, and that is why economic growth is, if anything, more pressing in those areas in order to bring equality to those communities. We need to focus on regional development. Jamie Halcro Johnston talked about the highlands and islands about our road and rail and ferry infrastructure, or indeed the lack of it, but infrastructure and connectivity is so important to every region to allow it to thrive. If we look back to the days when highlands and islands enterprise was empowered and funded, the difference it made, but now, like the south of Scotland enterprise, as Colin Smyth talked about, we are facing funding cuts. We need to stop the fragmentation of the enterprise establishment, because businesses now do not know where they are going. We need enterprise establishments with a local focus, but our knowledge of what is going on elsewhere is working together so that a business never pitches up at an enterprise agency and is turned away. Colin Smyth also pointed out that the more rural and further from the centre of power you are, the worse the fare, so we need to empower our local enterprise agencies. Jamie Halcro Johnston also pointed out the regional responses that were required, because that causes depopulation if we are not empowering people locally. Many speakers, including Alec Rowley and Colin Smyth, talked about education, training and colleges that are essential to economic growth. They also need to be in tune with their local communities to know what is required for the local economy. It is important not only for young people, but for upskilling and reskilling as change has happened to the workforce. Councillor Sandy Keith wrote to Jenny Gilruth highlighting the impact that a 25 per cent cut in staffing in UHI Murray would have on vital parts of its local economy. That is happening everywhere, but Sandy Keith pointed out with some irony that the college was an integral part of Murray's growth deal board. That seems to me crazy that a 20 per cent cut-in-quarter of an establishment that is integral to a regional growth deal. Alec Rowley highlighted schools' attainment and the importance of that. Colin Smyth also referred to the cuts in the skills development Scotland—all incredibly worrying. Daniel Johnston talked about the Grangemouth oil refinery, pointing out that it is Scotland's only oil refinery and is therefore of strategic importance. We need both our Governments, SNP and the Tories to get round the table to protect the crucial jobs, skills and infrastructure at Grangemouth. Both the Scottish and UK Government have faced criticism from site workers who feel that they are being failed and that their livelihoods are at stake. We need the workers, the skills and the infrastructure of the oil and gas industry to play its part in order that we can have a just transition to net zero. By abandoning that workforce, we actually are not creating a just transition and we are leaving them behind. The Scottish Labour Party would not do that. We would create GB Energy, headquarters in Scotland, delivering 5,000 jobs and a clean energy system by 2030. If we use a GB Energy company to empower our local communities, we wouldn't have the squandered opportunities that we see with Scotland. We would have local generation, which has brought huge benefits to areas such as Point and Sandwick in the western Isles. In conclusion, economic growth plays a crucial role in delivering strong public services and social change. Despite that, the Scottish Government has failed to use the powers that it has to grow the Scottish economy, which is in currently low growth and low productivity. We need a Scottish Government that takes a new approach to the economy, working in partnership with business to unleash the true economic potential of Scotland and its people. That concludes the debate on growing Scotland's economy. It is now time to move on to the next item of business, which is consideration of business motion 12470 in the name of George Adam on behalf of the parliamentary bureau setting out a business programme. I call on George Adam to move the motion. No member has asked to speak on the motion. Therefore, the question is that motion 12470 be agreed. Are we all agreed? The motion is therefore agreed. The next item of business is consideration of business motion 12471 in the name of George Adam on behalf of the parliamentary bureau on a stage 1 extension for a bill. Any member who wishes to speak against the motion to press their request-to-speak button. I call on George Adam to move the motion. Thank you minister. No member has asked to speak against the motion. Therefore, the question is that motion 12471 be agreed. Are we all agreed? The motion is therefore agreed. The next item of business is consideration of seven parliamentary bureau motions and I ask George Adam on behalf of the parliamentary bureau to move motions 12472 to 12476 on approval of SSIs, 12477 on committee remits and 12478 on substitution on committees. What you said, Presiding Officer, all moved. Thank you minister and the question on these motions will be put at decision time and there are nine questions to be put as a result of today's business and can I remind members that if the amendment in the name of Neil Gray is agreed to, then the amendment in the name of Sandesh Gulhane will fall. The first question is that amendment 12455.2 in the name of Neil Gray which seeks to amend motion 12455 in the name of Jackie Baillie on bringing down NHS waiting lists be agreed. Are we all agreed? The Parliament is not agreed therefore we'll move to vote and there'll be a short suspension to allow members to access digital voting.