 Good morning, and welcome to the 17th meeting of the Culture, Tourism, Europe and External Relations Committee in 2017. I'd like to remind members and the public to turn off mobile phones and any members using electronic devices to access committee papers during the meeting should be ensured that they are switched to silent. The only item of business today is an evidence session with the Committee of the Regions conference of presidents. I would like to welcome the first vice president and members of the conference of presidents to Scotland and to the committee. We are delighted to have you here and look forward to our discussions on the implications of Brexit for Scotland. Before we do that and make our formal statements, perhaps I'd like to invite you to introduce yourselves and for the members of the committee to introduce themselves. I'll start with myself. My name is Joan McAlpine. I'm a member of parliament for the south of Scotland and I'm the convener of the committee. Lewis MacDonald, Labour member for North East Scotland and deputy convener of the committee. Marie Evans, I'm the SNP MSP for Angus North and Merns in the northeast of Scotland. Richard Lochhead, MSP for Murray, whisky country. Jackson Carlaw, MSP for Eastwood, which is on the south side of Glasgow in the west of Scotland and deputy leader of the Scottish Conservatives. I'm Tavish Scott. I represent the islands of Shetland in the very far north, 200 miles to north of Aberdeen, so on the periphery of Europe. I'm a Liberal Democrat. I'm Catusia Marini. I'm the president of a socialist group at the committee of the region. I come from Italy and I'm in Italy, the president of a region of Umbria in the centre of Italy. My name is Karl-Heinz Lambert. I'm the first vice-president of the committee of the regions and I'm from Belgium, from the German speaking minority in Belgium. I am a member of the Belgian senate and I am also a member of the parliament of the German speaking community and I was minister and prime minister there for 24 years. Markkula, the president of the committee of the region and as I said, I've been here once before in your parliament. I've been to Edinburgh several times as well in the past. I'm the chair of the board of my own city, Espo, the second largest city in Finland, but I even originally come from very far from the north, so Scotland is close to my heart as well. From that respect, I was born out of the Arctic Circle and went to school there in Lapland, so we have much to share with Scotland and Finland. My name is Ulrike, Karl-Heinz Lambert and I'm also a member of the committee of the region and the first vice-president of the elderly group. I'm a municipal commissioner at Kungsbacke. It's a city near Gothenburg at the west coast in Sweden. Hi, my name is Olga Geblewicz. I'm a committee of regions member. I'm representing here the EPP group and I'm from Poland and I can say that I'm a president of one of Polish Polish region on the Baltic Sea, but in Poland we don't have a president of this regional level. We call them Marshall, so I'm a Marshall of a West Pomeranian region. It is not military position. It is executive body, so I'm a chairman of a board and I'm very first time here and I'm glad that I'm here. Thank you. I'm Stanislaw Szwabcki. I'm president of European Alliance within the committee of the regions. I'm Polish. I'm from the city of Gdynia. It's a city on the Baltic Sea, but on the eastern part of Polish border on Baltic. My colleague is from western part. I am a councillor of Gdynia. Thank you. Good morning. My name is Rob Youngman. I'm the president of the ECR group. I'm an old man in the city of Obstaland in the northern part of the Netherlands. It's my first time here in Edinburgh and it's not the first time that I drank whiskey last night, so I like it. I love it, I must say. Good morning. My name is Stuart McMillan MSP. I'm the MSP for the Greenock and Inverclyde constituency and I'm a Scottish national party member. Good morning. I'm Ross Greer. I'm an MSP for the Green Party for the west of Scotland region. Thank you very much. There's no need for you to press any of the buttons. The microphones will work automatically. You've come to Scotland at an important moment. Tomorrow is the one-year anniversary of the referendum at which the UK as a whole, but not Scotland, voted to leave the European Union. As you will be aware, 62 per cent of people in Scotland voted to remain in the EU. Furthermore, the process of withdrawing from the EU has now started. On Monday, the European Commission and the UK Government initiated the article 50 negotiations to leave the EU. Yesterday, the Queen's speech at Westminster set out the UK Government's programme for government and included proposals for a great repeal bill to ensure that EU legislation continued to have an effect in the UK. It also included proposals for other legislation to adapt to the UK's future outside the EU. Tonight, the UK's Prime Minister will inform the EU 27 of her intentions as regards the negotiations on the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the EU. Despite it being almost a year from the referendum, there is still a lack of clarity on the future relationship that the UK will seek with the EU. The UK Government's white paper has stated that the UK would forge a new strategic partnership with the EU, including a wide-reaching, bold and ambitious free trade agreement, and that it would seek a mutually beneficial new customs agreement with the EU. However, we know that the EU 27 consider that it is not possible to have full access to the single market without being a member of that single market. We therefore know that some sectors in Scotland will be affected by Brexit, but we do not know at this stage which ones will be hardest hit. This committee has engaged extensively with stakeholders from key sectors in Scotland, as well as individuals who will be affected by withdrawal from the EU. We have published four reports of our own covering a wide range of issues, including EU citizens' rights and the implications of Brexit for key sectors in Scotland, the intergovernmental structures in the UK for discussing the UK's approach to withdrawal, and the respective positions of the Scottish Government and the UK Government. We have also commissioned three reports from experts on the long-term economic implications of Brexit, the impact of Brexit on the devolution settlement, and the potential for differentiating the UK's immigration policy to respond to Scotland's needs. One of those pieces of research by the Fraser of Allander Institute based at the University of Strathclyde found that the implications of a hard Brexit for Scotland would be the loss of 80,000 jobs over 10 years, and the value of an annual salary would reduce by £2,000 by the end of those 10 years. Another of our reports said that the rights of EU citizens should be clarified at the earliest opportunity. It also outlined the value of EU migration to Scotland, whose demographic decline has been sharply reversed by EU migration, and we argued that there should be a separate migration system for Scotland post-Brexit. Our final report on the future of Scotland post-Brexit argued that there should be a bespoke solution for Scotland. The Scottish Government, as you may know, has argued for a separate solution that would allow Scotland to remain within the single market, even if the UK left the EU as reflected the 62 per cent of Scots who voted to remain in the EU. Our committee has heard significant concerns from some sectors. For example, will Scotland's universities be able to continue to participate in research programmes with other European universities? Will EU academics continue to seek to work in Scottish universities? Will the exponential growth of Scotland's food and drink sector, a very successful export sector, be sustainable post-Brexit? Will we still be able to welcome EU citizens to Scotland to make their homes here and contribute to our society and economy? Will the future relationship cover services? A hugely important part of Scotland's economy, Scotland's financial services sector, must be able to operate freely within the EU. Another question would be, will our producers be able to export to the EU without the imposition of tariffs and non-tariff barriers? The Parliament itself will be affected as the huge job of adapting our domestic legislation to the EU withdrawal is undertaken. There is a political debate about the balance of powers between this Parliament and the Westminster Parliament, with the Scottish Government arguing that the Brexit process is undermining the powers of this Parliament, although you will hear different views on that from colleagues around the table today. I hope that our discussions today can explore many of those areas in more detail, and I also hope that our discussions can start a dialogue between us on the implications of Brexit, once the implications of Brexit for Scotland become clearer. Mr Marcula, as president of the Committee of the Regions, I welcome you again and I invite you to take the floor to set out your views and your role from an EU perspective on the UK's withdrawal from the EU. Thank you very much, John, for inviting us here, and thank you for organising this very effective one-day programme that we have, and I think that we all will get a lot out of this. Let me first say that a year ago when we got the result of the referendum, so we were really surprised. We said that we regret that, but we respect that, and the result is what it is, but now it's time and has been already to look forward, and the process, especially after your recent election, will be a very complicated one. We hope that it will be flexible and that it will take especially into account two most important levels that what I see. It's the citizen level, so including those who now from other EU countries who now live and operate here in Scotland, that really is a big number, close to 200,000 EU citizens from other countries are here, more like permanently, and they have been excellent ambassadors for our countries from all around Europe on this, getting to know more about Scotland. Then on the other hand, the other important level is how we do from the local and regional perspective, how we do business, how we do educational collaboration, all those elements and cultural, of course, fishery policy included, so that how we do all these operations in concrete terms, what we have already started and people have started to believe and strongly see the European value added coming from this open and all the time improving collaboration. Now we are very afraid that one way or another there will be a big, big obstacles on that. It does not help much that the top political level is set regularly that okay, UK wants to be a European country in the future as well, because on the same time, we, the rest in EU through the European Union, we are renewing our practices, our structures, our policies, our processes, and we want to be the concrete EU 27, or hopefully it could be a 28, but EU 27 much, much targeted to tackle the societal challenges, much faster moving to single market, digital single market included on that and this free trade more based on the certain rules and regulations agreed. But that's for the people, that's for our businesses and we need to tackle these more and more in the global sense, especially now when we have agreed major agreements on Paris, on the climate change, continued, renewed some of the elements of that in Marrakech and are now preparing for next November in the climate change negotiations next phase in Bonn after that in Poland, in Cracow a year from that. So there are major concerns that our cities and regions and our citizens are having. And now when we are looking what the results of the activities in the US and their recent development, so we need to take much more responsibility than we thought on this global development into our hands in Europe. But that means above all so that the crucial level of activity, it is regional and local, that's where the action is. We know that we need national governments, we need European council to negotiate, get certain agreements, we need European parliament, but still action and more of the activities that are needed that happen by the people, with the people and for the people. And that's important when we think these aspects that we are having here. It's these reasons that we came here today. We want to listen to your concerns and echo in Brussels your views and your suggestions on the recently started negotiations on Brexit. In this juncture it's important to recall that Brexit will trigger many consequences for citizens and their regional local authorities, both in the UK and in the 27 countries of the rest of EU. Some of the UK's territories have land or sea borders with EU member states or a lot bilateral agreements, collaboration in concrete terms with heavy implications from security to migration, from energy to fishery policy, from school collaboration of young children to the scientific research by the universities. All of those are essential for our people. The local economy has been built in the last half century in Scotland, as in other regions, on the solid assumption of an internal European market at its disposal. The risk to lose this security is a shared concern. European cohesion policy, which is a must in the future as well, we just tackled the future prospects of Europe a month ago in our plenary with the speaker, the president of the European Parliament, Tajani, with the vice president of the commission, Katainen, and with commission, Ertinger, dealing these issues and it was a very lively debate, but it all came to the same conclusion on one hand, so that we need cohesion policy, we need to build more on the solidarity and collaboration, and this means that the cities and regions are building stronger partnerships, focusing on their specific core interest areas, so we can in a way build the critical mass of knowledge and implementation as well based on the strengths and interests of different parts of Europe. And on that, so one way or another, we want Scotland and the cities and regions of the whole UK to be part of, but that's the next two years or who knows how long it will take, how we process on that. We, from our side, so we have and we will a committee of the region with our 350 members and another 350 alternates coming from all parts of Europe, we have key mayors there, we have regional presidents, councillors, and what has happened in a year, so this is very much more bottom up nowadays. The commissioners are asking us strongly to take action and showcasing what is happening on a positive sense, how our cities and regions are tackling these grand societal challenges and building the future, and I need to stress it needs to be sustainable growth, growth but sustainable. That can create new jobs and that is our key priority as well. We have analysed and we will analyse the Brexit effect in the different concerned policies from the EU side, the Brexit cap in terms of financing in estimated from 10 to 17 billion euros per year and that has an enormous impact on us in renewing the EU structures and financial frame and we are working on our side on that but we can convince you as well so that we see that this Brexit process will positively renew European Union as well, so we build on our strengths on our joint European collaboration but take the different elements into account and that's what we would like to hear from you as well. What are your concerns, what the EU should be, how these operations should be and how we want to develop that further on. But let me then conclude that we have received an offer for cooperation from the chief negotiator of the European Commission, Michel Barnier. We have met him already several times. He has contributed our plenary as well and addressing our members. He confirmed his interest in listening to the remarks coming from the regional local authorities all through the process. Therefore, also we are via our committee, you will be able at any moment you wish to address informal consult, both the us and through us the chief negotiator and those particular European regions politically involved in the session process and that I think is important taking the different aspects of your interest and your citizens' interest on this occasion and on that so I think this your official meeting as well here is an important one especially looking the role of you linking culture to the European activities. I think that is always the crucial one. Next year will be the European year of heritage. We look backwards but we use the historical knowledge and the new scientific knowledge building the future of Europe and want to be that stronger, much stronger and taking the global aspects into account very strongly. Thank you very much. Thank you very much President Mercula. I would now like to invite the convener of the committee, Lewis MacDonald, to make a few remarks. Thank you very much convener and it's a pleasure to follow President Mercula. As deputy convener of the committee, just to add a little about what to what John already said about the work of the committee thus far, the next stage of course for our committee is to scrutinise the negotiations that will happen as part of the article 50 process and as you will all be aware the article 50 negotiations have just begun. They will focus principally in the first instance on three areas, the financial settlement, the position vis-à-vis the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland and also of course the critical issue of the rights of European Union citizens resident in the UK and indeed of UK citizens resident elsewhere in the EU. We will seek to scrutinise all of those aspects and other things that happen in that initial process of the article 50 negotiations. We have just launched a call for evidence and asked stakeholders here in Scotland and indeed further afield to give us their input, their concerns and their priorities and to encourage them to engage with us and to follow that process as it goes forward. Clearly, as a committee of the Scottish Parliament, our primary responsibility is to scrutinise the work of the Scottish Government and we know that the engagement of the Scottish Government with the UK Government in order to seek to influence the negotiations will be critical for us and for many stakeholders in Scotland, so we will continue to seek evidence from Scottish Government ministers and of course also from UK Government ministers involved in the negotiations going forward. We will also take evidence from other stakeholders and indeed from members of the European Parliament and others in Brussels and we intend to visit Brussels in September as part of that investigation or part of that report that we will compile on the article 50 negotiations. Now the way that the Scottish Parliament is structured indeed, we discussed this morning how the different committees of the Scottish Parliament would deal with the different aspects of the Brexit process. As the convener mentioned, the repeal bill, which will come forward from in the UK Parliament, will have substantial implications for Scotland. It will touch on many areas of policy that are devolved to the Scottish Parliament, agriculture, fisheries, environment, home affairs among others. It will also touch on the fundamental constitution of the Scottish Parliament, because section 28 of the original Scotland Act, which is our founding document, says that all legislation of the Scottish Parliament must comply with the legislation of the European Union. Clearly that fundamental aspect of our constitution will be immediately affected by the Brexit process. There are many aspects that will fall under the remit of the Finance and Constitution Committee of this Parliament. Our committee will have a particular focus on the negotiation process, and when the article 50 negotiation process is completed, we anticipate in future having a scrutiny role in relation to the negotiations around the creation of a long-term framework for the relationship between the UK and the European Union. There are a number of those things going forward, which this committee will keep a close watch in brief upon. Having spent much of our time in the past 12 months on Brexit, we anticipate spending a good deal of our time in the next 12 months on the next stage of Brexit as well. I might move on to a rather more political perspective, because I know that members of the committee of the region are keen to hear the political perspectives of the different parties in Scotland. As a member of the Scottish Labour Party, and also indeed as an alternate member of the committee of the regions, and through that a member of the party of European socialists, I would like to offer you my perspective, and I know that other colleagues around the table will do the same. Clearly we have just had a general election in the UK, which has very significant implications for the whole Brexit process. From my party's point of view, we are very disappointed that the UK Government, minority Government as it now is, does not appear to have changed its strategic objectives or its tactical approach to the negotiations. That, of course, may not be a permanent feature that may change in coming weeks, but questions such as the United Kingdom's continued membership of the customs union seem to me to be very firmly back on the table and back in the focus of what we want to do. There are many benefits of both the single market and the customs union from which the present Conservative Government appears to have simply walked away and turned their backs on those benefits. We clearly take a different view and believe that those benefits are very important to us, to our people and to our economy, and that we should seek to preserve those benefits. The first question for the negotiations going forward is the status of European Union citizens in this country and of British citizens elsewhere in the EU, and we certainly believe that the British Government should be much more proactive in putting forward a very positive offer and proposition on that in order to resolve that question quickly in a way that allows as much continued access and as many continued rights as possible for those European Union citizens who are here and indeed for British citizens elsewhere. From a Labour perspective, it is important to say that there is a case for the devolved administrations to be engaged with the process. The Welsh Government and the Scottish Government have made that case. We see a real political difficulty with the approach of the current Scottish Government in its insistence on at the same time having a proposition for a referendum on independence on the table. We believe that the case for engagement by the devolved administrations would be much stronger with a commitment to maintain the future benefits for the whole UK and negotiating as part of a UK approach. However, the most important thing is not so much the cast, it is the tune, and we would like to hear a much more positive tune being played on behalf of the whole United Kingdom in the negotiations with the European Union in the next few months. Thank you, Deputy convener. I would now like to welcome the first vice-president, Mr Lambits, to contribute to our discussions. Thank you very much, Mr Chair, dear colleagues. I would also like to express my gratitude and my satisfaction that we can change our point of views with the members of the Scottish Parliament. That way, we can directly try to explore how we can work together in a very, very difficult and complex situation. Even if nothing is perfect in the European Union, and even if we need many, many changes, I continue to believe strongly and even passionately in the idea of a united European Union. And so do also many people in Scotland and in the rest of the United Kingdom. With the results of the referendum as they are and the ways that people have voted after it, we now have to find the best possible solution. Finally, that is why we all became politicians. We fully support the request made at various stage for all the devolved governments and indeed also local governments to be as involved as possible in the negotiations. We do not know in detail how Brexit will work yet, but we do know that it will affect many, many things in the daily life of our citizens, where they live, in villages, in towns, in cities and also in regions. It will escape the way you will govern in Scotland and it will have an impact of many regions across all the European Union. We have mentioned already the rights of citizens, trade, regional development, or fisheries and agriculture. I would like to add to this environment and climate change, but also many other political challenges such as security and low enforcement or migration. These are challenges where physical borders do not and should not matter and whatever agreement is reached between the United Kingdom and the European Union in the end, political decisions on the ground will be affected by decisions taken elsewhere. That is why we need to exchange information. We need to start building structures with which we can ensure cooperation in the future and start exploring on which issues and through what means this can be realised. I note with great interest that you have launched a call for evidence on the implications of Article 50 for Scotland and we would be very interested to follow in detail with you the results. In the Committee of the Regents, we will also continue to explore policy by policy, what Brexit means really and how it may affect individual regions. Dear colleagues, let's try to make the best of these difficult situations together. Thank you for your attention. Thank you very much. Would our other guests like to raise any questions at this stage to open up the discussion? I have two questions. First, I read that your purpose is to stay into the single market as Scotland. Are there any indications that that is really a possibility? I heard from you that there are already spoken about Brexit a year, of course. Do you have an indication that there might be in the negotiations a possibility to stay in the single market for Scotland or is it too soon to say something about it? The other question is what main messages would you like to pass on to the EU about the areas where you would like to see continued co-operation after the UK exit from the EU? I think that the question that you ask is relating to the Scottish Government's position. The Scottish Government published an extensive paper just before Christmas arguing that, in the first instance, the UK should stay in the single market and failing that there should be a differentiated solution for Scotland and pointed to differentiated solutions and political solutions within the European Union. If the UK Government had accepted that position and allowed Scotland to present it, the EU would have given it a fair hearing and been open to discussions about it. My understanding is that that is why the Scottish Government is continuing to argue that there should be a four-nation approach to Brexit, but so far it is unclear how the UK Government is going to respond to that since the general election. Certainly before the general election, the process of inter-governmental relations and the devolved territories were very critical of the way in which they were being treated. Beyond Brexit, as I said in my open statements, it is quite unclear what the UK Government hoped to achieve in its negotiations. We are obviously at quite an unstable period in terms of where the UK Government is, but what we have gathered as a committee from Scotland's businesses is that access to the single market and free movement of people is absolutely vital to our economy. Our university sector is keen to continue with the collaborative projects with European countries that have really benefited their sector in Scotland as a whole. Jackson, do you want to come in? Thank you. I represent the Conservative party here. We are the largest of the Opposition parties here in Scotland and whatever guys you care to consider at the Government of the United Kingdom who are charged with taking forward the negotiations that are under way. You began by saying that you were surprised by the result. I voted to remain. Your surprise was nothing as compared to mine. Indeed, this committee, when we met after our own election here last May to plan our work programme for the year ahead, I have to say that Europe was not the largest of the things that we thought we would be having to consider as our agenda item for business. In fact, it has been almost all that we have had time to talk about, but we have in fact had a year of engaging with the unknown. That has been one of the most frustrating aspects of it. We have heard everybody's fears, we have heard everybody's concerns. Some of them are founded, some of the realities are frightening enough without the broader contextual arguments that surround them. I will not be pejorative in terms of the politics of this from the Conservative party's point of view. Obviously, we do not share the Scottish Government's analysis of how we proceed. We believe that ultimately the vote that I did not support but which we accepted will lead to us leaving the European Union. What do we want from that? Well, I think that it is clear that we want control of our own borders, we want control of our own laws and we want to maintain the broadest possible trade that we can. In that regard, our own treasury and others are starting to articulate where we might want to end up in any discussion and I find some of their arguments quite compelling. From my point of view, given the demographics of Scotland as a country with a rapidly ageing population, it is important that we have in the future a workforce that is capable of sustaining our public services and ensuring that we have an entrepreneurial dynamic to our economy that will allow us to prosper as a nation. It seems to me that where people feature in all of this is of fundamental importance. We obviously want to maintain the broadest possible economic activity across the widest possible territory but, clearly, we recognise the very important and fundamental relationship that we have economically with the rest of the European Union. People do have to come at the top of all of this. I understand that the Prime Minister is making a policy statement today to European heads of government in relation to the status of European nationals here and, obviously, of British nationals across Europe. I think that we want to understand and to resolve that as quickly as possible and everybody seems to believe that there is a tremendous amount of goodwill underpinning that desire. We want to obviously co-operate again on education. So many young people, I think, who voted differently in this referendum. I know that my own children were furious with their grandmother. They had voted differently and their view is that she will be dead and they will still be here. I think that they feel that the challenges that are presented to them are quite considerable. We obviously look to the future for them across the whole of Europe and the way that they can engage and participate in what they thought was an established arrangement, but which now, obviously, is called into question. There is a lot that we want to do in the development of medical technology. We understand that. There is a lot of dependency in terms of our security, not just from the immediate threats that have been facing nations without fear or favour in terms of terrorism, but obviously of the wider geopolitical defence arrangements in which we all have a common interest and bond. Fundamentally, there is the issue of the economic relationship that exists between us. All the discussions that I have participated in have had a slightly formal kind of aspect to them. Behind it, there is a desperate desire for some sort of pragmatic arrangement, respecting what you said about the 27 who will remain and obviously want to ensure the integrity and strength of the European Union that remains, but nonetheless desiring of an outcome that ensures that, while Britain may no longer be a former member of the European Union, that that European partnership in which Britain has played a part is allowed to continue. Without denigrating anybody else's perspective on all that, I hope and intend to remain an optimist with my glass half full, not half empty. I do not underestimate the challenges. I do not underestimate the fact of the many sleepless nights that we may have here, simply progressing what seems to be interminably complicated legislation to give effect to anything that is ultimately agreed, but I hope and believe that the goodwill that exists that you represent, that the people we have who represent it on the Committee of the Regions will be allowed to triumph ultimately in whatever outcome we arrive at. I just want to give a slightly different perspective as a liberal democrat. Firstly, I do not like what happened. The United Kingdom did vote overall to leave the European Union last year, but Scotland did not, nor did nor man, and no importantly did lots of parts of England and London. You will get this perspective that it is just Scotland and all that kind of thing. It is actually really important to remember that large chunks of England voted to remain in the United Kingdom and the European Union as well, particularly London. When you look at the London Financial Centre and the fact that in Brussels, as Jason Carlaw has just rightly said, in Brussels today they are contemplating how to take two main financial mechanisms out of London and locate them somewhere else in Europe, there is going to be an impact. We have had, as the convener might have mentioned earlier on, representatives here from the City of London pointing that out and the damage that will do to London. What happened a week ago in terms of the United Kingdom general election is actually really important. The straight politics of that are really important now because a year ago no one voted to leave the single market, no one voted to be poorer, no one voted to be worse off, they voted for lots of different reasons but they didn't vote for those things. Theresa May went into the general election here in the United Kingdom saying, vote for me for a hard Brexit, for a big majority of Conservatives who will then impose that hard solution on immigration and all those other things on the United Kingdom. She lost, she didn't win that argument, she absolutely lost that argument and we are now in a very different place. So your question about the single market, the convener is quite right, this thing is up in the air now, the convener is much more delicate than I'll be but this thing is right up in the air now. The Chancellor of the Exchequer, our main economic ministry made a speech two days ago in which he, in all but name, said the single market matters to the United Kingdom, that's because the whole of the United Kingdom business is telling him the single market matters. So I think this thing is all up in the air, I wouldn't take anything that's said by Theresa May in Brussels now as anything other than her latest position which will last five minutes. She may not be the Prime Minister next week, it's like John Major's days for those of you who remember British politics, it's like John Major's days, this looks so weak down in London now. So I think the context of where we are in Europe now is a United Kingdom, never mind Scotland, is utterly open, it's now going to depend on how long the Conservative Government will hold themselves together, it's going to depend on how long Theresa May stays as Prime Minister, so how long they leave her there because that's what it now is, she's the weakest Prime Minister we've had since John Major lost his overall majority, that's where it now is and what happens in the future is very different from where we would have been had the Tories won an overall majority of anything over 50, which is what they expected to win. So in that sense I have some hope for the future because I don't think, because I now know that she has no mandate, the Tories have no mandate to impose a hard Brexit on us and therefore the Scottish Parliament, the Welsh Assembly importantly as well, the Northern Ireland Assembly when they get back into being in legislative existence will have responsibilities in terms of as the Covina said of what may flow out of Westminster, but even that we don't know what'll flow out of Westminster. So it's all up in the air. I'll finish with this, the President of France made a speech or certainly met journalists from across Europe yesterday and said two things that for me were quite important. The first is that that door is always open until it's closed, which is self-definitly the case, but important, and secondly he respected why lots of Brits had voted to leave the European Union. And let me leave you with this. I represent Shetland. The reason that the vote against, the vote to leave in Shetland was as high as it was and we still voted to remain in, but it was as high as it was because of the common fisheries policy. The thing you need to remember is that some things, and I think you reflected that, some things the European Union do and are awful about reforming just don't work. And that's the problem a big, big structure has and the common fisheries policy for me in my part of the world is an example of that. It's been wrong for 30 years. Why the heck hasn't it been changed? So, if the European Union is going to be the kind of institution and the group of nations I wanted to be in the future, it has to recognise, as Macron did yesterday in Paris, what's wrong as well as what it needs to do to get right. Thank you for coming. Thank you, Tavish. Now, all our members have indicated their desire to speak, so I know that you want to hear as many views as possible, so I'll just take out our members in turn that they've indicated that they wanted to speak, so I'll invite Mary Evans first. Thank you. I would really just agree with a lot of what Tavish Scott has just said, and it's probably not often that I would say that, but I respect a lot of what you said. I mean, I feel that in particular the issues that matter to me to the people in my area are migration. That is going to be a key issue moving forward. Obviously, we have a lot of, I live in quite a rural area. Agriculture is very important. Across the northeast, fishing is very important. Tavish identified the problems with the common fisheries policy, but in terms of the fish processing sector, we employ a lot of EU nationals in terms of soft food industries. Even going beyond that, in tourism, in our health and social care, we are largely dependent on a migrant working force, and that is what's going to be vital going forward. I think that I don't take much comfort. I know that we'll see an immigration bill coming forward. We get hints of that in the Queen's speech. We don't know what that immigration policy will look like, but that's one thing that is absolutely vital to our economy here and one thing that we have to get right. That's where the devolved nations have to have a say and have to have an input in any discussions and negotiations that take place. We are a separate country in our own right. I feel that sometimes in Europe and in different European organisations, we're seen more as a region than in a country in our own right. It's in our of ourselves. That has to be borne in mind. We have different issues, we have different interests here, we have different needs and we do need different policies to the rest of the UK in specific areas. I think that another vitally important area is in terms of funding, in terms of all sorts of funds and different programmes across the European Union as well. Leader being an important one for rural communities, how this will work, post Brexit, if all of that goes ahead. I do think that a lot of that was lost in the discussions leading up to the referendum. I think that once the vote had taken place, people started to realise the extent to which we were involved and dependent on EU funds and the impact that those funds had had. I remember a study from the EU Commission a few years ago that went to different countries across Europe to ask the public were they aware of EU funded projects in their area. I think that Poland had the highest response rate of about 75 per cent of people there were aware of EU funded projects in their area and the UK had the lowest. People aren't aware, we didn't talk about it. Again, we are where we are now, but I think that that's an important thing going forward, how we're still and especially in terms of common agricultural policy, what will happen to our farmers, how will all those payments, how will all of that work and how will all that be teased out over the coming while. For me, those are the particular issues and, as I say, Scotland has to have a seat in the negotiating table because we need to be represented there. The next person who has indicated they would like to speak is Richard Lockhead. I'm the Scottish National Party member for Murray in the north of Scotland, which is also, as I indicated earlier, the home of Scotch whisky and that 50 per cent by volume of Scotch whisky comes from Spacide, McAllan, Glenfyrrach, some of the famous brands are based there. The Scotch whisky sector issued a statement yesterday, saying that continuity and stability from day one of Brexit is very, very important in the Scotch whisky sector, so clearly they're looking for a good agreement between the UK and the European Union. Scotland is a country, we're not a region and, whilst Tavish Scotch is quite right to highlight that other parts of the UK voted to remain, like Scotland did, and 62 per cent of Scots voted to remain. We do have a national parliament in this country and we do have other national institutions, so we're not a region, we're a country. Therefore, the debate in Scotland is different to the debate in London, and that's why the Scottish Government has said that once the terms of Brexit become clear, clearly at that stage, there should be the option of Scotland having a different choice in terms of future, and that's why the whole debate around independence referendum has been a feature of the Brexit debate in Scotland over the last year or so. Clearly Scotland is looking for a bespoke arrangement, and the compromise that the Scottish Government has asked from the UK Government is for that to be taken into account. The independence referendum clearly is not necessary because if we had a bespoke arrangement and the UK Government were negotiating with the Scottish Government to make that happen, as part of the UK's negotiating position, that would help the Scottish economy and Scotland greatly. The two key areas are access to the single market, and the second area is immigration. Quite clearly, immigration dictates the UK policy on Brexit far more so than the Scottish policy on Brexit. That's because the Conservative Party and the UK Government are very sensitive to the public opinion and internal party politics about immigration in England, and perhaps the economy is not the predominant consideration that's more immigration. However, in Scotland, we are very concerned about the future of our economy, and central to that is immigration, especially given that we have an ageing population, as Jackson Carlaw mentioned as well. That's why Scotland is very keen on a bespoke arrangement because of our national interests, and our national interests are access to the single market and membership of the single market, and powers devolve Scotland over immigration policy. The final comment that I want to make is that, as the president said in his opening remarks, Europe is not perfect, and the common fisheries policy has failed Scotland. I would also argue to a large degree that the common agricultural policy has failed Scotland. I've met very few farmers who voted to remain within the EU, and I've met next to no fishermen who voted to remain within the EU. Despite the on-going debate over the importance of the single market to seafood—two-thirds of Scottish seafood goes to Europe—and the importance of the single market to agriculture, because it's very important in terms of tariffs and equal standards and market opportunities. Those policies have been a very bad advert for the European Union in Scotland, so whatever happens going forward, those two policies will continue to remain very unpopular in Scotland unless something radical is done, but that's a debate for the future. Good morning, everyone. The vice president in his opening remarks spoke of the input from parliaments and local government into the process. Some colleagues have touched upon most immigration access to the single market, but my first point is that everyone would want to have some type of positive outcome from any discussions that take place. I don't think that anyone would want other than that, but when you then start to take it down to the next level and look at the details of what may or may not happen, one of my large fears is in terms of the power grab that may happen. With powers that leave the European Union and then come back to these islands and the possibility of particularly over the fisheries and agriculture, those powers remain at Westminster and then not coming to the Scottish Parliament. I think that that would have an adverse effect upon the Scottish economy, which Richard Lochhead was just talking about. I think that that would be extremely detrimental to our economic prospects going forward. The repeal bill was highlighted in the Korean speech yesterday, and the discussions about the situation regarding what role the Parliament will play in the repeal bill. Lewis MacDonald spoke about the competencies of the Scottish Parliament. The initial scoffing act to create this Parliament and how, in section 28 of that particular legislation, there is a lack of clarity in terms of the role that this Parliament will play in that legislative process regarding the repeal bill, and that is something that the UK Government really needs to clarify. Another aspect is in terms of the discussions between the UK and the Governments internally, and the roles of the Governments having an input into that aspect of the process. There has been the GMC, the Joint Ministerial Council. We have had discussions in this committee and representatives from the UK Government speak to the committee on the whole aspects of what has taken place thus far. It is clear that the GMC process has not been perfect. I have a concern that the UK Government might once again decide not to fully listen to the concerns, not just of Scotland but elsewhere in the UK. My primary concern is about Scotland. I have a concern that suggestions, ideas and proposals are once again rejected outright by the UK Government. My final point is that, once again, we are coming back to the issue of the lack of clarity and confusion. Shortly after the UK election, the Secretary of State for Scotland, Mr Mundell, had quite clearly delighted to have so many more new colleagues in his party. Publicly, he came out with a comment regarding the Conservative MPs representing non-independent supporting members of the public. Then, only a couple of days ago, Iain Duncan, the former MP, has now been ennobled, stating that Scotland should have a seat at the table in terms of negotiation. That is a confusing position, or two confusing positions from the senior representatives of the UK Government. Ultimately, we are in an absolute mess. It is an absolute constitutional crisis within the UK. The power grab option, an opportunity that is there for Westminster, is absolutely apparent. However, because of the minority Government at the UK, there is an opportunity to get something better for Scotland and elsewhere within the UK to have a better offering and a better deal if the UK Government is prepared to listen. However, I have my doubts. I am sure that I would now like to invite Ross Greer to make his contribution. I agree with almost all of what colleagues have said before, so I will not simply repeat it all. Like every other grouping, the Greens have criticisms of the European Union that I think they would be slightly different from some of the ones that you have heard already. We would have criticisms of, for example, the common fisheries policy but coming from a different perspective. From the point of view of the Scottish Greens, our position is still that Scotland has not given its consent to leaving the European Union. Not only did we reject that in the referendum last year, but we voted overwhelmingly to remain in the European Union. However, Scotland, at the general election this month, rejected the current party of government that went into the election with proposals for its hard Brexit. Scotland's consent still has not been given to that. The current UK Government and its position on a hard Brexit on leaving the single market and the customs union might not hold, as other members have already said. However, this last year has been deeply unsatisfactory for us. We have consistently seen both the Scottish and the Welsh Governments ignored their concerns not being listened to. There have been a number of notable examples. The Scottish Government's Minister for Europe highlights his frustration at finding out when article 50 was to be activated by watching the BBC news because he had not been informed by the UK Government. This is after very positive words from the UK Government about the involvement of the Scottish Welsh and when it reconvenes Northern Irish executives being involved in the process, but it has not been borne out in reality. We believe that the UK has set itself on a course to leaving the European Union, but the people of Scotland should have an opportunity to decide whether that is a course that they want to continue to be on. The other option is to become an independent country with aspirations for Scottish European Union membership in its own right. We are frustrated that, despite this Parliament having voted for there to be a referendum on Scotland's independence, the UK Government's position is to block that referendum. Constitutionally, they have the right to do so. It is a power that lies with them. We would need the temporary devolution of the power to hold that, and their position is for Scotland not to have that choice, that self-determination at this point in time. Given that, and the position that we are currently in as part of a United Kingdom heading towards Brexit, like colleagues across almost every other party, we would see leaving the single market as being absolutely disastrous, as being very much driven by ideology, as colleagues have highlighted, an ideological obsession with immigration and ending freedom of movement in particular. For Greens, we do not just look at that from an economic point of view. Our belief in the single market is not just about the economic benefit that it brings, but our belief in freedom of movement in principle. Our belief in continuing to remain part of the European project is about the collective efforts to fight climate change, to regulate the financial industry, to promote peace and the development of democracy. We still believe in all of those things, and we still want to be part of European efforts to enhance all of that. However, we are currently in a very challenging situation. We have a UK Government that has now begun negotiations and simply has no idea what it is doing. On day 1 of the negotiations, the UK Government's minister for leaving the European Union, our lead negotiator, conceded on the major points that he had been making over the last few months, over the last 18 months, both during the campaign when he was advocating for leaving and in his year as a minister. The UK Government's negotiations are fuelled, as I said, by ideology. That ideology is falling apart when it faces reality, and reality is hitting home very hard. To the rest of Europe, when I have been speaking to my colleagues from the rest of Europe, the UK Government looks weak at the moment. It looks like it does not have a clear understanding of what it is doing. It looks completely outclassed by the negotiators sitting on the other side of the table. That reflects very poorly on all of us here, but it also presents us with very significant risks. Those risks go across Scotland's economy and society across the whole of the United Kingdom. We have very acute particular issues that have been recognised, for example with Northern Ireland, where there is almost a perfect storm to damage a lot of what has been built over recent years and decades. From my colleagues there, I have certainly heard a huge amount of concern, because there is no Northern Irish Assembly at the moment. They struggle to advocate on behalf of the people they represent. The complicating factor added to that situation in the last few weeks is that the only two parties to have elected members of the UK Parliament from Northern Ireland are the democratic unionists who are currently negotiating with the Conservatives to give them a working majority and Sinn Fein, who do not take their seats. Only one party from Northern Ireland that only represents one community is currently active in elected politics and is negotiating with the UK Government. Our colleagues have huge concerns about what the impact of leaving the customs union will be on the border between the Republic of Ireland and the north, but they are unable to give effective voice to that, because there is no Northern Irish Assembly for them to have meetings like that in. It is a very challenging situation and one that we struggle to see a way out of that is going to be anything but damage limitation at this point. Thank you very much, Ross. Now that all our committee members have had the opportunity to put their views, perhaps there would be members of the committee who would like to hear. Yes. Can I ask you one question? It has been very interesting to listen to you and that key issue that you are all driven about, but do you think it would be possible to, when we see the results of the negotiation in two years, that it will be a new referendum or voting when we can see the results of what will happen? Obviously, it has a huge impact on Scotland, but would that be possible? That is what the First Minister has outlined. There was an election last year in Scotland to the Scottish Parliament. My question is more about a new referendum, not only in Scotland or in the whole UK referendum. Sorry. I think that this is a number of members who have said, and I know that it is foolish of me to say something about that, because it is his party that has that particular policy position. The Scottish Government has said that it thinks that Scotland should have a choice, and that should be through a referendum on independence. Because the situation is so fluid and because the UK Government is so unstable, it is actually quite a difficult one to predict. I have heard it said that it was the Irish writer Fintan O'Toole, when he was writing in the Irish Times, who said that when Mrs May got her comeuppance in the general election because she presented 52 per cent vote to leave as the overwhelming will of the people for a hard Brexit, which it clearly wasn't, and the people of the UK made that very clear in the general election result. I do not know whether others want to come in on that. I guess that we all want to have a brief word on that. I think that the experience that I think is reflected across Scotland and the UK is that referendums have been deeply divisive and conducted in a circumstance in which people are presented with information that is partial and sometimes plainly misleading. I think that what is most important is to change the direction of the negotiation so that we get something around which people can unite rather than simply another opportunity to divide. I suppose that I would say that the Conservative party did not win the election in terms of its objectives of securing a larger majority of seats. It did win an additional two and a half million votes. Joan McAlpine's party, the Scottish National Party, lost half a million votes here in Scotland alone—one-third of the vote that they previously had. It is very clear that the Prime Minister did not secure her objectives, but by no means did other parties triumph. There are 318 Conservative MPs and there are 12 who represent Tavish. There is a balance in all of those arguments as we go forward. My overwhelming view is that people in this country are very fed up because elections are meant to resolve things. We had a referendum in 2014 on independence, but we are still talking about it. We had a general election in 2015 when the Government got a small majority and then sought to get a bigger one and ended up without one and has resolved nothing. We had a referendum on Europe in 2016, the outcome of which was that we would leave, but now we are unclear what any of that means. What many people say to me is that I keep voting in things because I thought that that would solve the problem and I find all that I have done is end up with another vote ahead of me because nobody knows what the vote I just had actually meant or represented. My own sense is that there is no appetite for another early vote on anything. Whether or not that is something that is tenable, I do not know events will dictate, but I do not think that there is any popular will for it. It may come about at some point. I think that it is very unlikely that there will be another vote on Scottish independence in the lifetime of the Scottish Parliament. I did not predict that Donald Trump would become President of the United States, and nor did I predict that the United Kingdom would vote to leave the European Union. Frankly, I think that the game of political guessing as to what might happen is fraught at the moment. I would rather agree with Jackson's point that the country is absolutely fed up, but the flip side of that argument is that they have now got a Government who do not actually quite know what they are going to do. Ironically, Jackson is quite right about the numbers in terms of who we all represent and who went up and who went down. That is factually, of course, accurate. The irony of the outcome of the United Kingdom general election is that there is more likelihood of whatever the deal is being put to the people, because I can certainly see a scenario where the Tories stagger on, get through it and then are internally riffened by contradictions over the outcome. It is not hard enough for some that it will be too hard for the Ken Clarks to this world. Therefore, they are cop-out, because they were the ones who gave us this in the first place, and it is all about them in that sense. We will be to put it to the people. Before the general election, while I may have made the case for it, I do not think that there is any chance that it is happening now, ironically. I think that there is a chance that it might happen. Ross. That is just very briefly. There is a sound democratic argument for it happening. If you compare our two referendums in 2014, the Scottish Government proposed not just that Scotland become an independent country but that it proposed a white paper on that, which was a book on what independence would look like. You can have profound criticisms of that, but there was a specific offer on the table. I, as someone who voted for independence, disagreed with a lot of what was in the white paper. It was still there. People could still scrutinise it. The referendum in 2016 had no such prospectus. Many people on the leave side were explicitly saying, of course we will not leave the single market. Of course we will not leave the customs union. Others were saying absolutely the opposite. There was no clarity on what people were really voting for. There is a sound democratic argument that, at the end of the process, once we know what it actually is, it is not just the vague concept of leaving the European Union, but what that specifically means. There is a sound argument about putting that to the people. Like Tavish, I thought that it was almost certainly not going to happen before this general election. I think that it is now marginally more likely but still unlikely. For us in Scotland, though, it does not necessarily solve all of those issues because you could have another referendum with exactly the same result of Scotland voting to remain in, but the UK is a whole of proving the final deal in voting for Brexit. For those of us who do not consider that to be democratically adequate, it does not resolve our issues. Overall, it is still unlikely that we will have a referendum on the deal, but there was almost no chance of it before. Our politics, as you might have noticed, is rather fluid and unstable. Richard Lochhead Just to make the key point, of course, that, in the referendum on independence in 2014, one of the key issues in the whole debate was that, if you voted against Scottish independence, that was a guarantee to remain within Europe. The Conservative Party made that argument, and the no campaign. Quite clearly, in terms of Ross Greer's point, that the premise in which people voted in 2014 turned out not to be the case. However, the point is that, in terms of the national interests of Scotland and the views that are expressed by Scotland, we need Europe to reach out to Scotland. We need all of you and your colleagues and your respective countries and parliaments and chambers to reach out to Scotland because we have reached out to Europe and we are an outward-looking country. In terms of our continuation in the single market and free movement of people, those are very important national interests for Scotland. Clearly, we are part of the United Kingdom, and that does complicate matters from Scotland's point of view. However, given the history of Europe since the Second World War, where often the continent has adapted to a changing political environment and public opinion, our plea is that we need Europe's support in 2017 to recognise the political environment and public opinion and what is best for solidarity in countries working together. Stuart McMillan Thank you. It is an interesting question and it took me back to the phrase, or the quote from Harold Wilson, a week's a long time in politics. The next 18 months is an eternity. Nobody can predict what is going to happen within the next 18 months. I think that Tavish's point regarding Donald Trump and the like is absolutely accurate. Anything can happen. I do not think that the will of the population is there to have another referendum, but at the same time, going back to the lack of clarity in terms of the arguments to come out of the European Union, when information comes out about what is on the table, that might change. I think that I will also go back to Richard Lochhead's point regarding Europe. With this process, a deal has to be ratified by the member states, as well as within the UK. That is where the European Union has a very important role to play. The member states have an important role to play in terms of their thoughts. What is your commentary on the deal that ends up being offered to the UK and to the EU 27? To come back on the democratic point about your question, something that has not really been raised apart from Jackson and his opening comments is the role of many young people who did not vote in the European referendum and woke up the next morning, horrified at the result. We had a session specifically for young people in our committee to give them a voice, which was very useful. One of the things that young people are most concerned about is their rights as EU citizens, which they had always taken for granted. They were EU citizens and could travel freely, study, work and set up businesses. They feel that their citizens rights have been taken away from them. What has been interesting at a UK level in the last election is the big drive to register young people. Many more young people voted in the UK general election than voted in the referendum. At UK level, it is reasonable to say that many of them voted because they were galvanised by Jeremy Corbyn, the leader of the Labour Party. Although they did not know that the Labour Party's position was to leave the single market and to leave the customs union, which is exactly what they do not want to do. However, it seems to me that if that process continues and that more young people across the UK want to participate in the democratic process, there will be pressure for them to have another vote. That is just my personal opinion. I should quickly add that it is not the Labour Party's policy to leave the customs union and we are certainly looking to maintain as many as possible of the benefits of the single market. You can see that this will be an on-going discussion and a change of government at the UK would allow clarity immediately. I am not sure about that. Perhaps are there any more questions, otherwise you may wish a little bit of a break before I think you are attending First Minister's questions. Mr President, let me just add one important aspect because we need as well a lot more facts and figures. Of course, EU is well prepared on the Brexit process, so that is what we know. But for us we would like to get a bit more out of view, not necessarily now but for the coming weeks and months or about your exports. Most likely most of that is if you take Scotland as such. Most likely your export is mainly with England, but then the rest of EU, so that is the big market for all your industries, all your export activities. Then if you take your students in schools and so on, they have dreamed that they can go to visit other EU countries, study their erasmus has been a real success and we want to extend that kind of activities much more. So now what is the future at the moment or how that is seen? I have been working myself with the university level and there I was here several times some 15 years ago when we benchmarked the Finnish national innovation system and yours I visited several times Harriet Watt and the others how we can increase our collaboration. So a lot of your researchers, I had to figure that one fourth of your research staff in your universities is from abroad. So definitely that is a strong interest and they are all the aspects so it would be nice to solve one by one separately, but that's not the reality and what I've been worried and we've been worried much so that our committee of the region, our interest is strongly is on tackling these migration issues, those that kind of issues, but above all sustainable growth. We need to get the different funding instrument to operate more in synergy and that's the reason why we have established or the EU has established these strategic investments where most of the money is coming from the private sector, but coming due to that we public sector we are doing a lot of hard work catalyzing enabling this new development. We have and we will have the cohesion funding which is more targeted that's self as well on capacity building on knowledge on sustainable development so in synergy with the strategic investments and with private funding. So our major concern is to spend our time on that kind of things which come and create the progress and create the well-being for the citizens and now this Brexit is really taking a lot of time everywhere most likely more your concerns on that kind of issue and that we strongly believe that and and we are working on so that we see Brexit now as an opportunity for the rest of EU to renew certain activities maybe one third of the the points message is coming from UK and how do you want to change and what are the reasons why to leave so they are the one third is the ones that we want to change as well so we will change those so EU will be more positive in the future more target oriented more towards this this strong or global role and that means both for businesses but for the people for students for everyone and this is our concern as well and this is what we would like to continue with you on this kind of development so that we get more of the very concrete issues facts and figures included so that we can make this renewal process but that helps you as well and that hard Brexit soft Brexit or return back to the original place it's about I think I'm dreaming about the better Europe much stronger Europe where the people get much more out of this and I think that many of our key decisions and makers still have this and are are working for this the positive future of Europe and let's see then what is the final outcome of the whole Brexit process thank you very much mr president and I think that your your closing remarks there absolutely summarise much of the work that this committee has done over the last year I think it's fair to say and other members have said that in the vote last year many people perhaps just didn't understand the European Union and what it actually delivered for people in this country and I think some of the work that we have done over the last year has uncovered exactly what the European Union does for Scotland and how vital it is in all sorts of areas and the challenges that brexit presents so it may well be helpful to the conference of presidents if we perhaps sent you a summary of the work and those four reports that we have done over the last year as well as the reports themselves that you could continue the work of your conference of presidents into the implications of the referendum for the European Union as a whole. I would like to thank our guests for a very valuable and interesting discussion. I understand you will now attend First Minister's questions and that we will then have the opportunity to continue more informal discussions over lunch and I very much look forward to that. Thank you very much.