 Tyniadol. Oeddiwch chi. Perhaps the first item of the... I know very un-gentlemanly. The first item of business this afternoon is a debate on motion number 14190, in the name of Model Fraser, on internationalising Scottish Business. Members who wish to take part in debate should press the request button now. I call on Model Fraser to speak to you and move the motion on behalf of the economy in the United Kingdom Tourism Committee. Mr Fraser, a generous 10-minute? I'm delighted to open this debate on behalf of the Economy, Energy and Tourism Committee, our second committee debate in the space of eight days. Last week, I rather enjoyed healing the discomfort of various members and other parties that they expressed to me at having to vote for a motion in my name. I only look forward to the horror that will hit them at five o'clock this evening when they realise they'll have to repeat that experience for a second week in a row. I hope that it becomes a habit, Presiding Officer. There can be no disagreement that helping Scottish business to boost their export should be a top priority for everyone concerned with Scotland's economic performance. Our inquiry into internationalising Scottish business makes, I think, an important contribution to current thinking about the drivers and barriers that influence Scotland's international trade. Can I start by thanking my fellow committee members, the committee clerks, all those who gave evidence to the committee and all those who assisted us with external visits, whose help was all invaluable in reaching this report. Before I turn to the detail of our conclusions, let me just set the context for the inquiry. In 2010, the predecessor economy committee held an inquiry to examine the work of Scottish development international, the international arm of Scottish Enterprise and Highlands and Islands Enterprise. That inquiry looked at SDI's dual role of encouraging inward investment and supporting exports from Scotland. In that report, the committee concluded that SDI's primary focus should be on achieving, and I quote, a step change in the number of Scottish companies that see exports and international trade as a route to future success. That report prompted a review of SDI's strategy and the publication jointly by the Scottish Government, Scottish Enterprise, Highlands and Islands Enterprise and SDI of Scotland's international trade and investment strategy for 2011 to 2015. Five years on, it seemed appropriate to review progress. Back in 2011, the Scottish Government set a target to increase exports by 50 per cent by 2017. That looked to be challenging but suitably ambitious, as part of the Government's wider strategy to support business growth. The committee was pleased to note that significant progress has been made towards that target. However, as we look more closely at the facts and figures, the committee was concerned that Scotland's exports remain concentrated heavily with a limited number of large firms. Around 100 companies account for 60 per cent of total exports. By contrast, only 16 per cent of all international exports were from small companies. We wanted to explore the reasons why so many Scottish firms, particularly SMEs, did not export. What was preventing them and what more could be done to change that? From salmon to whisky to our universities, Scotland has some real success stories overseas, but breaking into international markets can sometimes be time-consuming, costly and difficult to do, especially for small businesses. That is when they need support. That could come from a business gateway adviser, a local chamber of commerce or a specialist working for SDI or their counterparts in UKTI. However, whatever the source, that support needs to be easy to identify, easy to contact and easy to deal with. Disappointingly, we found that, all too often, that has not been the case in the experience of businesses across Scotland. While there is undoubtedly much positive work being undertaken by all of those organisations and others to increase Scotland's export performance, it became clear during the course of our inquiry that the landscape of support remains cluttered and confusing and, ultimately, off-putting for many business people. Although there is plenty of information available about international opportunities and export-related issues, that seems only to add to the sense of confusion about where to go and who to speak to. As an example, the committee heard that trade missions were a key part of helping companies to break into overseas markets. However, more needed to be done to improve co-ordination, reduce duplication and eliminate unnecessary competition between organisers of trade missions. Helpfully, the Scottish Government says that it agrees. Discussion on an appropriate platform for publication of trade missions online is apparently a key issue for the epithely titled International Events Community of Practice, recently established by SDI. I wish them well in their endeavours, because issues such as those need to be tackled urgently. Above all else, that will require leadership. We concluded that overall responsibility for co-ordination and leadership of export strategy and initiatives in Scotland should rest with SDI as the main public agency tasked with international support for business. At this point, I must acknowledge that we have found many positive examples of SDI's work. Its interventions and programmes are valued highly by many companies around Scotland. However, if Scotland is to make a step change in its international export performance, SDI can and must do more. We recommended that it should have within its operating plan a renewed emphasis on promoting internationalisation and supporting Scottish exporters, backed by more challenging targets. However, that does not mean that it should do everything. We also expressed strong support for sectoral initiatives to increase exports, such as that led by the Scottish Food and Drink, where industry leadership has been supported and facilitated by SDI and the Scottish Government. James Withers from Scotland's Food and Drink told us that his sector attached a huge value to SDI resources, but it was industry's responsibility to help it to deliver better by setting the framework so that there was industry leadership and public sector alignment. In the seven highest priority markets, which are France, Germany, North America, Middle East, China, Japan and Singapore, new food and drink trade specialists are being recruited to join the existing SDI field teams. Indeed, I am told that from the beginning of this month, 10 specialists are now in post around the world helping to promote Scottish producers. It is good news that the Scottish Government has accepted our recommendation that SDI review the success of the initiative after its initial period of operation in order to see whether other key sectors might benefit from a similar approach. We were also struck by the potential for enhanced collaboration at the regional level. When members of the committee met Aberdeen and Grampian Chamber of Commerce, we were told about the North East Scotland trade group, involving Aberdeen City Council, Aberdeenshire Council, the Chamber, SDI, Scottish Enterprise, UKTI, Aberdeen and Robert Gordon universities and Subsea UK. All sharing information to reduce duplication and improve collaboration. We have recommended that the enterprise agencies look at whether that is a model that could be usefully replicated elsewhere in Scotland. Perhaps that is another task for the international events community of practice. Let me say a little more about the priorities for action that were identified by the committee. Firstly, in order to make it easier for businesses to find the basic information that they need when starting their export journey, we recommended that the business portal be developed which would include signposts to export advice and assistance from both public and private sector organisations. The Scottish Government has decided that that belongs to the MyGovScot website. I might think that I am a little skeptical, Presiding Officer, but I wonder about the likelihood of the owner of a small business finding what they need to know about exporting on that site with all the other information contained. Time will tell whether that is a wise decision. In terms of business advice and support services, the committee identified a clear opportunity to better utilise the GlobalScot network. GlobalScot is a diverse network of business leaders, entrepreneurs and executives with a connection to Scotland and a strong desire to see Scottish businesses succeed locally and in the wider world, or so says its website. Perhaps surprisingly, 17 per cent of GlobalScots are based here at home in Scotland. That presents an opportunity, a potential role for them to act in a mentoring capacity with companies at an early stage of their export journey. Those members who made the trip to the Middle East met a number of GlobalScots based out there, and it was clear that they do take a great deal of interest in helping Scottish exporters in that particular region, but we think that there is more that could be done. We believe that by using GlobalScots at home, we could help to augment the highly valued but more general business mentoring scheme that is already delivered by Scottish Chambers of Commerce. We also asked SDI to review the means by which businesses can access the GlobalScot network and to increase the number of one-to-one engagements between GlobalScots and companies in order to maximise the benefits from the scheme. Finally, we concluded that SDI's new export support programme, the successor to smart exporter, which was set up in 2014, has set a relatively modest target of support to companies. For that reason, we recommended a review after 18 months of operation, with a view to making targets for the remainder of the programme more challenging. We are told that SDI will consider those points. I hope that more challenging targets for support to Scottish exporters will be one recommendation that is accepted and pursued. I conclude my remarks by confirming that the Economy, Energy and Tourism Committee believes that the expansion of support to companies who have export potential is of vital importance if Scotland's international trade performance is to be improved significantly over the next decade. Henry Ford once said that coming together is a beginning, keeping together is progress and working together is success. It is that spirit of co-operation and collaboration reflected, I hope, in this afternoon's debate, which needs to be grasped if we are going to improve export support services for Scottish businesses. On behalf of the Economy, Energy and Tourism Committee, I am delighted to move the motion in my name. I now call on John Swinney, Deputy First Minister, eight minutes or thereabouts. I thank the Economy, Energy and Tourism Committee and its convener for the report that they have presented. When I gave evidence to the committee in March, I welcomed the inquiry that was being undertaken on internationalising Scottish businesses that represents a significant priority for the Government. I have considered the report that has emerged from the committee with great interest, particularly as we take forward the steps to develop a new trade and investment strategy for Scotland to replace the existing strategy that is in place. The Scottish Government formally responded to the key issues and recommendations in the committee's report on 19 August, and this afternoon's debate provides an opportunity to examine those in more detail. Our programme for government last week reaffirmed our ambition to make Scotland the best place in the United Kingdom to do business through focusing on the four pillars of our economic strategy, investment in people and infrastructure, innovation, internationalisation and inclusive growth. Internationalising Scottish businesses is a key priority for the Government. Our focus is on creating an environment in Scotland that supports companies to grow and enter new markets and ensures that Scotland remains a highly attractive location for inward investment. I set out the programme for government, and we will do it in a number of different ways. SDI will continue to lead work in Scotland and its overseas offices to promote Scotland's exports and to champion Scotland as a destination for international investment. Our new innovation and investment hubs in Dublin, Brussels and London will provide places for government, Scottish Development International, other agencies and public partners and the private sector to make international connections that will boost exports and attract investment, in addition to supporting the priority of expanding innovation. We are investing in infrastructure to deliver major improvements to business connectivity, and we have also set out our intention to reduce our passenger duty within the term of the next Parliament, incentivising connectivity to key markets. We are ensuring that companies have access to the right finance. Our new £40 million SME holding fund will support more SMEs to grow and achieve their export ambitions. Scottish businesses benefit greatly from access to the 500 million potential customers in the European market. Exports to the EU are estimated to underpin more than 300,000 jobs in Scotland, and so we will continue to make a strong case for Scotland to remain members of the European Union. Finally, we are developing a new trade and investment strategy for Scotland to replace the existing strategy when it comes to an end later this year, and I will say more about that strategy later on. First, let me say a few words about Scotland's performance. Scotland has had a strong record of success in recent years in exporting globally and attracting investment. In the three years to 2013, the most recent period for which we have figures, our exports grew by 20 per cent and we are on track to achieve our target of increasing exports by 50 per cent in value over the period 2010-17. Whilst I welcome those figures, does he recognise that, as a percentage share of the Scottish economy, our exports fell? It is always Jackie Baillie's position in the debate to concentrate on the dreary. Let us agree on the fact that exports are growing. Jackie Baillie has got her opportunity to share miserabilism with the debate in a few moments, and it is obviously going to be another of those miserable afternoons from Jackie Baillie, so we will look forward to it then. In the Ensign Young Scotland attractiveness survey, Scotland has emerged as the second most successful UK allocation in attracting foreign direct investment behind London in four of the past five years. Over the past year, SDI helped to attract 91 inward investment projects, a 17 per cent increase on the previous year. Those projects will bring £433 million of inward investment into Scotland and will create or safeguard nearly 10,000 jobs. However, we need to encourage more Scottish companies to internationalise. That may be a point on which even Jackie Baillie and I can find agreement. We need to support Scottish companies to expand into new markets, and we need to prioritise key sectors where we have a competitive advantage. Our new trading investment strategy will set out how working across government and with business in the wider public sector, we intend to respond to those challenges. We are taking a rigorous and evidence-based approach to the development of the new strategy, and the committee's report will help us in formulating those priorities as a consequence. Earlier this week, we published a comprehensive review of the data on Scotland's export and inward investment strategy, activity and the fact of shaping new trends in Scotland and in the global community. As important, if not more so, has been the engagement that we have had with a wide range of public and private sector stakeholders on the new strategy. At the start of the work, I met with the chairs of the industry leadership groups in Scotland to discuss the scope of the new strategy. When I attended the cabinet meeting in Oban last month, I had the pleasure of meeting companies from that locality to discuss their exporting ambitions and to hear about some of the challenges that they face generally and as a result of the rural location in which they operate. We have established a trade and industry strategy partnership of business leaders to act as a sounding board for the strategy, and the involvement of partners in developing that will be a key priority of the Government. We need to work together to achieve our trade and investment goals, strengthening the co-ordination of trade and investment support provided by the public sector and building a unique and strong partnership with business and industry. The new strategy will be a key mechanism for the responding to the recommendations in the committee's report, as well as setting out action in response to the Wilson review of support for exporting. We are looking closely at the suggestions made by the committee for improving companies' access to export advice and assistance and to information on forthcoming trade missions. SDI and UKTI already work well together, but we are exploring ways to further strengthen that relationship and achieve better co-ordination of export support across the public and private sectors. In that respect, I agree with the committee that we have to look at those issues from the perspective of the consumer. It is clear to the individual company how all those services are related and how they can work on behalf of individual companies. The committee highlighted the potential for enhancing further collaboration between business and our further and higher education sectors whose networks and connections span the world. Through its involvement in Connected Scotland, SDI is working with Universities Scotland and Colleges Scotland to develop initiatives that support Scottish businesses to internationalise while helping the institutions to realise their own international ambitions. We are considering how we can promote and make better use of the many networks that already exist in Scotland overseas, including the global Scott network. We are looking at how we measure and report on the impact of those interventions. Although there is a great deal that has been accomplished in the development of Scotland's involvement in exporting and in foreign direct investment, I want to reassure Parliament that the Government is going through a process that is aided by the Wilson review of exporting, aided by the committee's recommendations, which will lead to the formulation of the updated trade and investment strategy. That process is important for us to gather together in consort with industry the best advice and the best suggestions that we can make to ensure that we satisfy two fundamental objectives. First, we encourage more companies to become actively involved in exporting and that they participate in that activity to the full. Secondly, as a consequence of motivating that improvement in participation and performance, we can improve the external focus of the Scottish economy. If we do those two things, if we are able to use the evidence base that we are now gathering to motivate more companies to participate, and that priority is right at the heart of the Scottish business pledge, which is central to the Government's economic strategy, we will reap the rewards of motivating more companies to be involved in international business activity. The employment base of Scotland and the economic opportunities of our company base will be a great deal stronger as a consequence. Thank you, Mr Swinney. I now call Lewis MacDonald. Six minutes are there about, Mr MacDonald. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. Internationalising Scottish business is a desirable objective that has been pursued by successive Governments over a number of years, but this inquiry could hardly have come at a more critical time. Britain's membership of the European Union is up for debate. The devolution settlement in the UK itself is in the process of significant change. Of course, the principle of open borders within the European Union is being tested today as never before. Not only that, but the Scottish economy itself is facing the challenge of major contraction in the oil and gas sector, which includes many of our most successful global-facing companies, but is vital in sustaining a vast and varied supply chain across Scotland and beyond. This week's economic report from oil and gas UK revealed that 65,000 jobs had already been lost, many of them in Scotland, and that thousands more are said to go before things get better. The adjustment that is required in that sector is a strong signal of the scale of change that is required across the economy as a whole. There is no doubt in my mind, of course. I realise and understand his obsession with oil and gas, but when he looks at the forward forecasts, he is slightly more optimistic. Why do we talk about other sectors such as the fastest-growing sector in telecommunications, which has increased 10 fold over the past 10 years, and other sectors such as education, utilities and other activities? Why are you so obsessed with what we believe will be a medium-term downturn in the oil and gas industry? I will compensate you for your time, Mr MacDonald. That is very kind. That must be one of the most extraordinary interventions that I have ever heard in a debate on the Scottish economy. The notion that I stand up and account for 65,000 jobs lost across the UK oil and gas sector is that the majority of those in Scotland have tens of thousands of jobs lost in the region that I represent. Mr Brodie says why are you obsessed with oil and gas? That is an extraordinary intervention. I am talking about oil and gas precisely because of the critical role of the oil and gas industry playing, not just in the north-east of Scotland, but right across the country in the supply chain that stretches all the way from Shetland to the other end of the United Kingdom. I have no doubt that many jobs in the area that Mr Brodie represents are affected by the thing that I am describing. It is critical to understand the importance of that major shock to the Scottish economy, which is happening even as we speak, but the extent to which the ability of the oil and gas sector and the Scottish economy to withstand the impact of that shock depends to a very high degree on its ability to internationalise, to sell and trade and do business in other parts of the world, even while facing difficulties in the North Sea. That inquiry is indeed timely if nothing else as a wake-up call to those members of this Parliament who have not understood what is actually happening in the Scottish economy today. Labour welcomes the conclusions and recommendations of the report. We want ministers to go further in doing the same as I will outline in the moment, because we believe that more needs to be done to overcome the obstacles to internationalising Scottish business. However, I would like to echo the convener's tribute to all those who helped with the inquiry as a member of the committee, including Jane Gotzer, adviser, researchers and clerks. In particular, I have mentioned the quite exceptional input of Dr Haddie Fausie and his colleagues in both SDI and UKTI on the trade mission to Saudi Arabia. Although, of course, that visit confirmed, among other things, that the price of oil is unlikely to go back up any time soon. It was clear both at home and abroad that public and private agencies play an important role in sustaining Scottish exports. It was clear that, as the cabinet secretary said, Scottish Development International and UK trading investment do sterling work in promoting internationalisation, but it was not always apparent that they did so in a joined-up way. That is why the committee concluded that there should be a single point of entry for potential exporters seeking government support, as indeed Brian Wilson had also found in his earlier inquiry on behalf of the Secretary of State for Scotland. As Murdoff Fraser said, it is unclear how the plan to replace the business.scotland online portal with a wider Scottish Government site will help to make access easier for potential exporters. Apart from anything else, UKTI plays and should continue to play a major role in supporting Scottish exports and anything that impedes access to their support and advice will get in the way of internationalisation, too. The committee also concluded that the implementation of the findings of the Wilson review was a matter for both Governments, for both SDI and UKTI, and that the progress of that implementation should be made public on a quarterly basis. It is disappointing that, so far, the Scottish Government's response to that simple and sensible suggestion has been less than enthusiastic. Of course, Scottish Enterprise, Highlands and Islands Enterprise and Business Gateway are also parts of the picture. A good example is Business Mentor in Scotland, which brings potential exporting companies together with business mentors who have already made a success of internationalisation. The committee recommended that companies that were not account managed should be able to receive help with exporting and that potential exporters should have access to the global Scott network at an early stage, and I hope that those things can now happen. However, in addition to what the Government can do at its own hand, it also needs to be committed to working with other partners. Committee members visited Aberdeen and Grantian Chamber of Commerce to learn from their vast experience of internationalisation. The chamber highlighted two particular issues that are reflected in the committee's report. The convener has already mentioned the success of the North East Scotland trade group, which I think is a model that other parts of Scotland could adapt to their own needs. However, the second issue that was raised with us by the Aberdeen Chamber was the need better to join up activity between the public and private sectors in organising trade missions for Scottish companies overseas. I am delighted that, since the committee's visit and some of the difficulties that were highlighted at that time, since then, the Aberdeen Chamber is now co-ordinating a joint mission to Mexico supported by SDI and UKTI, and that the chamber itself will help businesses that do not meet Scottish enterprises' account management criteria to join in. That is exactly the kind of joined-up approach that the committee's report envisages and which deserves the broadest possible support. Enabling exports is not for Government agencies alone, just as exporting is not just for account managed high growth companies in key sectors of the economy. If Scotland is truly to go global, potential new exporters must have access to an inclusive and co-ordinated system of advice and support from both the public and private sectors working together, and that is what we want to see going forward. Presiding Officer, thank you all for congratulating the committee members, clerks and their excellent adviser on the work that they have done and the report that they ultimately produced. I sat on the previous inquiry for the economy committee in the last session of Parliament. The main conclusion that we reached at that point was that Scottish Development International was not spending enough of its time focusing on exports. I have to say that, for meeting the report and speaking to a number of witnesses, it looks like that position has been reversed. It looks like it has taken exports more seriously in this term than it did in the last term, and the results so far are positive. I think that we should celebrate the fact that, at least in the medium term, the trend for exports for Scottish businesses appears to be very healthy and positive. I got spice to trace it back to 2002. If we take 2002 as being 100 per cent, we are now indexed at being 140 per cent, so it has been a good trend of growth. We are a bit of a blip in the early part of the 2000s when the electronics industry went to its knees, but the trend since 2005 has been one of upward and positive growth, so we should celebrate and welcome that. I want to move on to a couple of areas where there are still some frustrations and work that needs to be done by agencies, Government politicians of all stripes and businesses. The first is the lag in the figures that we currently have. I know that that is a source of frustration for Government, too, but at the moment we are celebrating figures from 2013, which are the most recent figures available. That means that, when we ask ourselves, did we meet the 2017 ambitious target that was set, we will not know the answer to that question until 2019, two years later. I say to Government that there is something that we can do. Are there changes that we can make so that we can get more up-to-date figures so that we have a better feel for how exports are going on the ground? Otherwise, it is like the old quote where you are saying that you are trying to drive whilst looking through the rear-view mirror only. Can we get more up-to-date figures so that we have a better idea of what is going on on the ground? If we look at the statistics from HMRC about exports, which I know are collected slightly differently from the global connection survey, it would suggest that 2014 was not as strong a year as 2013. It would suggest that we were about £1 billion down in 2014, and while we only have figures for the first two quarters of 2015, if that continues through the rest of the year, it will be about £1 billion down in 2015 compared to 2014. I hope that those figures turn out to be wrong—I think that they are preliminary—but, if they are correct, it would suggest that the strong growth that we had between 2010 and 2013 has been reversed slightly last year and this year. I think that it is important—of course I will give it. I wonder if Mr Brown would reflect on the fact that the HMRC data that he has highlighted has significant elements of the overall exporting and trade position that is missing from the analysis that it undertakes. It is far from a like-for-like comparison with the data and the pattern that he has set out already. I know that there is a big difference. One of them being the treatment of services, which will have a huge impact. However, there is a like-for-like in the sense that I was comparing 2013 HMRC figures to 2014 HMRC figures. They were like-for-like in my view, but I accept entirely that it is a different methodology from the global connection survey. Nevertheless, if there was a £1 billion drop on the HMRC figures compared to the previous year, it suggests that, when we get the global connection survey in January, there is a fair chance that that will show a drop against the previous year. I hope that I am wrong, but I suspect that it will. That is the first frustration. Secondly, the Government brought in some policies that I supported smart export to being one that we certainly argued for in days gone by. The frustration for me is that it is very difficult to know what impact the Scottish Government policies have had on the overall figures. Scottish Enterprise gave evidence, High gave evidence, SDI gave evidence, but they all concluded that it was basically impossible to tell what impact the policies have had. They were able to say that businesses were satisfied with the training and the courses that were given, but what they were not able to do was tell us what impact that had had on the companies in terms of their bottom line and in terms of exports. I say to the Government, how do we try to evaluate our programmes better so that we actually know which ones are working and which ones are not, so that we can spend more on the ones that work and spend less on the ones that do not? I think that the Government's response to the report has been broadly positive. It seemed to have agreed with most of the things that the committee has said. Some of them were actioning already, and some of them have agreed to action in early course. I think that it is important that we track the number of exporters as well as just the value of export so that we try to get more companies exporting and reduce our overall risk profile if some larger businesses suddenly go out of businesses. I think that the idea of greater co-ordination is something that needs to be looked at, too. The last thing that I want to make to do with FDI is to pick up on a point that was made by the cabinet secretary because he quoted the number of deals that came forward last year under FDI. I say to the cabinet secretary, just be careful about cherry picking your statistics and make sure that you look at the statistics as a whole. From the same report that he quoted, yes, the actual number of deals are up, but, in my view, the more important figure, the number of jobs created by FDI, is substantially down for the third year in a row. In 2011, there were 5,926 jobs created by FDI. We had 20 per cent of the UK FDI jobs. For last year, we were down from 5,900 to 3,500. We were down to 3,500, from almost 6,000. We used to have 20 per cent of the FDI jobs. On the most recent report, we are on 11 per cent. That has dropped by almost half in a course of three years. Yes, the number of projects may be marginally up, but it is quite wrong of the cabinet secretary to cherry pick one statistic that suggests that we are doing much better than perhaps we are. I am content, Presiding Officer, to leave it at that point. Thank you, Mr Brown. We move to the open debate. The open debate speakers can all have five minutes of their abouts. Gordon MacDonald, followed by Linda Fabiani. Exporting is an important aspect of the Scottish economy, one that helps to deliver growth, maintains employment and sustains communities. A study based on export growth by N56, consultants highlighted that Scotland's exports have been growing and Scotland's total trade volume in 2013 is equivalent to 129 per cent of GDP, or nearly 35,000 per head of the population. They referred to the global connections survey for 2013 and identified that the Scottish exports to the United Kingdom and the rest of the world was £99 billion, giving Scotland a trade surplus of £12 billion compared to a UK trade deficit of £34 billion. However, despite that, the N56 report goes on to acknowledge that Scotland's export performance is, and I quote, lower than average for a small advanced economy and considerably less than the best performing small European trading economies. The EET Committee report recognises that significant progress has been made towards the Scottish Government's target to increase exports by 50 per cent by 2017. However, only 100 companies account for 60 per cent of Scotland's exports, and if we are to grow our exports, we have to increase the number of businesses in Scotland who are active exporters, especially small businesses where less than a fifth currently export. Two key bodies in providing support to businesses' interests in exporting are the UKTI and Scottish Development International. However, as the committee report states, co-ordination between SDI and UKTI was not as strong as it could be, and that was limiting the effectiveness of support available to Scottish companies. The Enterprise Research Centre told us that, from my experience of working with people at UKTI, I can say that they typically regard trade support as having been devolved to the Scottish Government. We also heard that the UKTI brand was pretty much invisible to most chambers. SDI supported 2,708 businesses in 2013-14 across its network of 28 overseas offices, yet UKTI, with a larger network of 160 offices in 100 countries, only provided assistance to 2,300 Scottish companies, suggesting that there is a lack of support to Scottish companies, given the UKTI larger network. The member suggested that he appeared to support fairly similar numbers of companies, yet he said that the UKTI brand is completely invisible. Can he explain that? When we were on the trade mission, we found that there were some Scottish companies who had found the UK Government website and delved into it and found the connection to UKTI, but they did not find it through any presence from UKTI in Scotland. There is also a lack of co-ordination across the range of organisations offering trade missions from SDI, UKTI, SEDI and chambers of commerce. The report recommends that SDI should be far more proactive in co-ordinating trade missions in order to maximise the opportunities for companies to improve co-ordination, avoid duplication and eliminate unnecessary competition between organisers of trade missions. We also need a single point for information on exporting, highlighting what support is available to potential exporting companies. A range of organisations, including Scottish Enterprise, Business Gateway and Councils, developed the existing online business portal, but although I could find topics from cash flows to employment contracts, there was nothing on the opening page highlighting exports. It was only when you clicked on services and scrolled halfway down the page and selected more did you find any reference to the subject. If the aim is to encourage more businesses to consider exporting, then I would suggest that it has not been given the prominence that it requires on the website. As part of this inquiry, we also visited fourth ports at Grangemouth. In my view, it has been starved of investment. In order to be able to export more from this country, we require port facilities that are fit for the 21st century. I know that the ICI committee will be debating that further in the next debate. The SPICE briefing identifies that Scottish international exports have increased between 2010 and 2013 by 20 per cent. However, if we are to achieve the 50 per cent increase by 2017, we need to ensure that the correct support is in place to increase the number of exporters, add to the sectors where we have an exporting presence and increase the value of exports. Only then will we achieve the export levels of other small European nations. I welcome the report from the committee and read it with great interest. I also welcome the Scottish Government response, both in terms of committee appearances and certainly today in the chamber, because it seems to me that there is a general agreement on how to proceed in this matter. What we need is a simplified landscape and an ease of taking advantage of opportunities. We are a small international respected country, so we have the ability to be fleet of foot and to capitalise on our expertise. It is absolutely essential, as my colleague Gordon Macdonald outlined, that, as well as larger companies, small and medium enterprises, are encouraged to be included in the strategy. My view is that there is room for both. Certainly in my constituency of East Kilbride, we have successful exporters, large and small. One of the larger ones would be Clyde Blores, an engineering expertise in manufacture, which is exported right across the world. We also have menthalatum, chemical and pharma, which is another growing sector. I am sure that people here do not realise that, deep heat, that wonderful product is manufactured in East Kilbride and used all over the world for all sorts of ailments that we will not go into here. I feel that East Kilbride is uniquely placed within Scotland, as Scotland is uniquely placed within the UK and within the world to be capitalising on export and on a simplified policy landscape. We have a task force in East Kilbride. Unfortunately, I am not allowed to hear much about it, but there you go, that is for another day. I will certainly send on the committee's report and the Scottish Government's response to the East Kilbride task force in the hope that it will try and capitalise on what I believe is quite an exciting way forward for exporting in Scotland. Lanarkshire has quite a good percentage of Scottish enterprise-managed account companies that growth company exporters with 11.8 per cent. I was really pleased to see that Mr Swinney, in response to oral evidence concerns that where a company was account managed, it was comparatively simple to move forward. More complex, one of the witnesses said to account manage a collaboration of companies, and there must be a way to look at sectors and try and come up with a way to move forward in that collaboration. Mr Swinney said that companies are not account managed but have gone through business gateway locally and identified as having the necessary characteristics and strengths to make them successful exporters. STI's mandate is certainly to help support these companies, because it is about growth potential. One of the things that was mentioned quite a lot in the report was the idea of a single portal. That is certainly worth looking at and moving forward with. In fact, Gary Clark of the Scottish Chambers of Commerce argued that a single point of contact was absolutely essential. Certainly over the years in different business fora, I have heard that as a barrier to potential expansion and export is the inability to know exactly where to go to get the expertise that is required. Talking of expertise, there was one thing that I wanted to raise about universities and colleges, colleges in particular, because colleges are very much mentioned in the report of the committee. Talking about how things have to interact and how we have to get things correct, there are also things that have to happen with interaction with UK Government policy as well. I am quite concerned, for example, about the UK Government talking about colleges stopping, for example, international students working in part-time employment while they are studying here. I am concerned about them making students exit the UK before they have time to use some of the expertise in this country that they have picked up from their learning. That is about post-study visas. All those things come together. The last thing that I would like to close with is to say that, as far as I am concerned, Scotland is the most valuable exporter of its people. We should never forget the professions and those who have moved abroad with that expertise and are internationally renowned. I do not have time to talk about many, but there are architectural practices, such as McAdlon's. Our national bodies, our theatre, our national companies, our orchestras, our traditional music sector, we are sending people abroad all the time. They are part of our export economy, and that very much has to be recognised. I am pleased to be given the opportunity to contribute to the Economy, Energy and Tourism Committee's debate on internationalising Scottish business. Like many others, I thank both the staff and the MSPs who sat on this committee for all their hard work on this important issue. As the world has become more interconnected through the development of high-speed communications and trade, Scotland is no different from any other country in the world. Our Scottish businesses can be afforded real, genuine international opportunities for expansion through accessing world markets. There are many opportunities for expanding Scottish international business. Examples of those opportunities have been listed within the committee's report, and Scotland is a producer of some of the world's food, drink and textile products. The world leader in such markets as renewables, oil and gas and life sciences is a key destination for international visitors. For today's debate, I aim to focus on our international visitors and what I mean by international visitors. Every member of the chamber is aware of the very valuable research role that VisitScotland carries out so that businesses in Scotland can do better to understand their international markets and to keep up-to-date on trends and developments. Rightly or wrongly, when the term international visitor is used, people automatically assume or think of people from countries out with the UK coming to Scotland for their holidays, short breaks, culture and sporting events. I could go on with numerous reasons of why international visitors come to Scotland, all of which generate economy, economic growth and development not only in the hospitality industry but also have a synergistic economic effect in other manufacturing and service industries. What about international students coming to study in Scotland? Is the student coming to Scotland to study not an international visitor? Be they undergraduate or postgraduate students, be they from the EU or non-EU countries? Is Scotland's education not a business? Scotland's expertise and tradition in the provision of high-quality education could be said to go way back in history. Glasgow is a city of education business. Glasgow is a city that I am proud to represent in this chamber and two of Glasgow's universities have an overseas presence. For example, the University of Glasgow has formed a partnership with the Singapore Institute of Technology and Glasgow Caledonian University has a campus in New York City. It also proudly hosts the world's renowned Glasgow School of Art. One of the report's key recommendations on page 4 stated that the recommendations at the Scottish Development International explore ways to utilise more effectively the extensive international networks that are established and managed by Scotland's universities and colleges in order to boost opportunities for Scottish business. In addition to that, Brian Wilson gave oral evidence to the committee and advocated the inclusion of an exporting dimension to any business courses that they run. Scotland has a wealth of experience in global trades. It has a whole range of networks and support mechanisms that can be called upon not only to expand developed markets but also to initiate new phrase into markets and countries where none currently exist. I urge and implore that investment consideration be given to developing Scotland's education business. I urge that the Scottish Government enact the key conclusions that are reached by the committee on page 33 of the report to enable our education business to grow efficiently and effectively. As it would not only provide untold opportunities for internationalising Scottish business, it would bring respect and prestige to our own Scottish institutions as they make their way in what seems to be an ever-shrinking world. The programme that has been made so far in internationalising Scottish business is a success story. That is clear from the committee report. Just because it recommends ways to improve matters does not mean that our internationalisation programme is not a success. As the cabinet secretary said and has replied to the committee, the report is timely, given that the Government is working on a new trade and investment strategy that will replace the one due to end this year. The Government set itself quite rightly ambitious targets and that is clearly paid off with the value of Scotland's international exports increasing by 40 per cent between 2007 and 2013, from £20 billion to almost £28 billion. I am very pleased that the internationalisation of Scottish business is central, is a central aspect of the Scottish Government's economic strategy, and I was pleased to see that one of the six key actions in that strategy was to encourage small and medium-sized enterprises, in particular to develop a more export-orientated focus to their business. Support for SMEs was a theme in the evidence that we heard, and the convener's resume of our recommendations touched on a number of suggestions with particular relevance for SMEs. Obviously, the single portal will appeal to them to smaller businesses, they have much to gain also from sectoral approaches to exporting with food and drink, an ideal example that can be followed by other sectors. The cabinet secretary also, in his speech, highlighted the measures that the Government has taken to support exporting by SMEs. I was pleased to note that the number of businesses receiving support from SDI increased from 2194 in 2010 to 5388 in 2014, so clearly progress is being made. A particularly important aspect of the committee's recommendations was to improve the way in which Government captures data on this matter. The committee said that SDIs should capture the increase in export sales by companies as a result of their participation in the programmes, and the Government agrees that that is good. I also think that the Government should publish data showing export performance by sector, company size and region. The inquiry did shine a light on the patchy performance across Scotland's regions when it came to exporting, and I was more than a little dismayed to learn that my own region of Dumfries and Galloway had only 1.8 per cent of Scottish Enterprise's growth-exporting companies, the lowest of all the regions in the Scottish Enterprise area. That compares to Lothians, for example, which was topped with 20 per cent of those companies, but even a more comparable area like Borders Council had 3.5 per cent of the growth company exporters, which has doubled Dumfries and Galloway. As the cabinet secretary knows, I have taken those figures to Scottish Enterprise and I have raised them with officials in public evidence sessions to see how we can address that issue. I am pleased that, as a result of this lobbying, Scottish Enterprise at a high level has committed to working closely with Business Gateway locally to improve support, because not all companies can become account managed, and companies in the south-west area do not tend to reach the size that triggers that kind of support. SCDI and the Scottish Chamber of Commerce echoed the concern that not all companies would get the export support that they needed if they fell outside key areas that were not account managed. Daniel McTaggart told the committee that we needed to recognise that there is export potential in other companies that are excluded from the account managed network, and we need to think about ways to address that. In particular, the evidence that we heard highlighted that in the Highlands and Islands Enterprise area, companies with a lower turnover met the criteria for help compared to those in the rural areas of the SE network, such as Dumfries and Galloway, which did not. However, Jane Martin of Scottish Enterprise told the committee that she was working with the local authority in the south of Scotland, and I can confirm that. I was very pleased that she is committed to assessing companies on the basis of potential and their opportunity for growth, as opposed to just using a threshold, which, as she said herself, is a bit of a blunt instrument. I was very pleased that the cabinet secretary also repeated that when he came to the committee and said that if Business Gateway identifies smaller companies as having the necessary characteristics and strengths that could make them successful exporters, SDI's mandate is to support those companies. It is about identifying potential, and that is all to be welcomed. I certainly welcome that, and I feel that, as well as providing recommendations to Scotland as a whole, the committee inquiry certainly resulted in me getting useful material to take forward in my region and hoping that we can get more support for the companies that are operating there. I will, of course, talk to local business and councils and enterprise agencies locally to ensure that the progress promised as a result of some of the issues that came out during the inquiry is making a difference on the ground. As we all know, Scotland is well-known all over the world for certain original and iconic products. Whiskey, tartan and bagpipes are an example, so in many ways Scottish business does not really need to be internationalised, as it is already well-known. I have travelled all over the world many times selling Scotland. I have appeared at many trade shows under the British flag, and I emphasise that under the British flag, so I know how important Scotland is to the world. We did not hide our Scottishness, in fact we are proud of it, and the saltire featured heavily on our stand, as does the thistle, which was my particular international brand. A black thistle on a red background recognised in fine textile shops literally all over the world. My business was selling tweed, tartan and cashmere, and selling it under a Scottish brand proved very rewarding. Nothing made me more proud than to see the Made in Scotland sign displayed everywhere. Of course, it was always easy to sell quality, and that is what Scotland is known for, not quantity. Every time quantity was due to be sold, we failed. Many of the small textile companies in the 50s and 60s who were selling t-shirts and cotton perished under increasing competition from our far eastern friends and our eastern neighbours. Scotland has a brand that needs marketing, a market that we did. When I led and participated in many trade shows all over the world in Europe and the east, and with a name like Cameron Buchanan I couldn't be taken for anything else apart from a Scott, I was leading a trade show on behalf of what was then the UK fashion exports coupled with Scottish trade international. We had a big stand at the Hilton hotel in Osaka, Japan, and it was a very, very hot afternoon. The stand next to me was selling custom made golf clubs, I think it was called the Swilkin Golf Company. They had developed a golf club that perfected your swing so that when you came to swing in the club you could ramp it up with clicks depending on how you swung the club. Well, unbeknown to me some friends had ramped up the numbers that you had to swing the club really hard to get the click going. Nothing happened for the first two or three swings, so I gave it an almighty swing and the club left my hands and shot straight up to the ceiling smashing a huge crystal chandelier. I was mortified. Everyone else laughed as this was thousands of pounds worth of damage, I thought. It was a hot day and it literally just slipped out of my hands. However, I was lucky because the whole show was covered by international insurance, so I was very pleased to see that. That evening, however, as I was making a speech that evening, I was presented with the formation golf club and the Japanese found it very funny and said, Mr Buchanan, this is for your whole in one. From then on, every time I got up to speak, they all shouted, four, four, four. So there was a lot of human involved and Scotland then needed very little internationalising. I value the Scottish brand greatly and with the brand come the business. We sometimes think of it as just another piece of fabric or a noise in case of the bagpipes or even a drink in the case of whiskey when it proves to be a very valuable product. Whiskey is a particular case in point where you see brands in countries that never appear in the UK and not all of these are counterfeit. One word of warning here, I think that we have to be careful not to spread ourselves too wide and produce a whiskey brand. I once saw in Taiwan called Scottish Knicker, which in Chinese it would be misspelled as Scottish Knickers. The brand, sorry, Scottish Kicker, which in Chinese it would be misspelled as Scottish Knicker, the brand consultant could not understand, even I misspelled it, the brand consultant could not understand why everybody laughed when he produced this whiskey bottle. It was only when he was pointed out to me that he had a totally different meaning and it was not considered very relevant to whiskey that he hastily had to relabel 4,000 bottles. Served him right. If we are going to make sure that we are successful, we have to be proud of our country and proud of our achievements. We are so lucky in Scotland that we do not realise it. Many other countries are envious of what we have and in particular are international recognisable symbols. After all, why would people like Donald Trump, I am sorry, Drump come out and build a golf course in Scotland and not in France? It is because we have seen or he was second to none, we promote our country in the right way. We even have weather, which, as Inworth and Welsh golfer once said, you have all four swings in one golf swing, all four seasons in one golf swing. We do not need fancy embassies or consoles, maybe we do need consoles, he says, all over the world in order to internationalise our business. I think that we should just be proud of what we have. After all, we have another iconic brand in Harris Tweed, which was registered as a brand in 1951. When people speak of Harris Tweed, it is after all a river, which is Tweed, which is after all a river made in Scotland. They all think that Tweed comes from Harris, where it mostly comes from Lewis and the name actually originally comes from Holland. Notwithstanding that it is a hugely successful export and that is because we have registered the trademark with its Orban Scepter, so it is a brand that is internationally well known and the aforementioned Brian Wilson is chairman of one of the companies up there, very respected. Scottish Silver is also well respected. You can bring your remarks to a cause anytime now. Thank you. Scottish Silver is also well respected and valued and the Scots have excellent original products. We only have to go to Hong Kong to see international firms like Jolly Matheson and Hutchison to realise that their origins originally came from Scotland. So let us appreciate what we have and shout about it with pride. Thank you. Thank you, Mr Beacon, and definitely the most entertaining speech of the day. I now call Jackie Baillie. Jackie Baillie, five minutes, follow that. Thank you, Presiding Officer. We did indeed trade statistics on Tuesday when we debated the Scottish Government's economic strategy. I have no doubt we will trade them today. Can I say as gently as I can to John Swinney, to do so is not to be miserable? I am actually one of the happiest people until, of course, we heard from Cameron Buchanan that I know, but it is to inject a note of reality into the cabinet secretary's fairytale, because I noticed something, Presiding Officer. John Swinney, when he doesn't like what I say, he resorts to insulting me. Now, I take that as a compliment, because it is the hard truth in what I say that makes Mr Swinney just so miserable. However, it is important that we understand the context of this debate, because according to the Government's own statistical bulletin, we export some £27.9 billion of products and services abroad. This may be an increase in cash terms, and that is to be welcomed, but it is a decline in our export market as a percentage of the Scottish economy. If I am reading the graph in the spice briefing correctly, it is a decline from 24 per cent to something like 17 per cent. Although I do not think that that is a positive sign, it suggests that there is potential to improve, and I would urge the cabinet secretary to look at that and try to increase our share of the Scottish economy in terms of exporting. There are about 100 companies that account for 60 per cent of our exports. There is less awareness and engagement with exporting from SMEs, so again, this is an area where I think there is potential to improve. Our largest international export market is to the United States, and just under half of our exports are to Europe. However, our largest export market overall is, in fact, the rest of the United Kingdom, worth at least £46 billion to our economy each year, and accounting for about 65 per cent of all our exports. Many of us recognise the importance of the European Union for our businesses and for growth in the economy. We know that removing barriers to trade is something that is valued by businesses in Scotland. I welcome the SNP's positive view of Europe and I share it, but I cannot help but observe that those arguments were exactly the same arguments deployed during the referendum as a good reason for staying part of the United Kingdom. However, let me move on and touch on inward investment. Part of becoming more international in our outlook is not just about securing more exports, it is also about getting foreign countries to invest in Scotland. I would observe that, although there are increases in inward investment and they are improving, that too is welcome, we need to make the connection with jobs. Here there is more mixed news. Inward investment may be increasing, but it is actually creating fewer jobs, a fall of something like 15 per cent to echo what was said by Gavin Brown in 2014, as compared to 2013. Indeed, 2014 is the lowest figure since 2009 and is the third consecutive year of decline. Everything that we do should be about adding value to our economy. We should focus on inward investment but as a means of creating jobs. Gavin Brown was quite right, the cabinet secretary should not cherry-pick his statistics. If we understand how we are to improve things, we need to understand the totality of the picture. As an aside, Mr Brown was not accused of being miserable. I look forward to the day of equality in this Parliament. A number of members have mentioned the Wilson review, which was reported in May last year. I do not take interruptions from a sedentary position. In his final report, Brian Wilson made a number of recommendations, many of which find an echo in the committee's report. I commend those to the Scottish Government. One of the key issues was the institutional clutter that causes confusion as there are different providers of advice, information and support. We need a one-door approach if our efforts are to be well-focused. We also undoubtedly need better collaboration between Scottish Development International and the UK equivalent to the benefit of employers. I noted the First Minister's announcement of the creation of three innovation and investment hubs in London, Brussels and Dublin. They are welcome, but I would like to know how they sit with the network of 28 overseas offices that SDIs already have. Let me join with others in congratulating SDIs. I close for the rapid increase in the number of companies that they support. The cabinet secretary I am sure will agree with the committee when they talk about giving them even more challenging targets to meet, but the cabinet secretary has a target to increase exports by 50 per cent to 2015. It is an ambitious target. We should be ambitious, but can I say in closing, I have heard it all today. We have had golf, we have had knickers, we have had kickers, we have had Donald Trump, not Trump. I think that we have in our midst an escapee from the Edinburgh Festival and I think that Mr Swinney and I can both agree that Mr Buchanan was a wonderful and amusing interlude. Many thanks. Now, Colin, whom are you, sir? Minister, seven minutes please. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. If there is one thing that we have learnt from this debate, it is never invite Cameron Buchanan for a game of golf on the course. If you do, make sure that you are wearing a hard hat at the very least. I welcome the contributions that have been made across the chamber by members this afternoon. Also, to what has been a very instructive and very informative debate, I think, as others have done, the committee and the clerks involved producing a report that I know across the Government we have studied extensively and broadly welcomed as well. Similar to Cameron in one sense, I have travelled the world and I have to say that the job that I have is by far the best in Government because I have the job of selling Scotland across the world and it is an easy job in one sense to do because people have very positive associations with the country. What I have noticed in the three years that I have been in this role is that when I initially went to some of our new emerging markets, Scotland was known for some of those more traditional things such as golf, such as castles and great scenery, the Loch Ness monster, people knew of those. Having travelled back to those countries, I have noticed that people have more of an interest and more of an understanding and knowledge of some of our produce, such as whisky and salmon. They have more of an understanding of our global companies such as Aberdeen Asset Management and more of an understanding of our expertise in areas of expertise such as oil and gas. I think that that is down to the great agencies. I think that that is down to many of the much of the good work that is done by—yes, indeed, of course. Nowadays, food is very important. Scottish food has really come onto the market and everybody talks about Scottish food and Scottish produce, which was not the case 20 years ago. I was not doing this job 20 years ago, but I accept entirely what he is saying. Today's debate has provided an opportunity to reflect on many of the factors affecting the ability of Scottish companies to internationalise Scotland's areas of strength and, of course, where there is room for improvement. We have heard about success stories and companies that have taken the opportunity to grow their business by expanding into new international markets. We have also heard about those challenges and the frustrations that seem to be a common thread for many businesses, in particular as many members have highlighted as small and medium-sized enterprises. Before commenting on those, I wanted to turn to Scotland's export performance just to reiterate that it is a generally positive picture room for improvement. Of course, undoubtedly, as many members have highlighted, but generally I would say that the picture is very positive moving forward. Scotland's total exports of goods and services, excluding oil and gas, grew by almost 70 per cent between 1998 and 2013, from £38.8 billion to £65.7 billion in cash. We are on target to meet that 50 per cent target, as has been mentioned. I would say to the ever-effusive and complementary Jackie Baillie that not to take Mr Swinney's criticisms at all personally, perhaps like the school playground—not perhaps like the school playground—really used to insult those that he really liked. Who knows? Perhaps he does it only because he likes you. I would say to Jackie Baillie that export as a percentage of GDP—I think that I will, Jackie Baillie. I think that the cabinet secretary's face tells a different story. I would say to her on the point that she raised that I would be interested to see her statistics, because exports as a percentage of GDP have increased in recent years from 46.3 per cent in 2006 to now 48.9 per cent in 2013. I agree with the general sentiment that was expressed here that too few companies are exploiting to too few geographies. However, the committee's report rightly drew attention to the fact that the number of SMEs involved is not enough. 60 per cent of the total value of Scottish exports in 2013 generated by just 100 companies. We heard that statistic repeated time and time again. In addition, Scottish exports to emerging markets remain relatively low compared to what they really should be. Our economic strategy made clear that more needs to be done to encourage more export-orientated focus across all companies and sectors in Scotland. I want to try to address one of two other points as well. Gavin Brown's point about statistics and the lag in statistics. I would say that we share that sense of frustration. I thought that the point was very well made. I think that it is one that we can certainly reflect on. I would say that the global connection survey is a very fulsome assessment of what the statistics produced. Therefore, such a fulsome assessment needs time, but I agree with him that perhaps we can reflect on that and see what further can be done. In regard to the committee's recommendations, there are four areas that I will try to whizz through if I can in response to. First, in terms of encouraging more Scottish businesses to internationalise, it requires very close collaboration across public and private sector. Murdo Fraser spoke about that in his opening remarks. Linda Fabiani also touched on it in her remarks. They were both right to mention Scottish food and drink. There is a great example of how private sector public agencies have managed to work together very collaboratively and had great success. We saw some of that success played out in statistics this week. We need to co-ordinate the contributions that are made by a range of different organisations involved in helping Scottish companies to internationalise and identify ways of encouraging more business to business support. The committee also drew attention to North East Scotland's trade group, which Murdo Fraser again mentioned, that the committee met and suggested that similar regional export partnerships might be developed. That is something SDI is most certainly looking to do. Secondly, although many Scottish companies successfully access high-quality advice and support, some companies struggle to find that information. Virtually all members made that point. How can companies better access that information? How can we ensure that that information is better co-ordinated at one central point? I also agree that SMEs can only find that information if they know where to look. Perhaps there is a job there for Government to reflect on and SDI to reflect on the information that one stop shop might exist. However, how do we get outreach to SMEs through business gateway so that they know where that support is? Murdo Fraser uses the term cluttered, and we recognise that progress is being made through our portal and myscot.gov. I also agree with members that we need to make more of our assets—people, global Scots across the world—but many of those who have passed through our universities and our educational institutes have some kind of affinity to Scotland. In conclusion, I thank committee members for all their recommendations. Everybody who has participated in the debate will certainly reflect on what they have said. Generally, of course, I welcome that the report will work closely with UKTI and other public agencies to ensure that we fully take into account what they have said and ensure that we can have Scotland globally positioning itself better and marketing itself better across the world. I welcome the short debate on internationalising Scottish business, produced by the EET Committee, and I commend Murdo Fraser for the way in which he led the inquiry as the convener of the committee. We cannot be complacent, and I will make some comments that the EET Committee arrived at, but we meet today, the day after, which was announced that Scotland exported £14 billion of food and drink in 2013. Also, as Jackie Baillie indicated, we shipped £27.9 million of exports overseas at which he translated into a GDP figure without bringing in the impact of exports south of the border. As I said in my contribution to the programme for government debate last week, if there is one subject that I am particularly passionate about, it is Scotland's place on the international stage and its consequent trade and investment strategy across the globe. That was perhaps stimulated for me as a young manager responsible for the international distribution of NCR products from its Dundee manufacturing plants. The thrill of being able to ship four class 395 electronic accounting machines from Dundee to Honduras in exchange for a container load of bananas was palpable. Who knows what might have happened last September if we had involved bartering and bananas in our currency exchange discussions. Others in this debate share the great interest, and I hope that you will forgive me if I declare a regret that we have curtailed the debates today, because they are not mutually exclusive. I am sure that the following IC debate will wish to accentuate that Scotland's international business growth, most of it to Europe, cannot be largely dependent on only one major artery to Europe, namely the channel tunnel. Nor can our international aspirations be contingent on carbon emission-busting activities such as consolidation and haulage of Scottish goods to be exported going down the M6 to Heathrow, Gatwick or Dover. Hence, the proposal some four weeks ago—I know that you will appreciate this, Presiding Officer—to fly seafood and perishable goods out of Prestwick and our other outlets at not much greater landed cost than by road to retain our markets and our customers. Let me return to the EET report and its recommendation and also highlight some of the contributions today. Gavin Brown is absolutely right, thoughtful and provoking about the need for accurate data. Linda Fabiani surprised me, because I thought that East Kilbride was famous for coca cola, not red heat, so I have a totally different view of East Kilbride. Joan McAlpine focused quite rightly on the regional disparities in the economy. As for Cameron McHannan in talking about specialisation and product focus, I have to play golf with the Chinese console at Turnbury at the weekend. I did not break any chandeliers, I just broke my heart in the way that I was playing. Having met the senior members of Scottish Enterprise and the Scottish Development and National just last week to talk as Joan McAlpine did of the need for more emphasis on the south-west of Scotland and the regional disparities that exist, I have no doubt as a result of that and previous conversations of the dedication of the agencies to secure the internationalisation objectives that will be set out, I believe, in the Government's new trade and investment strategy, and that the foundation of that will not just be a focus on the product and service sectors that we excel in but will relate them directly to the geographic markets where need is crystallised as opportunities for us. The recommendation that the agencies review the criteria for account-managed status and, with it, greater emphasis on companies' export potential is, of course, critical, particularly when a recent survey of Scottish Chambers of Commerce found that 65 per cent of non-exporting companies felt that they did not have suitable products or services to export. Who knows, with appropriate promotion, marketing and involvement of the various trade missions? Who knows? We might be able to capitalise on the huge opportunities that exist overseas. Account management support is critical to those companies particularly, those companies who can and who wish to export. However, the very roles of the agencies, such as Business Gateway, Chambers of Commerce, Enterprise Agencies and, indeed, other bodies' interests in exporting are somewhat confusing and need rationalisation and focus with the greater role, as the cabinet secretary said, in the mandate for SDI to oversee all companies who might and who can become successful exporters. That will enhance, in the committee's opinion, an increased focus on internationalisation, where we have already seen the total number of businesses, as was mentioned earlier, increasing from 2,194 in 2010 to 5,388 in 2014. We welcome the Government's response to recognise internationalisation as a key driver for growth and the Scottish Enterprise will bring more companies into its embrace, into its international account management services. However, as part, as per the recommendation from the EET committee, that can only be achieved with the use of experienced export knowledge available to us. That, with advice and help through the proposed mygate.scot website and involving experience and good data, we can be very successful. For example, how many of our potential exporters know that the main geographic destination of Scottish international exports in 2013 were to Netherlands, Germany, France and Denmark, some to the USA, and that 50 per cent of all international exports went to the EU. I refer to my comments earlier about the one and single R3. Within that £13 billion, the largest growth, believe it or not, in monetary and percentage terms, was to Denmark. I think that we can learn perhaps what we are doing there, different products or whatever. Of course, there are other international markets, growth markets, to provide product and service demand, but market intelligence—I come back to what Gavin Brown said—aligned to products services has to be the basis of advice from our internal analysis and from the external networks, such as Global Scots, as we referred to earlier. Also, advice on our innovations and on aid and engagement with international partnerships is essential. As is its agreement that an even closer relationship or partnership between the SDI and the overseas campuses of our universities and research centres is desirable, if not even critical. The committee recognises the need, the impact of changing the culture, the enterprise culture in Scotland, and of promoting the opportunities for measuring the framework of improvement. There are many things that are healthy, both in terms of what it should be and in the Government's response. I am pleased to support the EET's recommendations on internationalisation and to acknowledge the will of the Government in its response to them. Many, many thanks. We now move on to the next item of business, which is a debate on motion number 14193, in the name of Jim Eadie on freight transport in Scotland. I invite members who wish to speak in this debate to please press the request to speak buttons now. I invite Jim Eadie to speak to and move the motion on behalf of the infrastructure and capital investment committee. Mr Eadie, when you are ready, 10 minutes please. I am delighted to be able to speak today on the infrastructure and capital investment committee's inquiry into freight transport in Scotland. I am looking forward to hearing the views of members from across the chamber on their perspective on this important issue. That important issue is often said in this place, rightly so, but that regularity can lead to its meaning being diminished. I want to give a flavour of why the freight transport sector in Scotland is indeed an important issue. Around 200 million tonnes of freight is moved in Scotland each year. To try and give that number some context, the new forth crossing will use 150,000 tonnes of concrete, or just 0.00075 per cent—less than 1 per cent—of that figure. HGV and Light Good's vehicles make up one-fifth of all-road traffic in Scotland and cover a combined five and a half million kilometres per year. Or, for the astronomers among you, or those interested in spacecraft, I think that I see Chick Brody in the chamber this afternoon, that would get you to the moon and back 47 times. Scottish ports, meanwhile, handle around 68 million tonnes of freight each year. That is the equivalent of around 340 fully loaded visits by the world's largest container ships, which can carry almost 20,000 containers. Given the importance of freight transport to the Scottish economy, the committee launched its inquiry with the aim of identifying and understanding some of the challenges facing the freight transport industry in Scotland. We wanted to examine both domestic and international links, how rail, road, air and sea freight services are connected, as well as identifying key areas for development, improvement and change. I mentioned the moon, so it is only right that I go on to refer to the sun and the stars. I would like to record my thanks for the enthusiasm and dedication of my fellow committee members, Adam Ingram, David Stewart, James Dornan and Mary Fee. I think that she knows I was referring to her when I mentioned the sun, Mike Mackenzie and last but by no means least, Alec Johnson. It was a real team effort, and after reading a room of written submissions, holding seven lengthy evidence sessions and conducting nine fascinating visits, we were in danger of becoming freight geeks. We were also very ably assisted by the committee's adviser, Dr Jason Monios, from Edinburgh Napier University, whose expert knowledge of freight transport and logistics was invaluable. The committee is very grateful for all the evidence that we heard and received during the course of the inquiry. Our findings were very much based on what we learnt over the course of our work. I would also like to thank all the organisations who welcomed us on visits in England, Scotland, the Netherlands and Sweden, so that we were able to cover as much ground as possible. We ran some visits concurrently by splitting the committee into two groups. Moving on to the report itself, while I am sure individual members will want to cover specific parts of their work, I would like to try and give a general flavour and summary of the committee's findings. I will start with roads. In many ways, a theme of the committee work was how to minimise freight on our roads, either by moving to other modes of transport or by maximising the capacity of vehicles. However, it was clear that a good road network is still an essential part of freight movement. I will use the A77 as an example. Many members, including our own Adam Ingram, know that route well. Although the Glasgow to Aire section is primarily dual carriageway, south of Aire, to the ports at Cairnryan, a distance of roughly 45 miles, is single carriageway. Although the scenery is breathtaking, its route takes you through congested town centres such as Mabel, while twisting and turning on at times very narrow roads. However, that is a designated trunk road, as well as being the primary freight route to Northern Ireland. The clear message that we received was that an upgrade to that route should be treated as a priority. Improvements to the A77, as well as 28 other schemes, are contained within the Scottish Government's strategic transport projects review. While designated for improvement, no timelines are associated with the necessary work as yet. The committee heard from businesses and groups across the country, such as the freight transport and road haulage associations, that some approximate timetabling of road projects would be helpful in planning future investment. The committee has therefore recommended that indicative timelines for all 29 listed schemes in the strategic transport projects review are published in due course. In terms of rail freight, the committee was encouraged by the enthusiasm of producers, retailers and hauliers to make more of a shift to rail freight. In our visits to the rail hubs at Grangemouth, Coatbridge and Dirk Daventry near Birmingham, which is the UK's biggest rail hub, we saw at first hand encouraging signs of movement away from road to rail. However, it is nevertheless a fragile growth. We heard of hub operators who struggled to get backing for investment in new or replacement rail infrastructure when their customers don't themselves want to commit to long-term contracts. That is a real difficulty and a real issue that we need to address and make further progress on. However, it was encouraging to hear during the summer of the planning approval for the proposed investment to the Mossend rail hub. The rail network also has capacity issues, which will have a bearing on increased use such as variable loading gauges, lack of sufficient passing loops or access to the network either at weekends or during busy periods for passenger trains. The committee therefore looks forward to scrutinising the forthcoming report by Network Rail on how it plans to upgrade the network over the coming years, such as the main line linking Perth and Inverness. In terms of linking rail to water freight, the committee was, however, disappointed to discover that, despite a rail line into the port of Grangemouth, there is no regular service between it and Grangemouth rail hub barely a mile away. That has been put into focus recently by the creation of a regular rail link between Grangemouth rail hub and Teesport in the north-east of England, almost 200 miles away. Moving on to water freight, it is fair to say that the committee was concerned by what it saw at the port of Grangemouth, by far Scotland's largest port. Investment appeared limited, which a number of witnesses suggested was perhaps due to a lack of competition. The economy committee shared its view, believing that the port acted as a constraint to Scottish trade rather than a facilitator to it. The report, therefore, called on the Scottish Government to explore ways of working with port operators to help to encourage appropriate private investment to ensure that strategic international gateways meet the high standards of service required by customers. In relation to the recite to Zee Brugge ferry service, the committee was also disappointed to hear from its operator DFDSC ways of the poor quality of service on offer at Recife compared to that at Zee Brugge. It was nevertheless encouraging to learn in July of the over £4 million of investment by fourth ports and DFDSC ways in that route. I will only briefly mention air freight, as sadly, despite requests to airports, freight carriers and industry groups, there was little input from those in the industry with regard to this important sector. The committee regrets that and views it as a missed opportunity for those involved in air freight. Other issues that our inquiry looked at, but because of time I cannot go into detail on, included the need to review availability of freight grants, increasing the use of urban freight in town centres, including the use of cargo bikes in built-up areas, reducing carbon emissions through modal shift and better use of policy and planning. Hopefully, colleagues will pick those issues up in the course of this debate this afternoon. I will, however, close with the primary recommendation by the committee, namely that a new freight transport policy needs to be developed by the Scottish Government in order to meet future rail, road, sea and air freight transport needs. That would provide a strategic direction, which would help to provide greater certainty to all in the industry to help to ensure that Scotland's freight transport sector is receiving the investment that it needs. In the minister's response to the committee's report, he said that the Government is currently updating the national transport strategy, and the committee certainly welcomes that development and that announcement. However, the committee was clear in its view that, in order for freight to be given the importance it deserves, there must be a dedicated freight transport strategy. That report reflects the views of all stakeholders within the sector, and the committee speaks with one voice, calling on the Government to respond positively to that clear recommendation in due course. I commend the ICI committee's report to the chamber, and I move the motion in my name. Many, many thanks. I am extraordinarily tight for time now. I call on Minister Derek Mackay up to seven minutes, please. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I am giving evidence to the infrastructure and capital investment committee on 29 April. I welcomed its work to help to identify and understand the challenges that are facing the freight transport industry in Scotland. The Scottish Government provided a formal response to the key issues and recommendations of the committee's report on 17 August, and I look forward to this afternoon's debate as it provides an opportunity to examine the findings of the inquiry in more detail. Since 2007, the Scottish Government has pursued policies focused on its purpose of creating a more successful country with opportunities for all of Scotland to flourish through increasing sustainable economic growth. It is supported by the four pillars of our economic strategy. Those are investment in people in infrastructure, innovation, internationalisation and inclusive growth. In the programme for government that was set out last week, we restated our ambition to make Scotland the best place in the UK to do business. As part of that, we recognise that transport infrastructure needs to provide for the efficient, effective and dynamic movement of goods, and in so doing, is a key enabler in helping the Scottish Government to achieve our purpose and our goals for economic growth. To achieve that, we are investing in infrastructure that connects people to jobs and services and connects businesses with customers and suppliers. We are supporting developments that are focused on improving journey times and connectivity, enhancing Scotland's competitiveness, improving accessibility and integration, and minimising the impact of transport on the environment. I am reassured that the findings of the committee's inquiry are supportive of that being the correct strategy and puts us in a strong position to tackle many of the issues identified in the committee's report. It is beyond dispute that the Scottish economy needs efficient, sustainable and robust freight transport in order to meet growing custard demands and compete effectively in a global economy. Our vision is for Scotland to be a place where the movement of freight through the entire supply chain is efficient and sustainable on a transport infrastructure that is integrated and flexible, thus allowing Scotland's businesses to compete and grow in a global economy. The investments that we are making in major transport infrastructure projects in Scotland demonstrate our commitment to achieving that vision. The strategic transport project view, the evidence base for our investment, identified facilitating strategic freight routes as one of the primary functions of the national strategic transport network. I note that the committee's report makes a number of recommendations aimed at bringing forward or accelerating projects already identified within the STPR. However, the timetable for delivering of the projects is determined by the availability of resources in future spending reviews—a matter that we have discussed just recently as last week. We can only unlock extra resources if we have access to greater spending capacity. Nevertheless, this Scottish Government has made and continues to make significant investment in projects that ensure that our national transport network meets this primary function. More than that, we are investing to ensure that we have a transport infrastructure that is fit for purpose and able to support future economic growth. Since 2007, we have invested £6 billion on our trunk roads and have a £3.5 billion capital investment programme in rail for the next five years. We also continue to provide grant funding for projects that are aimed at achieving modal shift. Projects such as the Queensbury crossing, the Aberdeen western peripheral route and the dualling of the A9 and the A96 will serve to improve transport connections both within Scotland and to markets that businesses want to reach. We are working with industry partners to ensure that international transport links are able to support our ambitions for growth. That includes supporting the Rathfaith Zebrugfer ferry service, which we are all delighted will continue when it was threatened in earlier stages. We are working together with the parties involved to look at new ways of increasing and improving services for Scotland in the longer term. We recognise that business operates in a dynamic environment. That is one of the reasons why I have instigated a refresh of the national transport strategy to reflect the current strategic context and the recommendations that have come from the committee report. In addition, a refreshed rail freight strategy will consider the on-going role of Scottish Government in support of rail freight, including future planning and how that can best contribute to sustainable economic growth. Here, too, we are investing with the £30 million Scottish Strategic Rail Freight Investment Fund. In all that we do to enhance freight transport, we must always bear in mind the commercial nature of the freight industry and the competition both within and across modes, identifying solutions that can achieve public policy aims is not enough. They must be sustainable from a business perspective also. We know that that can be achieved only through close partnership working between the public and the private sectors. We do that through our well-established freight stakeholder group, the Scottish freight and logistics advisory group, Scott Flag. At the evidence given during the committee inquiry showed that we continue to enjoy the support of key stakeholders for this partnership approach. Indeed, Scott Flag was specifically mentioned by stakeholders as providing good links between Transport Scotland and industry itself and a useful forum for identifying and addressing freight transport challenges collaboratively. Scott Flag will be discussing the committee's recommendation when it meets on 14 September. I consider that the Scottish Government's purpose, economic strategy, infrastructure planning, investments to the network and our partnership approach with the freight industry provide a strong structure and the best approach to tackle the freight challenges as identified by the ICI committee. I welcome the report that has been done by the committee. It is an excellent report and it does benefit from that consultation and the input of key stakeholders. I think that, as has been said already, freight is hugely important to the Scottish economy. The committee report gives us that overview, both of the challenges and also highlighting the need for innovation and investment if we are going to expand our freight opportunities. What we particularly need is an overarching vision and policy. It is now nearly a decade since the freight action plan and I think that now is the time for us to look at this issue and to think to the future. As the previous report did, it looked 20 years ahead. Ten years on, I think that we are in a good place to say what we need to do for the next 20 years. Enabling the political support across the chamber to emphasise the role of freight is crucial. If it is about exports, we just need to look at the last debate that we have had in the chamber about the importance of facilitating exports. It is also key to the transition to a low-carbon economy. It lets us enable us to tackle other Government challenges on air quality, community safety and the quality of life along key routes. It is now a good time for us to be having this debate. The fact that the committee highlighted the national planning framework is particularly important. I hope that the minister will draw on his last portfolio to look at this. That gives certainty to business and partners to think about how we plan for the future. Crucially, it is about how local authorities are involved in that joined-up approach. The key points that are made in the committee about investing in routes and infrastructure upgrades is absolutely crucial. The integration between different modes, particularly ports and urban areas, is something that we need to be focusing on. We need to make sure that we are not just looking at roads and railways, but at what happens next. That has to be done in terms of transfer, particularly if we are looking at modal shift. There will be huge benefits in terms of our environment to do with vehicle technology and efficiencies that can be delivered through packaging of goods. There are particular areas that I hope we can follow on from the committee's work to look at urban areas in particular, where a different approach—a more radical approach potentially—will deliver not just better freight options but will also help us to tackle air quality targets and lead to lower emissions. I hope that the use of more electric fleets is changing fast and we cannot afford to be behind that. The idea of looking at different sectors and working across industry partnerships is really important. If we just need to look at how the retail industry has changed over the past decade and the whole circular economy debate, we are beginning to see some real win-wins coming through in the freight sector. I want to focus on my last couple of minutes on rail freight, because the environmental benefits are potentially massive—70 per cent less CO2 emissions compared with roads, but also big benefits from other road users in terms of tackling congestion. Network rail's identification of a 60 per cent growth if we can seize the opportunity is something that we should not miss. The committee's report and identification on routes and the freight facilities grants are crucial. In terms of routes, pinch point and capacity work is absolutely fundamental. Yesterday we had the official opening of the Borders rail, yet within the first few days of the focus on borders, we are already getting rail experts talking about the fact that we have only got 10 miles of double track. If you look at a lot of our more established rail routes, particularly some of our key intercity routes, Perth to Inverness, Aberdeen to Inverness and right across to the central belt and down south, you can see some serious pinch points and problems for the freight industry that do impact on reliability. That is something that is reflected very effectively in the committee's report, so we need to see more investment there. As with roads, more freight investment and more tackling of pinch points lead to passenger services benefiting as well, so there is a real win-win. A particular issue that we need to look at is passing routes. That will enable us to have longer freight trains. The capacity difference between 10 and 20 carriages is huge in terms of efficiency for the industry and making it more competitive. Also, we need to see load-engaged restrictions addressed. Particularly for the food industry and the retail industry, that is crucial in terms of refrigeration. We need targeted investment within Scotland, but also in terms of the cross-border routes. Let's have another look at the freight facilities grant. It's clearly not working, we need to look at the rules and to make it effective, let's get that money out the door to improve our freight industry and really make sure that rail freight can take off for the next 20 years. I now call on Alex Johnson up to five minutes, please, Mr Johnson. Thank you very much, Deputy Presiding Officer. This is indeed a timely inquiry and a timely report. The issue of freight transport in Scotland is one that involves a lot of other interests, but to look specifically at the issue of freight transport is something that I know the committee has discussed for some time. Getting to this point of having a report to debate is probably long overdue. However, the message is positive in many ways. Most of those who are involved in freight transport in Scotland are doing a good job. They are getting on with their priorities and they are ensuring that they provide a service to those who need them. However, the message that we did get is where they are failing is in the effectiveness of the way in which they work together. We are not doing enough to support them, because too often we find that the connections between transport methods are not as effective as they should be. If you look, for example, at the connections that we have with roads or railway to our ports, it is interesting that rail access to our ports is limited, in most cases, in absent and many. If you look at road access, that can be a problem on a large scale or a small scale. A major port such as Cairnryan is now providing a lot of linkage to Northern Ireland, and yet on this side of that route, we find that roads such as the A75 and the A77 are largely unfit for the purposes that we require them to carry out. As the minister himself has acknowledged, there are improvements that can and will be made in that area. However, even ports that find themselves much closer to main rail and road links will find difficulties in getting goods on to the key side. That remains a challenge in many areas and one that we will have to be dealt with on a local level. Looking specifically at rail freight, there are a number of things that we need to do to improve opportunities in Scotland. As we heard a moment ago, the issue of passing loops, particularly on the routes north to Inverness, is a key one. Those loops simply are not long enough, and they limit the length of the freight trains that can go to the Highlands. Of course, the congestion on our rail network is the number of train movements. There is a lot of free capacity to be had there if we can simply run longer trains, so those passing loops are vital. However, another problem that we have in relation to rail freight is that many of our routes north from the central belt are constrained by high-tissues. As a consequence, there is a need for low-loaders or lower wagons in order to accommodate the existing containers that we have operating in Scotland today. The availability of those lower wagons is something that a number of rail freight operators brought to our attention and a little effort and perhaps a little Government support in order to provide a larger pool of those wagons might have the success of putting a lot more freight on to our railways. Certainly something worthy of consideration. The connections between our roads and our railways are also constrained by the fact that many of our roads are not fit to carry the vehicles that will carry the containers that we can get on to the rail. My ability to participate in some of the visits was slightly curtailed during the process of the inquiry by the intervention of a general election, which I had to devote a little time to, surprisingly. However, one thing that I did do was take the opportunity to visit the firm of Grey and Adams in Fraserborough, one of the premier manufacturers of temperature-controlled trailers for the road-haulage industry. I saw some of the work that is being done to get better or more effective loads on to our roads. Only a few years ago, the issue of road transport was weight. Everybody wanted higher weights on the roads for efficiency and people, of course, were concerned about heavier trucks on our roads. Suddenly, the emphasis has changed. Many of the cargoes on our roads are much lighter than they are, and it is volume or bulk that becomes the issue. What I saw at Grey and Adams were 40-foot trailers, in some cases, with special licences of 45-foot trailers, with facilities for double-deck loading in them. With the presence of such vehicles on our roads that are vital to supply areas where we cannot get rail connectivity, we need to consider the accessibility of those vehicles in some of the regions that we need to get to. Perhaps there is a great deal still to be said on this matter, but I believe that we have brought a report together that highlights the issues that they are, and having heard the minister's opening speech, I believe that we may be pushing at an open door. Many thanks. We now move to the open debate. Four minutes of speeches, please. I call on Mike McKenzie to be followed by James Dornan. I would first like to thank my fellow committee members, the clerks, the advisers and all, who gave evidence to the committee on what was a fascinating inquiry. I gained an understanding of what is a far more complex freight system than I had previously realised. In fact, I had never really before stopped to consider how our freight transport system works, how products end up on supermarket shelves, from dispatch points all across the globe, and how all the goods that keep the wheels of industry and commerce turning are transported. It was an inquiry that benefited significantly from the external visits that we made. The visits that I made to Forth Ports at Grangemouth, the rail freight terminal at Coatbridge and to Gothenburg in Sweden greatly assisted my understanding of the logistics of freight transport. I was particularly struck by the fact that, in Sweden, we visited a rail freight facility that had been initiated and funded by a local authority, which was justified because it would increase local economic growth, provide local jobs and boost the local population. I was forced to wonder why Scottish local authorities do not think about making such investments. As the inquiry progressed, I began to view the system like a plumbing and a heating diagram for a large and very complex building. The building has constantly been extended and its use has changed, and the pipe work has constantly been changed and upgraded to suit. The building is open every day, all day, and it cannot be wholly shut down for upgrading or repairs. Those pipes carry the lifeblood of business and industry, and changes in one part of the system affect all the other parts. It carries the historical legacy of being largely designed for a different time and a different age, and it can only be improved incrementally. The consequence of that is that, at times, some of the pipes are too narrow in diameter to carry the volume required, blockages and some disconnector car. Frictional resistance can increase, and the effect can be to increase the cost of doing business and in getting goods to market. In this age of diminishing public sector budgets and, particularly the Scottish Government's capital budget, it is impossible to fund all the desirable improvements that all have their own merits. Many of the transport operators who we spoke to realised that, although, understandably, they all made the case for improvements that they felt would improve their sector's efficiency and effectiveness. I am reassured by the Scottish Government's recognition of the importance of maintaining a freight system that can be as fit for purposes as it can be by the transport minister's comprehensive response to the committee's report. One thing that strikes me in the inquiry worthy of further exploration was the number of private sector freight operators who suggested that there was significant scope for greater efficiency and effectiveness if there was greater co-operation between operators. They saw a crucial and perhaps catalytic role for the Scottish Government in acting as honest brokers in facilitating such co-operation. They pointed out the difficulties of operators doing that on their own in what is a very competitive market with tight margins and where rivals often find it difficult to trust each other. I am optimistic that, when we have the full borrowing powers that every other country enjoys, we will be able to improve our transport system comprehensively and significantly. In the meantime, I am pleased to know what the Government intends to define the national transport strategy, which will include freight transport. Representing the Highlands and Islands, I must say before I close that I am especially pleased that transport Scotland is conducting a review of freight fares across the Scotland's ferry network. I would like to start off by associating myself with the words of Mike McKenzie towards the clerking team, the witnesses and, of course, our convener who convened the inquiry exceptionally well. I am going to have a more local emphasis than the convener did. I won't be talking about the moon, sun and stars, but I will be talking much more about the urban freight and the issues around the last mile of the journey. The committee heard from Dr Maya Paicek of challenges to businesses such as failed deliveries that need to be repeated and therefore increase the number of trips. Of course, we know that there are various problems in making inner city deliveries, small window of delivery time, environmental zones and vehicle restrictions, around their quality just being some of them. That was an issue that the committee was keen to investigate further. That was why, on a visit to Amsterdam to Holland, Dave Stewart and I went to the business stad service. I would like to say thank you to Andrew Proudfoot, who came to that visit with us and looked after the two of us very carefully. I am sure that he would not want to do that again. The business stad service is a consolidation centre based on the concept of carriers. Instead of trying to make their way through that last mile in a large lorry through busy and sometimes narrow streets, we would deliver the goods to them. We would then bundle the goods to be delivered in a more appropriate vehicle and in a more efficient and environmentally friendly way. It might well be that consolidation centres could be part of the solution to the problems that many of us from urban areas will recognise so well. We know that Taktan has been looking at such an idea and I was encouraged to read in the Government's response that it recognised that the consolidation centres could have a part to play, although they said that they would work better if local level and private sector worked together. Again, I interestingly might Mackenzie use the phrase, honest broker, and it may well be that that is a role for the Scottish Government there to try and facilitate such consolidation centres. The committee also heard of the success of the nighttime deliveries that received special permission to operate during the Commonwealth Games in Glasgow. Martin Reid from the Rotology Association commented that, the way in which everyone worked together and pulled together during the Commonwealth Games meant that during the entire period of the games we did not take one negative phone call from a haulier saying that they could not get access, that they were stuck in traffic or that a road was closed. That was because of the joined-up nature of the organisation. Sadly, he says that that was a one-off rather than the norm and maybe what we should be doing is we should be trying to make sure that that sort of joined-up behaviour becomes the norm much more than one-offs. Chris McRae from the FTA said that such a scheme once been looked at further across other Scottish cities, as trucks are generally quieter now than in the past, some objections relating to noise may potentially be overcome. He did recognise, however, that changing zoning regulations may prove difficult. Trials of such work have also taken place in other parts of the UK, just in Kurt Cote from the Co-operative Society, spoke of its work with local authorities in London to expand the number of hours available in which it can deliver to its stores. That followed the relative success of a trial during the London 2012 Olympics. Now operating in 66 stores across the capital, the co-operative group believes that changing timing has led to more reliable deliveries, reduced traffic congestion and the ability to reuse its vehicle fleet, leading to improved efficiency. Because Hamden Park played such a crucial role during the Commonwealth Games, I can draw on my constituency's experience of night-time deliveries. Before the Games, I was inundated with concerns and worries from local shopkeepers, and one of those main concerns were time restrictions on deliveries, i.e. the night-time deliveries. I should draw to your closure. After the Games, I arranged another meeting with them to discuss how they felt about things, and the overwhelming response to the night-time deliveries was extremely positive. I am delighted to see that, again, there is a recognition that there may well be a role for those night-time deliveries, and I hope that the Government will take on board the recommendations that were made by the committee in that report. I live very close to Port of Versaith, so every day I am aware of the importance of connectivity and freight to that area and to the whole of Scotland. The freight work done there supports hundreds of jobs in the area, so the recent concerns over DFDS seaways that have resided as the Brug of Freight service has served to highlight the significance of Fife to the freight industry in Scotland. I hope that we constantly work to ensure that those jobs are protected and that Scotland has a direct freight connection to mainland Europe. The new fourth crossing was introduced not just to connect Fife with Edinburgh, but to increase capacity for freight transportation in the area and across Scotland. Road holliers were pleased to support Fife's campaign for a new bridge because of their increased time of fuel costs arising from being caught in tailbacks at peak times. As long as cars, buses and lorries share the same road network, we have to plan for their combined impact on road capacity. Speaking more generally, 196.8 million tonnes of freight were lifted in Scotland in 2010. We know that there is a continuing reliance on roads for transporting freight, with just over 70 per cent of freight transported on roads, compared to under 5 to 10 per cent on rail, with little improvement on getting freight on to rail between 2000 and 2010. The freight action plan was published by the then Scottish Executive in 2006. That was the last comprehensive freight-dedicated policy that was developed at the Scottish Government level. Would the member not accept that, even in the absence of a republished policy paper, the Government takes the right interventions and recife Zeebrugger as an example where we have been able to opportunistically intervene to secure the service that is good for the economy, which just goes to show, even if the absence of a rerun policy we take action where it is required? Yes, I agree with that, but I think that we have to take that approach and take that willingness to intervene and make investment and turn it into a strategy. Good things have been done, but we have to formalise that into a strategy. Almost a decade on, in the aftermath of a global financial crash, it is obviously vital that the Scottish Government takes a fresh look at creating a new plan for freight in Scotland. The report is a detailed one. It outlines five core challenges for the future of freight transportation in Scotland, which are to reduce the need for transport by restructuring the supply chain, a modal shift to rail or water, more effective use of vehicle capacity, driving more fuel efficiently and switching to alternative fuels. The report correctly identifies that there are several precise challenges for Scotland's freight industry, including the need for wider road improvement schemes across the country, the need for improvement of the network needed to directly link ports to each other, the problem of the current over-reliance on narrow local roads, concerns around recruiting new HDV drivers and the question of speed limits on roads, with some suggesting increasing speed limits to 50mph. Another method of transporting freight outlined in the report is by rail. Of course, that is a method of transport best suited to large and bulky freight, but it is more environmentally friendly method of transporting freight than by road. The report highlights that increased use of rail for freight transportation is sabotaged by Scotland's ageing and inadequate rail network. Problems with our rail infrastructure, such as gaps in the rail termination provision, lack of capacity and lack of electrification, all conspired to limit the amount of freight that is transported by rail in Scotland. Improving this situation would be a real benefit to Scotland's freight sector and our overall economy. We can move freight by air, although this is typically reserved for sensitive and expensive cargo. The final mechanism of transporting freight is by sea. As I mentioned at the beginning of my contribution, my region is a major contributor to this method of transporting freight in Scotland. Throughout the report, there is repeated focus on ensuring that planning is properly executed. As I mentioned earlier, there is an obvious need to formulate a new plan for freight in Scotland. Working from the remnants of a nearly decade-old plan is unsatisfactory. The problems around road and rail detail in the report apply beyond the freight sector and need to be examined in the round. I am grateful for the opportunity to speak in this debate. I would like to start by reflecting on the contribution that the Scottish Government has made to my constituent's report of Montrose. It is an opportunity to thank the outgoing recently retired chief executive John Patterson, who did a huge amount of work to bring that port up to scratch and ensure that it has a future in servicing North Sea renewable operations. The other major port in the north-east of the country is Aberdeen. Like Montrose, it is very close to the railway but not directly linked over most of it. I wonder whether both of those should be investigated that there are roads in the way. Double handling is clearly a bad idea. Mr Don is right in some regards, but there is a rail connection to Aberdeen Harbour, the cotton street line, which is underused and is probably not the right line to deal with major freight, but it is fair to say that there is a link. I do not dispute the local knowledge on that, but it is plainly—I think that the member has made the case. I did enjoy Mike Mackenzie's vision of a plumbing and wiring diagram, because I think that that actually is a very good way of looking at the connections across Scotland. In the context of the north-east, there is access to Aberdeen. It really is the Dundee to Aberdeen railway line and the A90, both of which run through my constituency. There are no alternative routes realistically from the south. When I pick up on the railway issue, of course, there is a single track working just south of Montrose at USAM, and I do want to press again on the Scottish Government that that is something that needs to be looked at, or else perhaps even bypass, maybe we should have another line up, the A90 from Dundee to Lawrencecote via Forfer and Brickin. It won't be done overnight, of course, but the route up to the north-east, through the north-east to Aberdeen, is not particularly good. It will not last us well forever. At a national level, of course, the report also points out the need for a consistent upgrading of the loading gauge across the tracks, and we would welcome activity on that. Turning now to roads across my constituency, I am delighted that the Aberdeen western peripheral route is now under way. Long overdue for reasons that have nothing to do with this Government, of course, it is going to make a huge difference to traffic on the roads getting north of Aberdeen and will enormously improve the connectivity of that part of the world. It does, of course, simply extend the A90, and I am going to have come back to the issue that my constituents routinely have to cross the Lawrencecote junction. There is no need to add any more to that. The minister is smiling knowingly. The need to do something about that junction is something that my constituents expect me to press upon the Government, and I do so once more. Finally, I have also written to the Government about the idea that maybe we should have an average speed 50mph limit all the way up the A90. I have a response saying that there are no plans to do so, but it does seem to me that the A90—and there are many other roads around Scotland in the same place—is a very busy road with a lot of very small junctions at which it is extremely difficult to join when you are trying to join traffic that is doing 70mph, whether it is freight or just ordinary vehicles, and that is something that I suggest needs to be looked at in the round across the country. In conclusion, Presiding Officer, this is an infrastructure issue. Infrastructure costs a lot of money. It takes a lot of time. It needs a long-term plan. I commend the Government for having that long-term plan, and I look forward to developments in the years ahead. That will not be done quickly, but we just need to keep at it. I now move to closing speeches, and I call on Alex Johnston—four minutes, please, Mr Johnston. Thank you very much, Deputy Presiding Officer. It has been a consensual debate and one that I hope will take us forward against this difficult process. There are a couple of things that are worthy of mention that come from the report, specifically the issue of the models of the ports that we have in Scotland today. As has been mentioned during the debate, there was perhaps some concern that there was a lack of investment at Grangemouth, but we heard from the evidence that we got that perhaps some of that is a result of trying to make equipment perhaps last as long as it possibly can. We have seen other examples or other models of ports achieve positive outcomes in different ways. Nigel Dawn mentioned the work of John Parterson at Montrose, who, during the course of the evidence, was made clear that he had achieved a great deal in managing to gather every bit of European grant money that had been available and have it spent on the one project in the past three years in Montrose to replace a dock. Similarly, the ambition that has been shown by Aberdeen Harbour to take forward the proposals for the major expansion at Nig is an example of a port that, under a different model, has the ambition to go forward and achieve what it needs to achieve. I think that there is no one-size-fits-all approach for Scotland's ports. There is success to be found in every model, if you look. The other issue that I wanted to raise is the issue of speed limits, which has been mentioned by a number of people. I have commended the Scottish Government for the 50-mile-an-hour speed limit that has been applied to the A9, but I think that for heavy goods vehicles, and we have heard initial evidence from a number of operators that that has been a success, I hope that as time goes past we will be able to use that experiment to give us statistics that indicate that there is little risk associated with that. It is a concern for many people to see HDVs going at higher speeds in built-up areas. We would never wish to see that, but on long routes in Scotland where transport times are important, we need to get vehicles moving more quickly. I hope that that will produce figures. I would accept that, in some of the west coast roads, it would make it virtually impossible to overtake heavy goods vehicles that, on bends and hills, are forced to slow down to 20 miles an hour. Indeed, it is horses for courses, but I think that the experiment in the A9 will give us vital information and the results so far, the feedback seems to be positive. It would be a missive, not to support the call by Nigel Doane to ask the minister to look at the issues surrounding the junction of the A90 with the A937 at Lawrence Kirk, where many people I know personally play Russian roulette with the traffic on a daily basis. It is important, however, to note that I would not support any suggestion to introduce a 50mph speed limit on the whole length of the A90. Aberdeen, in the north of Aberdeenshire, is already a long way from many of its markets, and we do not want to make it any further away by reducing the speed of traffic unnecessarily on that road. Sadly, there have also been one or two suggestions during the course of this debate that we should have some grand centralised strategy, like a five-year plan to take forward Scotland's freight industry. I do not believe that that is necessary. I believe that we have good people working within the industry with good intentions who, with a little help and a little direction, can achieve a great deal more. I believe that the approach that the minister has taken and outlined in his opening speech is an indication that we are doing the right things. We just need to do them sooner and perhaps a little more effectively. Mary Fee has been a short but nonetheless important debate. I thank everyone for their contributions. I also thank my fellow infrastructure committee members and the clerks for a very interesting and insightful report. It was a very good inquiry to do, and I think that all of us in our own way in the committee would become freight anoracts. I know that I look at trains and ships in a different way now since doing the inquiry, so that is a good thing. Scotland has a thriving freight industry, and Scotland's largest port at Grangemouth handles over a quarter of a million 20fts equivalent units, and they handled that in 2013. Freight by sea is flourishing, but further investment is needed in the future as demand for larger vessels and containers will increase. Road transport in Scotland consistently makes up around two thirds of all freight movements, and therefore plays a key role in our freight industry. Although road transport is becoming less polluting as a result of innovation in the industry, such as better driving practices and tougher standards on emissions from engines, at a UK level it is estimated that up to a third of journeys run empty, and we must ensure that we are doing all we can to minimise the impact on the environment while striving towards sustainable economic growth. I welcome the improvements to Scotland's road networks, such as the M74 extension, although more needs to be done to ensure that Scotland remains a competitive player in the freight industry. For example, the routes to the Cairn Rhine ports via the A75 and the A77 were described by the road haulage association as inadequate and outdated to cope with current traffic and freight volumes. Although the majority of Scottish freight travels by road, a number of retail companies, including major supermarkets, choose to use rail freight. The modal shift to rail is a key element in helping Scotland to meet its challenging climate change targets. Network Rail has forecast that Scottish rail freight will grow from the present 14 million tonnes per annum to 26 million tonnes by 2026. Of key importance to Scotland's rail freight sector is the freight liner terminal at Coatbridge, with daily services to deep-sea container ports throughout the UK. However, I was concerned to learn that the cranes in operation are 45 years old and therefore require to be upgraded to ensure that the terminal remains competitive. I urge the Government to work with freight liner to help to deliver the necessary investment. Investment in the last mile infrastructure is another key challenge, and the last mile is crucial for access to terminals and for ease of movement between modes of transport. All forms of freight are important for achieving sustainable economic growth, and I hope that the Scottish Government will agree with me that we must work more closely with the air freight sector to ensure that our infrastructure best meets the industry's needs. To sum up, I welcome the investment in our infrastructure networks to support Scotland's thriving freight industry. However, there are a number of areas that require attention, such as improvements to Scotland's primary rail freight terminal in Coatbridge and greater engagement with the air freight sector. I hope that, in closing, the Government will work with us to tackle those issues and will, as was said in Jim Eadie's opening remarks, introduce a new rate freight transport policy to invigorate and re-energise our freight. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I think that the debate has been characterised by roughly. We're in the same place, we're doing the right kind of things, just do more of it and do it more quickly, and absolutely I would share that view. We'll do as much as we can as resources allow, but this Government cannot be accused of not putting our money where our mouth is when it comes to infrastructure investment—a multi-billion-pound investment in infrastructure that has been welcomed. Of course, we want to do more of the strategic transport projects, review projects and do them as quickly as possible, because they're there for a reason, supported for a reason, and it will deliver further sustainable economic growth. The big ask of the convener, Jim Eadie, and all members to me and Government, is will I produce a new revitalised, energised policy? Yes, I will, as part of the national transport strategy, which should be complete by Christmas. However, here's a further commitment. This is decision-making in real time. If that looks too big, too comprehensive to dominate the national transport strategy, I'll separate it from it to have a separate document, but my ambition would be to have it as part of the national transport strategy. That will capture the Government's economic strategy, the national planning framework 3, the position on Scottish planning policy and our marine plan, because I think that it is very important to align all of our economic and investment strategies together to make the recommendations in the report happen. You will have your new, rejuvenated policy, but it will capture, as I said to Jane Baxter, many of the interventions that the Government is already making. I don't wait for a new policy to be written to be able to intervene to deliver the kind of infrastructure investment that will realise sustainable economic growth. The Recythe Zeebrigger example is a good one, in which we have sustained waterborne freight through support and intervention in the private sector and, of course, leadership as well. Aberdeen Harbour and Niggs are another good example of private sector-led development, with multi-million-pound development potentially going forward. I think that there is much to be positive about and more to do to support our economy and the transport of goods indeed as well. As people can say, I was very involved in freight in relation to the national planning framework 3 and the national designations there. There is an action plan around supporting freight and supporting infrastructure enhancement. There is a question around the port models. We have mixed models, and we have other potentials for deep water ports as well, such as Hunterston or ScapaFlo. There is a plan, and there is a range of plans that we can bring together to give that leadership that people seek. On some of the other issues of substance investment, we are very much delivered an agenda and a mantra of on-time and on-budget, even under-budget in some respects, if you take the Queensferry crossing. However, I have been disappointed sometimes by the failure to spend some grant support—for example, the freight facilities grant—and sometimes it is because of the complexity of the case or private sector competition with each other, or the failure to meet the critical mass, so collaboration, partnership working and greater involvement. I am happy to play the role as honest broker, of course. I take that point, and I think that that was well explored in the committee report. However, having identified that money, it would be a huge missed opportunity not to find ways to help to get that innovation in the freight industry that we all want. I want to make sure that the funds are streamlined as possible and can reach their objective. The reassurance that I give you is that, where we were not able to spend it on freight facilities grant and ensured that it stayed within as best I could, the future transport fund was actually spent on other objectives within future transport. You would welcome such a sustainable travel, but the good news is that it is coming. We are on the precipice of not just big announcements in terms of private sector port infrastructure spend, but I can also say very carefully that we are actively considering a line freight facilities grant application from a well-known Scottish company. We hope to make an announcement soon. The reason I cannot reveal the details yet is that it will be subject to planning conditions and so on, but it will be a big announcement. I think that we will show a very helpful step forward in terms of freight facilities grant, which will continue to remain under review. Mike McKenzie will be very helpful points around infrastructure. A number of members have talked about speed limits for road haulage as well. That is a very sensitive matter. On the A9, for example, it was the package of measures, including the average speed cameras that allowed us to increase the speed limit from 40 to 50 for HGVs. I would only be looking at doing it elsewhere if there was an appropriate package of measures that made it safe. Members will know that south of the border, the Department for Transport has wholesale increased on a blanket way speed limits from 40 to 50mph. The reason I am not attracted to that proposition is because they estimate that there will be more totalities and casualties as a result. That is not a gamble that I am willing to take with Scottish lives in a Scottish context, but I will, of course, learn the lessons from what happened south of the border and look very closely at our findings on the A9. Here again, the plea for Lawrence Kirk has established a team to try to take that forward by way of funding commitment as a further intervention as well. Between the report of committee 2, the investment plan, the constant review and the energy that we continue to put into infrastructure investment, and I hope that we can support freight in Scotland across the modes, delivering modal shift to deliver our objective of sustainable economic growth. I now call on Jim Eadie to wind up the debate on behalf of the committee. Before I try and summarise the debate, I thank again my fellow committee members, our expert adviser and, of course, the clerking team, who's work on this inquiry was so invaluable. It was a true example of MSPs leaving any political baggage at the door of the committee and properly reflecting on the evidence that we received as a committee. This report and debate has also demonstrated that, if Scotland makes the right choices, and we encourage collaborative working in taking those choices forward, despite our geographical position at the northern tip of Europe, a successful freight transport sector can be at the heart of our economy while also playing a significant role in helping to meet our environmental targets. Those are themes that ran throughout the contributions in this afternoon's debate. The minister reiterated the Government's commitment to identifying strategic freight routes within its wider approach to transport infrastructure. I was glad that he acknowledged the committee's call to accelerate projects already identified in the strategic transport projects review. He talked about the importance of continuing to make significant investment in transport infrastructure, including investment in the rail and road networks, and in projects that can bring about the modal shift that all of us wish to see, which can improve transport links within Scotland and ensure connectivity with international transport routes. I very much look forward to the minister putting his money where his mouth is to use his own words from this afternoon. He also reminded us of the importance of the freight and logistics advisory group, Scott Flag, in ensuring that the Government engages with the sector and that there is the necessary leadership and strategic direction in taking forward those issues. That was also a very welcome contribution from him this afternoon. Many of those issues can also be taken forward through the strategic rail investment fund, which will be another opportunity for the minister to put his money where his mouth is. Sarah Boyack spoke of the challenges and the need for innovation and investment, which will be necessary in overcoming them. She rightly placed an emphasis on the role of a freight transport policy and strategy in bringing about the transition to a carbon-free economy. That is particularly important as we look at bringing about the modal shift from moving freight on road to moving it on the rail network. She also talked about the interrelationship of the national planning framework with our freight strategy. That was a point that was also well made this afternoon. Alex Johnson, for the first time in this chamber, I agreed with every word of Alex Johnson's contribution. I look forward to that being something that is repeated in future debates, but perhaps I should not hold my breath, Presiding Officer. He talked about Cairnryan and the importance that it has in terms of having appropriate links along the A75 and A77 given its importance in facilitating trade with Northern Ireland. He also talked about the challenges of getting goods on to the key side, the challenges of passing loops and of being able to free up capacity if we are to run longer trains and increase capacity in moving freight along those routes. Mike Mackenzie shared with us his experience on the committee's trip to fell-shopping in Sweden and the fact that the rail freight facility had been funded by a Swedish local authority. Perhaps that provided an exemplar of good practice for local authorities closer to home to follow. He used a plumbing and heating diagram analogy, which I have to confess that I did not fully understand, despite being the son of a plumber, but perhaps that is more of a reflection on me than it is on Mike Mackenzie. However, he made a very important point in terms of getting goods to market, and that was about the need for greater co-operation between operators and the role of the Scottish Government as an honest broker in facilitating and bringing about that co-operation in what is a competitive market. James Dornan, in a contribution that was perhaps not unsurprising, reminded us of the good practice that took place during the Commonwealth Games in terms of barriers to urban freight, and the fact that the nighttime deliveries during the Commonwealth Games did not actually produce the complaints that might have been expected as a result of that. He also talked about the contribution that consolidation centres could bring about in reducing road use. Another point that was very well made during the debate, Jane Baxter, reminded us of the importance of the recith to Zee Brugge service, and of the importance of that, not just in terms of passenger numbers but in terms of freight as well. Nigel Don, not for the first time, mentioned the Lawrence Kirk junction, and I think he received some of the reassurance that he was seeking from the minister in his summing up. Mary Fee reminded us of the air freight sector, which was perhaps an area in which we had received less evidence from stakeholders than we would have wished, but is an important issue nonetheless. She also talked about the need for investment at the freight-liner terminal in Sunnycote bridge, which was also a visit that the committee undertook during its inquiry. In bringing my remarks to a close, I would like to highlight the fact that the committee has gone to some length to highlight the importance of freight transport in Scotland and the role that the Scottish Government, local authorities, transport operators and other stakeholders in the sector and users can all play in supporting and facilitating innovation, growth, efficiency and sustainable operations in the sector. That is a theme that runs throughout the contributions that we have had from across the chamber this afternoon, just as it ran as a theme throughout the evidence that we received as a committee during our evidence sessions and the numerous visits that we undertook as a committee. All of that has informed our work, all of that is reflected in the report that the committee has brought forward, and it is also something that has been addressed in the Government's own response to the committee's inquiry report. The committee, and I hope any successor committee, will continue to closely scrutinise this work. The aim must be to continue to identify, to understand and to overcome the challenges facing the freight transport industry in Scotland, to ensure that we do overcome the barriers to moving goods across rail, road, air and sea, and that we ensure that Scottish businesses have the high-quality links by all modes of transport within Scotland to and from the rest of the United Kingdom and connecting with the rest of the world. As Scotland has always done, as Scotland will continue to do, and as I think this report has been very invaluable in pointing the way forward, both for the Government and for the sector. Mr Reidy, thank you for the valiant effort in taking us to five o'clock. That concludes the debate on the freight transport in Scotland. We now move to the next side of business, which is decision time. There are two questions to be put as a result of today's business. The first question is at motion number 14190, in the name of Murdo Fraser, on internationalising Scottish business to be agreed to. Are we all agreed? Yes. The motion is therefore agreed to. The next question is at motion number 14193, in the name of Tim Meadie. On freight transport in Scotland to be agreed to. Are we all agreed? Yes. The motion is therefore agreed to. That concludes decision time, and I now close this meeting.