 That concludes the debate on UK shared prosperity fund. What this means for Scotland? It is now time to move on to the next item of business. The next scheduled item of business is a statement by Kate Forbes on national strategy for economic transformation. Given that the cabinet secretary answered a government-initiated question on this matter yesterday and that relevant material is already in the public domain, we will move straight to questions from I intend to allow around 30 minutes for questions after which we will move on to the next item of business. I would be grateful if members wished to ask a question. Could please press their request-to-speak buttons now? I call Liz Smith. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I am grateful for your decision to move straight to questions, given the fact that the statement about the economic strategy was made yesterday. Not market-tested or pragmatic, that was the assessment of the economic strategy from Sir Tom Hunter. We know that the STUC effectively disowned the strategy despite having been key to the consultations. Others, such as the CBI and the Chambers of Commerce, were a little bit more encouraging about the lofty ambitions, but they said that there was a real lack of clarity over the detail, so hardly a ringing endorsement of the cabinet secretary's new economic strategy. Can I ask the cabinet secretary three questions? Firstly, she says in her Scotsman column this morning that Scotland must become more welcoming for innovators and entrepreneurs. I completely agree with that, but can I ask how that fits with the SNP's priority for a second independence referendum, which virtually all leading businessmen and women tell us would create a whole lot of renewed uncertainty and additional cost at the very time when the exact opposite is required in order to attract new investment that we so desperately need? Secondly, Chris Van Der Kool of 4G Studios says that none of the cabinet secretary's ambitions will be achieved unless there are serious efforts to improve education and skills across Scotland. So can I ask the cabinet secretary if she agrees that publication of the recent OECD report into school education is essential if we are to fully understand and address the weaknesses in our education system? Thirdly, can I ask again about when the Scottish Government will provide the full details about the current situation at the Scottish National Investment Bank, given its key role in supporting future investment? Cabinet secretary, I thank you for the opportunity to answer questions this evening as well. In terms of Liz Smith's questions, she was invited, as all Opposition spokespeople were invited, to the virtual launch yesterday. Opposition parties regularly point out what the challenges are facing the Scottish economy. We have had exchanges on a number of occasions in the chamber pointing out the challenges. We have not shied away from those challenges in the strategy. We have addressed them head on. My invitation to Liz Smith and to others is what would you remove from the strategy that you do not think will deliver and what would you add in if you think that we are missing policies? In terms of the specific questions that Liz Smith asks, first, on Tom Hunter's point—Tom Hunter was invited to comment on the draft on a number of occasions—he asked for us to focus on business. That is what we have done in the strategy, to focus on ensuring that there is a growth strategy. Secondly, she quotes Chris Van der Kyl in terms of investment in education, and she will see that one of the five pillars is very much on skills—a point that she has made a number of times and a hope one that she welcomes. She asks what will be different about the strategy. The strategy will focus on unlocking our potential and unlocking new markets, particularly as part of the transition to net zero. There is a lot of substance in the strategy, but, as with any strategy, what will ultimately be measured is the outcomes. Some of those outcomes are short-term in terms of how we recover over the next few months. Many of them will only be delivered over the longer term. My invitation to all people in the chamber and beyond is to work with us to deliver that, because I do not think that there is anything in the strategy that Liz Smith ultimately disagrees with. Daniel Johnson Thank you very much, Presiding Officer, and thank you for arranging this opportunity to ask questions in Parliament about the strategy. Indeed, perhaps the best way of summing up is better late than never. Just to the cabinet secretary's comments about the so-called invitation to the launch, let us be clear, that invitation came at four o'clock on Monday and was, at a time, when we were all in finance committee. It is just not a credible invitation at all. More importantly, she asked what would we remove. I genuinely would not remove anything, but I think that there are things missing. First of all, it is a report that is largely broad in terms of its objectives. I think that there is insufficient analysis of the deep structural problems, and there is no real analysis about what would change in terms of delivery, which, if a strategy is to be worth, its name needs to have those things. Of the specific questions, there is a key focus on entrepreneurialism, but, given that, 99 per cent of firms in Scotland have seen zero productivity go over the last decade or more, do we not need more focus on scaling up existing firms rather than focusing on starting new firms, although that is important? In terms of reskilling—I welcome those comments, but again—what is going to change? Labour market participation is a key problem in the Scottish economy, so how will that be delivered through existing structures and mechanisms or new ones, and how will flexibility be incorporated? In terms of the cluttered landscape, we seem to be adding two new bodies, and that means that we have gone from three to seven boards and bodies if we start from the beginning of the last Parliament. That is a key issue that is identified by, amongst other people, Audit Scotland. How will that be resolved? Finally, can I ask this question? In future, cabinet secretary, when major plans and strategies are launched, can you please bring them to Parliament first so that we can ask questions here first, rather than private invitees to a private event elsewhere? In terms of Daniel Johnson's three points, if I could start with entrepreneurialism, and he talks about the importance of scaling up versus new startups. That is precisely backed up by the analytical paper, which, if he has not read, I would strongly recommend that he reads. Obviously, the strategy that has been published is the tip of the iceberg, but underpinning that is a very comprehensive structural analysis of the Scottish economy, and it provides answers on a number of exchanges that we have had in the past. Obviously, one of the points that is very much on the scale-up. At the moment, if you look at the longevity or the lifetime of most new businesses in Scotland, most businesses that last beyond five years, about 42 per cent survive beyond five years. He is right—the point about scaling up is really important. That can deliver significant benefits from the Scottish economy, because those scale-ups, those growth businesses, are the ones that are creating jobs and contributing significantly to GVA. In terms of skills, he talks about flexibility. Actually, if there was one word to describe our proposals around skills, it is flexibility. Ensuring that people have access to the right scaling opportunities wherever they are. There are proposals in here in terms of the provision of qualifications throughout somebody's life, being able to access that through a digital academy. There is a comment here about how we work with business to provide an upscaling and a retraining offer that is easier for businesses to access on behalf of their employees. Flexibility is probably the watchword of our skills proposals. In terms of the last point on a cluttered landscape, I would disagree with that, because one of the key points in the strategy is not to add new layers, but either to repurpose what is already there or to remove. Removing things never goes down well. It is quite a difficult thing to do politically, but in terms of a cluttered landscape, it does not create new bodies. It either repurposes them. For example, the Enterprise and Skills strategic board is going to become the end-set delivery board so that it can monitor delivery with me co-chairing and an individual from the private sector. I will caution against the suggestion that it clutters. It de-clutters and refocuses on the vision that the end-set provides. Willie Rennie I am afraid that there is not much new in this. After 15 years in charge, the Government is looking very, very tired. The report does not properly reflect the Government's failed industrial intervention policies at places such as Lochaber and BiFab. Thousands of jobs were promised that have just not materialised. The report does not cover that. How is Scotland going to exploit the jobs potential of offshore wind if we can even find enough workers to build the eight jackets for the NNG wind farm in the fourth? How on earth is that going to happen? In terms of Willie Rennie's first point about how much is new in here, I would offer the invitation to him that, if he thinks that we are missing something major in the strategy, tell me. If he thinks that we should remove something from the strategy, tell me. Otherwise, that is just rhetoric. In terms of the position on Lochaber, I know for a fact, as a constituency MSP, that we saved jobs that would not have been saved had we not intervened. He asks a really important question. I would refer him perhaps to the second programme of action in terms of new markets, because he is right that with Scotland comes the opportunity of up to £1 billion being invested in every gigawatt of energy that is produced. The strategy here very specifically and methodically looks at how we reap the benefits of that beyond what has been done to date. How do we develop the supply chain? There are three areas that I would point him to. First of all, it is the private sector funding. We have a world-renowned financial services sector. We need to align that with the funding that is required, so the private sector funding that is required. To do that, the First Minister is chairing an investor panel. The second point is about the supply chain. Developing the supply chain, the commitment is there from the developers that have won the bids to develop the supply chain. We need to make sure that we support businesses to be there. My last point is about ultimately delivering on all that is required in terms of the investment and the supply chain and making it joined up. Again, in the strategy, you will see a very joined-up approach, so that we ultimately reap the benefits of a significant investment in the world's largest commercial offshore floating wind farms. Many members, of course, wish to ask questions. I would be grateful for short and succinct questions and answers. I call Michelle Thomson to be followed by Murdo Fraser. Can the cabinet secretary provide any further information about the underpinning methodology and analysis undertaken to inform the strategy and ultimately led to the key themes identified to deliver improvements? Cabinet secretary. Talks about the evidence. We started with an evidence paper, an analytical paper of 133 pages, which has been published and is available for anybody to read. The five new policy programmes of action have been carefully chosen based on that evidence, not based on rhetoric or ideology or political desire, but based on the evidence of where the big challenges are—long-term, structural challenges or short-term—and where the greatest opportunities are to position Scotland to maximise the greatest opportunities of the next 10 years. There is a robust evidence base underpinning each of the programmes, and it is available for anybody to look at. Cabinet secretary announced a new talent attraction programme to bring people of working age from other parts of the United Kingdom to come and live in Scotland. It is an important initiative because the working age population here has not been growing as fast as many other parts of the United Kingdom. However, why does the cabinet secretary think that, for the past 15 years, people from the rest of the UK have not been coming to Scotland? On the contrary, the evidence would not back that up, which is why I would refer the member to the analytics paper. However, in terms of what we are seeing right now, the challenges facing people from outwith the UK to relocate to Scotland for visa requirements, and what we have set out in this strategy is, one, to target the skills that we need. If you take, for example, the tech industry, which was forecast to be the second-fastest growing sector in Scotland over the next five years, they regularly say that they struggle to recruit particular skills, and we want to target those skills from the rest of the UK. People are moving to Scotland attracted by the work-life balance and the on-average lower living costs in Scotland, but we need to do more to make sure that we are aligning the skills that we need with those who are moving here. The transition to net zero is clearly a huge imperative, so I welcome section 3-headed new market opportunities. Can the cabinet secretary say any more about how we can benefit from those new markets and new industries? It is one of the biggest economic opportunities facing Scotland, and that is why the second programme focuses on strengthening Scotland's position in new markets and industries. We are already well regarded as a pioneer in the net zero space, and a number of independent analysts have suggested that Scotland has the greatest potential to create green jobs, but success is not inevitable. It needs to be delivered, and that is why the plan sets out how, alongside the just transition, we will also secure the private investment that is required through the investor panel, as well as developing the supply chain. The strategy describes Scotland's desire to be a magnet for global private capital and foreign direct investment. On the face of it, it sounds impressive, but we know that there needs to be more critical analysis of that. There are two types of foreign direct investment—developmental and dependent, and so often in Scotland's economy. We have seen companies that flourish under Scottish ownership and then can only achieve growth by foreign takeover, often meaning that capabilities are stripped out of the Scottish economy. The strategy does not offer any critical analysis of how we do that. There are examples around the world of how we can tackle that. For example, the Scottish Investment Bank could be taking anti-takeover shares in strategic firms to protect them from predator takeovers. That is happening in the UK already with Oxford and Nanopore, for example. Could the cabinet secretary take consideration of that as being a way to improve the strategy? The member raises a good point. Obviously, Scotland has been the top destination in the UK for FDI outside London. For the past six years, Edinburgh, Glasgow and Aberdeen have appeared in the top 10 UK cities in 2020. We are good at securing FDI, but the point that he makes is very important. I do not want to be celebrating the creation of jobs elsewhere outside Scotland. I want to be celebrating the creation of jobs here in Scotland. If you take the supply chain as an example where we want Scottish businesses to be qualifying for work here in Scotland as part of the development of Scotland, we need to work very constructively and very intentionally with those businesses with the greatest potential to participate in that supply chain and ensure that we retain and create the jobs here. To deliver economic growth in Scotland, it is vital that we encourage new startups and support existing businesses. Can the cabinet secretary provide any further information about how this economic strategy will support existing businesses to grow? The strategy is certainly not just about new industries and markets. It is about backing our existing industries, supporting them to improve, to grow, to be more productive, to be more creative, to transition to net zero and to reap the benefits. The five policy programmes in the strategy are intentional about supporting new and existing businesses to prosper. For example, although the SME sector is the backbone of the Scottish economy, we are also conscious that a number of large businesses, particularly in energy, are creating a number of jobs and have great potential to drive productivity. We will work with SMEs and large businesses—any business that wants to be more productive, wants to be more internationally competitive and wants to scale and grow. Whilst we are pleased to have secured commitments to fair pay in public contracts, support for co-operatives, social enterprises and public ownership models and a focus on green jobs, the cabinet secretary will know that the Scottish Greens believe that prioritising growth as a measure of economic success drives increasing inequalities, more precarious work and unsustainable resource extraction and exploitation. Will the cabinet secretary ensure that equalities and human rights are embedded in all economic development activities and over what timescale and how she will engage with communities so that Scotland's economy works for them and supports wellbeing and a vibrant economy? The member hits the nail on the head in terms of suggesting that growth or economic performance should be for a purpose. The strategy is very clear that the purpose that we want to see is raising living standards across Scotland, ensuring that no region, community, household or individual is left behind when it comes to participating and enjoying the benefits of success. Yesterday, there was at least one representative of Unite who was heartened to hear multiple mentions of trade unions and that two of the foundation stones referred to better paid work and were based on fair work principles. That is what we want to embed, both directly in terms of conditionality with Government support but also ensuring that there are workers' voices throughout the sectors that we want to see grow and develop. Ruth Maguire to be followed by Douglas Lumsden. The strategy includes a welcome focus on improving wages and conditions in sectors where low-pay and precarious work are most prevalent through the sectoral fair work agreements. Can the cabinet secretary provide further details as to how the Scottish Government will work with trade unions and industry to deliver high fair work standards? I said that the strategy ultimately wants to raise standards. It wants to deliver good jobs. It wants to address structural inequalities, for example the underrepresentation of women in parts of our economy and to ultimately reduce poverty. The strategy needs to play a part in reducing child poverty. We will require payment of the real living wage and a channel for effective workers' voices in all Government support by this summer. We are not waiting 10 years. We are moving quickly on this and we will work with employers and trade unions in sectors in particular where low-pay and precarious work is prevalent, including leisure hospitality and early learning and childcare. Douglas Lumsden to be followed by Jim Fairlie. The strategy gives absolutely no support to the oil and gas industry, even though tens of thousands of jobs right across Scotland depend on that industry. Although we still have a demand for oil and gas, it is better for our economy and better for the environment that we produce ourselves. The last thing that we want is to be reliant on Putin or his likes for energy supply. When will this Government stop turning its back on the oil and gas industry and the north-east of Scotland and encourage investment into the sector, because at present this Government is driving investment away? There were representatives from the energy sector from the north-east on the advisory council and, considering that Aberdeen and Grampian Chamber of Commerce have welcomed the strategy yesterday, the member might want to reflect on whether it is strictly accurate that there is no reference to oil and gas or to energy, because in terms of one of the programmes of activity around new markets, it is very much about helping and working with the energy sector to transition. I have referenced the energy sector in most of my answers this afternoon, such as its importance, not just in terms of ensuring that households across Scotland have access to secure energy sources. It would help if perhaps the UK Government could regulate energy as well to ensure that people who have that energy are being produced are not paying more than elsewhere in the UK. I very much welcome the ambitious strategy, especially the focus on entrepreneurship. It is vital that the benefits of the strategy are felt right across Scotland, including in our rural communities. The cabinet secretary will provide any further information as to how the strategy will ensure a transformation right across Scotland. As the member will know, as a representative of rural Scotland, that is first and foremost in my mind when it comes to a strategy like this. Perhaps the area that I am most enthused by in the strategy is the notion that, if every community and region of Scotland is able to perform well and is given the right support, our national economy will prosper. If we leave any part of our economy behind, we will ultimately undermine that national performance. We have spoken to businesses, workers and stakeholders across Scotland, and I want to ensure that we work with rural representatives to embed that strategy. That is partly why I am going to the Western Isles tomorrow to discuss it further. During the pandemic, there was much talk of building back better. The Scottish National Party has described the report as a missed opportunity and a strategy for economic status quo rather than economic transformation. The detailed action plans will be crucial if that analysis is to be changed, but I ask why the action plans were not included in the strategy and how the action plan progress will be measured. I did not quite hear the last comment, but in terms of the STUC's input, can I put on record how much I have appreciated their input, particularly Ross Foyer's helpful steer and fully recognising the fact that all stakeholders want us to go as far as possible? Right at the heart of the strategy, perhaps running through every single programme of action is a commitment to fair work. There are two of the five programmes that are specifically about wellbeing and raising standards of living, embedding workers' voices and ensuring fair pay runs throughout our economy. The action plan will be published to ensure that we have a means of delivery that is effective, and we will be ensuring that there are metrics alongside that. Again, I would perhaps refer her to the analytics paper that outlines what some of those metrics might be. Can I just give Ms Baker the opportunity to repeat the end of her question? Thank you, Presiding Officer. It was just to ask about how progress would be measured on action plans, but I think that the Cabinet Secretary has perhaps covered that. Thank you very much. Christine Grahame, to be followed by Jamie Halcro Johnston. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. The strategy focuses on five key priorities, and I quote, within Scotland's current powers, while in the previous debate we found out how they are already being undermined by the Tories. With energy, migration tax, including co-operation tax, VAT, national insurance, all reserved, does the cabinet secretary not agree with me that we could do so much better for prosperity of Scotland and the justice distribution of its wealth with independence? Christine Grahame is right that when it comes to economic prosperity, a number of the key levers that you would normally expect to see being deployed in an economic strategy are reserved. Migration powers, employment law, energy powers, taxation, regulation—these are all reserved. What we have committed to in this strategy is to push the current levers as far and as hard as we possibly can, because we are serious and ambitious about delivering a strategy that ultimately improves Scotland's economic performance. Jamie Halcro Johnston, to be followed by Martin Whitfield. Having waited so long to see it, it is an underwhelming report. In response to its publication, Professor Ronald McDonald said that the kind of substantive issues that we need to discuss are simply not there. That on solutions is simply a rehash of all the failed scripts that we have seen since 2007. Will the cabinet secretary accept that, after 15 years of SNP economic mismanagement, the delayed report, the underwhelming report of rehashed ideas, fails to address the long-term issues in Scotland's economy and is simply not good enough? I would accept that I have not heard a single policy proposal from the Conservatives this afternoon or indeed in any of the debates that we have had. The member talks about the need for new and bold ideas. Let us hear them, because I have been waiting a long time to hear anything from the Conservatives. The strategy that we have set out today, backed up by 133 pages of structural analysis on the substantive issues, outlines the areas where we think that we can make the greatest difference. If the member thinks that we should take anything out or add anything back in, I am all ears. Martin Whitfield, to be called by Stuart McMillan. Before I go ahead, can I just say that I do not expect to hear members shouting across the chamber at one another? I would like to make sure that we can hear questions and responses. Back in 2014, Scotland was the most highly educated country in Europe, among the most well educated in the world in terms of tertiary education. Yesterday in a speech, the Cabinet Secretary pointed out that we are now only just one of the highest. The report states that it recognises significant inequalities persist in educational attainment. 10% of Scotland's workforce has low or no qualifications. The answer in the statement talks of implementing a lifetime upskilling and retraining programme for both individuals and businesses. After 15 years in power and success of upskilling, maybe not seen for up to 10 years, is that it? The member is right to say that we have one of the most educated populations anywhere in Europe. I think that that is something to be welcomed and to be celebrated, because it demonstrates that we have a strong foundation to build on. The key right now, which we all are well versed in if we speak to any organisation trying to recruit, is to ensure that our businesses and organisations have the skills that they need right now, but the skills they will need in 10 years' time. The pace of change when it comes to technology, when it comes to the transition to net zero will require us to up our game and ensure that we have a flexible skills system to respond to the need, not just the need today, but the needs over the next 10 years. The Scottish Chamber of Commerce yesterday said that Scotland's businesses will applaud the scale and ambition set out in the strategy, which has the potential to live up to its name and truly revolutionise the Scottish economic landscape over the next decade. Can the cabinet secretary provide any further information about the engagement work that has been undertaken by stakeholders to ensure that the strategy delivers for all of Scotland's economy, in particular dealing with the regional imbalances that Scotland has? The engagement to date has been extensive, it has been in-depth. I cannot count the number of meetings or submissions that I have been party to. Economic transformation has to be a national endeavour. In other words, while we can set the vision that we have done in this document, while we can renew our focus on delivery that we have done in this document and will do going forward, all of us ultimately have a stake in Scotland's success. Every member in this room has a stake in Scotland's success in ensuring that they contribute, but they represent the businesses that want to contribute. I look forward to working collaboratively with trade unions, with the private sector and with the third sector in order to deliver what will be an immensely successful strategy. The cabinet secretary missed an important question from Liz Smith earlier, so I am sure that she will welcome this opportunity. Given its key role in supporting future investments, when will the Scottish Government provide full details about the current situation at the Scottish National Investment Bank? Any questions about the matter that the member is referring to are for the former chief executive and the board. I said yesterday that I recognise the appetite for answers but it is important that the board is given its place and that those questions are for the board. That concludes questions on the national point of order, Daniel Johnson. I am very grateful, Presiding Officer, for allowing me to make this point of order. I know that a number of members are still waiting to ask questions. Given the great discourtesy that the Government has shown to the chamber by not coming before now, I wonder whether I could propose a motion without notice to extend the session under rule 8.14, section 3, so that we can hear the questions for those who wish to ask them. There are other matters to attend to in this afternoon's business. That was agreed by the bureau. I have already taken extra questions, so we will move on at this point. Of course, it is a matter for the bureau whether we come back to the subject in a lot further time in due course. That concludes questions on the national strategy for economic transformation, and we will move on to the next item of business, which is consideration of business motion 3422, in the name of George Adam, on behalf of the parliamentary bureau, setting out a business programme. I call on George Adam to move the motion. Thank you, Presiding Officer, and moved. Thank you. No member has asked to speak on the motion. The question, therefore, is the motion 3422 be agreed? Are we all agreed? The motion is, therefore, agreed. The next item of business is consideration of business motion 3426, in the name of George Adam, on behalf of the parliamentary bureau, on stage one timetable for a bill. Any member who wishes to speak against the motion should press their request to speak button now. I call on George Adam to move the motion. Thank you again, Presiding Officer, and moved. Thank you, minister. No member has asked to speak against the motion. Therefore, the question is that motion 3426 be agreed? Are we all agreed? The motion is, therefore, agreed. The next item of business is consideration of three parliamentary bureau motions, and I asked George Adam on behalf of the parliamentary bureau to move motions 3423 and 3424 on approval of SSI, and 3425 on designation of lead committee. All of which I'm glad to move, Presiding Officer. Thank you, minister. The question on these motions will be put at decision time, and there are six questions to be put as a result of today's business. The first is that motion 3389, in the name of Claire Adamson, on behalf of the Constitution, Europe External Affairs and Culture Committee, on UK Internal Market Inquiry, be agreed? Are we all agreed? The motion is, therefore, agreed. The next question is that motion 3394, in the name of Tom Arthur, on Scottish Government debate, local government finance Scotland order 2022, be agreed? Are we all agreed? The Parliament is not agreed, therefore, will move to vote, and there will be a short suspension to allow members to access the digital voting system.