 Ac we start with question number one from Joan McAlpine. Thank you, Presiding Officer. Can I ask the Scottish Government what recent discussions it has had with the United Kingdom Government regarding the triggering of article 50? Minister Michael Russell. The Scottish Government has been pressing the UK Government since December last year to give serious consideration to the proposals that are outlined in Scotland's place in Europe through the joint ministerial committee framework and via bilateral relations with the UK Government. Despite a range of disappointed points, we can't know that yet. difiadw�us a profiadol wrth dweudyddol, y cyfiesion ni. Felly, mae wych ynberoch i ddiogel, diogel o cysylltu ddechrau iawn i ddechrau iawn i ddechrau iawn ni o ddweuddiant yn rhan o beth, ac i ddull â yr rhan o beth, ac yn ddull o jyderwch y diogel yn maen nhw a beth, y cyfieithu i ddych chi'n llyfl yn y ffordd o ddweuddiant ryngwclen, yn y cyfieithu i ddychrau iawn ni o ddweuddiant. Gem upfronten. I thank the minister for that answer. Last July, the Prime Minister came to Scotland and promised she would not trigger article 50 without first securing a UK-wide approach. In fact, she said and I quote, I'm willing to listen to options and I've been very clear today that I want the Scottish Government to be fully engaged in our discussion. From the minister's first-hand experience of the GMC discussions to what extent has the UK Government been willing to reach a position that fulfills that promise by the Prime Minister? Regrettably, I've seen no such willingness. The terms of reference of the GMC-EN say that one of the purposes is to work collaboratively and to seek to agree a UK approach to and objectives for article 50 negotiations. At no time has information been brought to the GMC which would allow us to do so. I think that it is that frustration amongst others that really gives the lie to any claim that there has been some attempt to engage certainly the Scottish Government, but I do know that that has been the view of ministers of other devolved administrations too. Thank you. Yes, the First Minister announced that the people of Scotland will get a choice on the future. They will decide what they want and not be told what they're getting by a Tory Government with one MP in Scotland. How will the Scottish Government ensure that the will of this Parliament is respected if we seek a section 30 order from that UK Tory Government to give the people of Scotland their right to choose that future in a referendum? It will be for this Parliament to request a section 30 order and then it will be for the UK Government to respond. If the Parliament expresses that will, then I find it difficult to believe that anybody who is a Democrat and believes in democratic decision making would... I hear the Tories laughing at democracy not for the first time in Scotland. I think that it is difficult to believe that in a democracy that will not be respected. The precedent of the referendum in 2014 is that it should be up to the Scottish Parliament to decide upon those matters. I think that that is absolutely correct. If the Scottish Parliament seeks a section 30 order, then it would not be in any sense a democratic move to try and thwart that. Adam Tomkins Given that yesterday the First Minister jumped the gun by issuing uncalled for and unilateral demands for a second independence referendum to break Britain up, why should the United Kingdom Government now take Scottish ministers into their trust at all about the UK's Brexit negotiations? I do hope that the UK Government is made of more thoughtful stuff than Mr Tomkins. A moment's consideration would make people realise that the right way forward in this, and a difference of opinion now about the right way forward for Scotland, is to ensure that the people have their say. The request from the First Minister, and if it is followed by this Parliament, is very clear, to do so within the same timescale as the article 50 process that is set out in the treaty. That's a fair thing to do, and it is fair to do that in a civilised and constructive fashion. I have to say that I don't feel, as a member of the GMCEN, that I've been taken into the UK Government's confidence on any occasion, but I'm quite happy to be taken into the confidence now if they choose to do so. Lewis MacDonald The First Minister will recall that he told the House of Commons Select Committee last month that the so-called article 50 letter should remain at the top of the agenda for discussion, including in the way in which that letter will make mention of the devolved Administrations and their requirements, including that in differentiation. Does he not recognise that it is the First Minister who has taken all of those issues off the top of the agenda this week, in order to launch her own campaign for Scotland to leave the UK even before the article 50 letter has been sent? Can he tell us what it was that was so pressing for Nicola Sturgeon that she needed to say what she said yesterday without having heard the response that she said he has been pressing for all these months? I think that there are two considerations that need to be taken into account. The first of which is, I think that the First Minister made the point, but I repeat the point and I repeat it as a member of the GMCEN. I have no idea when the article 50 letter will be lodged. I have no idea what is in it. We do know that there are 17 possible days—well, 16 actually, because the commitment is not to do it on 25 March—there are 16 possible days. Speaking as a member of the GMCEN, not to know when it is going to happen, not to have had any discussion of any sort about what is in it, rather indicates that there isn't a seriousness of purpose, even the question of how long the letter should be, which has been a debate. That's the first point, but the second point is this. I think that what the First Minister did yesterday shows her leadership in this matter from the very beginning. To be absolutely clear that the maximum certainty that we can bring, we will bring. It is not within our gift, unfortunately, to wish away the foolishness of the Tories in this matter, nor to wish away the way in which the Scottish Tories are not listening to the people of Scotland, but only to themselves and to London. It is within our gift to be able to ensure that that period of uncertainty is kept as minimal as possible and to do it within the window of the article 50 process. That is what the First Minister did. She showed leadership yesterday. If only there were leadership in this chamber from Tories and Labour, we might be in a different position. Does the Scottish Government want to see an independent Scotland as a full member of the European Union? The position of the Scottish Government in this matter has not changed and will continue to be the same as it has been. As the First Minister said yesterday, it has been our policy to seek full membership of the European Union. Obviously, we are in different circumstances now, but on this issue, as many other people want to consider in advance of choice, we will set up our position in advance of the choice so that it is an informed choice. I think that the member knows perfectly well that I have been a long-term proponent of the benefits of EU membership. Perhaps if that issue had been pursued with more vigour by the Liberal Party among others, we would not be in the unhappy position that we are in now. Richard Lochhead The minister will be aware that the European Committee of this Parliament published its report last week, concluding that a bespoke solution for Scotland must be considered before the triggering of article 50. Does he agree that it is unacceptable for the UK Government to continue to be so stubbornly averse to respecting the views of this Parliament at every turn, and that so far Theresa May has failed to treat Scotland as an equal partner, and if anyone is guilty of tunnel vision, it is the UK Prime Minister. I could not disagree with that thesis, I have to say. The reality of the situation is that the tunnel vision on this has come from the Prime Minister, who I am afraid has not facilitated the possibility of an agreement on a compromised position. I have read a report of the committee and will be debating it here tomorrow, but suffice it to say that the conclusions of the committee reached are not dissimilar from the conclusion that the Scottish Government has reached. A differential solution was possible, and it is much to be regretted that there has been a refusal to engage with it. For example, Presiding Officer, on the issue of migration, where last week the UK Government, the Prime Minister of Spokesperson ruled it out unilaterally, whilst there was still a high-level group of civil servants discussing issues of migration. In other words, we were not negotiating. There was an ex-cathedra pronouncement from Downing Street, and that was meant to settle the matter. I am afraid that it does not. Jackson Carlaw The minister demands that the Westminster Government respect the resolution of a vote in this Parliament when, of course, the Scottish Government now routinely ignores them. Given that the First Minister said that she will disavow and campaign against any agreement that has now reached on withdrawal terms from the European Union, why should the Governments of Wales, Northern Ireland, the Channel Islands, Gibraltar or the rest of the UK have any confidence in the participation of Scottish Government ministers, whose sole objective now is to campaign for independence and not for the best terms for Scotland out of the European Union? I have found myself in agreement with many of the things that ministers from other Administrations have said about this process. Most recently, the Welsh Minister, who indicated in his evidence to the House of Commons Committee that the JMCEN was less well organised than St Fagans Community Council, which actually conforms with my own views. The reality is that we can work together to try and continue to make some progress because these are serious issues. However, if the member is suggesting—this is a serious moment—that what should happen is that there should be an exclusion of one part of these islands from any further discussion, I think that that would send a very interesting message to the European Union. That is not the observing of due process, that is saying take it or lump it, which has, of course, been the Prime Minister's view up until now. Could the minister remind the chamber what mandate this Government has to give people in Scotland the right to choose between a damaging, hard Tory Brexit or becoming an independent country? I am sure that the Scottish Tories do not wish to remember last year's election in which they did so badly. I am sure that they do not wish to remember last year's election in which they did so badly. That is why we are sitting here and they are sitting there. However, the reality of the situation, and with double of the number of seats too—let me just point that out—but the manifesto that I stood, Mr McKee stood and indeed all the members on this side stood contains these words. The Scottish Parliament should have the right to hold another referendum if there is a significant material change in the circumstances that prevailed in 2014, such as Scotland being taken out of the EU against our will. I think that that is very clear. I remind the Scottish Tories that we are sitting here, they are sitting there and we stood on that mandate. Neil Findlay, if Scotland leaves the EU as part of the UK or not and seeks a future date to rejoin the EU, will the minister and the Government give a 100 per cent commitment to support the holding of a referendum before that could take place? I can say to Mr Findlay that when the proposition is put to the people of Scotland, there will be absolute clarity on what we are suggesting is done. I think that Mr Findlay can show the patience for that, then perhaps he will also accept the bona fideus of a Government which on all occasions has been unequivocal support for the European Union, something one could not say about Mr Findlay. Article 50 will be triggered with no protections in place for EU nationals currently living in the UK. Yesterday, Labour was still making the ludicous claim that it will challenge the UK Government's Brexit plans at every turn. They have so far failed to provide any opposition to the Tories and failed to stand up for EU nationals. Surely they will not now fail to give the people of Scotland a choice over their own future. The Labour Party position is, I suppose, very kindly confused, but confusion is one thing. Voting actively against the right of EU citizens is quite another. There were Labour members in the House of Commons yesterday who did that. That was a disgraceful thing to do. The position of this chamber has been absolutely clear and continues to be clear. EU nationals should not be used as bargaining counters, but yesterday evening the Tory party quipped its members to vote to use EU nationals as bargaining counters, and some Labour members voted in support of that Tory motion. I think that the people of Scotland can judge for themselves who is standing up for the rights of human beings and who isn't. James Kelly The minister lectured Parliament about the importance of respect in democracy. What sort of respect does the minister and the Scottish Government have for democracy when they want to stampede to the country into a divisive referendum that no one wants just over two years since we have had a clear democratic vote in favour of staying within the United Kingdom? James Kelly Clearly, Mr Kelly is not a Corbyn Easter. The realities of the situation are, of course, Mr Corbyn is quite happy to accept the democratic right of Scotland to hold such a referendum, but I go back to the point that I made. I stood for election in this chamber. The people around me stood for election on a manifesto that referred to Scotland being taken out of the EU against our will. I am standing full square on the mandate that I have. So is this party. If only Labour were thinking of Scotland rather than its rather threadbare self.