 We begin this afternoon's business with portfolio questions. Question 1, Lewis MacDonald. Thank you very much to ask the Scottish Government what assessment it has carried out of public support for a second referendum on Scotland leaving the UK. Minister Michael Russell. Thank you, Presiding Officer. The current Scottish Government was elected last year with the largest ever constituency vote since the beginning of devolution on a clear manifesto pledge that the Scottish Parliament should have the right to hold another referendum if there was significant and material change in the circumstances that prevailed in 2014, such as Scotland being taken out of the EU against our will. That specific material change is now taking place. We believe that the people of Scotland should therefore have the final choice of their future once the terms of Brexit are clear. Lewis MacDonald. I take it from that answer that the Government has carried out no assessment of public attitudes to this matter since the Brexit referendum on 23 June. Has the minister considered the opinion poll evidence, summed up by Professor John Curtis in a blog on 2 March, which is that Scottish voters are overwhelmingly opposed to a second independence referendum before the final outcome of Brexit negotiations is clear? Does he not agree that the priority for the Scottish Government for the next two years should be to protect Scotland's vital interests in those negotiations and to secure the repatriation of powers over devolved alias from Brussels to Hollywood rather than promoting a further referendum that the Scottish people do not want? Of course, those two objectives are not mutually contradictory. Indeed, I received a letter from David Davis this very day to look forward to working together on some of the issues that lay ahead. The member is wrong about that matter. He is also wrong about opinion poll evidence. It shows to me about 50-50 in those circumstances. There are very clear indications of public support available, often in the opinion polls. I draw attention to those opinion polls, which show the Labour Party to be in third place in Scotland. That is an indication of public support for Lewis MacDonald, his point of view, and the Labour Party. Gillian Martin. I assume that Mr Russell has inadvertently confused my question about support for holding a referendum with a different question about support for independence. Would he care to collect the record at this point? That is not a point of order, Mr MacDonald, but the point has been noted, I am sure, by the minister. Gillian Martin. Does the minister think that the Opposition is telling us, both sides of the Opposition, to spend parliamentary time discussing health and education? At the very first opportunity, using portfolio questions to talk about independence is a little bit hypocritical? Yes. The cute point is ever from the member. I have to make the point, of course, that the Scottish Government will... That is a point of order. Order, please. It is all very amusing, but order, please. Some people are easily amused quite clearly. The reality of the situation, of course, is that the parliamentary time that this Government uses is due to further the interests of Scotland in many different ways. That is shown by the record of achievement that the Government has had over the past 10 years, which is considerable and growing. I know that that makes Opposition parties uncomfortable, but the Scottish National Party and Government has been efficient and effective and will continue to be so. I would suggest that the leader of the Opposition, whoever the Opposition is these days, because it seems to be only a united Opposition, the leader of the Opposition and indeed the Prime Minister should get back to their day jobs and start to concentrate on the real issues that are facing Scotland like being dragged out of Europe against our will. Adam Tomkins. I can ask a supplementary question about the constitution in portfolio questions on the constitution. To propose another referendum in the next Parliament without strong evidence that a significant number of those who voted no have changed their minds would be wrong and we will not do it, unquote. Or again, if I, the SNP, those who believe in independence, cannot shift opinion from September 2014, we will not earn the right to ask the question again, both direct quotations from the First Minister. Was she wrong or if she wasn't wrong, why have ministers changed their minds? The member knows very well that, and I read it in my original answer so clearly he was not listening, the manifesto in which the First Minister stood, I stood, everybody on this side of the chamber stood, says, if there is significant material change in the circumstances that prevailed in 2014, such as Scotland being taken out of the EU against our will. He has clearly seen what has been taking place today, he has clearly seen the attitude of the Prime Minister, in all those circumstances that manifesto commitment has been fulfilled and will be followed. Secondly, Presiding Officer, I'd make this point, it is a very dangerous position for any Opposition to believe that it can veto a majority in the Parliament based upon a manifesto commitment. That is not democracy, and those who choose to depart from that cannot be, by definition, Democrats. Question 2. To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to concerns that reductions in local government budgets will have a negative impact on local services in South Scotland. As Scotland local authorities will have an extra £383 million to support local services in 2017-18, which represents an increase of 3.7 per cent compared to this year, this should have a positive impact on local services all over Scotland, including the south of Scotland. I thank the cabinet secretary for that answer, but the sorts of cuts that are happening from the Scottish Government to our local services are absolutely mind-boggling, frankly, with hundreds of millions from the Scottish Government being cut to local services since 2011. I thank the minister for the answer. I would like to know what assessment has been done at the impact on third sector organisations who are finding their funding reduced as a result of budget cuts to local services. For instance, in my region, the Lanarkshire Care Centre has approached me about their funding position. NHS Lanarkshire, they have great concerns, but NHS Lanarkshire, a contributor, perhaps you would like to hear the question. Excuse me, in order, please. NHS Lanarkshire contributor has confirmed with me that they are unable to continue the top-up funding, which was previously done. 2016-17 funding is honoured, but beyond this it is uncertain. In addition, as the Scottish Government money is only announced in relation to carers on anual basis, long-term planning is challenging. Similar issues have been raised by Borders Care Voice Forum. I would like to know what assessment has been done at the impact of Scottish Government cuts on local services, particularly on the third sector. I tried to make the point, Claudia Beamish, for the interests of the chamber, that we have actually increased the resources for local services across. I have checked beyond the point that has made around wider local services, which includes health and social care integration, but specifically all the local authorities in the south of Scotland region and every single local authority that I have looked at will have an increase in total funding. I say that separating out health and social care. I say that Claudia Beamish is shaking her head, so I will give her the figures for each council, Dumfries and Galloway an increase of 4.1 per cent, East Ayrshire an increase of 4.9 per cent, East Lothian an increase of 5.3 per cent, Mid Lothian an increase of 4.2 per cent, Scottish Borders councils an increase of 5 per cent, South Ayrshire council an increase of 3.8 per cent, South Lanarkshire an increase of 2.7 per cent. Of course, it is a matter of local choice as to how local authorities spend those resources, but the budget has approved specific sums to tackle, for example, attainment. In relation to third sector, I have gone out my way to try and protect third sector functions and budgets through the course of the budget. Of course, there will be analysis of the impacts of our spending decisions, but I will reflect once again on the fact that we have increased, and yes, through the co-operation and support of the Greens as well, to increase the total resource to local government in what was quite a challenging settlement. Essentially, I think that the partnership arrangements that we have, no local authority rejected the financial settlement that I gave to them. I work constructively with COSLA, they recognise the movement on the part of the Government, and as well as all of that, local authorities had the ability to raise the council tax up to a level of 3 per cent, which many chose to do, but many local authorities did not. Maybe Claudia Beamish should ask some local authorities why they chose not to increase the council tax to invest in the exact kind of services that Claudia Beamish said she was concerned about. Rachael Hamilton The south of Scotland is crying out for funds to improve its roads. Recently, I wrote to the Scottish Borders Council and was told that there is a long list of unidentified projects, many of which are classed as high priority. Unfortunately, over recent years, the priorities from other sectors have meant a significant downturn in the number of road improvements being undertaken. That has further been exacerbated by reducing revenue budgets and a deteriorating asset base that leads to an increasing higher percentage of investment going on, maintaining the existing asset rather than actual improvements. When will the Scottish Government adequately support our local authorities to improve our local roads? First, I would like to point out to the member that, in the budget, we increased road maintenance and the Conservatives voted against it through the course of the Scottish budget, but it really is quite rich of the Conservatives. I have to say to the Labour Party, at least with some credibility, maybe not with every local authority, but with some credibility you can argue that you wanted extra investment in public services because you proposed to put up all levels of tax, including basic rate tax. That is not a choice that we made, but, at least with some credibility, the Labour Party can say that they wanted to invest those increased taxes into more public services. The Conservatives, however, proposed tax cuts for the richest, richest individuals, richest businesses and richest in terms of value of house and the transaction tax therein. The Tories really cannot speak with any credibility when they call for extra resources into local services, especially having imposed increased budgets that this Government proposed particularly around maintenance and investment, which was an area that Rachael Hamilton asked me about. Question 3, Johann Lamont. To ask the Scottish Government what assessment it has made of the local government budget allocation to Glasgow since 2007. All of Scotland's 32 local authorities have received their fair formula share of the funds provided through the annual local government finance settlement as agreed with COSLA. Glasgow City Council will continue to receive that level of local government funding per head of all holy, mainly councils in 2017-18. Johann Lamont. Can I thank the cabinet secretary for that response? The cabinet secretary is aware, of course, that his government has cut Glasgow's budget by £377 million since 2007. Does the cabinet secretary recognise the importance work of Glasgow Labour Council in doing its best to protect front-line services, leading the way in supporting childcare and apprenticeships, and making Glasgow a leading centre for business, tourism and sport? Does the cabinet secretary further acknowledge the critical role of Glasgow to the economy of Scotland? In those circumstances, does the cabinet secretary regret the opportunities lost, the families unsupported and the economy benefit lost directly by his Government's choice, the price to be paid by every Glaswegian service? Can I begin with recognising some of those points? The areas that have been identified I would welcome as the city council addresses key issues in the city. I would welcome any administration to focus on those. There have been good areas of partnership working between the Scottish Government and the city of Glasgow Council. I was a signatory on behalf of the Government for the city deal proposition as well. There are many areas in which we have been able to work in partnership with the city council. Not always found every area to be of agreement, but there are many areas of partnership and shared endeavour, not least around deprivation and equality, the need for further economic development and partnership, as I say that we have taken together. Again, it would be wrong to suggest that the overall spending power of the city council has decreased. Again, as a consequence of the budget, Glasgow city council's overall increase in 1718 will amount to more than £35 million and that is 3.3 per cent. I hear Joanne Lamont complaining about the settlement, but I would gently say that although it is a matter for local authorities if they want to suggest changes to the distribution formula. I am open to discussion on that via COSLA, but since this is the day of exits I would remind the Labour Party that Glasgow City Council Labour Administration walked away from COSLA. Surely it is in the interests of all the people of the city to participate in COSLA who negotiates with government on matters such as finance, the budget and the settlement and distribution thereof. I would encourage the Labour Party to think deeply about their position as we enter local government elections about local government frankly being stronger if the 32 local authorities are willing to engage with us together in partnership. Once again, it is an increased settlement strong partnership working on areas such as joint endeavour, city deal is all about economic development but I would encourage the Labour Party to think about their engagement with COSLA going forward so that we can have further discussions about distribution. Finally, I would say again just as the Tories opposed increased investment on roads maintenance and then called for more, the Labour Party asked for increased investment in attainment really important for education in tackling the attainment gap in Glasgow and the Labour Party voted against that when push came to shove at stage 3 in a budget. John Mason. When I look at the per capita budget allocations by authority and when you take away the four island authorities the three remaining, if Johann Lamont will allow me, the three remaining with the greatest per head is Glasgow, Inverclyde and Western Barnd, which strikes me as good because they are the ones with great needs in the west of Scotland. Will the Government commit to continuing to well fund such needy authorities? It is very important that there are different elements to the complex nature of local government funding. Fundamentally the needs-based assessment is a feature that has been agreed with local government through COSLA and does distribute on the basis of need and that is why local authorities like Glasgow feature so highly when it comes to the distribution of that resource. It is important to make sure that there is a level of redistribution. The Labour Party has not been consistent on that because if you speak to the Labour Party and for example Aberdeen, the finance convener there, Willie Young, says that Aberdeen's money has been ripped off and sent to places like Glasgow. In Glasgow the Labour Party says that their money has been sent elsewhere. In truth the formula, although it may not be perfect but it is the best that we have to ensure that resources are directed on the basis of that need. Question 4, Clare Adamson. To ask the Scottish Government how its national digital strategy will impact on the constituency of Motherwell and Wishaw. Realising Scotland's full potential in a digital world is a strategy for all of Scotland that aims to build a vibrant, inclusive and outward-looking nation with a successful digital economy to help comprehensive access to connectivity and an education system that is focused on digital skills. The strategy was published on 22 March. Clare Adamson. I thank the cabinet secretary for his answer. Motherwell and Wishaw has unique post-industrial challenges while we have a wonderful college in New College Lanarkshire. We also have one of the biggest brownfield sites in Europe. What investment potential does the cabinet secretary envisage for Motherwell and Wishaw under this new strategy? The strategy covers a number of areas including skills, connectivity and the potential of growth employment. More physically, when we are dealing with the connectivity challenge, we have very ambitious targets around that. If we then take that to areas of deprivation and dereliction, then it should tie up with other strategies such as the vacant and derelict land fund to bring together the softer interventions that we are making with the actual physical structure. It is incredible to Lanarkshire to be able to invest in those sites. I would absolutely commend the work that the college is doing and education and the potential that there is around skills and the new funding that is announced as part of this. It should all come together to help areas such as the constituencies. Question 5, Graham Dey. To ask the Scottish Government what the impact will be with the finance secretary's recent digital Scotland programme? An additional 17,000 homes and businesses across 27 local authorities will benefit from fibre broadband. As a result of the £15.6 million gain share investment being made through the digital Scotland contract covering the rest of Scotland region. That is in addition to the £2.2 million of gain share funding announced by the Highlands and Islands Enterprise last year which will deliver fibre broadband connectivity to additional 1,800 premises across the Highlands and Islands region. Graham Dey. In announcing the additional funding the cabinet secretary said that it would have a particular focus on maximising the number of premises that have access to speeds of greater than 24 megabytes with funding targeting on areas with the lowest speed coverage including Angus. Can I ask if there are any specific plans yet for my constituency of Angus South and whether the Scottish Government will be prepared to work in collaboration with Angus Council on this? Yes, I do believe that there is potential to do that but we have set out our ambitious targets including coverage of a 100 per cent of homes and businesses by 2021. We are very much on track to achieve the milestones of our targets but this particular initiative should benefit an additional 500 premises in Angus and ensure that we roll out superfast broadband through that particular challenge and it will increase superfast broadband coverage in Angus to 91.2 per cent by the end of the digital Scotland roll-out and then as I say, move on to our much more ambitious target of 100 per cent coverage. Jamie Greene Can I ask the cabinet secretary just to clarify a point on this additional funding? Is it not the case that this money is a result of a clawback clause in the contract with BT and is not new additional money being provided by the Scottish Government? I didn't say that it was Government money. I think I was very clear in making the original announcement how it is part of the contract where BT has been involved in an area, it hits certain targets, that money is provided and then released and then there's that dialogue about how it's distributed. I suppose what I'm highlighting is how it's benefitted in communities that otherwise wouldn't have that connectivity. I welcome the approach, I welcome the intervention, I've tried to raise awareness of it, I appreciate members asking questions of it and I would encourage members who are interested to look at the website www.scotlandsuperfast.com Putting it into context is just one of our many interventions to reach a target of 100 per cent coverage by the end of this Parliament. I fully recognise that there will need to be new technologies, different ways of procuring the services to reach that ambitious target, this is just one. I've never pretended that it was Scottish Government money or Scottish Government involvement in the contracts and I'm happy to confirm that to the member. We move from finance and constitution to economy, jobs and fair work questions. Question number one from Fulton MacGregor. Thank you, Presiding Officer. To ask the Scottish Government what action it is taking to boost the economy and create jobs in Coatbridge and Christon. Minister Paul Wheelhouse. Our enterprise and skills agencies are working to deliver sustainable, inclusive economic growth across Scotland by promoting Scotland as an attractive place for business and innovation and through our substantial investment in infrastructure, regeneration, skills, internationalisation and business support. The Scottish Investment Bank has also directly supported eight investment projects in North Lanarkshire while Scottish Enterprise currently account manages 167 companies in the local authority area and Biocity at Newhouse was designated as life sciences enterprise area in April 2016. The competitiveness of Coatbridge and Christon as a business location will be enhanced by the £100 million upgrade to the M8, M73 and M74 that will reduce traffic congestion while the Scottish Government has delivered a highly competitive business environment with a reduced poundage on business rates and premises with a rateable value under £15,000 now qualifying for 100 per cent business rates relief through the small business bonus policy with those between £15,000 and £18,000 rateable value benefiting from a 25 per cent discount on rates. Fulton MacGregor. I thank the minister for that response. Coatbridge Town Centre has suffered multiple setbacks including closure of two banks, proposed closure of the DWP processing unit and some major fires in some of the empty buildings. People are rightly concerned about the future of our main street. Having hosted a well-attended public meeting recently, I am in the process of establishing a steering group involving residents and businesses to create and implement a plan to improve the town centre. Would the minister be willing to meet with the steering group to discuss how the Scottish Government could support the regeneration of Coatbridge Town Centre and create more jobs locally? On the latter point, I would be happy to meet Mr MacGregor's constituents to discuss how we can help to support regeneration within the community. I would commend the scene efforts elsewhere across Scotland where similar initiatives of taking a grassroots approach, looking at how communities can help to develop a vision for their community. I would be very successful not only in developing a plan that the local authority can then take forward, but also in other good causes to support projects locally. What I would say is that, Mr MacGregor, I will provide further detail on that, but the Government has also taken forward the town centre first principle with the local government trying to encourage any investment decisions made by public authorities and indeed to secure private sector investment in town centres to identify if that could be the best location first and then only looking at peripheral areas thereafter to try and drive more footfall into our town centres and support local businesses. I am happy to meet the member and his constituents and to provide further detail to him. Richard Leonard. The minister will be aware of representations that I have made to save the jobs at the Tannoy factory in the town of Coatbridge. The GMB union, the workforce and Scottish Enterprise have been actively working to secure these jobs at Philanexer, but all too often have been kept in the dark by the owner of the factory based in the Philippines. Despite the valiant efforts, many of the workers are facing redundancy at the end of this week, so can I ask even at this stage that the cabinet secretary himself makes personal direct contact and representations to the owner of the company in Manila? Minister. I would like to reassure Mr Leonard that I, on behalf of the Government, have been actively involved with the cabinet secretary in looking at the case involving Tannoy. We are obviously very concerned at loss of any jobs, but I would reassure the member that the company has been engaging with Government and Scottish Enterprise on proposals to develop new capacity in relation to a specific project which I am not a liberty disclose, but we are hopeful that there will be some jobs retained in the area in due course. I can investigate the matter about the communication with the trade union. That is not entirely within our gift, but we will certainly encourage the company if we can do to engage with the trade union to ensure that those who are affected are kept informed of what is happening. I reassure the member that there are encouraging discussions about retaining some employment in the area. Question 2, Tom Arthur. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I refer members to my register of interests and my professional background in music. To ask the Scottish Government what assessment it has made of the economic contribution of the music industry. Cabinet Secretary, Keith Brown. The music industry in Scotland is a key part of our thriving creative industry sector. Scottish Government growth sector statistics show that, in 2014, the music industry in Scotland had a turnover of £27.9 million and a GVA of £15.5 million. Moreover, the 2016 UK Music Report, which you were here, showed that music festivals and live concerts attracted 928,000 music tourists to Scotland in 2015. Those visitors generated £295 million for the local economy and also helped to sustain 230 full-time jobs across the nation. Tom Arthur. I thank the Cabinet Secretary for that answer. Every women's majority of musicians are self-employed. The emerging phenomena of the precariat and the gig economy are conditions long known to people operating in music. In light of the Cabinet Secretary's answer, if he agrees with me that it's vital that we continue to nurture musical talent in Scotland and to provide the support that we need to encourage young people to pursue a career in our growing and even more exciting music industries. Cabinet Secretary. I agree with the member. I also think that it's true to say that we have to make more of the contribution that the creative arts make to the economy to increase that contribution but to recognise the current contribution that's there. It's very important that we support young people to learn music and to pursue musical careers through the Youth Music Initiative, £109 million since 2007 and is delivered by Creative Scotland. The Youth Music Initiative provides a range of music-making opportunities for young people of all ages. It gives them a chance to try new music-making activities in their area to begin their musical journey or to build on their existing experiences. Early this month, the Cabinet Secretary for culture spoke at a Scottish Music Industry Day at Glasgow University to promote career opportunities in the industry. Boris Golden. Thank you, Presiding Officer. We should be rightly proud of new and emerging talent, like constituents of mine, the Ayub sisters, who recently were nominated for the Young Scott Award and who will be performing in Parliament later this year. They've got some great songs that's well worth a listen. What steps is the Scottish Government taking to support a broad range of musical talent and genres in order to help grow the economy? Can I look forward to the performance that has been referred to? I'm sure that it will be excellent. Considering the other support that the Scottish Government can bring, we have the regularly funded music portfolio and our thinking has been framed by a 10-year plan, including the music sector review and the music companion piece. I agree with Boris Golden that there is some huge talent that we should support. I have to say that in my own household I actively support a budding musician who does that. It's very interesting to see that, well, I have to be fair, he also works part-time at ASDA to help sustain himself as well. I think that it's very important. What I have seen in recent years, and I don't know whether Maurice Golden would agree, that compared to Ireland, which is a very vibrant live music scene, we've started to see much more of that taking place in Scotland. It is to be encouraged and perhaps the best way we can encourage it is by each of us to do that. David Stewart To ask the Scottish Government what action it is taking to support Dingwall's economy. Minister Paul Wheelhouse Dingwall is within the inner Murray first area of Highlands and Islands Enterprise and businesses and communities in Dingwall are able to access the full range of support from Highlands and Islands Enterprise. Since 2013, High has invested around £1 million in companies in the Dingwall area to support 219 full-time equivalent jobs and safeguard 106 full-time equivalent jobs over a range of sectors. Over the same period, High has also provided £2.46 million research and development grant and £90,000 smart Scotland support for inside biometrics, a Dingwall-based company. David Stewart The minister will be familiar with the award-winning inside biometrics facility in Dingwall, which is developing an innovative KIA smart product that will be life changing for people with diabetes. The company is looking to expand the production capacity and that may create a substantial number of new jobs, but the company is looking for further advice, guidance and assistance from the Scottish Government for this major and significant expansion. Will the minister agree to meet me to help to bring this project to fruition? Minister As Dave Stewart, who I recognise takes strong interest in this issue, the inside biometrics are account managed by High, and High is close to providing financial and advisory assistance to support the company to grow their business. I recognise their award-winning company and a excellent one, indeed. High has already provided a £2.5 million research and development grant, which is referred to in my original answer. I am aware that inside biometrics has plans to expand their operations in Scotland. Indeed, I was contacted by Selly Sianni, the owner, following the Life Sciences Awards in which Dave Stewart refers to and in which inside biometrics were award winners. Officials in High are remaining closely engaged with the company to explore every option to help to support their growth. I visited the company last year myself and was hugely impressed by their technology. I have accepted an invitation to meet inside biometrics in the near future to discuss how the Scottish Government can continue to support the company with its development plans. I am, of course, happy to meet Mr Stewart to see if there is anything he has to suggest that we could help the company with. Brian Whittle To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to the latest Fraser of Allander economic commentary that warns that indicators of Scottish consumer confidence are more negative than that of the UK as a whole. Keith Brown The latest Fraser of Allander institutes economic commentary provides a timely update on the Scottish economy. The report shows that consumer sentiment, as Brian Whittle has mentioned, has weakened in Scotland, but it has also done so in the UK since the EU referendum. The findings highlight the risks to Scotland's economic outlook following the EU referendum's heightened uncertainty and rising inflation are forecast away on household incomes and consumption. By far the biggest threat to Scotland's economy is a hard Brexit, which threatens the cost of our economy according to the same Fraser of Allander institute around £11 billion a year by 2030 and cost the country 80,000 jobs over a decade. Brian Whittle I thank the minister for that answer. Perhaps the minister can explain to the chamber why the Scottish economy is lagging behind the UK economy in a range of economic indicators. We have lower employment, higher inactivity, lower consumer confidence, lower annual pay growth, lower productivity and lower GDP growth. Why is Scotland falling behind under the party that claims to be stronger for Scotland and I wonder if there is something distracting you from the day job? Cabinet Secretary I think that the member will be aware of the nature of the impacts of the price of oil on the Scottish economy and the fact that that would have a disproportionate effect on the Scottish economy as opposed to the wider UK economy. My response is to go out and try to attract more jobs. That is very important for the Scottish economy. I see today that there are 300 new jobs being announced by GenPAC in Glasgow. Digital solutions, risk management following a contribution from Scottish Enterprise, 300 jobs because it is a new European centre in Glasgow. That is extremely important and that is what we should do. It is part of my job title in terms of jobs. The member mentions different economic indicators. Of course, there are other indicators which tell a different story. In terms of youth unemployment in Scotland we have the second lowest in Europe with only Germany having a better outcome. We also have very good numbers in terms of female employment and the same unemployment rate despite that oil impact as the rest of the UK. That shows real progress. Lastly, on confidence, which he mentions again in today's times, if you look at the Scottish technology industry survey, 78 per cent said that they were optimistic in Scotland or very optimistic for this year. We should try, difficult though it might be to accentuate the positive, to see the things that we are doing well and, of course, to note the challenges but to try to do more of what we are doing well. To the economic challenges which Brexit presents for us. Kenneth Gibson Being part of the UK has not done much for Scottish national self-confidence over generations. Can the cabinet secretary please tell us what the impact of the alleged union dividend has been on Scotland, given that since 1900 we have had the lowest rate of population growth of any country on earth? I could tell him if I was able to identify a union dividend but I am afraid that I cannot see a union dividend. More than that, the price of the union if you think about the recession, the huge recession that we went through with a recession caused by failures of the UK, under the UK in terms of the banking and financial system, of course there were global elements to that but there is no question that the regulation of the banking system was inept and it was crucial that they did look after that and the consequences for Scotland and by which I mean individuals and companies in Scotland of that recession were huge. The UK has to accept its share of responsibilities. I am accepting the Scottish Government's share of responsibility for the condition of the Scottish economy. After all, it was a Conservative MSP that said that the UK still holds all the major levers in the case of the Scottish economy. They have got to take responsibility as well. Jackie Baillie. Isn't the truth, cabinet secretary, that the same Fraser of Allander report noted that a second independence referendum is likely to act and I quote businesses and potential investors? Isn't it also the truth, cabinet secretary, that the UK market is worth four times that of Europe to the Scottish economy so the impact has the potential to be much greater than leaving the European Union? It is true to say that, as I have mentioned already, the Fraser of Allander institute identifies and quantifies the effect of the hard Brexit that has been mentioned. £11 billion a year by 2030. 80,000 jobs over a decade and it is interesting to me that Jackie Baillie decides not to even mention that. When, even in the report that she cites, the institute that she refers to, they say that these are going to be the impacts, not a word about Labour, about these impacts, huge impacts on the Scottish economy and I would say, in relation to the point about the recession that we have just come through, it was the actions of the Scottish Government by investment in public infrastructure works which helped to mitigate the worst effects for that and has helped us to recover more quickly. Excuse me. Those actions are very important in sustaining the economy and I think that it would be useful if members could acknowledge that but also if the Labour Party could acknowledge the effects of Brexit, which is very serious, £11 billion a year, 80,000 jobs which they failed to do on many occasions up to this time. Dean Lockhart. The cabinet secretary asked about the union dividend. I will point him to the Scottish Government's own numbers that last year the GERS numbers showed a £15 billion union dividend. The Fraser of Allander Institute also highlighted that, since the SNP came to power, Scotland's economy has grown by an average of only 0.7 per cent a year over the past 10 years. That is less than a third of Scotland's long-term economic growth. That underperformance has nothing to do with oil, nothing to do with Brexit. Does the cabinet secretary think that this underperformance over 10 years is acceptable? I do not know. I can imagine businesses out with this chamber listening to somebody talking about economics that the rate of growth in Scotland has nothing to do with oil. How do you even start to respond to a point like that? It is quite obvious to me that there is not the basic understanding of the Scottish economy implicit in the question. It is also true that I did not raise the union dividend, somebody else raised it and I responded to that point in the way that I did. It is to make sure that we do the right things through the Corrie Martin Gibson for Aberdeen Asset Management said that we should look through the fog and try to see where the opportunities are. I have just mentioned 300 jobs, not a word of joy or congratulations from any opposition party, but 300 new jobs coming to Glasgow. Not a word about the increased confidence in the Scottish Technology Industry Survey. Those are important measures for Scotland. Of course we have to recognise the challenges. I recognise those challenges and I am trying to take action to address them, but perhaps sometimes, surely, some of the opposition parties could acknowledge the strength of the Scottish economy even if it is just to try and encourage them so that we can all get the benefit from increased economic activity in Scotland. Mike Rumbles. The minister said that he could not identify any union dividend. Could he identify a union dividend in his case with the Royal Marines for the protection of the whole and, in my case, the army? Would he accept that there is a union dividend in our defence approach to defence? Sort of related, cabinet secretary. Briefly, cabinet secretary. Once again, I just can't understand the lack of information or experience. If you look at the defence footprint in Scotland over recent years, what we have seen, what we have maybe don't think it's relevant, regiments actually in front-line service being merged, people being handed their P45 in their active service, reducing base cuts, reducing numbers in Scotland. He would know this if we talked to some of the local authorities who are trying to wrestle with the latest round of basing cuts. For example, Fort George or Glencourse, a barracks that has had millions of pounds of investment is going to be closed. The actual lack of understanding or knowledge of the question that Mike Rumbles shows shows that he has no understanding of the defence activities here in Scotland. Perhaps before he asks a question like that you should do a bit of homework next time. Question 5, Richard Leonard. To ask the Scottish Government when it last met representatives of the Scottish Investment Bank. The Scottish Investment Bank is a division of Scottish Enterprise officials from Scottish Government met with representatives of the Scottish Investment Bank on Monday, 20 March. Richard Leonard. Sorry, can I thank the cabinet secretary for that answer? Order, Richard Leonard. What guidance has the Scottish Government given to the Scottish Investment Bank on the requirements that need to be satisfied for lending to companies or taking out equity stakes in companies regarding its stated goal of inclusive growth and so good trade union and industrial relations, the standard of employment contracts and the gender pay gap? Cabinet secretary. The Scottish Investment Bank is actually an arm of Scottish Enterprise so they are fully appraised by the ambitions and the standards that the Scottish Government would like to see encouraged. They have invested £52.4 million in 133 Scottish companies. They have helped companies to leverage £277 million of private investment and they have also invested £12.2 million in 13 SMEs to the Scottish loan fund. It is available to start-up early stage on expanding businesses. Those aims that we have in terms of the gender pay gap in terms of inclusive growth are embedded in the work that Scottish Enterprise does and they are well aware of the Scottish Government's standards and its ambitions in those regards. I apologise to members who waited patiently and to whom we did not reach. We will now move on to the next item.