 I ask the public leaving the gallery to do so quietly as the Parliament is still in session. The next item of business is a member's business debate on motion 7165 in the name of Richard Leonard on the importance of worker ownership to the Scottish economy. This debate will be concluded without any questions being put. Would those members who wish to speak in the debate please press their request to speak buttons down? I call on Richard Leonard to open the debate. Mr Leonard, seven minutes please. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. What we face today is a state of affairs in which we are witnessing a growing centralisation and a growing concentration, and I would argue a growing over-concentration in the ownership of Scotland's economy. Too much power rests in too few hands, and increasingly this power rests in boardrooms thousands of miles away with over a third of Scotland's economic and industrial base now overseas owned. Now there is nothing intrinsically wrong with foreign direct investment. It can bring innovation, investment and employment, but all too often it is the result of mergers and acquisitions, including in recent years the acquisition of public utilities which we the people used to own, a transfer of ownership rather than the source of new investment. If our economy becomes, as it has increasingly become, a branch plant economy, the result is that we are more vulnerable to international shocks. The truth is that economic ownership matters because with economic ownership comes economic power. If we are to achieve, as I believe we must achieve, a redistribution of wealth and power to the many from the few, it will require decisive action to challenge and change the ownership structure of our economy. That is why I say that it is time that we put in place a Scottish investment bank worthy of the name working as a proactive agent of economic change, investing patient capital and taking strategic public interest shares in private companies. It is time, as well, that we put in place different frameworks and ownership structures to build up business resilience to takeovers and to build in greater democracy and accountability in our economic system. It has long been my view as well that in order to do this it is time to promote direct employee and worker ownership in the Scottish economy. I am delighted to bring this debate to Parliament today and I am delighted to have secured some cross-party support so that together in this Parliament we can all recognise the contribution made by employee-owned companies to the Scottish economy in the present and so that together in this Parliament we can consider the even greater contribution that worker-owned businesses could make with a bit more support from this Parliament in the future. The motion that we are debating today is prompted by a recent visit that I made to two employee-owned firms in East Kilbride. One now well-established as a worker-owned business, one just starting out on that journey. In both cases, Clansmen Dynamics and Novograph, the catalyst for the transfer of ownership was the far-sightedness of the existing owners. In each case, the owners were looking for a succession plan that did not entail selling up the business only to see the assets stripped, the order books stolen and the local jobs lost forever. Those are owners to their great credit who believed that they had a moral obligation to the working women and men who with them had built these businesses up. The question for this Parliament is this, what can we do to put this radical idea into action more widely? Can we make this moral obligation on some, a legal obligation on all? How can we move it from the fringes to the mainstream of our economy? What can we learn from international experience? In Italy, the Marcora law introduced in 1985 gives workers whose business faces closure a statutory right to buy the company, and alongside that legal right is funding from the state to match a contribution from the workers themselves. In France, the social and solidarity economy law passed in 2014 gives legal recognition and incentives to workers again to buy the business that they work in when it is to be sold off. In the Basque country of Spain, Mondragon has been a shining beacon of cooperative ownership for six decades. Over 83,000 workers are employed in over 250 worker-owned enterprises where surpluses are reinvested in the business rather than redistributed to absentee shareholders, with the result that, during the current economic slump, jobs have been retained. So I say this this afternoon. Why shouldn't Scotland, which was the home to the phoenic weavers, where Robert Owen wrote a new view of society and established New Lanark? Why shouldn't we set ourselves the ideal, the goal of becoming the Mondragon of the north? Let us have a vision of Scotland as a northern European beacon of co-operation. If we can have a community right to buy land, why can't we have a workers' right to buy business? Why shouldn't those who create the wealth have a right to own the wealth that they create? If we support that idea, whether as a statutory right of first refusal for workers, when an enterprise is put up for sale or facing closure, or simply its wider promotion on a voluntary basis, it will demand a better resource and a more powerful co-operative development Scotland, with access to investment, technical support and statutory underpinning from this Parliament as well. There are sound industrial and economic reasons to promote worker ownership, to boost employment and to forge a sustainable alternative to footloose and speculative capital ownership, but there are underlying political and social reasons too. A century ago, GDH Coal declared that if democracy is, I quote, good in the state and local government, it is good in industry also. I believe that we need industrial and economic as well as political democracy. We can and we must build a future in Scotland based upon equality and greater common ownership, because it is a future that is working people all across this country, all too often encountering drudgery, alienation and exploitation at work will strive for and reach out for, because it is a message of hope and a message of change. Real hope and real change is what I believe the people of Scotland expect this Parliament to deliver. I am absolutely delighted to have the opportunity to explain why we have embraced this model up in the Highlands and Islands and to talk about some of the thriving businesses that we have as a result, such as Aquascot, Hebride and Jewelry, Highland Homecareers, Shetland Vets and the West Highland Free Press. I think that that northern beacon that you spoke about in your speech already exists. We just all need to look north. We have two of the biggest employee-owned businesses in Scotland. Aquascot is the largest by turnover and that is a sustainable seafood business with a turnover of 45 million, which employs around 180 people. Highland Homecareers is the largest by number of employees, so the largest provider of care at home in the Highland area and it employs more than 500 members of staff. Employ ownership has a specific role to play in the fragile economy of the Highlands and Islands. Before going down the employee ownership route with Aquascot, Dennis Overton had a look at the history of the entrepreneurial startup in the Highlands. First, going back to 1960, there were only a few businesses that had achieved a turnover of 20 million plus at 1990 values. Secondly, most of the founders exited by way of a trade sale and thirdly, the majority of businesses had disappeared, usually through consolidation with operations in the south within five years. Because of that, HIE is putting significant effort into raising awareness of employee ownership. That is why I am particularly grateful to have the opportunity to speak today. This model, which makes no mistake, is about successful businesses. Independent research suggests that a combination of shared ownership and employee participation delivers superior business performance. Productivity in the UK workforce as a whole might be flat, but when a business becomes employee-owned, productivity is boosted by 5 to 10 per cent, and it is sustained at that higher level. It is not just a temporary boost. Research shows that those businesses grow well, even in tough times. At the moment, the employee-owned sector contributes 30 billion GDP to the UK economy annually. There are a lot of misconceptions about this business model, so I thought that I would take the opportunity to bust a few myths. Employ ownership is not necessarily about saving failing companies—it really is about successful business. Although a common reason behind becoming employee-owned is retirement, some folk choose to do this long before retirement because of the benefits to the business and the benefits to the staff. It does not need to be a complex transaction. Everyone tends to be on the same side, as you can imagine, so there is less conflict and there is generally a more cooperative transition. It is not too expensive for employees to afford. If shares are bought on trust on behalf of employees, it can be funded by contributions from the company itself or by a loan that is paid for by the company. The vendor does not need to sell at a lower price, so there is no reason why a carefully considered employee buy-out cannot deliver a fair price in line with the company's market value. One of the reasons why we like this model so much in the Highlands and Islands is because it keeps profits and jobs in the local economy. Companies can protect both the location and the ethos of their business following succession. That is what happened with Highland home carers. The founder did not want to see the company being swallowed up by one of the national providers and the company's core values diluted and high-care standards compromised. With this business model, employees share in the profits and bonuses, which increase the spending locally and boost the local economy. I personally love the egalitarian aspect that every shareholder gets the same size tax-free bonus from factory floor worker to managing director. I have mentioned Aquasco a couple of times, and I really love it if the minister would come and visit for himself to see the difference that employee ownership makes. This month, he won the Highlands and Islands... Sorry, you must conclude that that is where to stop because I think that he was nodding accepting your invitation. Okay, can I just sum up saying that employee ownership is good for business, it is good for the local people working in the business, and it is good for the local economy. I have absolutely no doubt in the future that Scotland will be inclusive, fair and prosperous, and this business model will help. I have been more than generous, giving you that little bit at the end. We are well done. Jackie Baillie, I know that you have to be away sharp to something. I do, so thank you very much. Followed by Dean Lockhart. I will be as brief as I can, but can I start by congratulating Richard Leonard on securing this debate? Diversity in the economy is absolutely a good thing and very good for economic growth. Let me illustrate this, because if all that we do in this Parliament is considered the evidence, then here it is. The employee ownership index compares the share price performance of companies that are more than 10 per cent owned by their employees with the performance of footsie companies. Since 1992, the employee ownership index has outperformed the footsie by an average of 10 per cent a year. In cash terms, an investment of £100 in an employee-owned company in 2003 would have, by the time you got to 2014, resulted in a net worth of £754. That same investment in a footsie company would have been worth a mere £280. If you needed any more evidence than that, it matters financially for our economy to invest in employee ownership. That difference is borne out in growth measures. Sales typically for employee-owned companies grew by 11.1 per cent. In contrast to the rest of the business sector, that growth was 0.6 per cent. Productivity in employee-owned companies has increased by about 4.5 per cent, year on year, when others have clearly struggled. Employee-owned businesses, as Marie Todd rightly pointed out to us, contribute £30 billion to GDP each year. I think that there is so much more potential, and more potential not because it is about failing businesses, not because it recycles things into fragile economies, but just look at John Lewis, look at waitrose, look at the things on our high streets that we know so well that are employee-owned. If you needed any further convincing, Minister, 80 per cent of employee owners would recommend their organisation as a place to work. Employee-owned businesses are positive models that contribute to a growing economy. As Richard Leonard pointed out in his motion, employee-owned businesses have grown. They are an attractive option for business succession. Employee-owned businesses build resilience into our economy. When you transfer ownership to employees, that guarantees that the new owners will take a genuine interest in the long-term future of the business. I am very proud that it was a Labour Scottish Government that set up Cooperative Development Scotland. I commend my co-operative colleagues at the time, Cathy Jimison, Joanne Lamont, to name just two for their efforts in this regard. I know that Cooperative Development Scotland has done a lot to encourage employee ownership, but its profile is low. It sits within Scottish Enterprise, and I do not think that they entirely get it. It does not really appear to be a priority. When you look at Scottish Enterprise's focus on key growth sectors, five out of six of them have not grown in the last four to five years. It is not about putting all your eggs in one basket, but surely we need to encourage more employee ownership. Those businesses are growing, they are productive, and they contribute positively to the economy. I want to ask the minister what additional action he will take to provide Cooperative Development Scotland with the resources that they require. Can I invite him to look at Scottish Labour's proposals in our industrial strategy that places Cooperative Development Scotland on a statutory footing and provide it with investment tools to grow employee-owned companies? I apologise for not being able to hear his response to that challenge, but I look forward to reading it in the official report. Let me start by congratulating Richard Leonard on bringing this motion and debate to the chamber. A valuable opportunity to debate the benefits afforded by employee-owned businesses in Scotland might not come as a surprise that my views on wider economic issues diverged slightly from Mr Leonard, but I am very happy to support his motion in respect of employee-owned businesses on a voluntary basis. The increasing importance of this business model has been highlighted by the Employee Ownership Association. There are 115 of those businesses in Scotland, collectively they generate over £1 billion in turnover and employ a total of some 7,000 staff, so clearly an important part of the business community. The importance is increasing. There is more interest in this business model from public and private sectors, giving the increased demand for a more progressive form of ownership as well as ageing populations and the baby boom owners looking to prepare for retirement. For example, research commissioned by Scottish Enterprise suggests that there are 16,000 businesses in Scotland whose owners will be looking to exit within five years. It is good that this is one of the business models that can be looked at. There is clearly great potential going forward for a greater uptake of the model. Reflecting this, as Jackie Baillie said, within Scottish Enterprise you have the service run by the Cooperative Development Scotland arm of Scottish Enterprise working with Highlands and Islands Enterprise boards. The service involves expert advice on how companies can transition, business owners can go in and talk to the team for one to three days and get an understanding of how you can transition existing businesses into this model. We would encourage any business considering this model to get in touch with that team at an early stage so that they can make the necessary preparations. Research commissioned by Scottish Enterprise has identified that the performance of those companies can, in many areas, be superior to other business models. Jackie Baillie mentioned the comparison with the FTSE, but there is also strong performance in the areas of job creation, exports and higher productivity. It is worthwhile to step back and consider why those businesses have better performance than some of their peers. Research has indicated that the improved performance is driven by a number of factors, including increased employee motivation. Richard Leonard mentioned that. Employees have a direct stake in the success of the business and feel that they are contributing to the success. Higher productivity levels are driven by employees who are feeling empowered to alter and improve processes on a daily basis and systems to make the business more efficient. The concept of workplace productivity is becoming a central policy driver across all business models, and I think that this particular business model shows you that, on a relatively small scale, if workers are looking at a process day in and day out, they have the best ideas of how to improve that process. There are also higher levels of interaction with the local community. Employee-owned businesses tend to have more engagement with local communities and engage in a wider range of stakeholders. Any business model that can achieve any or all of those improvements has to be welcomed. John Lewis has a partnership with Waitrose, which has also been mentioned as good examples. I was lucky to visit the Waitrose store in Stirling recently to see how that model can make a difference to employees and the level of engagement. One of the challenges that such businesses will face this model is the capital investment that is required up front to transition to the employee ownership model and raising awareness amongst businesses and professional advisers that it is a feasible and viable option for not just succession planning, but other types of circumstances in which a business can transition to the model. It is important to highlight the benefits of employee-owned businesses and to have a discussion about some of the attributes and success that those businesses have generated. The employee motivation and participation, higher levels of productivity, engagement with the local community and stakeholders are all things that, I think, would get consensus across the chamber, not just in the context of employee-owned business, but in terms of the economy as a whole. I am very pleased to support Richard Leonard in that motion. Thank you very much. I call Andy Wightman to be followed by Elaine Smith. I thank Richard Leonard for bringing that motion. I was particularly pleased to hear him talk about the importance of who owns the capital in our economy. It has been a topic that has not had sufficient attention in recent years, although it used to be a bigger topic of conversation. I will also welcome the fact that he noted that much foreign direct investment is not actually investment. It is merely transfer payments that come into this country—don't even come into this country—they go into some other country and go somewhere else. Because so much of our industry now and economy and things like whisky is now foreign-owned, there is very little left. I think that the Edrington group, most of the shares, were handed over to the Robertson trust. If you want to buy socially benign beneficial whisky by famous grouse. I was also a little bit disappointed that Richard Leonard in his motion talked about recognising notes, welcoming and noting. I think that the substance of his intention to bring this debate was to promote the notion that there should be rights for labour to acquire capital. Those are rights that have existed in the past. They are rights that do have some precedent in this Parliament and they are rights that should be embedded in law. Because a number of contributors noted by any metric, employee-owned companies are more likely to be successful than others. Staff are more engaged and productive, as Dean Lockhart pointed out, that business is more resilient, better links to the community, etc. It is encouraging to know that employee-owned businesses are growing at a rate of nearly 10 per cent across the UK. Employ-owned businesses grew their sales by 11.1 per cent through the recession compared with others that grew by 0.6 per cent. In my constituency, in Edinburgh, I was pleased shortly after being elected to congratulate Blacklight Ltd, a sound and vision company based in Granton, to take the move into employee ownership. At the instigation of the previous owners, as Richard Leonard pointed out, they are often critical because they often have some kind of a sense that they want the business that they have spent a lot of time and money building up to have a sustainable future, and the most sustainable future, in many cases, is employee ownership. In the past one year, Blacklight's turnover has increased by 10 per cent. Richard Leonard might also be aware that employee-owned capital is central to green thinking. In our policy passed by members at our conference on trade union and workers' rights, we are committed to economic democracy, whereby undertaking shall be managed cooperatively through the involvement of those who work in them and the communities that they serve. We support a mutual sector as a key component of a green economy. Just two years ago, I was very pleased to second a motion that we will legislate to grant private sector employees the right to buy the company for which they work, creating a co-operative. That right will be dependent on the company meeting or range of criteria, which will be subject to public consultation, which may include the size of the workforce, ethical standards such as tax compliance and pay ratios, etc. As Richard Leonard knows, many of those aspects are reserved to Westminster, but we already have in the frame, in Scottish legislation passed by this Parliament, the community right to buy. We have had instances last year, for example, when a major estate in Scotland, the Tolkien estate, managed to avoid the provisions of the community right to buy by selling the shares in the company rather than the land itself. That will be the subject of a sale that is coming up in Aberdeenshire very soon. Therefore, we need to revisit that legislation to stop those avoidance tactics. To conclude, I am very happy, as Greens are, to work with Richard Leonard in whatever capacity that he plays in Parliament to advance those notions. I thank my colleague Richard Leonard for bringing this important issue to the chamber. Richard has spent much of his working life fighting for workers' rights, and he has consistently raised workers' issues in his chamber since his election last year. Indeed, his first member's debate was on the caterpillar workers' occupation. The number of employee-owned businesses in Scotland has trebled over the past five years, and it is one of the fastest-growing forms of ownership in our country, and it is time that we paid it more attention. Last year, I lodged a motion to celebrate the work of specialised castings of Denny in my region of central Scotland. There are Scotland's only employee-owned foundry, and there are one of only two remaining ironed foundries in the country. By the owner allowing employees to buy out that company and a succession plan, that key historic industry has been kept in the area and it has been allowed to thrive. Without that option available, we would not only have seen unemployment, but we have been left with having to look abroad for specialist items like that. That is a model of ownership for other businesses across the region and the country as a whole. As the motion notes, other companies in central region, such as Novigraph and Clansman Dynamics, are flourishing in a similar way. Not only is employee ownership radical and forward-thinking, but it is sensible, too. Who better to advise on how to run a business or an organisation than the people who work in it every single day? For many people, our economy is not working. When people are put out of work, often because of employer relocation or closing down, it can result in poverty, family breakdown, mental ill health or homelessness, as my committee has heard in our on-going inquiry. That happens to many workers without them ever having the opportunity to do anything to stop it, and that cannot be right. Richard has mentioned the Makora law, which enables workers to buy out an enterprise when it is up for sale or rent with closure. Of course, there are other European examples. Richard himself is personally committed to pursuing legislation to ensure that those who create the wealth have a right to own the wealth that they create, and I fully support that. It makes sense to keep jobs and profits in Scotland as part of a wider industrial strategy with workers' ownership at its core. That could have dramatically changed the situation for the UCS in 1971, the Workers of Leeds in 1981 or Caterpillar Workers in 1987. Rather than a sitting, a working or a strike, workers could meet owners face to face to decide their own futures rather than having it decided for them by corporate greed. We should design our society with the workers who toil every single day right at the forefront. That would include profits being fed back into companies and the economy to secure jobs and build expertise. What better way to improve productivity and job security than to give people a financial investment in their own labour? As a socialist, I firmly believe in the principle in which Labour's 1918 constitution was founded, which is also known as clause 4. I will remind the chamber of it. To secure for the workers by hand or by brain the full fruits of their industry and the most equitable distribution thereof, it may be possible, on the basis of the common ownership of the means of production, distribution and exchange, and the best-obtainable system of popular administration and control of each industry or service. Indeed, Scottish Labour's campaign for socialism, which I was the convener of for over a decade until last year and has now been taken over as the convener by my colleague, Eir Neil Findlay, was set up to retain that very clause and campaign for socialist policies to build the sound planned economy that is needed to ensure equality and social justice. We need to let workers, business owners and especially colleagues in here, politicians, know that employee ownership is not a fantasy or utopia, it's an everyday reality that can transform our economy in new and progressive ways. So, Presiding Officer, let's promote co-operatives, foster worker buyouts and teach young people about the possibilities of employee control so that we can produce wealth, not just for a tiny handful at the top, but for everyone or, in other words, for the many, not the few. I call John Mason to be followed by Jamie Halcro Johnston. Thank you, Presiding Officer, and thank you, Richard Leonard, for bringing up this very important subject, and I'm more than happy to take part in this debate. When discussing the economy in Scotland, we've tended to focus on starting and growing businesses, but I've spent less time, as others have said, on who owns them and whether it is a good or bad thing for a business to be sold. We've tended to accept that the norm is for one or two people to start a business, then to grow it to some extent, and if it can be sold off to a multinational for a sizeable sum, that is considered to be a huge success, and we'll certainly get headlines on the back page of the herald, if not the front. But there are downsides to this model. Often only a few people make a big profit on the sale and controlling profits, as others have also said, then go abroad and we're left with a local branch, which is always vulnerable when a downturn comes. However, as Richard Leonard has described today, there are alternatives. Clearly the best known example is John Lewis and Waitrose, although that's a bit bigger than your average business. I thank co-operatives UK and others for their briefings for today's debate, and they make the point that, quote, while giving employees a beneficial ownership stake in business is a very good thing, the positive impacts of doing so are maximised when the workforce also has a significant degree of collective influence in the running of their business as well. I've seen various statistics, some have been quoted already today on worker and employee ownership, but the key ones seem to be that there's between 51 and 86 employed-owned businesses, maybe 115 if it's worker-owned, 6,800 to about 7,000 workers in Scotland, and turnover somewhere between £925 million and £1 billion. The research suggests, and I think that Jackie Baillie quoted quite a lot of that, that worker-owned companies do outperform their competitors in employment, sales and productivity. They have staff turnover and absenteeism, which are often less than half their sector and are considered more trustworthy by people. 58 per cent would trust an employee-owned business as compared to 33 per cent for others. As co-operatives UK say, worker ownership can mean flatter pay structures and profit sharing, reduced inequalities, opportunity to develop skills, boost life chances and improve social mobility. However, it has to be accepted that those are not automatic, and I was disappointed to some extent to see that, in the John Lewis constitution, the pay of the highest partner can still be 75 times the average basic pay of non-management partners. I accept that 75 times may be better than some companies, but I have to say that it is still not great. Andy Wightman I thank Mr Mason for taking intervention on that point. It highlights the fact that I too have also studied the little green book of John Lewis. The governance structure of that company does not give the partners, the workers, as much control over their labour and over the future of that company, as some people note. It makes the point that I am sure that Mr Mason will agree that governance is just as important as ownership. John Mason I think that that was very much the direction that I was going in. I am enthusiastic about that, but I obviously have to watch both sides. I can give my more positive example, perhaps, from my own constituency. Members may well have heard of Page Park architects, who are owned by their 40 or so employees, not a huge business. They are based near Glasgow Green and have been involved in projects such as Scottish Opera, Scottish National Portrait Gallery, Maggie's Centre in Inverness and the National Museum of Rural Life. Some of us in the economy committee visited them as part of the gender pay gap study, which we are debating next week. I have to say that I was very impressed by what we heard there. Page Park has what I understand to be a system of indirect ownership. Everybody knows everybody else's salary, and the salaries are structured in a fairly flat system. In good years, if there is a bonus, that is also completely transparent and is shared in proportion to salary. Although, of course, if there were to be a bad year, there is potential for everyone to lose in the same proportion. I do realise that my time is up, but I again thank Richard Leonard for bringing this subject today. I was giving a little extra for your intervention, but there you go. I call Jamie Halcro Johnston, the last speaker in the open debate. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I would first like to congratulate Richard Leonard on securing this debate on an issue that is clearly close to his heart. Employee ownership is a concept that can bring support from all sides of this chamber. Noel Skelton, the former unionist MP for Perth, is best remembered for his advocacy of property-owning democracy in relation to the advances in home ownership and the understanding that this gave individuals a greater stake in society. However, Skelton's central focus was not housing, despite him later covering the topic as a Scottish Office minister, but in the status of the worker and his or her stake in the enterprise that they were employed in. There has been a long tradition as far back as Adam Smith recognising the benefits that a more direct involvement in the economic life of a nation for the many will bring. Research suggests that workforce wellbeing can be improved with wider benefits to the business, reductions in absenteeism, reduced staff turnover and attrition, faster growth and greater resilience. Fitting in with the aspirations of both of Scotland's Governments, we can look to the evidence that employee ownership can be the potential driver of productivity. Above all, we should see the benefits in terms of people having greater direction over their lives. There are, of course, different models of employee ownership. There are all sorts of enterprises, large and small, established and innovative startups that have successfully adopted one or other of those models. It is welcome that the chamber is having the opportunity to consider its successes. In my own region, the Highlands and Islands, there are a number of employee-owned enterprises operating today. As Marie Todd mentioned in her speech, Westside Vets and Shetland used employee ownership to ensure its independence and local focus. AquaScot salmon processing in Easter Ross was part of a management buy-out that involved into an employee-owned trust. Highland Home Carriers in Inverness is now one of Scotland's largest employee-owned companies, while the well-known West Island Free Press continues to operate as part of an employee-led publishing co-operative. Other alternative models of ownership are familiar in my region, too. The expansion of local community co-operatives has shown that people can maintain essential services within rural areas, harnessing local enthusiasm and local knowledge for the benefit of all. I am pleased that this month's programme for government recognises investigating the scope to expand support to employee ownership as an aspiration. To hear voices across parties speaking up on those issues is a positive step in making progress. In practical terms, other steps have been taken. We know of existing tax reliefs that incentivise certain employee ownership schemes, and the number of businesses that have taken up such models have increased across the UK. Workers have also been undertaken by the UK Government, following its commission of the Nuttall review on employee ownership in 2012, including developing a range of information for workers and guidance for businesses that are considering moving towards employee ownership. Last year, the economy committee, which I now sit on but then exchanged correspondence with the Deputy First Minister on Employee Ownership, in his response. I note that Conservatives had a proposal in their manifesto last May to put workers on company boards and to allow workers to hold annual votes on executive pay. Does Mr Halcro Johnston support that, and will he be encouraging his colleagues in Westminster to bring forward those proposals in legislative form? Last year, the economy committee exchanged correspondence with the Deputy First Minister on Employee Ownership. In his response, Mr Swinney indicated that the business gateway was consistent across Scotland in providing support and advice on alternative business models and that the enterprise agencies were appraised of the Scottish Government's objective to widen models of business ownership with cooperative development Scotland taking the lead. One proposal was to enhance Scottish Enterprise's community development remit, particularly in relation to rural areas, noting the comparative success of Highlands and Liners Enterprise in supporting local-led business. It would be welcome if the minister could update the chamber on any changes to the signposting of alternative business ownership within Scottish Enterprise in the ordinary course of its work. The frameworks are clearly in place to enable employee ownership. In many cases, the challenge, as my colleague Dean Lockhart mentioned, is simply making businesses aware of that option and giving potential employee-owned start-ups the support that they need to make their business a success. I again thank Richard Leonard for bringing us to the chamber. I warmly welcome today's debate, which has been a very intelligent debate across the chamber on the merits of employee ownership. During our time in government, we have supported co-operative business models, for example, through the number of employee-owned businesses that were headquartered in Scotland in the past five years as a result of co-operative development Scotland's work. I am sure that we all share a pleasure in seeing that happen. That is an important subject and a very worthy debate that Richard Leonard has brought forward. I am very pleased to support today. We have a proud and rich history of co-operation in Scotland, and it forms an important part of our enterprise heritage, which has been referred to by Richard Leonard and other members. Members have made a number of very positive contributions today and I will respond to them shortly. I will also outline the Government's commitment that we have made and continue to make to supporting employee ownership. Way back in the middle of the huge social and economic changes that were taking place in the 18th century of Scotland, the Fennec Weaver Society, which has been referred to by Richard Leonard, decided that their best hope for prosperity lay in working together in a properly constituted society. Those were workers who recognised the benefits of taking control of their working environment, not just for themselves of course, but for their families and the wider community. Ever since, people around the world have looked to those same principles and examples, and co-operation is now a worldwide movement. We might be a small part of that worldwide movement, but Scotland can and should be proud to stake our claim as being the birthplace of doing business in a better way, a way that puts people first. I think that we all share that intent. Richard Leonard, before I move on to other comments from other members, made some very important points in his opening remarks regarding foreign direct investment. I did welcome his clarification, so I am not going to labour the point, but we have opportunities, even with foreign direct investors, to work with those companies on the business pledge and other means by which they can take forward the same kind of approaches that would be delivered through employee ownership in terms of workplace innovation, valuing the workforce, and trying to gain those same productivity improvements. I think that we are in agreement on that, so I am not going to force the issue, but certainly productivity is one of the best defences for companies to protect them from being attacked in the market sense. We warmly support engagement in workforce innovation and great successes in companies that I am sure all members are aware of, such as Michelin and Dundee, where the workforce really took a grip of their future and developed a really successful business model going forward, working with employees to innovate and to drive productivity improvements. Marie Todd followed Richard Leonard's comments with excellent points about sustaining productivity improvements of 5 to 10 per annum, and highlighted that we can take forward measures such as succession planning well before the retirement of the owners of a business, which is an important point to make. Regarding the attainment of profitability within the local community, clearly any areas such as Highlands and Islands have a very dramatic impact in sustaining general prosperity within local economies. Jackie Baillie also made some sensible and important points around the Employee Ownership Index, and I was fascinated to hear the difference in performance between FTSE index and that index, which was enlightening indeed. I appreciate that Jackie Baillie is not here, Presiding Officer, but for the record, since she asked me to refer to those points. In terms of co-operative development Scotland, it is a core part of Scottish Enterprise now, and that has ensured that Employee Ownership is now a core part of Scottish Enterprise's succession planning approach, which addresses part that Mr Halcro Johnston made, and I welcome him to the chamber the first time I have had the opportunity to address him directly. That also ensures that account managers have direct access to Co-op Development Scotland's resources as well, so that hopefully helps to answer the points that Jackie Baillie raised. I will try to cover more points as I go forward, but the Scottish Government recognises the importance of Employee Ownership enterprises and the contribution that they make to the growth of our economy and in providing jobs and wealth across Scotland, and also contributing strongly to inclusive growth. Although Employee Ownership companies in Scotland are not high in number at 86 at the last count, some are substantial employers and we should recognise that as a number of members have done. With a combined turnover of just over 925 million and employing 6,800 staff, collectively the sector is important and crucially, and I want to stress this point, it still has the potential to expand much further in future. Richard Leonard and a number of other colleagues across the chamber have made this point, and it is highlighted specifically in the motion, the examples of clansmen dynamics, and also Novograff, which are important companies in Lanarkshire, but other examples have been raised by members across the chamber. Employee Ownership businesses are, unlike other businesses in a number of other ways, in their social purpose, their values, in their governance and in their commitment to their local communities. They are collaborative vehicles that play an important role in creating sustainable and inclusive growth. They enable employees, businesses and communities to work together to fulfil shared interests, and that in turn unlocks creativity and capacity within the workforce, leading to a greater feeling of being valued in the workplace, and that further unlocks in productivity improvements. There is growing evidence that the use of this model increases productivity, innovation and growth, while it is also achieving wider societal benefits to our local communities. To emphasise again, the models make a positive contribution to inclusive growth, and this is in combination with increasing placing them in the spotlight from an economic development policy perspective. As the Government of the Scottish Government has been and remains committed to encouraging and supporting those who choose the employee own business model to drive forward their businesses, helping to deliver our vision of inclusive growth. By using the term, we speak of growth that combines increased prosperity with greater equality, and that creates opportunities for all and distributes the dividends of increased prosperity fairly within society. Our support is very ably delivered through Cooperative Development Scotland, the Scottish Government's delivery agent, who, working through Scottish Enterprise and Highlands Islands Enterprise, supports company growth through employee ownership business models. Cooperative Development Scotland's ambition is to achieve a tenfold increase in employee ownership in Scotland over the coming 10 years. Indeed, examples that it has already delivered include companies such as Scotland Fife and Stuart Buchanan garages, which between them employ over 240 people, which gives an indication of the scale of success that they are having. There is a generation of businesses now facing a succession problem. We know that, as the baby boomer generation reaches retirement age, many business owners will be considering what will happen to their companies when they choose to take that step back. Starting that process early creates more opportunities, as Marie Todd has indicated. Scottish Enterprise's succession export support provides business owners with advice on the various succession options. Advice in employee ownership is provided as part of the service and we can see real advantages in it. For the record, whenever companies get into difficulty and pace, the partnership for action and continuing employment is engaged, I quite often raise that as a solution if a company is in difficulty, could an employee ownership or management buy-out be an option to take forward? I give a commitment that I will continue to press. It is not always appropriate, as members will accept, but we continue to raise it at least as one of the options that we should consider in these situations and see if it is possible to take it forward. There is no doubt that the co-operative movement and the co-operative development of Scotland are doing a fantastic job. I welcome members' endorsement of that across the chamber. I think that this is an area where Scotland is particularly strong now and getting stronger, but I take the message that we could do even more and I will commit to continuing to keep an eye on how we can do so. With more than 180 businesses having access support over the past five years, a strong pipeline of businesses are seriously considering the employee ownership option. As a result of the CDS's promotional activity, a much larger number of businesses are now being made aware of that model. In addition, as members will be aware in recent months, the Scottish Government has completed phase 2 of the enterprise and skills review. In undertaking that review, we aim to improve the customer journey for all businesses, including employee-owned businesses, which will be achieved by ensuring that the delivery of business support is both clear and, we hope, in practical terms joined up behind the scenes to hide the wiring, to ensure that partners collaborating deeply to support individual businesses are able to do so successfully and with no wrong door when businesses do approach us for support. Work is already under way to put the business user at the centre of our collaborative focus on business support, and I move towards a more rounded team approach to companies and their growth ambitions. I will include scope for specialist support where that is appropriate. The approach is very much aligned to our can-do framework. I am weaving my pen in vain. Can you find out, minister? I will come to a conclusion quickly. There are a number of approaches that have been outlined today that I very much welcome. I welcome the quality of the contributions from across the chamber today. It is a good example of how this Parliament can operate collaboratively and co-operatively in the context of discussion today. We very much support the motion in terms of the emphasis that Mr Leonard has put on engagement and employee-ownership companies. I will happily work with any member in this chamber to achieve success in their own areas. Thank you. That concludes the debate. I suspend this meeting until 2.30.