 The next item of business today is a member's business debate on motion number 247 in the name of Kate Forbes on rural communities and post-study work visa. The debate will be concluded without any questions being put. May I ask those who wish to speak in the debate to press the request-to-speak buttons now, please? I call Kate Forbes to open the debate. You have seven minutes, Ms Forbes. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I start by saying that I am a migrant and I have been one both individually and as part of a family. My family migrated to India twice, the first time when I was only a few months old and then again during my teens for a total of eight years. Individually I have also been an economic migrant and have left the Highlands for several years to work and to study. At a time when we are battling over the meaning of migration—a battle so fraught that I am fearful that it is shaping our constitutional future—at a time when migration is a word that has the dual power to break hearts as bodies are washed up on Mediterranean beaches and then harden hearts as faceless numbers are reported in the press—at a time when families in my constituency, such as the brains and the zealdorfs, are facing deportation—at a time like this, charged with complexity and confusion, I want to be very clear and simple in this debate. I have two points. Firstly, in rural communities, like the Highlands, our greatest challenge is immigration. Secondly, of all the UK Government's unhelpful changes to visas, scrapping the post-study work visa has been hugely detrimental to Scotland. Let me just start by sketching out the challenge that we face in the Highlands, where we have fewer young people and a skills shortage. If the Highlands had the same demographic profile as the rest of Scotland, there would be an additional 18,000 young people between the ages of 15 and 30. Of the working age population—that is between 16 and 64 years old—51 per cent in my constituency of Skye, Lochaber and Babnoch are aged over 45. That is 10 per cent higher than Scotland as a whole. Instead, many of our young people are leaving as economic migrants to pursue training and work opportunities elsewhere. I am grateful for Kate Forbes giving way. She has made excellent points, which share my view that it is really important that the University of Highlands and Islands is able to recruit not just young people but international students from across the world. Kate Forbes—I could not agree more, and I will come on to that in a minute. Employment figures are deceptive in the Highlands because unemployment is lower than for Scotland as a whole. The employment rate for my constituency is 83 per cent, whereas in Scotland as a whole it sits at 73 per cent. That is impressive, but it is driven by a much higher dependence on part-time work. The skills shortage in the Highlands is acute, but it is also a challenge across Scotland. According to the UK Commission for Employment and Skills, there has been a steep rise in job vacancies in Scotland since 2013, going from 54,000 in 2013 to 74,000 in 2015. 34 per cent of those are due to the lack of necessary skills in Scotland. I do not need to spell out that skills shortages also have an impact on business productivity and growth. Why does the post-study work visa fit in here? That is to make the case for the reintroduction of it as a way to meet the skills shortage demand. That is costing us. In Scotland, I believe that we are unanimously agreed on the need to reintroduce a new post-study work visa. All Scottish political parties are colleges, universities and businesses, and even the Scottish affairs committee at Westminster agreed that we need talented international graduates. Universities Scotland conservatively estimate that Scotland has lost about £254 million of revenue since 2012 as a direct result of the closure of the tier 1 post-study work visa for international graduates. However, if the skills shortage and the population pressures are more acute in the Highlands, then so is the need to reintroduce a new post-study work visa. Last week, for example, I had dinner with a fine family from India who brought a wealth of medical knowledge and experience to NHS Highlands and whose son got five higher A's. We need them. A close friend in the Highlands is working as a dentist at a time when we are in short supply of dentists but her husband still needs a visa to join her. We need them. Many of you will have seen the brain family in the news, a family who has the skills we need, whose son is in the Gallic primary and who came to Scotland expecting to be able to stay on after studying on the post-study work visa. We need them. The Zealdorfs run the village store in Lagan, a very small community, and the family has been denied leave to stay by the UK Government. We need them. We need all the international students who no longer apply to the University of the Highlands and Islands because there is no post-study work visa and it is easier for them to go to our competitors in Canada, the US and Germany. I just do not get it. I do not get why we are kicking out families when we need them in the rural areas of Scotland. Taking up the member's point on the University of Highlands and Islands, in 2012-2013 there were 26 full-time undergraduates from Nepal and the University of Highlands and Islands. This year it is seven. In 2013-14 there were 61 full-time undergraduates from India. This year it is 12. The University of Scotland has been quite clear that it is visa changes that have impacted on recruitment to the University of Highlands and Islands. India has previously been UHI's main market and that was once the main international market for Scotland as a whole. The number of students applying from India since 2011-2012 has fallen by a whopping 57 per cent and the number of students applying from Nigeria in the same period has reduced by 24 per cent. This is at a time when our competitors in Canada, Germany and the United States, to name but a few, are reporting significant growth in international students. In conclusion, our current visa arrangements are restrictive and off-putting, and all of us are the poorer for it. Alexander Stewart has four minutes to speak. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I would like to thank Kate Forrest for bringing this motion before the chamber today. This is clearly a very important issue, and Ms Forbes has already indicated the background to the brain family who are in part of her constituency. They have had quite a high media profile surrounding that, and the current lack of post-study visas in Scotland is, as I say, a very important issue that she raises. In the meantime, however, I am pleased to note that the Home Office has, in this case, granted a further extension to the Bains, because I think that that is the right thing to do under their application, and they will remain with the United Kingdom. I hope that there can be a satisfactory solution to the conclusion for that family. It is essential that we act and attract people with skills and talent to Scotland. There is a broad consensus of all the parties in the chamber that a dedicated post-study immigration route is essential, and I am very much in favour of that. I would like to pay tribute to what happened in the previous parliamentary session, when my colleague Liz Smith argued from the Scottish answer on a problem to be solved, and she has continually been contacted by colleges and universities who are greatly concerned about the end of the tier 1 visa, which took place in 2012. Liz sat on the cross-party group on post-study visas, and on behalf of the Conservative Unionist Party, she signed up to the recommendations that came that the UK and the Scottish Government should work together to find a solution. I still believe that that is a very important way for us to go. Shirley-Anne Somerville I thank the member for giving way and notwithstanding everything that he has just said, does he share my disappointment that the Secretary of State for Scotland has indicated that he has no intention of taking any of the issues that the Scottish Government has raised with him in that matter any further. Alexander Stewart I appreciate what you are saying, but there is still lobbying taking place, and I will become part of that lobbying, along with Liz Smith and others, because we believe that there is some opportunity here, so it is important that we give him some information and try to move things forward, because, as I say, we think that there is a case for it. As I have indicated, Liz Smith has been talking to the Westminster colleagues, including the Home Secretary and the Secretary of State for Scotland, to ask them to reconsider their position, and that is exactly what we are doing at this stage. We must consider the demographics of Scotland's population. We are markedly different to England. The population is projected to grow by 16 per cent in England between 2012 and 2037, but at the same time, 9 per cent would be cut here in Scotland for the same period, and that causes concern and alarm for us. Moreover, the population of our working-age population is forecast to fall by 4 per cent during that same time, so there will be gaps, and those gaps need to be filled. No question about that. As Ms Forbes highlights in her motion, that affects demographic issues, and particularly strongly in the rural community that she represents. It is very important that we also consider the issues when it comes to business and industry, and what they are looking for and what they are trying to achieve. Talented individuals from overseas have the opportunity to come to Scotland, and they are aware, challenge and have the opportunities to do that. We must make sure that those cultural transformers and business are there to do the best that they can and fill the opportunities that we have here in Scotland. We are looking at all aspects. Our universities are leading the way in the cutting edge of what they can achieve. Many of the projects that they are bringing forward are pioneering, and we must ensure that that takes place. In conclusion, we need to make decisions for the future of post-scat study visas, and it is very important that we look at all the facts. I hope that we can within the chamber and the members across the chamber work together in a co-operation of both the UK and the Scottish Governments to seek a solution to the issue that is right for Scotland, for the economy and for our communities. Thank you very much indeed. Ina Collin, David Stewart. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I congratulate my fellow Highlander, Kate Forbes, on her success in securing this afternoon's debate and her work in raising the constituency case of the brain family. I was very happy to add my name to the cross-party support for the brain family to remain living and working in Scotland. I would like to touch on the wider issues raised in the post-study work visa issue and the specifics of the brain case. As universities Scotland have said in their very helpful brief for today's debate, there is significant and respected evidence to back the economic, social and cultural benefits that Scotland would gain if the post-study work visa was to be reintroduced. However, do not just take my word for it. Ask key universities, as is pointed out by Kate Forbes already, ask Glasgow and ask Edinburgh, and the new kid on the block, UHI, ask the college sector, ask the student unions. Let me give you an example. A number of years ago, I visited Taiwan as part of the cross-party group in Taiwan. I met the British Council and I met universities. They made it very clear that in Taiwan there is a very strong background of students from schools, going to universities and then studying abroad. They also then stayed on in the international destinations to work. Since the changes in the visa, the Taiwanese students coming to the UK has collapsed, which is extremely worrying. However, our loss has been the gain, as other speakers have identified, in New Zealand, in Canada, Australia and America. University Scotland argues that there is a direct correlation between change in policy and student numbers falling off the cliff. If you look at Indian students, they are down 60 per cent, Pakistani students down 46 per cent and Nigerian students down 22 per cent. While demand is still relatively strong from China, the majority of universities in Scotland are not meeting their international recruitment targets. As the NUS has said to the all-party group from the House of Commons migration, that over half of international students see the option of working in the UK after study as a very attractive option. What is the problem with the new UK tier 2 route? In my view, and echoed by other speakers, it is strict, bureaucratic and unattractive to international graduates. The US, Canada, Australia and New Zealand have a much more compelling visa offer to international students who study there. As the Westminster all-party group in migration 2015 report, and I quote, Presiding Officer, the restricted nature of the tier 2 visa has prohibited some employers from being able to recruit skilled university graduates under this route. We know in Scotland that we have a great higher education product for international students. We exceed the global benchmark for international student satisfaction. There are very strong quality assurance mechanisms within our universities, and we have world-class research. That is why I want the Breen family to stay and work in Scotland. The came here, as we heard, on a student visa, but obviously the Home Office cancelled the scheme in 2012, forcing the family to apply for a tier 2 visa instead. As Mr Breen said to the national newspaper, I quote, we are ready unable to contribute to the economy of the UK. The restrictions being imposed on us are not coming from Brussels, they are coming directly from Westminster. For generations, Presiding Officer, Scots have left the nation of their birth to seek a new life in America, Canada and Australia and beyond. They have an enriched universities, industry and the political process. All we ask is that the Breen family be given their chance to enrich their adopted country. I ask the Government to think again on the respective and anti-competitive tier 2 policy. I now call the last of the open speeches, and that is Stuart Stevenson. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. Let me add my congratulations to that of others to Kate Forbes in obtaining time for this debate. Let me also thank my work placement student for the week, Daisy Collins, who has done the research and written the notes that I will use during my contribution. Scotland has been greatly enhanced by the diversity that comes with immigration, those from different nations who freely come to build their lives here in Scotland. It is hard to imagine any area of human activity that has not benefited from that input economically, politically, socially and culturally in our classrooms, in our surgeries elsewhere, across our towns and rural villages and, in particular, in remote areas of Scotland. The endeavours of different peoples from different backgrounds are evident to us all and continue to be overwhelmingly positive. However, the current rules that we have all been talking about imposed by Westminster are driven by the needs of another area in this island, the populace some might say over populace parts of the south. Certain parts of the Conservative Party have rather cynically taken the opportunity to use immigration to Panda to other agendas, which has resulted in backward-looking immigration rules that help no-one whatsoever, utterly failing to reflect the stark divide that exists in our needs between Scotland and the rest of the UK. Indeed, almost certainly disadvantaged areas in England as well. That is to the detriment of our economy education system and rural communities in particular that are the focus of the motion before us. It is for that reason that I support the motion to restate the post-work, post-study work reason. We need a fair and robust system, one that is sensitive and intelligent and designed to support the requirements of all the countries of the UK. When, in 2012, the coalition Government decided to scrap the visa, our potential as a nation was fantastically weakened and all our futures affected by that. If we continue to support and allow barriers that are unnecessary, we all suffer short-term and long-term. We miss out on the enormous gene pool that comes from international students. In particular, it has a direct and personal effect on the brain family and other families. That is a bankrupt policy whose time has come for abolition. We are losing a well of talent. We want to accept people who will train us, who will develop in our society, otherwise we will get a brain drain. We have heard from a number of contributors about the effect on international students coming to Scotland and the counter-attractions that come from other nations. That is an economic impact, as well as a practical and moral impact. The decline of international students is very much to be regretted. Historically, we have seen immigration from our rural communities, and that does not help. My family, like others, is represented in Canada, in the United States, in Australia, in New Zealand, in Sweden, in Denmark and in other odd places, even like Lebanon. If we stop people coming here, the odds are that we will find it more difficult for our people to travel, and that helps no-one. We have to strengthen and enhance our economy and cultural diversity. That policy does not help us. The long-term effects of that are obvious and depressing. It is time that we use that as one of the levers to tackle depopulation in our rural communities. We need a sensible post-work visa system. The current arrangement simply does not work. I now call Alasdair Allan to respond to this debate. You have seven minutes, please, minister. Thank you, Presiding Officer. My apologies that I am still struggling through a cold. My voice may run out halfway. I thank Kate Forbes for tabling the motion and for her fine speech, and I am pleased to be called to represent the Scottish Government in closing this debate today. The debate has not only been about one very compelling case of the brain family, who are, as we have heard, desperate to secure the future in the Scottish Highlands, but it is also about the broader, equally compelling case for a fair and managed immigration system that meets Scotland's specific social, economic and cultural needs. I am pleased again to see a broad cross-party support in the chamber for the principle of the reintroduction of a post-study work visa, which we have seen many times expressed before. I assure Ms Forbes that this is something that the Scottish Government is committed to continuing to push the UK Government to deliver. I also welcome, as have others in this debate, the Home Office decision to allow the brain family to stay until August. I hope that they are able to take this opportunity to find a UK visa route, which meets their needs and allows them to remain in the community that they clearly call home. However, I must say that this uncharacteristic compassion from the Home Office on this point does not help others to find themselves in the same situation as the brain family, and it makes no mistake that the brain family is not the only compelling immigration case. As has been alluded to by others, there will be many other families in equally difficult circumstances across Scotland. The fact is that, if there was a reasonable post-study work option for international graduates, as the Scottish Government has been pushing for, since the UK Government announced the closure of the previous route in 2011, if we had been listened to and a post-study work route was in place, we would not be here talking about that today. The brain family, Catherine Gregg and Lachlan would be happily carrying on the life that they have built for themselves in Dingwall. Catherine would have had two years after she graduated, in which to further develop her skills in the workplace, gain experience and move into graduate-level employment, which, with luck, might have met the UK Government's UK-wide income requirements. As it is, under current UK immigration rules, international graduates do not have two years in which to find graduate-level employment. They have a maximum of four months. Four months from graduation to finding a job that pays at the very minimum £20,800, depending on the job and the sector that they hope to work in, that level could be much higher. Four months is clearly not an adequate period for international graduates to transition between education and skilled employment. That is not a new issue. That is not the first time that I have stood here in this chamber and called for the UK Government to listen to Scotland's specific needs and introduce an effective post-study work visa. The Scottish Government has evidenced and argued and evidenced again the case for a post-study work route to allow international graduates to remain and work in Scotland and for Scottish-specific immigration flexibilities. I stood here last year as Minister for Learning, Science and Scotland's Languages and I argued the case for a post-study work visa. I welcomed the cross-party support for post-study work. I offered the evidence gathered by leaders across our education and business sectors and I called on the UK Government to honour the commitment in the Smith report to discuss the potential for the reintroduction of a post-study work route for Scotland. At that debate, Liz Smith said that it would be to Scotland's detriment if we did not sort this issue out and that the Smith commission provided us with an opportunity to do so. I appreciate the sentiments that have been expressed here today from the Conservative and other benches but, with respect, I am sorry to say to Liz Smith that we are still waiting on the UK Government, which has so far failed to honour that commitment. Following that debate, my predecessor Humza Yousaf set up a cross-party steering group on post-study work, which included representatives of all the major political parties in Scotland, as well as representatives for education, student and business interests. That steering group, I will, yes. Liz Smith. I apologise for being a little late into this, I had another commitment. The situation is as follows that the Secretary of State for Scotland has until July 23 to reply to the Westminster, the Scottish Affairs Committee report. There is still a window of possibility of getting a Scottish solution to this. I give him a guarantee that we are still in discussions with the Secretary of State for Scotland to press the issue. Alasdair Allan. I very much appreciate the tone of that. I hope that the window is being pushed vigorously, because, as far as I am concerned, the statements to date from the Secretary of Scotland have been very far from encouraging on that point. As I say, I welcome the comments from Liz Smith that she intends to change minds in Westminster on those issues. Following the debate that I said, my predecessor was involved in many of those issues, and the steering group published its findings on 3 March this year. That report again concluded that the flexible post-study work group would benefit Scotland. That report was sent to the UK Minister for Immigration, James Brokenshire, and he advises me that he is still considering its contents. If I can conclude, Presiding Officer, I want to say again that the Brain family are clearly not the only family to be unfairly caught out by the UK Government's increasingly restrictive immigration rules. The removal of the post-study work group is not the only issue that I have with the UK Government immigration system. I offer my sympathy to all those who wish to live in Scotland and contribute to our economy, culture and society, but who have been stymied by the UK Government's increasingly restrictive rules. I call again on the UK Government to honour the recommendation in the Smith report to discuss with the Scottish Government the possibility of a post-study work group. I have already written to Mr Brokenshire to ask him for a meeting to discuss this issue and await his response. I again conclude by thanking Ms Forbes for tabling the debate, and I hope that next year we are here again to discuss the success of the new post-study work group that we have won for Scotland. I would also like to wish the Brain family every success with their own visa application.