 The next item of business is a statement by Angus Robertson on Europe Day 2023, the Scottish Government's commitment to remain aligned with EU laws. The cabinet secretary will take questions at the end of his statement, and so there should be no interventions or interruptions. I call on Angus Robertson up to 10 minutes, cabinet secretary. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. May I begin by wishing you and everybody else a very happy Europe Day, and I'm delighted that we're joined by a number of consuls general from European Union member states today. Europe Day is a day that celebrates peace and it celebrates unity in Europe, and it marks the day in 1950 when Robert Shuman presented his proposal for placing French and West German coal and steel production under a single authority. This, of course, set our European neighbours and ourselves on a path to peace and co-operation and led to the creation of what became the European Union. Events over the last 15 months on Russia's barbaric invasion of Ukraine have reminded us again why that peace and that co-operation is so precious. So today I wish to make a statement on why and how the Scottish Government is endeavouring to remain as close to the European Union as possible and how we will ensure that this Parliament can properly scrutinise that endeavour. In doing so, I hope it will become clear why it is so important for Scotland to escape the damage of Brexit and to regain the rights and the responsibilities of full independent European Union membership. The first reason is democracy. People in Scotland voted overwhelmingly to remain in the European Union. There were majorities for remain in every single local authority area in the country. When Boris Johnson set out his so-called oven-ready Brexit deal to people in Scotland, the people of this country massively rejected it. Despite that clear democratic expression on Brexit and Boris Johnson's hard Brexit, it has been imposed on us. The Labour Party now, sadly, for what can only be misguided electoral reasons, supports both Brexit and supports hard Tory Brexit, which has taken Scotland out of the single market—a market that, by population, is seven times the size of the UK and has taken us out of the customs union. On this generational democratic disaster for Scotland, a conspiracy of silence exists between Labour and the Tories, and that silence signifies broad agreement on Brexit policy between the Westminster parties. That brings me to the second reason why alignment with the European Union, where possible and appropriate under the current constitutional arrangements, is so important and why membership should be our goal. That reason is the damage this Westminster agreed hard Brexit is doing to Scotland. The OBR estimates that, in the long run, compared with EU membership, Brexit will reduce the UK's national output and productivity by 4 per cent. The director of the Institute for Fiscal Studies says, what does this mean? In the long run, we will be about that much worse off on average, so people on average sorts of earnings might be £1,000 to £1,500 worse off before tax than they would have been otherwise. Of course, it also means less money for public services like health and education, which is what he said. Brexit is added to the cost of living crisis by pushing up food prices. It has reduced opportunities for young people with the loss of freedom of movement in the Erasmus Exchange programme. It has meant broken promises to our fishing communities with fewer fishing opportunities for some key stops compared with the common fisheries policy. It has hurt our creative sector and our touring musicians. The Brexit damage goes on and on, which makes the Labour Tory conspiracy of silence on Brexit ever more baffling. Presiding Officer, the EU, however, is not just about tangible benefits, important though those are. It is a values-based project. The core values of the EU on human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law, respect for human rights are also Scotland's values. The third reason for an alignment policy is that we want to remain close to and be part of a European Union of shared values. The fourth reason we want to remain aligned with Europe is because we recognise that the global challenges facing Scotland today from climate, the cost of living, energy costs to delivering a fairer society only confirm the need for ever more international co-operation and engagement, not less. For those reasons, the Scottish Government policy is to continue to align with the EU where we can. However, in pursuing this alignment policy, I acknowledge the constitution, Europe and external affairs and culture committee's concerns regarding scope, engagement and transparency and I understand the Parliament's desire for greater information to support scrutiny of our approach. This week, I wrote to the convener acknowledging those concerns and reaffirming our commitment that we will provide significantly more information on how that policy is being pursued. We will closely monitor the European Commission's proposals and consider where we can align in a meaningful manner with policy that will protect standards of our people's wellbeing. The immediate benefit of this is self-evident. Last year, we brought forward our first legislation under the continuity act 2021 to ensure that Scotland continue to align with the best international standards in terms of the water that we drink. In 2022, we brought into force regulations to ban certain single-use plastics in support of our commitment to circular economy. Those are important powers. We will rely on more in future, but alignment is not just about regulations, laws and standards, it is about much, much more than that. The EU's priorities map across our own ambitions and plans has set out in the national performance framework and the First Minister's vision and priorities for Scotland published last month. In particular, the commission's commitment to accelerate the green transition and its approach to digital economy closely aligns with Scotland's ambitions for fair and just transition to a digital net zero wellbeing economy and society. Our hydrogen action plan, our draft energy strategy and the just transition plan all propose actions to deliver a flourishing net zero energy system that supplies affordable, resilient and clean energy to Scotland's workers, householders, communities and businesses. Hydrogen produced in Scotland could play a significant role in supporting EU plans to scale up that energy source. We will press for co-operation with the European Commission to facilitate the smooth international trade of hydrogen and renewable energy sources. That is alignment in action. Unfortunately, by contrast, the hard Brexit that the UK Government pursued has uncoupled energy co-operation. The UK's pursuit of post-Brexit legislation, often in the absence of consent from the Scottish Parliament, has undoubtedly created significant challenges for both the Scottish Government and the Parliament, with the responsibilities and competences of each being either ignored or overridden. Let me put on record that I am committed to working closely with the Parliament and the Constitution, Europe, External Affairs and Culture Committee specifically to respond to those challenges robustly and ensure that Parliament is able to fulfil its role of holding government to account. Westminster's deliberate attempts to ignore the devolution settlement as it ushers in its divergent and deregulatory agenda is at odds with the high standard that Scotland shares with the EU and should be a concern for all of us in this Parliament. That inevitably means that the focus of the Scottish Government's alignment policy efforts in the months ahead will be primarily on preventing important standards and protections being undermined by the loss of retained EU law provisions. Every such law safeguarded is an example of alignment in practice. The difficult reality is that a Scotland cannot, while part of the UK—that is not part of the EU—ensure alignment with the EU in all cases. We must align where we can and where that alignment is meaningful but, first and foremost, we must protect Scottish legislation from the UK Government's retained EU law bill, which is creating significant uncertainties for our country during an on-going economic crisis. We will always seek to work constructively with the UK Government because we value co-operation as a matter of principle. However, where the UK Government seeks to undermine the basis of co-operation, such as agreed rules on exemptions to the internal market act, we will challenge that robustly. The Scottish Government will keep fighting for the values and standards that we hold dear, a Europe that is green and prosperous, united and diverse, a Europe that, above all, stands for co-operation and stands for peace. That is what Robert Schuman stood for, that is what Europe Day represents and what the EU project is, an ideal that Scotland continues to support and believes in to which we will return. Thank you. The cabinet secretary will now take questions on the issues raised in his statement. I intend to allow around 20 minutes for questions, after which we will move on to the next item of business. I would be grateful if members who wish to put a question were to press their request-to-speak buttons now. I thank the cabinet secretary for early sight of his statement. Of course, we whole-heartedly support Europe Day 2023, a day to celebrate peace and unity throughout Europe. Indeed, we are united in our support for Ukraine as the Russian invasion continues into its second year. Europe Day was, of course, first celebrated by the Council of Europe, and the United Kingdom is a founding member of the Council of Europe and, of course, remains one. In his statement, the cabinet secretary set out the Government's commitment to remain aligned with EU laws. However, the reality of how this policy has been implemented tells its own story. After all the fire and brimstone that we heard from Mike Russell, his predecessor during the passage of this legislation in this very chamber, how many times has the Scottish Government used the formal keeping-pace power since 2021, just once, a perfect example of the SNP virtually virtue signalling over proper policy-making. However, in truth, the Scottish Government has chosen to not align with the EU on a wide variety of issues. We welcome this bespoke Scottish approach, but why on earth does the Government keep up this facade of alignment? Will the cabinet secretary now listen to the warnings of many in rural Scotland who have said that full alignment with the EU would be devastating? Will the Government commit to only adopting laws that suit Scotland best while remaining aligned with our largest trading partner, the rest of the UK? Can I start off with words of agreement? I think that it is great to hear from the Conservative benches that they also recognise today is Europe Day that they welcomed that, that they think that that is worthy of being marked. It is also helpful to hear the important genesis of European institutions emanating from the Council of Europe. For those of the non-initiates, and I know that the honourable and learned gentleman opposite being a lawyer to trade understands the importance of the human rights aspect that the Council of Europe has brought to the standards right across our continent, not just within the European Union, and I think underlines the reason how bad it would be whether to be any stepping back from our shared human rights standards across our continent. I think that the only countries that have resiled from European standards in the Council of Europe are the Russian Federation and Belarus, and we certainly should not be following that example. On the issue of different ways in which one can remain aligned with European legislation, I think that Donald Cameron chose to concentrate on one route in which one can remain aligned. Of course, there are a number of ways and different ways of doing that. I think that it is fair to say that it is important that our committee structure should be able to best understand why using this legislation or not using that legislation, why doing it in different ways. That is why the Scottish Government is updating its approach, particularly in the context of the retained EU law situation, because I think that it is absolutely right for parliamentarians right across Parliament to have the best information to hand to hold government to account on those matters. He knows that I spent 10 years on the European scrutiny committee in the House of Commons, so it is a matter that lies close to my heart. I have given the committee the undertaking that I want that to be as meaningful and workable as possible. I give that commitment again in the chamber. I am not entirely sure whether he meant to say that, but I very much welcome Donald Cameron saying that he welcomes the bespoke approach of the Scottish Government, and I do too. Neil Bibby. I thank the cabinet secretary for advance sight of his statement. Scottish Labour welcomes Europe Day 2023. We agree that the Tories have made a mess of Brexit, and I would urge Conservative MSPs to lobby their Government not to make matters worse with the EU retained law bill. The SNP has been said that it has a commitment to align with EU law, but, like so many other areas, its rhetoric does not match its record. Mr Robertson has also not always supported EU treaties either. In fact, he previously described the Lisbon treaty as completely and utterly unacceptable. So what is the Government's criteria for lining or not with EU law now, and how widely will they consult on their approach? The cabinet secretary also mentions Erasmus, but why are Scottish students still waiting for a replacement programme when Labour has created one in Wales? Finally, maybe Angus Robertson should have indulged his own conspiracy of silence—the Lisbon treaty 2014, the Erasmus failure. The Tories have made a mess. Only a UK Labour Government can clean it up. Perhaps it's time for the SNP to accept their relevance and get out of the way. Cabinet secretary. Can I begin by welcoming Neil Bibby to his new position? I look forward to working with him constructively where we can. It's a shame that we don't have a lot of clarity from his question about where Scottish Labour is on the position on European alignment. I, growing up, grew up with a Scottish Labour party with names like Bruce Milanoff, a European commissioner of David Martin, a vice-president European Parliament of Janey Buckan, a long-standing MEP in the European Parliament. It's not the same party that we are hearing today—indeed, not the same party questioning what the Scottish Government is doing. It's no welcome for the target of remaining aligned with the European Union, and the chimera, the imaginary situation that the Labour Party is going to clear up the Tories' Brexit mess by sticking with the same policy. It's absolutely inconceivable that there will be any difference whatsoever. Notwithstanding the fact that Anna Sarwar has described Brexit as an economic disaster, the Labour Party is going to continue with it. A party led by Keir Starmie saying that it's not going to reconsider the UK's position within the European Union, it's not going to reconsider the United Kingdom's position in the single market and it's not going to reconsider the disaster, the ending of free movement of people. Labour really must do much better. It should embrace the policies and approach of the past and not ape the Tories, as they've done, sadly, again today. A recent British Council report, Soft Power, today found that countries that invest in overseas cultural institutes see significant returns. Meanwhile, its report gauging international perceptions. Scotland and Soft Power found Scottish Soft Power to be in a competitive position, but noted that the challenges of Brexit will require Scotland to have a clearly articulated narrative on its place in the world. A recent committee report from a constitution at the European External Affairs and Culture Committee praised the work of the international offices and indeed the British Council said that it would welcome more to spread Scotland's presence throughout Europe and throughout the world. On this European day, does the cabinet secretary recognise the vital work of going forward as we seek to maintain our relationship with Europe and to align with it? First of all, I take the opportunity of saying a huge thank you to everybody that works in Europe House in Brussels. The representational office of Scotland in the capital of the European Union won, I think, the office of which was initiated under the Scottish Conservatives, opened under the Labour Party and the Liberal Democrats and, of course, continues to operate to this day. They do hugely positive work, yes, in relation to the multilateral organisations, primarily the European Union based in Brussels, but also in bilateral relations with the government of Belgium. The address for those who do not know of the Scottish Government office in Brussels is on Shuman Avenue itself, so there is a nice circularity in our proceedings this afternoon about all of that. In terms of the challenge that Brexit has brought in particular on the cultural front, this is something that is regularly raised by culture and arts scene about the great difficulty that those of our artists who wish to tour can undertake elsewhere in Europe. We continue to press the UK Government to seek changes, but the European Union has made absolutely clear to have free movement of people, so our cultural and artistic community can travel and perform across Europe is something that is only possible if one accepts free movement of people. The UK Government is not prepared to do that. We will continue to press for that. In the meantime, the likes of Scotland House in Brussels will not only be working on optimal relations with the European Union, but will also host a wide range of cultural events as well. The cabinet secretary talks about how Brexit has reduced opportunities for young people with the loss of freedom of movement in the Erasmus exchange programme, but, while the UK Government has introduced a successful touring scheme in 2021 with funding of £110 million for 2022-23, the Scottish Government has so far failed to provide any detail of their promise to develop a new strategy for international education. When will the Scottish Government provide us with the details for their replacement scheme? First, I am really interested to hear that the touring scheme is successful, because on any objective measure when compared with the Erasmus programme it is absolutely not a success story. It is a great shame that our young people are forced to operate through a scheme that is not as successful as it replaced. I would love to see Scotland join the Erasmus scheme fully as a member state. That is the only way we can do it. Maybe a good reason for Sharon Dowey to reconsider our position and embrace Scotland's future membership of the European Union. Fighting crime is an example of where co-operation among EU states has proved particularly successful. The UK withdrawal from Europe has left a woefully complicated security landscape, and I am in no doubt risk Scotland's justice system being left behind, as our European counterparts develop more effective tools to deal with present and future threats, including serious and organised crime, cyber threat and terrorism. I ask the cabinet secretary if he can outline what engagement he has had with the UK Government to ensure any changes to EU retained law do not risk not only Scotland's future security, but also our operational effectiveness in tackling crime, in particular cross-border crime. Cabinet Secretary? The first thing is that there is no effective substitute for being part of the European institutions that deal with judicial and legal co-operation. I am pleased to say that the Lord Advocate and other colleagues in our legal service attend those events that they are able to to try and find ways in which our legal system is able to maintain the highest level of judicial co-operation, but in a very imperfect environment. In relation specifically to the issue of retained EU law, I would like to update the chamber in as much as we believe that there is a fast-moving situation at Westminster where the UK Government is performing a U-turn as we speak on that bill, which would be hugely welcome. I understand that, potentially, we may even see a new schedule published in Westminster as soon as tomorrow on the issue. I have to say that, just for the record at this stage, has there been any consultation with the Scottish Government on this? No, there hasn't. Has there been any consent issued by the Scottish Parliament on this? No, there has not. Do we know what the territorial extent of the bill in its new terms might be? No, we don't know that either. If we are going to see a UK Government U-turn on the European Union retained EU law bill, which was literally throwing the baby out with the bath water and seeing if we could save different bits of EU law, if they are now going to change that into a system where they will legislate to get rid of things, that is certainly a much better way of doing things, and we will work with the UK Government as soon as we have details from them. In a written submission for the conference on the future of Europe, the Scottish Government outlined that, and I quote, Scotland will maintain alignment where possible and practical with EU legislation, standards, policies and programmes. It is also previously outlined plans to implement a Scottish educational exchange programme which would aim to replace the Erasmus programme. Since then, there has been no progress made towards this. Instead, the Scottish Government continue to deflect any questions about the Erasmus programme. The mention of the Erasmus Plus programmes only briefly in the ministerial statement pinpoints exactly how much of a priority it is for the Scottish Government. The Welsh Labour Government have now implemented the scheme intended to replace Erasmus. This has since lined up over 5,000 exchange opportunities since September 2022. There is no reason as to why the Scottish Government have not already delivered a similar scheme for young people in Scotland. So, when will the minister stop hiding behind the arguments for independence and act now to truly realise Scottish priorities with EU practice to provide Scottish students with the Erasmus programme? I think to be fair, but maybe Faisal Choudhury didn't have time to get to the important fact and nub of the matter. Originally, we all remember that there was a commitment given to seeing the re-nationalisation of everything that was carried out at a European Union level. Those things relating to devolved matters would see the repatriation of not just powers but also budget. That is not what happened. We have not seen a repatriation of budget that would have gone towards the Erasmus scheme. He is absolutely right. Work is in progress on how to have what can only be a second best scheme, because the best scheme is an Erasmus plus scheme. Faisal Choudhury has any ideas about which bits of the education budget currently spent in Scotland he wishes to see cut to pay for a new programme. I will listen very closely to what the Labour Party is advocating. Emma Harper to be followed by Willie Rennie. Scotland benefits from EU alignment in many areas, but with Brexit we find ourselves cut off from EU structural funds that helped our communities to flourish for decades, not to mention the major 800 billion euros of next generation EU pandemic recovery programme. That is completely bypassed, Brexit, Britain and massive barriers to European trade also. While Scotland remains outside the single market, how does the cabinet secretary hope to maximise investment from our European partners? The first thing is that we should commend the extraordinary successes of Scottish Development International that do so much to ensure that Scotland is still in the circumstances of Brexit, Britain, as an attractive place that it can be under those circumstances. I am right in saying that Scotland remains the second most successful part of the United Kingdom after London when it comes to inward investment. SDI internationally has very talented and hardworking members of staff right across Europe, and there are a number of Scottish Government officers across the European Union, in Paris, in Brussels, in Berlin, in Copenhagen. They all do a tremendous job in promoting Scotland, yes, when it comes to inward investment, yes, the potential when it comes to jobs, yes, when it comes to building on tremendous new opportunities that we have here, such as the renewable sector, but, yes, on areas where education, co-operation matters a lot and the soft power and cultural dimension of things. All of that is really, really good, and I am hugely grateful to everybody that does those jobs, but we cannot look by the reality that Brexit is a massively damaging phenomenon, socially, economically and politically, and that is why it is absolutely right that we do everything that we can to remain as aligned with the European Union as we can possibly be, and it would be great if the other political parties in this chamber embraced that fully as they should. I would like to get in all members who have expressed an interest this afternoon, and I would be grateful for shorter questions and responses, and I call Willie Rennie to be followed by Co-Cab Stewart. I do not understand why the ministers wriggling so much on Erasmus, and this was a manifestal commitment in 2021. Wales has done it already. They have had it for one year, they are about to go into the second year, but there is no sign of a plan from Scotland. Why have we not got it? He has got the powers, he could do what Wales has got, why is he not getting on with it? One of the real challenges that exist as a result of Brexit relates to the free movement of people, and that includes the ability to live and study in other countries. If he would make the effort and speak to colleagues in Wales, he would understand that, where they have set up their own scheme, they are suffering with the impact of the UK's relationship with the European Union in terms of the free movement of people. That issue is not simply about having a scheme, it is not simply about finding resources, it is also about a situation where, whether it is workable or not, given the circumstances of Brexit—I give Willie Rennie full marks for his consistency in asking questions about the subject—it would make his argument a little bit more powerful if he made the effort to learn about the difficulties in setting up different schemes, operating within the Brexit system that the United Kingdom finds itself in. The day-to-day impacts of Brexit are being felt across many industries. GMAC film, an organisation that trains budding filmmakers from all backgrounds, based on my constituency of Glasgow Kelvin, has explained to me first hand its account of how difficult post-Brexit bureaucracy has made working across Europe. Glasgow and Scotland, more widely, is proudly internationalist. Does the minister agree that, while we do everything in our Parliament's ability to remain aligned with the EU, the only way to ensure that we don't continue down the path of this isolationist UK Government is through full EU membership as an independent nation? A majority in this Parliament also believes that to be the case. Can I take the opportunity to put on record my huge positive impression of GMAC in COCAB's constituency? It does an absolute power of work in our contributing to the great success of Scotland's film and TV sector. The success of that sector would be significantly improved were free movement of people restored in Scotland. The only way that that's going to happen is with Scottish membership of the European Union. Membership of the European Union is not being offered either by the Conservative party, nor the Labour party, nor for the Liberal Democrats, who now say that they are not a rejoined party. If anybody has any aspirations for Scotland being in the European Union, it's not going to happen through the United Kingdom, it's going to happen through Scottish membership of the European Union. It's just a simple statement of fact. Maurice Golden to be followed by Mark Ruskell. Thank you, Presiding Officer. The EU has set a target of separately collecting 77% of plastic bottles by 2025 and 90% by 2029. Given this statement and previous commitments, the Scottish Government will match this. However, the Scottish Government have failed on a series of environmental targets the 2013 household recycling target, seven out of 11 emissions targets and are on their third delay of the deposit return scheme. Does the cabinet secretary accept that environmental EU alignment promises from this Government are worthless? Cabinet secretary. No, I don't, but I go back to the central point about which the statement today was given, Presiding Officer, which is about making sure that the Scottish Government's alignment with the European Union is legislation and its aspiration can be interrogated. I know Maurice Golden from my frequent attendances at the committee that he is a member of. These are exactly the kind of questions that he will ask, and he is right to do so. I am confident that, given what I think will be an enhanced level of information that committee members will get about Scotland's alignment with the European Union will be beneficial for scrutiny and will help Maurice Golden to continue with the scrutiny role that he performs with some distinction in the committee. Mark Ruskell to be followed by Fiona Hyslop. The Tory retained EU law bill is not just a failure of statecraft, it is an attempt to systematically dismantle the state with it the protections and rights that Britain helped to create during our decades as members of the European Union. Although there are welcome signs that the UK Government may be forced to weaken its approach to throwing EU laws over the cliff edge in December, can I ask if there are particular portfolios where the threat of a race to the bottom in standards still hangs over Scotland? We need to remain alive to all possibilities, and across Scottish Government there is a lot of effort going into the retained EU law bill continuing as it is currently proposed. That is that there would be a sunset that unless we found ways to retain that EU law in in Scots law and we have to understand the complication that some of this is shared sovereignty, those are all the contributing facts why this is such an unworkable and unacceptable way to deal with legislation that is so important, whether one likes individual pieces of legislation or not. That is why the potential change that we might hear more about as soon as tomorrow, but certainly in the weeks ahead, I think, is going to signal a change. The UK Government is going to put the horse before the cart, to be honest, which is to seek to get rid of laws that are named rather than getting rid of everything and having to do it the other way round. If that is the way that things are going to proceed, I think that that is a lot more workable. It is something that the Scottish Government called for the UK Government to do before it drove a coach and horses through the Sewell convention again. Hopefully, common sense can prevail and the UK Government does indeed go through the U-turn on this, which would be hugely welcome. Fiona Hyslop. One of the most important areas for alignment with the EU is on environmental law for food and other exports currently as well as for tackling the biodiversity crisis issues. Can the cabinet secretary give more details on his approach to environmental law as currently the sheer volume of environmental regulations would fall to the net zero energy and transport committee for scrutiny? Does he agree that for Scotland to become an independent member of the European Union, Scotland's approach in this area of alignment will be key, as well as in the interests of our own environmental standards? I think that Fiona Hyslop, given her long experience in this portfolio, absolutely hits the nail on the head, which is why anything that would see the change in retained EU law approach of the UK Government is absolutely key. I think that most people in the chamber or watching are aware that the most numerous parts of European legislation are in the fields of rural affairs of agriculture and fisheries and also in terms of the environment. All of these areas really matter to consumers, amongst everybody else, that we can retain the highest possible standards. A really good start would be to try and make sure that we do not fall off the retained EU law cliff edge and in terms of going forward that we have an improved reporting structure vis-à-vis the committees and members of this Parliament in terms of how we remain aligned. That is exactly what the Scottish Government is proposing to do. Given the devastating warning from the Institute of Government about the damage that could be done by the passage of the EU retained law to the process of parliamentary scrutiny and parliamentary democracy, to the administrative exercise of power and to the power grab that would be represented by United Kingdom Government ministers by its passage, has the cabinet secretary sought the agreement of all political parties in this chamber to make representations to the United Kingdom Government that they should not proceed as planned? If he has not done so, will he do that as a matter of urgency and will he secure the agreement to protect this Parliament from the recklessness of the EU retained law bill? Can I welcome John Swinney to his place in asking me the question that he just did? There is a bit of me that wishes he was able to ask that question right at the start, because we may have had some contributions from the Conservative and the Labour benches to find out whether they would join the Scottish Government in this. I am hearing from a sedentary position from Neil Bibby that he will. I am looking towards the Conservative benches whether there is any form of acknowledgement that they might do. I am not really seeing any. Maybe it is going to take another statement or question so that we can find out whether the Conservative Party in the Scottish Parliament will support the Conservative Party in the UK Government in U-turning on the retained EU law bill. That would be extremely sensible. Unfortunately, they did not take the opportunity to make that clear earlier today.