 the final item of businesses is a member's business debate on motion 4002, in the name of Russell Findlay, on World Press Forum Day. This debate will be concluded without any questions being put. I would ask members who wish to speak in the debate to press the request-to-speak button now or as soon as possible. Place an arm at the chat function and I call on Russell Findlay to open the debate roundabout seven minutes. Thank you very much. It's a privilege bringing my first members' debate to Parliament. Dyma hwnnw, a ydych chi'n gweithio'r cyfryd gan y gweldau.ooooo Rwy'n amlwg hwnnw i ddwynghwm iawn i gyd ymgyrchu dym ni. Rwy'n amlwg hwnnw i gael leihau hyd yn ffordd ddiarkol, yn rhan i'ch gweithio'r amlwg hwnnw. Rwy'n ogym entirelyg yr unaddo eu maen nhw ac roi'w ymddangas i April 1999, ddych chi'n ystafell hwnnw i chi'n ei wneud. Mark Zuckerberg yn ddwy 14, Facebook ddim i gyd, os rydw i'n gweithio gyd, fel yng Nghymru yn llwyteidau yn gweithio gyd. Rydw i'n gweithio'n cyfnodau. Rydw i'n ei oedd i'n gweithio gyd. Edyddiol wedi bod y bêl ffordd i gynhyrchu cyflogau. Y ddigonol hwnnw, yn 700,000 gwych i'r ddaf, mae'r rydw i'r ddweud o ddweud o fynd o'r ddweud. Fyllfa yn gweithio hwnnw i'r ddweud o ysgol yn gweithio'r ddweud i'r ddydd. gael hwnnw i'r mollid, yn ystod o hynny, ddwyllgorau hynny, yn ysgotsman, bydd yn gallu dylunio drafod trafodig. Mae'r prif, mae'r pethau ym mhwylwyr ar y cyfnod yw'r seidiaeth digital. Rydym chi'n gweithio i ddweithio i'r newid yn fwy o gweithwyr, mae'r fwy o'r newid yn fwy o'r newid. Mae'r fwy o'r newid yn fwy o'r newid yn fwy o'r newid. fake news, infected outrage, cancel culture and angry echo chamber opinions dominate. Social media fuels an ugly mob culture of ignorance and intolerance. Many abusers lurk in coverdly anonymity. Governments and tech billionaires like Zuckerberg must do more to tackle disinformation and to champion the cherry strights of free expression. The demise of newspapers has also triggered an exodus of experienced and often exhausted journalists. Many find refuge in public relations, perling sanitised stories on behalf of their paymasters. I strongly suspect that Scotland's myriad public bodies employ many times more former journalists than the entire Scottish press does. Local newspapers, the beating heart of our communities are on life support. Fewer journalists have time to do journalism, to forge relationships with people, build trust chap doors, sitting courts, troll archives. Diligent new journalists are chained to their desks and put under pressure to produce clickbait while profits from online news largely remain a holy grail. Far too many wealthy people use expensive lawyers to bully newspapers into silent surrender. Thank goodness then for people like Marion Scott, the chief reporter of the Sunday Post newspaper. Marion was in Parliament last week with the family of Louise Acheson, who was murdered in circumstances that raised serious questions of the authorities. She embodies the best of journalism. It is compassionate, fearless and gives voice to the marginalised. It challenges the powerful. The hard truth that she encovers can be awkward and uncomfortable just as it should be. Marion does not seek praise and will likely give me an absolute doing for embarrassing her. Anyone who has ever met her will know that I am not joking, but her extraordinary track record of exposing rapists, pedophiles and child killers, of fighting gross injustice and pursuing medical scandals, including the devastation of mesh surgery, has changed countless lives. Today it has been recognised in Hollywood, but frankly it is worthy of Hollywood. Christine Grahame, who we are due to hear from, has already issued me with a very stern warning against any SNP bashing this afternoon. I give her my word that I am not daft, but I will say that Scotland's public authorities should accept that a vibrant and pluralistic newspaper industry is good for democracy and good for Scotland. Despite my mournful take on the newspaper industry, we should be grateful to live in a society where the media is free to be obtuse and to prod the powerful. Can you imagine the fate of a Russian journalist if they pursued Putin into the Kremlin canteen? Despotic regimes such as Russia and China either crush, silence or kill their Marion Scots. Their state propaganda knows no shame. The sheer scale and creativity of their lives is infinite and obscene. Any comparisons between the BBC and Putin's media puppets only confirms the ignorance of those who attempt to do so. I would like to conclude by paying tribute to journalists who have lost their lives while doing their jobs. One of those is Veronica Guirin, who was shot dead in 1996 for her work in exposing Irish drug gangs. Last week, I had the privilege of talking with another Irish female journalist, who is equally fearless. Nicola Talant reports on society's seedy underbelly, and the malignant, far-reaching influence of organised crime. It is dangerous and dirty work that few have the stomach for. Last year, Dutch journalist Peter De Vries was murdered in Amsterdam by a drug gang, which has connections with Scottish organised criminals. Following his murder, his family told how he lived by the maxim on bended knee is no way to be free. When I lodged this motion last month, UNESCO recorded that 1,516 journalists had been killed since 1993. That figure now stands at 1,519. Many are being murdered by Putin's forces in Ukraine. While Putin unleashes industrial-scale terror on the people of Ukraine, he is also engaged in a war on media freedom and the truth. Those who bravely put themselves in danger while reporting from conflict zones or indeed their own countries are deserving of gratitude and respect. We are truly blessed in this country to have a strong and independent media. Recognising that is a starting point. Protecting it is in all our interests. I thank Russell Finlay for bringing this important debate to the chamber today. As a fellow former journalist, this is a subject very close to my heart, too. Freedom of the press is the foundation of any democracy. Speaking truth to power and exposing injustice would not be possible without this basic right for journalists working throughout the world. On world press freedom day, it is entirely right that we should pay tribute to the 1,516 journalists who have been killed in the line of duty working to bring truth to the public. Those men and women put themselves on the front line in the pursuit of truth and they paid with our lives. We must also remember among many Lyra McKee, a young journalist from Northern Ireland, who was cruelly shot and killed in 2019 during rioting in Derry. The sense was death of a remarkable young woman in her hometown with a commitment to peace and a will to end the strife and tension in her troubled country. The war in Ukraine is the starkest illustration of just how necessary media freedom is. At the end of last month, at least 14 journalists and media workers had been killed in the line of duty in Ukraine. I fear that figure will rise until this horrible conflict is over. With the gagging of the press in Russia, the people there have been hoodwinked and manipulated by a deranged despot who is exercising complete power over the media. Thousands of civilians are dying as a result. That is what happens when the media lose their freedom to tell the truth. We are fortunate in the UK to have outstanding journalists covering the conflict. We watch them in their protective gear every night from the comfort of our homes. I think that we all owe them a huge debt of gratitude for their bravery and commitment for the work that they do. Of course, we have excellent journalists in Scotland who get to the heart of vital issues in the public interest without standing investigative journalism on a huge range of issues. Mark Daley, Marion Scott, Shelly Joffrey, Sam Poling, Alan Little, to name just a few. The Ferret is an award-winning investigative journalism platform for Scotland and beyond, and we have superb writers such as Joyce McMillan, Danny Garavelli and David Pratt, a photojournalist of outstanding ability. I could go on and on, but time won't allow. My 25-year-old journalistic career was in newspapers, and I looked back on that with huge fondness while realising that I was fortunate to work at a time when newspaper circulation was high and good-quality journalism and editing was valued and rewarded with realistic salaries and good terms and conditions. I agree with everything Russell said about the issue. I thought that he had articulated it very well, summed up exactly as it is now, sadly. I only hope that the new generation of journalists are not corrupted by values held by certain so-called newspapers, such as The Daily Mail, who seem to believe that in 2022 it is acceptable to produce misogynistic offensive nonsense, which demeans the profession and women. Freedom of the press should never mean the freedom to abuse and offend people in public life, such as Angela Rainer, or any other citizen by any means at all. In conclusion, I thank Russell Findlay again for bringing the debate to the chamber. Our hard-working and brave journalists should be proud of their profession and their commitment to bring truth in the public interest. The world is a better place for their work, and freedom of the press should never be compromised in a civilised society. I am delighted to be contributing to today's motion brought forward by my colleague Russell Findlay. Journalism is the best antidote to disinformation, however it is completely blocked, seriously impeded or restrained in 73 per cent of the country's evaluated despite a notable reduction in freedom of the media across the globe. When push comes to shove, we see the importance of the media, not just for democracy, but for influencing our response to humanitarian crises. I would like to express my gratitude to the journalists out there on the front line in war-torn countries such as Ukraine and Afghanistan, putting their lives on the line to play an instrumental role in influencing the international community's response to the plight of others, to their cause, to the hard facts, to the action on the ground. Without their bravery, we would be in the dark about the world around us. With recent wars in Syria and Iraq, marked a key turning point in the safety of journalists, with some Governments now reviewing journalists as a target, a message to be sent to those who challenge the incumbent, at least 16 journalists have been killed since the beginning of just this year. That has not been helped by the fact that the evolution of modern technology has seen the increasing use of malware and spyware against journalists. Understandably, with many journalists now unwilling or unable to enter conflict zones, we are seeing a rise in the use of social media, activists, citizen journalists and bloggers. However, that too makes it easy for either side to control the narrative, and so the reduction in foreign correspondence is increasingly problematic. A recent study by the international committee for the Red Cross showed that immediate access to news on smartphones is significantly reducing audiences' deep engagement with the conflict, leading to reduced empathy for victims of war. The ICRC is therefore advocating for deeper engagement that is brought to us by traditional press. I am sure that across the chamber we are all thankful to be living in the United Kingdom and uncomedicated by conflict. It is welcome news that the UK's score on press freedom index has improved, notably, from 33 in 2021 to 24 in 2022. However, there is still room for improvement. Press freedoms are essential for building public trust and ensuring that Governments do not abuse the powers that they hold, but it is also a vital mechanism in a healthy functioning democracy. Although here in the United Kingdom we boast comparatively strong press freedoms, there is still more that can be done to improve accountability and ensure that the press is able to carry out the job of holding Governments to account as effectively as possible. I congratulate the member on securing this debate. In particular, I congratulate him on heeding my words earlier today. I wish the whips had the same reaction when I speak to them. I recognise that, as narrated in the motion, the courage of journalists killed in the line of duty without whose bravery and professionalism we would often be unaware of the evils in this world through war and poverty and oppression in all its forms. I would also add the courage of the support teams that they may have, the drivers, the photographers, the camera men and women often unseen and unrecognised. There are in particular those who defy oppressive control in their own countries and pay for it with their freedom and their lives. Are we in the public worthy of their sacrifices? I hope so. Today, with the demise of the printed press and 24 hour rolling news, the internet and Twitter are we at risk of, at the very least, news fatigue? Has it become devalued by its very relentless accessibility and how it is delivered? If so, then we do not deserve those journalists out in the field, whether at home or abroad. We try to tell us as it is. Paper press has its agenda, particularly on home affairs, but that has always been the case. The Daily Mail stands up for Boris. The Daily Record does not. The telegraph is his mouthpiece. The national supports independence. We each source our domestic news on paper online from where it reflects our own values. Where can we source news that is at best, can be objective and perhaps challenge our values? I turn to public broadcasting, such as the BBC and Channel 4. Now they are not perfect. The Beebe, in my view, bows too often to the establishment, be it news of royal events, where does it reflect republican views? During wartime, it can become dingoistic. I recall reporting during the Falkland war that turned my stomach with its smattings of propaganda. It too frequently reports an English domestic agenda with only a nod in its UK slot to the devolved Governments, but all in all, it does not do too bad a job. Channel 4 is my news channel of choice. I watch to contrast with the reporting on the Beebe, but then I am a bit of a news and the addict. It is interesting to see the distinction not only on the choice of lead stories but the commentary. It is, in my view, edgier. Though I confess that I also like Tom Bradley's style as the occasional news presenter on ITV, his facial expressions and his sides may cross the reporting line for some, but not for me. However, we politicians are not normal folk when it comes to following or trying to make and influence the news. The old line is still a truth about that relationship between a reporter and a politician being that of the dog to the lamppost, though which is the lamppost is out for debate. Although I exclude from that local press, such as the People's for News, the Southern Reporter, the Board of Telegraph and the Midlothian News and the Midlothian Advertiser all in my patch and all at risk, they are pretty even handed towards their political representatives locally, whoever you are. However, is the press, as we know it, on its last legs? Advertising, which sustains both local and national paper press, has shifted to the internet, where it is cheaper and has a much broader reach. However, if we rely on an unregulated Twitter, then we end up with a trump. If we lose that press independence, qualified it may be, then look east to Russia. Back to public broadcasting then, and the need for channel 4, at the very least, to remain in public hands. The cost of losing that independence of reporting is at a cost to our democracy. Can I join colleagues, first of all, in thanking Russell Finlay for laying his motion today? Because it enables us to come and put on record the importance of journalism for us as a country. Journalism must be both fierce and fearless. If done right, it unveils the truth about our world and our place in it. Truth that may be uncomfortable for some and inconvenient for others, but truth all the same. Could journalism challenges the status quo, can become a voice for the voiceless and a force for change. However, as colleagues have said across the chamber, press freedom is a core part of who we are as a democracy. In recent years, we can see what happens when that is undermined. Six years ago, an unprecedented leak of 11.5 million files from the database of the world's fourth biggest offshore law firm shed light on the Panama papers. Was it a surprise to learn that the rich and powerful transfer their wealth to offshore companies to avoid paying taxes? Hardly, but the facts were revealed that evidence was there. In relation to oligarchs, it was 2016 when we first heard about a scheme in which money from Russian state banks was hidden offshore. It is almost unnerving to see how long it is taken for action to acknowledge and address the issue of money flowing with no transparency or accountability. Two years after that revelation, we learned about a firm harvesting 50 million Facebook profiles of US voters using them for targeted political adverts and its connection to the Vote Leave campaign, including the operation in the run-up to the Brexit referendum. We have known about those difficulties and this week we have seen the private decision from the US Supreme Court on abortion rights highlighted. Closer to home, as has been mentioned, we have got the ferret, a media platform that has adopted a co-operative, crowd-funded model of operations exposing that nearly a third of Scotland's biggest wind farms have links to offshore tax havens and revealed the truth about our newspaper ownership in Scotland that 10 of our major national newspapers are owned by three billionaires. So, truth can be uncomfortable. Russell Finlay has been right to point out the impact of social media on our press, already under pressure from declining income that has actually been dramatically impacted by the impact of the pandemic. If you look at local newspapers, as Christine Graham has said, a pillar of our communities is more and more threatened with closures. 33 local newspapers closed in just in one year in 2019-20. More print titles were launched, but we have seen a loss. Since 2005, we have lost 265 local newspapers. As others have talked about, during our public health crisis and the war in Europe, impartial information is needed more than ever. It is vital to our democracy. That is why, as others have said, we need to keep the BBC and Channel 4 public and properly funded. Channel 4's remit is to deliver content under service and excluded audiences. It also invests £10 billion in our UK production industry and creates thousands of jobs. That is why many of us believe that Channel 4's journalism must remain publicly owned and be a voice for those who are underrepresented in today's media landscape. As today's motion reminds all of us, independent journalism is not guaranteed. If we look abroad, Russian President Putin recently signed a law that criminalises factual news reporting with many independent journalists being forced to flee the country or worse, to be detained, arrested, fined or imprisoned. Earlier this year, a Turkish journalist was sentenced to more than two years in prison for insulting the President. Wanyu Sing, an independent radio host and commentator who covers political issues in mainland China and Hong Kong, has been detained since February 2021. The list goes on and on, but, as others have said, in Ukraine today, journalists are demonstrating bravery every day that they send us their reports. As the motion states, journalists are being threatened, prosecuted, imprisoned or even killed for simply seeking the truth. That is not acceptable. Until it is no longer the case, it is vital that we mark world press freedom day and thank journalists across the world and in Scotland for their vital work. I congratulate Russell Finlay on bringing his first member's debate to the chamber of the Scottish Parliament on world press freedom day. The third of May acts as a reminder to Governments of the need to respect their commitment to press freedom. There is also a day of reflection among media professionals about issues of press freedom and professional ethics. This is important because world press freedom is a day of support for media, which targets for the restraint or abolition of press freedom. It is also a day of remembrance for those journalists who lost their lives in the pursuit of a story. April saw the fourth anniversary of Palestinian journalist Ahmed Abu Hussein's death from the Israeli sniper bullet that fatally wounded him as he covered one of the great march of return protests near the Israeli border in the Gaza Strip. Reporters Without Borders announced in April that it had registered more than 140 Israeli violations against Palestinian journalists since those weekly protests began in March 2018. Mr Hussein died in hospital on 25 April 2018 from the gunshot injury that he sustained while covering the protests on 13 April. Another Palestinian journalist, Yasser Mortazia, was killed on the spot by an Israeli sniper bullet while covering the protest on 6 April 2018. According to a Reporters Without Borders tally, at least 144 Palestinian journalists have been at the receiving end of live rounds, rubber bullets, stun grenades or tear gas fired by Israeli soldiers or police, or their baton blows in the Gaza Strip, the West Bank and East Jerusalem during the past four years of great march of return protests. Israel is ranked 86th out of 180 countries in their world press freedom index, while Palestine is ranked 132nd. I have spoken about Penn's international day of the imprisoned writer before, so I will take some time to talk about their call to action on this press freedom day. Ismail Al Iskandri is an award-winning writer, investigative journalist and sociopolitical researcher who is best known for his research and writings on militant groups operating in Egypt's Senai Peninsula. He was arrested on 29 November 2015 at the airport upon his return from Berlin in Germany. The authorities seized his laptop, mobile phone and personal belongings and later presented them as evidence against him. He was held in arbitrary pretrial detention for over two years before being referred to a military court under the pretext of revealing military secrets. In May 2018, he was sentenced to 10 years imprisonment for leaking military secrets and membership of a terrorist group. On 24 December 2018, an Egyptian military court upheld the 10-year prison sentence against him. He is currently held in the Mansra prison in Tora prison complex, where he has reportedly denied access to in-person visits with his family, as well as access to reading and writing materials. Penn believes that Al Iskandri's detention and conviction are linked to his work, which challenges the Government's narrative on its counterterrorism operations. I will be joining their call to action and writing to Egyptian authorities. Colleagues, we wish to join me. Freedom of expression is a fundamental right, and, of course, the need to fight for fundamental rights is not new. It has always been important to protect people around the world from the threat of violence or state suppression. However, as with so many things over the past few years now, with on-going conflicts in Ukraine, Yemen and Afghanistan and the shadows of a global pandemic and operating in a digital era, which brings as many challenges as it does opportunities, that need feels even sharper. I want to conclude by recognising the contribution that journalists all over the world make to the crucial foundations of democracy and dialogue. Press freedom and freedom of expression support the protection and promotion of all human rights. It is in all our interest to ensure that, both here and around the world, journalists can do their work freely and safely. I thank my good friend Russell Finlay for securing today's important debate. I would like to put on record my thanks to him for all the work that he has done to help someone—I personally know Jess Insall—who had a drink spiked a few weeks ago and had a traumatic experience. I know that Russell has been in enormous support to her and the means by which her story has become better known through the pages of the Sunday Mail. I would also like to pay tribute to Russell Finlay, who is one of the most courageous people I know, who is the living embodiment of the values and virtues of sound journalism. I know that he is slightly embarrassed, as I have just said, particularly since I am his chief whip, but that is genuinely how I feel about him. Before I begin, I would like to declare an interest as a trustee of freedom to clear foundation, a charter that seems to defend and champion freedom of religion or belief within the United Kingdom. Our freedoms, as laid out in the Universal Declaration and European Convention, are collective. We cannot pick and choose which freedoms we want to defend, nor can we prioritise certain freedoms over others. We must defend them collectively. It is often the case that, when one freedom is infringed, many others are likewise. That is particularly the case when it comes to freedom of religion or belief, which is often in association with infringements of freedom of speech, freedom to protest and freedom of the press. It is this relationship between freedom of religion or belief and the free press that I want to explore briefly in my contribution today. The Chinese Communist Party is cracking down on free press throughout China, particularly in Hong Kong. They do that to cover up, among other things, their increasing levels of religious persecution. Last year, the Chinese Communist Party strengthened its censorship laws, particularly over religious publications, with only those permitted by the state allowed to be distributed. According to China Aid, a Christian NGO that focuses on freedom of religion or belief in China has resulted in words such as Jesus and Christ being removed from text before distribution. Sadly, that crackdown on religious publications is not a surprise, considering reports of the destruction of churches and crosses within China. The Chinese Communist Party is not just cracking down on Christianity and the Christian press. Reports show that they have destroyed mosques, and an independent tribunal concluded that the Chinese Communist Party are committing genocide against the Weijer population. Determined to cover up this genocide, reports from brave journalists have shown how the Chinese Communist Party regularly burned documents, destroyed evidence and then have the nerve to take international journalists on perverse nothing to see here guided tours. The Chinese Communist Party is not the only Government in the world that censures the free press to try and suppress freedom of religion or belief. Violating countries include North Korea, Myanmar and Russia, among other examples. We have spoken quite a bit about Russia in this chamber. Ironically, I am one of the 250-odd politicians in Britain that was sanctioned by the Kremlin just last week and for the reasons of stirring up Russophobia. I am not guilty of stirring up Russophobia, but I am definitely guilty of prodding a sharp stick in the direction of Putin and his gang that he calls a regime or government. We are very fortunate to live in a country where freedoms such as freedom of the press are defended, but sometimes I feel that we take our freedoms too much for granted. We cannot afford to be complacent. All of us in this chamber, regardless of political party, must continuously defend and champion our freedoms, including freedom of the press. We must ensure that those freedoms are upheld in our law and that the benefits of them are felt at a societal level. Our collective vision should be that the United Kingdom is seen as the global standard on how to implement and safeguard those fundamental freedoms, and we should and must work together to ensure that vision becomes a reality. Thank you very much, Mr Kerr. I now invite Angus Robertson to respond to the debate, Cabinet Secretary, for around about seven minutes, please. Thank you very much, Deputy Presiding Officer. I am delighted to have the opportunity to close this debate on the pertinent issue of a press freedom and to join members in celebrating world press freedom day. I begin by thanking in particular Russell Finlay for raising this important motion, as the many strong contributions that we have heard today emphasise that this is a critical discussion, and we must take the time to acknowledge the crucial work of journalists at home and abroad in providing us with high-quality news and information. I have a clear interest in press freedom, as Cabinet Secretary for Culture, with portfolio responsibility for media policy in Scotland. In addition to that, like Russell, I am a former journalist myself, so the subject matter is close to my heart. I am incredibly proud of my decade as a broadcasting foreign affairs correspondent, including reporting from the former Yugoslavia during the civil war. It taught me how important it is to report facts and for the public to be able to learn the truth. I wholeheartedly acknowledged the important role of free, independent and strong press plays in upholding a democratic society. I thought that it was important that we were able to hear from all corners of this chamber, from all of the main political parties. We heard excellent contributions from Rona Mackay, from Pam Gosel, from Christine Grahame, Sarah Boyack, Ruth Maguire and Stephen Kerr. All had really important things to put on the record, and I associate myself entirely with the points that were made in relation to the importance of channel 4 remaining in the public sector. On world press freedom day, I want to take a moment to recognise the importance of article 10 of the Human Rights Act, embedding in law our right to freedom of expression. That right belongs to all of us, but today I want to highlight its particular relevance to journalists and to news publishers. Our press must be able to be independent so that journalists have the freedom to criticise Governments and to hold elected representatives to account. A free and independent press is also an essential guarantor of human rights. Without press freedom, it is not only our right to free speech that is put at risk. Journalists play a critically important role in challenging and exposing human rights abuses of all kinds. That is true at a global level, and it is one of the reasons why repressive regimes around the world go to such lengths to intimidate and to silence the press. As we know, it is one of the reasons why investigative journalists, and we have heard about a number of them today, have challenged the official narrative or so regularly exposed to threats and violence. Indeed, far too many have paid the ultimate price for speaking out today. We remember those journalists. I want to take this opportunity to condemn in particular the action of the authorities of the Russian Federation in closing down the few remaining independent media outlets that have dared to challenge the lies and delusions of the Putin dictatorship. I also want to recognise the bravery of those who continue to expose the truth about Putin's illegal war of aggression in Ukraine. Sadly, it is necessary to pay tribute to the growing number of journalists who have been killed or abducted by Russian forces in Ukraine, nor should we forget the repression of the Lukashenko dictatorship in neighbouring Belarus and its long record of intimidating and jailing journalists in civil society activists. In fact, Belarus is one of the worst five states in the world for jailing, for intimidating journalists, according to figures compiled by the committee for protecting journalists. Of course, the vital role played by journalists in exposing injustice and upholding human rights is not confined to action that confronts repressive regimes such as those in Russia. It is an essential feature of every healthy, successful democracy. One only need to think of the award-winning investigative journalism of Amelia Gentleman in exposing the Windrush scandal, one of the most shameful examples of human rights being disregarded and violated by the UK Government. Such journalism serves a very clear public interest purpose. For Scotland to prosper, we must respect and genuinely value the diversity of Scottish society and we must commit to sharing and debating our different views and opinions in a spirit of openness and mutual respect and dedication also to shared values and to pursuit of the common good. A strong and sustainable public interest journalism sector is essential for preserving media plurality, and that is why my previous assessor Fiona Hyslop established a short-life public interest journalism working group to consider ways to ensure the ongoing resilience and relevance of the sector. I am currently in the process of carefully considering the recommendations and I will respond to them shortly. The work of the public interest journalism working group is essential for ensuring that journalism in Scotland remains transparent and strong as a key element of Scottish democracy. Today, I joined others in celebrating the work of journalists in Scotland around the world in keeping us informed with current affairs. It is only because of journalists reporting cutting-edge stories from local news to global events that we can stay up-to-date with fast-moving situations and develop informed opinions based on facts. To close this debate, please let me take a moment to express thanks to all who work in the press industry in Scotland. It is essential that the news media strives to reflect the plurality of views and opinion in the country as a whole, and I am pleased that we continue to have a vibrant news publishing sector in Scotland. I am committed to helping to ensure its longevity, its independence and its freedom. I close this meeting of Parliament.