 The next item of business will be a statement by the First Minister on Scotland's place in Europe, and the First Minister will take questions at the end of her statement, if there are no interventions or interruptions at this stage. Just before our summer recess, Parliament gave the Scottish Government a mandate to explore all options to protect Scotland's relationship with the European Union. Over the summer, I have updated Parliament on two occasions in writing. Today, I will provide further information on our work, on our priorities and how we intend to involve Parliament as we move forward. Since the referendum, our first priority has been reassurance. That has included seeking to do everything that we can to reassure non-UK EU citizens living here in Scotland. Let me say at the outset that it is a disgrace that the UK Government has not yet guaranteed the position of EU citizens. I call again today on the Prime Minister to do the right thing and stop using human beings as bargaining chips. We have also taken targeted steps to support and promote economic stability. Last month, I set out a £100 million economic stimulus plan. Yesterday, I announced that a £500 million Scottish growth scheme will form a central part of our programme for government. In taking those steps, we are acting on our obligation to mitigate the immediate effects of the referendum result and we will continue to do so. We also have to be realistic about the long-term consequences of leaving the EU. Those who are complacently crowing that the sky has not fallen in on the economy will do well to remember that Brexit has not happened yet, it has not even started. The reality, as every sensible economic commentator recognises, is that leaving the EU will weaken the economy. The damage will be even deeper if, as all the signals suggest, the UK is heading for a hard Brexit outside the single market as well as outside the EU. Applying the UK Government's own analysis to Scotland suggests that this could result in our GDP being more than £10 billion lower than if we remain in the EU. The impact of that will be felt in jobs, trade, investment and living standards. The G28 summit at the weekend was a harsh reminder of the consequences of Brexit. The US made clear that there would be no preferential treatment for the UK in trade talks and the Japanese Government set out in detail the potential implications of leaving the single market. A loss of company headquarters, a hit to exports, turmoil in labour markets, damage to financial services and cuts to research and development investment. There is no doubt that leaving the EU will be an extraordinary self-inflicted blow to the UK's competitiveness and it will be compounded if the decision is to leave the single market as well. That is why it is so essential that we work to retain the benefits of our EU membership. Over the summer, I set out the national interests that are at stake, our democratic and economic interests, our interests in social protection and solidarity and our interests in influencing the world that we live in. As I said in the morning after the referendum, we are committed to pursuing all possible options to protect those interests. Of course, our ability to fully assess the different options will be constrained until we start to get some clarity about what the UK Government is seeking to achieve. That is one of the many reasons why, 10 weeks on from the referendum, it is so frustrating that the Tories are no further forward in setting out what Brexit actually means. What we have in place of a policy is a meaningless, tautological soundbite. Indeed, the position of the UK Government became even more farcical this week when the only scrap of substantive detail that David Davis volunteered in his statement to the House of Commons was immediately disavowed by the Prime Minister. A Prime Minister who then earlier today was unable or unwilling to answer the simple question, does she want to see the UK State in the single market, yes or no? However, as the position of the UK Government does take shape ahead of article 50 being triggered, as surely it must, it is essential that Scotland's voice is heard. To that end, we have been working hard over the summer in discussions with UK Government officials, and we continue to press for urgent clarification of how the UK will deliver on the Prime Minister's commitment to full involvement for Scotland. I hope to be able to confirm soon, along with the UK Government and other devolved Governments, how that engagement will work in practice. The Parliament's approval of the appointment of Michael Russell yesterday ensures that we will have a dedicated Minister leading for Scotland in this process, and we are also working closely with the other devolved Administrations, the Crown Dependencies and the Government of Gibraltar to make common cause where we can. However, let me be crystal clear about this, and it is a point that I have made directly to the UK Government. The Scottish Government will not be window dressing in a talking shop to allow the UK Government to simply tick a box. We expect to have, along with the other devolved Administrations, a role in decision making. We expect our engagement to be meaningful. That was the commitment given by the Prime Minister and one that I am sure this Parliament expects to see delivered in full. Assuming that it is, we will enter into and take part in those discussions in good faith. The approach that we will take will be exactly as I set out on the morning after the referendum. We will pursue all options to protect Scotland's interests. First, we will seek to use whatever influence we have to shape the best or, more accurately, the least bad outcome, not just for Scotland but for the whole UK. In my view, that does mean that the UK is continuing as a member of the single market. I accept that the Prime Minister has a mandate in England and Wales to leave the EU, but I do not accept that she has a mandate to take any part of the UK out of the single market. Indeed, during the referendum, many leave campaigners said explicitly that leaving the EU did not mean leaving the single market. I hope that all parties in this chamber will back us as we make that case, and I also hope that we can make common cause with others of like mind across the UK. Secondly, and regardless of the direction that the UK Government decides to take, we will seek to find ways to protect as best we can Scotland's place in Europe and our vital national interests and embed them in the UK's negotiating strategy. Our standing council of experts met for the second time last week and is already working on a spectrum of options to protect what matters most to Scotland and to consider the additional powers that our Parliament would need to make them work. For example, how can we protect the benefits to our businesses of the single market and free movement? How can we protect workers' rights, the place of our universities in horizon 2020, the continued ability of our students to participate in Erasmus and the enhanced security that comes from Europe and the European arrest warrant? As they are developed, we will assess the options against the five key interests that I set out in the summer. We will update Parliament further on the progress of this work in the coming weeks and I will also appear before the European Committee next week. We also intend to propose a series of parliamentary debates over the next few weeks on the implications of Brexit in key areas such as the economy, rural affairs, education and the environment. Those debates will give all members the opportunity to have their say on the issues that the Scottish Government should be prioritising as our discussions with the UK Government develop. I also issue an open invitation to all party leaders today to submit to us their views and options that they think we should be proposing as part of this process. Mike Russell and his officials will be happy to meet with them to discuss any suggestions that they wish to make. We are determined to do everything and examine every option to protect Scotland's interests. As I have said before, that must include the option to consider independence if it becomes clear that our interests cannot be protected within the UK. To give up the right to even consider that option would be to accept that we are at the mercy of Westminster decisions, no matter how damaging or destructive they are to our economy, our society and our place in the world. That is not a position anyone with Scotland's best interests at heart should ever be prepared to accept. Presiding Officer, our focus in the months ahead will be very much on seeking to positively influence the UK's negotiating position ahead of article 50 being triggered. As we do so, however, we will also continue our work to ensure an awareness and understanding of Scotland's position across EU institutions and member states. Since the referendum, I have had direct discussions with the presidents of the EU commission and the European Parliament, the Taoiseach, the Prime Minister of Malta, who is likely to hold the EU presidency when article 50 is triggered, and the German Minister for Europe. I also attended the extraordinary summit of the British Irish Council at the end of July. Fiona Hyslop has met with the ambassadors of a number of EU member states, and those discussions will continue in the weeks and months ahead. The circumstances that we now face are not of our making and they are certainly not of the choosing of most of us in this chamber. The responsibility for uncertainty lies not with those of us seeking solutions, but with those who have so recklessly taken us to the brink of EU exit against our will. However, it is now for all of us to seek to shape the response. The Scottish Government will lead that process, but in doing so, we welcome the support, the contribution and indeed the challenge of Parliament. As we continue to consider the best way forward, my assurance is this. Our guiding principle will continue to be at all times the best interests of the people of Scotland. We will now move to questions. If members could press their request-to-speak button, Ruth Davidson. Thank you, Presiding Officer, and I thank the First Minister for early sight of her statement. Firstly, may I say that there is no one here who is complacently crowing about the impact of Brexit? Maybe the First Minister wasn't listening, but both the Prime Minister and myself have said in recent days that there may well be difficult times ahead and we should all acknowledge it. However, I have some specific questions about the First Minister's own responsibilities. Firstly, in the wake of the Brexit vote, a group of our leading trade bodies said that, in response, this Scottish Government should respond by, and I quote, reviewing domestic areas of control, including supportive taxation rates. I would like to ask if the First Minister or her team has held any discussions with these groups relating to those concerns. Secondly, the UK Government has guaranteed funding for many EU-funded projects that support economic development across the UK until 2020. Will the Scottish Government make that same commitment in devolved areas such as fishing? Lastly, on our comments today on independence, when the First Minister first spoke to the chamber about the referendum result in June, we alone expressed our concerns that the SNP's planned activities were concerned primarily with its on-going campaign. I believe that this summer has proved us right. I see that Willie Rennie has recognised this also and now withdrawn Liberal Democrat support. I note that, in recent days, the Scottish Government has rolled back on its earlier proclamations and is now talking of coalitions with UK Government ministers and co-operation with all the UK Administrations in good faith. Unfortunately, despite the new charm offensive from Mr Russell and the First Minister, our concerns on this side of the house remain. For example, the First Minister declares that independence will be considered and I quote, only if it is in the clear and best or only way to protect our membership of the EU. Can the First Minister honestly tell the chamber under what circumstances and on what issue she has ever concluded that it is not the best option for Scotland? More fundamentally, I repeat the question that I asked earlier in the summer. Nicola Sturgeon says that leaving this trading block is bad for Scotland, so why does she believe that leaving one that is four times as important in terms of trade is the answer to any of today's questions? The First Minister said that. Well, let me answer each of Ruth Davidson's questions in turn. I met with the key business organisations in Scotland in the week following the referendum. We have responded positively to the suggestions that they made. Our decision earlier in the summer, I confirmed this yesterday to set up a post referendum business network, which was something that they specifically called for. My announcement yesterday about the Scottish growth scheme came from a desire to see policies that will boost economic growth, and we can continue to consider other aspects of the business community as we formulate our budget plans. One of Mike Russell's key responsibilities, along with Keith Brown and other ministers, will be to engage closely with interests affected right across the spectrum of interests in Scotland. Secondly, we will guarantee interests in Scotland where we have the power to do so. Indeed, it was this Government before the UK Government had even begun to work out its position on any of those issues that guaranteed free tuition for European Union students coming to study here this year. The guarantee that has been given by the UK Government in terms of structural funds and support for farmers is partial and short term, and I hope to see them give one that is full and long term in the not too distant future. In terms of the question of independence, I will always seek to act in the interests of the people of Scotland. I would say two things in response to Ruth Davidson. Firstly, it really is unbecoming of anybody to stand up in this Parliament or anywhere in Scotland and to talk about the prospect of Scotland seeking to protect its EU membership is somehow turning our back on a single market across the UK when Tory colleagues of Ruth Davidson are going to Ireland and saying that Brexit does not mean a border with independent Ireland, it does not mean barriers to trade. The Tories cannot say one thing in Ireland and then say the exact opposite here in Scotland. Lastly, I will always seek to behave in the best interests of the people of Scotland. That is why I will not rule out options that may be required to protect Scotland's interests. However, I think that Ruth Davidson should be reflecting and reflecting very hard on that. Why was it that, two years ago, she said to the people of Scotland that the only way to guarantee membership of the European Union was to vote against independence and now that her party has taken us to the brink of exit, she is still trying to say that independence in no circumstances is the answer to that. It is Ruth Davidson that is inconsistent and is learning down the interests of the people of Scotland. I welcome the First Minister's statement and the invite to sit down with her new European Minister. As we have repeatedly made clear, the Labour party supports the Government's efforts to secure Scotland's place in the European Union. That includes the First Minister's efforts to meet with Governments around the world, to seek to find a means to retain our EU membership, but also that wider economic case around emphasising that Scotland is very much still open for business. However, there has been a shift in the First Minister's approach in recent days. Previously, her stated aim had been to retain our EU membership, but on Monday the First Minister appeared to only be seeking access to the single market. Can she comment on that shift and confirm whether or not she has received any legal advice on this issue and, indeed, whether she intends to publish it? The First Minister. Can I say to Kezia Dugdale that, firstly, I appreciate the support that she has given and that her party, in a unified sense, is giving. There is no shift in the Scottish Government's position. I have just seen a comment—I do not know whether it is true or not—a comment to the effect that Jeremy Corbyn's spokesperson has said that it is not Labour's position to argue for continued membership of the single market. I certainly hope that that is not the position of the Scottish Labour Party. I have said all along that I will examine all options to protect Scotland's interests. There is no doubt that what I see as the best option is to retain her membership of the European Union, and I will be working to seek to do that. However, I will also be working along the way to try to protect all the aspects of European Union membership that we possibly can. That is what I mean by keeping all options on the table. It is also what I mean by not ruling out any options. If it turns out that the only way to protect her membership of the European Union is to consider—and I stress consider—whether we should be an independent country, I do not think that it is right to take that option away from the people of Scotland. That is perhaps one of the differences between our positions. In terms of the advice that we are taking, the Scottish Government will take out a range of advice. I talked earlier about the standing council of experts, which is in the early stages of giving us advice across a whole range of the issues that we have to consider. I will be as open and transparent with Parliament as possible. As I have said before, we are going into a period that will involve a range of different negotiations and we will have to develop our position depending on how the position of the UK Government develops. However, I want to make sure that we harness the involvement of this Parliament, and that is why it offers to people across the chamber to be fully involved as a genuine one. I hope that all party leaders will take it up. Willie Rennie I thank the First Minister for an advanced copy of her statement. On Monday, the First Minister told us that she was reaching out to build a coalition with pro-EU Conservative ministers in London. Today it was not even mentioned in the statement. Can the First Minister update me on that initiative? Have any Conservative ministers joined that coalition or was it all just flimflam? The First Minister Willie Rennie clearly decided not to listen to what I said today. What I have said is that what we will do as part of examining all options is that, as one of those options, we will try to see if we can use our influence to get the UK into the least worst position. In my view, that is staying in the single market. I think that I explicitly said in my statement that we will seek to make common cause with people of light mind across the UK. That remains the position. I noticed over the latter part of the summer that Willie Rennie said that he was no longer part of the consensus to protect Scotland's interests. Given how long it has been since Liberal Democrats have ever done anything to protect Scotland's interests, I do not think that anybody will notice the difference. Presiding Officer, this Government will continue to do everything that we can, examine all options, leave no stone unturned to seek to protect the vital interests of Scotland that are at stake. Let me tell you, if we have to struggle along without the merry band of Liberal Democrats, we will just have to do it. Ross Greer Thank you. I welcome the First Minister's statement and thank her for advancing notice of it. Given the concerns raised at this morning's Education and Skills Committee, can the First Minister confirm when the Scottish Government will be clarifying the funding arrangements for EU non-UK students studying at Scottish universities in the year 2017-18 to ensure that we do not lose out on those talented international students? Given that it was raised in her statement, would she be able to clarify what confirmation she has given to Japanese businesses in Scotland regarding their place here after the publication of the letter from the Japanese Government? The First Minister On the first question, which is a very important question about the position of non-UK EU student studying here, as I said in response to one of the previous questions, we have given that guarantee for this academic year. Clearly, we are now considering and engaging with the sector about extending that guarantee to those who will be seeking to come to study here for the next academic year, and we hope to be able to confirm our position on that very soon. In terms of the response to the Japanese publication at the weekend, I have to say that it is quite extraordinary that the Japanese Government has managed to publish far more detail about the implications of Brexit than the United Kingdom Government has managed to do two whole months after the referendum result. We will be engaging with Japanese companies and indeed inward investors from all parts of the world here in Scotland intensively in the period ahead. Keith Brown and Mike Russell will be leading that for the Scottish Government and will be seeking to use the information and the intelligence that they give us to feed that into the UK negotiations. That is all part of protecting Scotland's interests, of seeking to ensure that Scotland remains an attractive open place for people to do business, because that is absolutely essential to the health of our economy. Richard Lochhead I welcome the First Minister's statement and also her appointment of Michael Russell to his new role as well. Michael Russell will have a tough job, because during my visits to Brussels as part of UK delegations, I found the UK conducted two kinds of negotiations that affected Scotland, negotiations that he told us about and sometimes involved us in, and others that he kept us in the dark. Therefore, the FM satisfied that the Prime Minister and all her ministers will include Scotland in all formal and informal discussions and negotiations between the EU and the UK. Does she agree that, in terms of intra-government relations within the UK, UK ministers must be fully transparent at all times about what has been negotiated and discussed in formal or informal settings? Thank you to Richard Lochhead for those questions. In terms of the First, will Scotland be fully and meaningfully engaged in the UK negotiations and the development of the UK position? The honest answer is that that remains to be seen. I hope that that is the case, that is the commitment that we have been given by the Prime Minister and that is the commitment that we are working with the UK Government right now to turn into reality. We certainly want that to be the case, and if that is the case, we will go into those discussions in good faith and seek to play a constructive and a positive role. As I said in my statement, we will not simply be window dressing, we will not take part in a talking shop, we expect to be meaningfully engaged and I hope to be in a position to say more to Parliament about that very soon. In terms of the transparency of the UK Government in both the development of its position and then how it seeks to achieve that position, I do think that that is really important. I have been concerned by some of the comments of the Prime Minister today when she has said that she will not have a running commentary on the negotiations. I accept that, although negotiations are underway, there are aspects of that that have to be done behind closed doors, but I do not think that it is acceptable to have a cloud of secrecy hanging over the UK Government's negotiating position. I do not think that it is acceptable to have a Prime Minister that is unable or unwilling to answer the simple question should we remain in the single market or not. The UK Government, I suspect right now, is using phraseology to mask the fact that it does not yet have a clue what it is seeking to achieve, let alone what its chances of achieving that are. Before we get too much further into this, there must be greater transparency from the UK Government, so people across the country can judge whether or not what the UK is trying to achieve meets our national interests or not. Jackson Carlaw. There will be time to debate the wider content of the statement next week, but suffice to say today that that was one of the most belligerent and have calculated to enhance Scotland's immediate influence, self-defeating statements from any First Minister. During our busy summer tours, can the First Minister, for the avoidance of doubt, confirm which EU member state heads of government with whom she has not met or spoken directly since June 23? Is she just to paraphrase her own words earlier this afternoon and, as our tone today suggests, destined to define herself as a window-shopper in these negotiations? I think that the tone and the lack of any substance in that question really does expose just how little detail or substance there is in the Conservative position on this at all. Let me say to Jackson Carlaw without a single word of apology. When it comes to standing up for Scotland's interests, I get pretty belligerent, because that is my job as First Minister is to stand up for the interests of this country. Right now, the interests of this country are under threat because of the actions of the Conservative Government at Westminster, and somebody needs to stand up for Scotland, and that is the job of this Government. I would also like to thank the First Minister for an early sight of her statement. Beyond the autumn statement later this year, no guarantees have been given for key EU funds, with hundreds of millions and supporting jobs and infrastructure projects and communities right across Scotland. What reassurance has the Scottish Government had from the UK Government in this regard? There is no reassurance to anybody affected by this decision from the UK Government whatsoever. Joe McAlpine rightly says that no assurance has been given about structural funds or payments to farmers beyond the autumn statement. It is much worse than that. We cannot even yet get the UK Government to confirm what the date of the autumn statement is. There is no great expectation at the moment that it is even going to be in autumn, as far as I can tell. There is no detail from the UK Government on its Brexit negotiating strategy. There is no detail on the date of its autumn statement or what its fiscal position is likely to be after the autumn statement. In place of Government policy at UK level right now, as I said earlier on, all we have is meaningless soundbites. That is not good enough. It might have got the new Prime Minister through the summer. It is not going to get her very much further. Lewis Macdonald The First Minister reports that the Government's standing council is in the early stage of formulating advice on a spectrum of options for protecting Scotland's vital interests and that close working arrangements are already under way with other devolved Administrations. That is welcome, as those are both critical areas going forward. However, in order to set a good example in transparency, I wonder if the First Minister will outline how that work will be supported over the period ahead, how many officials will support the new minister for UK negotiations in Scotland's place in Europe, how many are dedicated to working with the standing council, and what budget has been set aside for those purposes. The First Minister I am more than happy to provide that information. Clearly, we are putting together a team of officials. We have already substantially done that over the summer period that are able to support the work of the Scottish Government going forward. We will require to be flexible about that, as the demands of those negotiations become clearer. From day one, I have made clear that I want to be in a position where we are fully equipped to deal with whatever we require to deal with. That is why I set up the standing council. That is why I have appointed Mike Russell as a dedicated minister to lead this, and we will make sure that that is supported by the right officials across the Scottish Government. Clearly, there is a team of officials supporting that work directly, but that is work that has an impact across most aspects of the Scottish Government's work. We have to make sure that different departments and different interests in the Scottish Government are fully involved in that. Mike Russell will be absolutely happy to write to members who are interested to set out the structure and the detail of that. From memory, I wrote to Kezia Dugdale over the summer, providing an update on where that work was. I am happy to develop that and provide an update on it to members. Stuart McMillan As someone who has benefited from EU funding to undertake my university education, I have huge concerns about continuing funding for exchange programmes. Can the First Minister confirm her support for EU exchange programmes and the Erasmus programme, and will she commit to ensure that international look is high on the agenda in any discussions that she has with the UK Government and also with EU member states? The First Minister I specifically mentioned Erasmus in the statement that I made. I think that Erasmus is hugely important. It is one of the benefits of EU membership that has very hard economic benefits, but it has benefits that are more intangible as well. When you speak to, as I am sure most members have, to students who have either come here as part of Erasmus or Scottish students who have gone overseas, what they tell you about the experience and the development that they have enjoyed as a result of that underlines the importance of it. I think that it would be tragic if we lost in any way the benefits of schemes like that. So it will be very much one of the priorities that we take forward as we try to protect the interests that I have already spoken about. Thank you, First Minister. That concludes questions on the First Minister's statement. We shall now move on to the next business, which is the continuation of the programme for government, and we will take a few moments just to change seats.