 Felly rwy'n cael ei ddweud ychydigiaeth. Y cyrchlet y ffordd hyn yn y mynedd y Rhath 서fferdd, 5.007994 yn unig Tom Arthur. A yw O'r Infant y Brexits i'r ystodiau mor hyn y cyryddiau Gwylwch i gywiradau a'r cyfrannol I, Tom Arthur. Y cyfrannol y maeddiad erbyn 7 munud, O'r Llywodraeth arbennwys y ffaith? I remind members of my professional background in music and my membership of the Musicians Union. This debate provides an opportunity to highlight the growing concerns over Brexit held by the Scottish and wider UK music communities. Those shared concerns are at the heart of the Musicians Union campaign to protect musicians' rights after the UK leaves the European Union. I would like to place on the record my thanks to the Musicians Union for bringing the campaign forward. I would also like to state my thanks to the members of Labour, the Greens and the Liberal Democrats who joined my SNP colleagues in supporting this motion. Before turning to the specific implications of Brexit for working musicians and the wider music sector, I would like to provide some context. It is now 16 months since the UK voted to leave the European Union. I, along with the majority of my constituents in Renfisher South and the overwhelming majority of people in Scotland, voted to remain. However, as I have stated previously in this chamber, I accept the result of that referendum. What I do not accept, however, is that the vote to leave gave the UK Government a mandate to take Scotland and the UK out of the single market and consequently end freedom of movement. That is not a view that is unique to me. It is one that I believe to be held by a majority in this Parliament. I have no doubt that even many members of the Conservative Party while publicly demurring still agree that retaining our place in the single market should be the overriding priority to quote Ruth Davidson's words to this chamber exactly one week after the Brexit vote. I do not highlight that to make an easy political point but rather to remind members of a common ground in this Parliament that has been obscured by the fog of the battle over Brexit's definition at Westminster. I hope that the debate's concerns with the makers of music, the most universal of languages, will serve to remind all of us of that shared commitment to the European project, which this Parliament expressed with near unanimity in the month preceding the referendum. The Musicians Union campaign to protect musicians' rights after Brexit has been garnering pace over the past few months. To date, nearly 20,000 people have signed online petition backing the campaign. That is not surprising given that a survey carried out by UK Music found that of those working in the sector expressing an opinion, nearly 70 per cent believe that Brexit would have a negative impact on the UK Music sector. It is therefore vital that politicians back our musicians and back the Musicians Union campaign. So far, more than 100 MPs and peers have indicated their support. Today, I hosted the Musicians Union here in our Scottish Parliament, where many MPs have pledged to support their support for musicians' rights post Brexit. I encourage all members who have not yet done so to sign the online petition, a link to which can be found on the Musicians Union website. The music campaign itself centres in five key areas—free movement, copyright protection, workers' rights, rights of EU citizens in the UK and arts funding. My remarks will give particular focus to the importance of freedom of movement and to securing the rights of EU citizens. All of us here will likely have enjoyed the benefits freedom of movement brings in allowing us to easily visit and holiday in EU countries. However, free movement is not just for the convenience of holiday makers. It crucially also permits the freedom to work in any part of the European Union. While there has rightly been much public discussion regarding the single market freedoms to trade, to sell services and move capital, for most people the only assets that they can monetise are their skills and labour. That is particularly true of performing musicians. For those musicians in Scotland and across the UK, the single market has afforded the opportunity to work in 27 other countries in access to a combined market of 500 million people with relative ease. As members of the single market, UK musicians working in EU countries do not require a visa or work permit. Membership of the customs union means that we do not need a colony that is required for transporting equipment across borders. Merchandise sold at concerts is not subject to the duties that are faced by UK acts touring, for example in the United States. Each of those particular benefits has a significant impact on the profitability of a tour, and it is equally so for musicians from other EU countries seeking to perform in the UK. Leaving the single market and customs union as planned by the UK Government, it risks the imposition of a costly bureaucratic regime that could make touring unviable for all but the most established acts. Consequently, it would hinder fledgling talent in Scotland in building a European audience and make it more difficult to attract acts from Europe to perform in Scotland. With the weakened pound caused by the Brexit vote already impacting on the UK's ability to attract international acts, an end to freedom of movement would do significant further damage to the prospects of working musicians in Scotland and the UK's wider music sector. The second area that I wish to highlight concerns the rights of those EU citizens currently living and working in Scotland and the wider UK. The 2016 UK Music Diversity Survey found that EU nationals make up 10 per cent of the UK music industry workforce compared to an estimated 7 per cent of the UK workforce as a whole. EU nationals can be found performing in our major orchestras and in the teams that support them, teaching music in schools and universities, as students such as at the Royal Conservatoire of Scotland where they make up 17 per cent of the total school of music population, and as directors and chief executives of ensembles and festivals. They are our friends, our neighbours and our colleagues who have each made an immeasurable contribution to our country in enriching and enhancing our culture and way of life. The UK Government's failure to guarantee their status is utterly shameful. In this Parliament and beyond, we must continue to make clear to EU nationals that have made Scotland their home, and that this is their country too. We must be relentless in pushing the UK Government to do the right thing and guarantee the rights of EU nationals in the UK. I first spoke in this chamber on a day when Parliament overwhelmingly voted in favour of Scotland and the UK remaining members of the European Union. The events since the 23rd of June last year have only served to strengthen my conviction, but Scotland's future is best served in partnership with our European friends and neighbours. Music as a discipline demands a capacity for empathy, understanding and co-operation. As an art, it allows individuality to flourish within a group, leadership to be shared, spontaneity within structure and the possibility to reimagine the familiar. For musicians, there is no more fitting a campaign than one that seeks to preserve our European community of musicians. I would like to thank Tom Arthur for bringing this important issue to the chamber for debate this evening. It is fitting that we will hold the debate today following on from the earlier debate on Brexit negotiations in the chamber this afternoon. I would also like to thank the Musicians Union for coming to the Parliament today and for their briefings on the topic. The disaster that is Brexit continues to unfold. The impact of the ill-advised decision to leave the single market becomes more apparent as the true scale of the chaos of the Brexit negotiations continues to unravel, with uncertainty heaped upon uncertainty. The downsides are well documented and often discussed with regard to key sectors of our economy, in agriculture, hospitality, manufacturing and financial services, to name but a few. However, the impact of Brexit reaches far beyond those key sectors, as they are. It reaches to all aspects of our economy and our society, every career choice hobby and leisure pass time that we engage in. It touches the lives and choices of everyone every day, because Brexit is not just a debating point for politicians and as a disaster unfolds the impact on the day-to-day lives of everyone in our society becomes more apparent. I am glad that Tom Arthur has raised that specific issue, because the impact of Brexit on musicians and the music industry clearly demonstrates the scope and reach of leaving the single market into all aspects of our lives on something that we understand as consumers of music, if not all as its creators. In a limited time available, I intend to focus on the impact that the decision to leave the single market will have on touring. Although I never reached the heady heights of Mr Arthur's career as a professional musician, I have some very limited experience of gigging internationally in a past life. I must declare a current interest as my brother, who has raised in a pride for more than a decade regularly tours with his band across Europe and the UK. Thechancers.cz is available for bookings at least until Brexit. Touring is the bread and butter of all bands and musicians, both large and small, making money on the road is hard enough, and it is about to get a whole lot worse for UK musicians. The short-term nature of touring means that normal permits to work, rules and bureaucracy will buy them enough for regular work are completely unsuitable for a life on the road. The end of freedom of movement, the ability to travel and work without visas or permission will cause untold problems with industry and we can see the future already. France, for example, already requires work permits for performances by artists from outside the EU. They can only be acquired by a lengthy and complex process administered by French promoters. For UK artists used to short-term visits, that would be a major and costly change. The UK already imposes restrictions on non-EU touring musicians, stricter than those of most other EU states. If that were to be replicated on UK musicians travelling to the EU post-Brexit, the impact on disruption would be significant. As not only restrictions on musicians and crews to freely move between gigs that will be disruptive, it will also prove problematic for transport of equipment, are to be classed as imports, what documentation is required to prove free export, does it comply with non-tariff barriers and product conformance regulations, what type of delays and costs will all this build into the process and what have merchandise been transported from gig to gig, a key income generator for bands and musicians, how will the import and export of such goods be facilitated in a world where truck crews at Dover will be the norm? Nothing is clear as a Brexit negotiations lurch in every direction except forward. Finally, I want to touch on the fundamental issue of the exchange of artistic ideas and expression, because Brexit not only is a challenge to the day-to-day life of musicians but also challenges some more fundamental concepts. The benefits and open Europe brings has brought over its past decades the ability for the young and not-so-young to freely mix and mingle, to exchange ideas and experiences, to understand each other's cultures and each other's music. Brexit is a challenge to those very ideals. Leaving the single market is a bad idea and the impact on working musicians is but one example of the problems that will cause across all aspects of our society. I thank Tom Arthur for bringing this debate to Parliament today. I stand before you as a former very average piano and trumpet player. The Scottish music industry makes a fantastic contribution to Scottish life. It plays a key role in the creative sector and is rightly celebrated and acknowledged as world class. Of course, we should listen to the concerns of all industries and sectors, and we should work to resolve those concerns. The UK Government has indeed noted that the contribution of the music industry and all the creative industries make to the UK economy recognises the £87 billion and more it provides to the economy and over £19 billion in exports. The UK Government is thus committed to giving all the support that is necessary for those creative industries to continue to thrive after we have left the EU. I believe that UK ministers have been working closely with the Creative Industries Council, who represent the whole of the creative industry, to understand both the possible opportunities and the impact that is presented by the UK's decision to leave the European Union. Also, round-table meetings have been held with businesses and industry representatives from across the creative industries to discuss those matters. That is the action of a Government that seeks to help the music industry and other creative industries with life outside the European Union. It is evidence of a proactive Government that sees the value in the music industry and sees its importance in the UK economically and, of course, culturally. Indeed, ministers will continue to work closely with the music sector to ensure that its needs and views are understood. The door is very much open for proactive discussion for life after Brexit. It is important, however, that we do not jump to conclusions, as people will well be aware that Brexit negotiations are under way. However, it is no doubt that the UK Government will fight tooth and nail for the best deal, and it will not sacrifice sectors or industries. It will instead work with its interests in mind. The issues that are highlighted by the musicians union are not dissimilar from other sectors. Those sectors and industry concerns, including that of the music industries, will rightfully be at the forefront of any of those discussions and negotiations. Leaving the EU door open for new opportunities such as renegotiating existing terms of trade will enable the industry to grow and develop international markets. Brexit does not mean that the world will end far from it. I looked to the quote from Mr Ashcroft of PRS on royalties who has been licensing their rights on a pan-European basis. He says that Brexit will not stop that. He also said that we are so international that we think that our business transcends that. Look at Edinburgh, Glasgow and the Scottish Borders. They are cultural hubs. They lead from the front and European cities have taken note of what we offer and sought to replicate. Why now do we assume that, because we have chosen to leave the European, that this will change? Will these cities cease to be cultural hubs? Will this be the end of the Edinburgh Festival, the Borders Book Festival and music concerts? Certainly not. There is no reason to think that they will. We should stop conflating Brexit with backwardness. The UK Government is working for a progressive Brexit and we are on this side of the chamber working towards the same. There is much progress to be made on Brexit, but it is time to shift the narrative from the pessimistic and start talking passionately and positively about the opportunities that it can bring. That means renegotiating existing terms of trade to help the music industry and to help it to grow. Instead of thinking that we might lose, let's instead think what we might gain. The UK Government is supportive of the music and creative industries and getting the best deal for them. Let's work together to find that outcome. I thank Tom Arthur for bringing forward this debate and for highlighting the key challenges that are identified by the Musicians Union as threats to their members arising from Brexit. Mr Arthur mentioned a number of issues, and some of those ought to be easier to address than others. Copyright, for example, could be assured by replicating existing protections. Rachael Hamilton suggested that that was straightforward. Under EU law, through the withdrawal bill that is being considered by MPs at Westminster. The problem, as we have heard already today, is that Tory ministers at Westminster want to take executive powers to amend such laws even while they are retained without further consulting Parliament. That undermines the assurances given, and therefore defeats the apparent purposes of the bill. It ought to be easy to do, but it is not automatic and it certainly will not follow without some significant changes to the bill that is being brought forward at Westminster. Future funding is another area where Government can act, including in this case the Scottish Government. The automatic access to creative Europe's 1.5 billion euro budget will be lost after Brexit, as well as access to programmes that are currently supported by the European Regional Development Fund. Replacement of creative Europe's funding in Scotland will be up to Scottish ministers. I hope that the minister can tell us something this evening about what the Government estimates that funding is currently worth to Scottish performers and how ministers plan to replace that after 2020. Clearly, again, replacement of EU structural funding is important to the industry, too. That will require agreement on a new framework between the UK and Scottish Governments, and we need to see a very different approach to UK-wide frameworks from the one currently contained in the EU withdrawal bill. Those matters can be sorted out on this side of the North Sea by the Scottish or the British Governments, or both. However, the threats posed by Brexit to freedom of movement and to workers' and citizens' rights can be addressed only through the negotiations between the UK and the EU. A survey by UK Music last year found that 10 per cent of the music industry workforce in the UK held a passport for another European country, compared with an estimate that 7 per cent of the British workforce as a whole. That means that, again, given Ivan McKee's contribution—no surprise—a relatively high proportion of musicians will be able to travel freely within the European economic area after Brexit, but it also reflects just how important Europe is to the sector. For the 90 per cent of British musicians who depend on freedom of movement for their opportunity to work in other European countries, an agreement on citizens' rights after Brexit will be essential. It is not an optional extra or something to be part of a negotiation process. That agreement will need to be comprehensive because of the way the industry works. Musicians are often hired to work on an individual project rather than on a long-term contract. The insecurity that that brings will become even more of an issue if EU citizens have to meet new employment criteria in order to remain post-Brexit. Of course, the same will apply to EU citizens in Europe. If there is no comprehensive agreement according to Michael Duggar, the chief executive of the UK music, subjecting European performers to the rules that are currently applied to those from elsewhere would be hugely damaging to European musicians working here and to the musicians from here working in Europe. Culture Counts, the umbrella organisation for Scotland's cultural sector, has called for the permanent free procedures used for the Edinburgh festival centre to be deployed more widely in future. We heard earlier this afternoon that there are those in this Parliament who believe that threatening and no-deal Brexit would be a clever thing to do to get more concessions during the negotiations that are on-going. In truth, the impact of such an outcome on the cultural life of Scotland would diminish us just as it would so many other sectors of society and economy. Therefore, it is time for no-dealers to waken up to that reality, start trying to reach agreement with Europe to protect our music and cultural life as well as our economy instead of planning to fail. Thank you very much. Mary Todd. We follow by Brian Whittle. Miss Todd, please. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I want to start by thanking my colleague Tom Arthur for this debate and thanks to the folks from the musicians union for their campaign. As many of you know, I am lucky enough to represent the Highlands and Islands, which is home to a vibrant traditional music scene. Because of our history of migration, we have managed to export our musical culture all over the world. We may not have welcomed all of that migration, but the beauty of gospel music from the southern states of America, which may well have its roots in Gaelic Sam singing, cannot be denied. I spoke to a lot of folk when I was preparing for this debate, and I have to say that it is very unusual for folk from the arts scene to speak with one voice, but on the subject of Brexit, the feelings and concerns that have been expressed to me are pretty much unanimous. When I ask them if Brexit will impact upon them, they answer with one voice, yes, badly. Their concerns are pretty clear. Being able to travel easily is essential for many musicians to make a living. Any extra bureaucracy or cost will have a detrimental impact. If migration from Europe is reduced, what will that do to our talent pool? Will we be able to access European funding in the future? Finally, if Brexit causes any further squeeze in public finance, which I have to say is almost certain to be the case, will arts funding be a casualty? Just yesterday, the Scotsman reported that the Celtic Connections Festival has been forced to dramatically scale back the number of overseas acts in their lineup because of the slump and sterling that has reduced their buying power so significantly. I am looking at the fantastic music festival held in Glasgow, the Celtic Connection Festival. I noticed that it featured artists from around the globe. I also noted that there were artists from Brazil, the States and from India, and it did not seem as though they had been put off by what you are describing. Mary Todd. This year, the programme that you will notice if you were a keen follower of Celtic Connections is exactly one-fifth smaller than usual because of the effect of the sterling slump on their buying power. Frankly, we will all be worse off financially and culturally as a result of Brexit, and let's remember that that is something that we did not vote for here in Scotland. In the Highlands, kids are engaged in immersed in music from primary school to school-leaver age and beyond, and the hugely popular face-ross music programme, which now extends way beyond Rosshire, is common for young musicians from home to travel all around music for festivals. Is that going to continue? One of those young musicians, Joseph Peach from Achill to Bowie, is now in his final year at the Royal Conservatoire of Scotland. He articulated very clearly and passionately his many concerns, and I will quote him directly on one aspect. He says that it is heartbreaking to look around to see world-renowned institutions like the European Baroque Orchestra and the European Youth Orchestra leaving the UK, to look around to my fellow students, lecturers even from other parts of the EU, who with the inevitable introduction of income thresholds that, at current levels, are far unrealistic for those working in the arts to meet, will be unlikely to remain here long-term. We have a plethora of musical talent in the Highlands, so I thought I would finish with some words from post-punk legend Edwin Collins, who lives in Helmsdale now and has a recording studio up there. He sang Never Known a Girl Like You Before at my celebration when I was elected, which was obviously a high point of my life. He was accompanied by a Cailey band, which is a fine example of fusion if ever there was one. He says that the UK music business is serious money, a big contributor to the GDP, but as musicians are in the industry of human happiness and personal freedoms, I remember travelling the corridors of East Germany and four full border checks to get into West Berlin, and four more to get out again. I remember massive coronary paperwork to get from Belgium to Germany or Italy to France. Musicians will always be on the side of free movement and increased co-operation between countries. Our collection agencies across Europe and the rest of the world and, therefore, our incomes rely on reciprocity. We will always be about cross pollination of ideas and against anything that seeks to divide us. On Brexit, I really think that we should rip it up and start again. Brian Whittle, to be followed by Pauline McNeill, Mr Whittle, please. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer, and I thank Tom Arthur for bringing this debate to the chamber. I am pleased to be able to speak in this debate, and I recognise Mr Arthur's particular interest in and knowledge of the music industry. He is also aware of my own interest in music, although perhaps our musical taste differs somewhat. I do not know that many years ago, when I was asked about my ambitions by a sports magazine, I answered that I actually wanted to play guitar in a rock band, and many, many years ago I did actually play guitar in a rock band. It went by the name of Oasis, although not perhaps the one that everybody recognises now. I look at it to say that, if I was asked again about my ambitions, that one would particularly remain, although I have to say that my musical career was tragically cut short through a severe lack of talent. I also wanted to state for the record that I was very much in the remain camp during the Brexit referendum, given that the business that I was a director in had its main technology office in Prague and employed talent from all over Europe and beyond. I am always disappointed to be on the losing side of that vote, but apparently we do live in a democracy. Where Mr Arthur and I agree is the importance of the economic and cultural contribution made by Scottish music industry by EU citizens and from the rest of the world for that matter, and I would definitely want that to continue. However, what his motion fails to address is the economic and cultural contribution made by Scottish citizens to the global music industry, including the EU. With much of the SNP rhetoric around Brexit, the motion fails to recognise two key points. There are two sides in this negotiation. I will happily take an intervention. It is not SNP rhetoric, it is rhetoric of the musicians union. There are 30,000 musicians across the UK, so would you like to correct that point? No, I am not going to correct that point, Mr Arthur, because it is your motion. In the rhetoric in this chamber, as I said, it continues to have to miss two points, and that is that there are two sides in the negotiation, with citizens on both sides, with similar needs. When we are only discussing EU nationals working and living in Scotland, why did Mr Arthur and his party consistently fail to mention the reciprocal arrangements required by our musicians playing their trade overseas? The world extends beyond the EU, and that world somehow manages to work with the UK quite well, thank you very much. In fact, a far greater proportion of foreign workers migrating to the UK and to Scotland have traditionally come from outside the EU, and how have they managed? What did we do before the European Union? We had to struggle along with the Beatles and the Rolling Stones and Led Zeppelin. We imported Elvis, Bob Dylan and Jimi Hendrix, who spent much of his time living in London. How on earth did we manage? I absolutely agree that we should strive to maintain the diversity and cultures in the development of the arts in many other areas, and with that in mind I am happy to continue to encourage any musician from anywhere in the world to come and apply their trade in Scotland. The reality is that when Brexit is finally agreed, musicians from around the world, including the EU, will continue to be welcomed to Scotland, as well as an opportunity for Scotland musicians to travel and work around the world. The Prime Minister, as we have already heard her earlier on today, has unequivocally stated that all EU nationals living and working legitimately in the EU she wants to remain. That is the number of the issue here, I think, for the SNP. A successful Brexit kills her own constitutional ambition stone dead, so they are doing everything that they can possibly to throw as many spanners in the works as they can. Far from trying to aid a positive outcome for the UK and Scotland, what the SNP is doing is hiding behind Brexit in the hope that it deflects away from the failings in other governmental departments. Music is an international global industry, so I will hopefully continue to enjoy many music events throughout Scotland, as is my want. I am quite confident that Brexit will not affect those events no matter where the artists come from. I have recently enjoyed—I go to many concerts and recently enjoyed—Alterbridge in Edinburgh and I have just purchased tickets to see Brian Adams. Brexit will not affect those events one bit, and I will continue to welcome those acts from around the world to Scotland. My sincere thanks to Tom Arthur for choosing to bring this motion for debate, like others that I have learned this evening. Fellow musicians in the chamber, I declare my own interest as a practising musician—in fact, I am currently touring Glasgow—and that is challenging enough, let me tell you. If you talk to musicians who do not have the full entourage paid for and they do it themselves, they will tell you that it is not a glamorous profession. When you pack your gear, you do it yourself. Tom knows this. It takes hours to set up and hours to derig just to get the chance to play for an hour or two, but you have to live it. As you can see, music is a passion for me, but it is for many Scots. In fact, Scotland sells more live tickets than any other part of the United Kingdom. That is why I think that the debate that Tom Arthur has brought this evening is important because music deserves our attention, particularly in relation to Brexit. Scotland is always punched above its weight when it comes to music. I was pleased to hear the mention of the wonderful Edwin Collins, but there is the mention of a few others, Franz Ferdinand, Biffy Clyro, Travis Katie-Stunsell, one of my own favourites, and the fantastic Pauline Netini. Scotland has a lot to offer when it comes to music. However, it is a mistake to not conclude that Brexit will be easy for musicians who are touring around coming to Britain. I think that the impact will be hard felt. There is a potential for a great deal of harm if we do not get the Brexit arrangements correct. I would like to add my voice to the musicians union petition about the serious and potential consequences of leaving the European Union. The music sector has always needed a bit of support because it thinks about all the top acts that you know. Nowadays, Brian Whittle talks about the Beatles managing it in 1967, but many bands tour with a lot more equipment now and there are some acts that are much, much, much bigger. It is not just the freedom of movement of people, but it is also negotiating the equipment as they move around. Thank you very much for allowing me to intervene. I wonder if you would agree with me that what did not happen back in the 1960s, and certainly has been happening in the last few years, is the opportunity for young people from Scotland to travel all over Europe and participate in festivals that celebrate our shared Celtic musical heritage? That seems to be true. I was quite staggered. I did not know that Celtic connections had to just the size because of the problems with freedom of movement. I was not aware of that at all. There are serious concerns to overcome. It is based on the simple notion that being part of the European Union has meant that for musicians they are fairly able to travel without barriers and take all their instruments and equipment with them. Scotland has a reputation for defending our excellence in music, and, as Maurice Todd said, it is the extent of live music these days that has had the biggest impact in interaction with Europe. It would be a serious loss to Scotland if there were touring and performing acts that had to scale back, which has been suggested by some serious people in advance of the debate. As others have said, we would be a far less vibrant country if we did not have the full presence of music and performing arts. All our lives would be less fun without that diverse choice of music. Therefore, I fully support the motion and the petition by the musicians that the union presented. Thank you very much. I call Gillian Martin. Again, thank you to Tom Arthur for securing what has been a very interesting and important debate. I want to talk about part-time or amateur musicians. I feel that I should declare an interest, albeit not a financial one, as the wife of a musician who juggles his life as a teacher with that as a lead singer in his spare time, one who has played all over the EU in the past and is quite the opposite of a financial interest. In fact, the partner of any part-time musician will tell you that the only money that seems to go in any direction seems to be out the door rather than back in the door. I have another interest to declare as well. My father and my niece are in the Eleanor district pipe band together. They have had a very close relationship with Musaic in Belgium for about the last 20 years, albeit not my niece but my father. I have gone over to Musaic a couple of times a year, and they have enjoyed freedom of movement opportunities that have brought in great friendships that have built up as a result of that. Some of the professional part-time novice or amateur musicians could be the ones that are completely squeezed out of the opportunities to perform in other EU countries as a result of Brexit. The barely break even is that membership of the EU and all that brings—we have mentioned today—freedom of movement, customs union, membership of the single market, and the gateway to UK performers being able to access international audiences. A band or performer squeezing in a tour or a festival performance between their other commitments, for whom it is not their main occupation, is lucky to recover the costs of their overheads as a result of those endeavours. More restrictions on them could be the difference between them playing overseas or not. How much more fundraising are Ellen and District Pipe Band going to have to do to continue the relationship that they have with their friends in Musaic? What a terrific shame it would be if they decided that it was not worth it. Of course, the same applies to young bands wanting to make a name for themselves whenever they can, accessing opportunities in EU countries with the minimum of red tape and expense. That is not just a shame, but it is crucial for the future success of the Scottish and UK music industry, as many people have mentioned before me. Let us look at what a hard Brexit or a no-deal situation could mean to performers. Out with the EU, you are in a customs carny requirement situation, which has been mentioned onerous. At the moment, you are performing in EU countries, you pack up your kit, you fly out with it, you collect it from the carousel, you perform with it and you come back home again. No red tape, no more planning other than the normal carny restrictions on luggage, and you are travelling insurance. No proof required that you are not going to sell it in that gear while you are in that EU country. If you sell it in a single market, it is all as well. There is a freedom of movement aspect. Would it be realistic for a semi-professional musician or a band heading into a country to get a work visa for a one-off performance in a festival, the fee for which it might even cover the travel costs at all? How much would that visa cost? How long would it take to get? It is all beginning to sound that it is just not worth it. At the moment, the cost of travelling to a gig in an EU country, whether that is part of a festival line-up or one-off gig, is probably going to cancel out any fee for that gig, but we do not necessarily do that for the money. However, all the same, you will have less semi-professional musicians or young bands taking up those opportunities if it really starts to cost them. That will mean that only wealthy kids can be in bands that take up those opportunities. The best bands I know came out of the working class. Everyone knows that, but I need to mention them. One way that you make a performance in another EU country equitable is by selling merchandise when you are there. If you sell enough CDs and t-shirts and badges or whatever, you might cover some of the costs. However, hang on in the future, Brexit UK will not be part of the single market. To sell your merch, you might need some kind of export licence on top of the customs currency and the work visa. How much will that cost and how long will you have to wait for that and what paperwork is involved in that? It is really starting to not look that it is worth it. I guess what I am saying is that there is a lot more to music than big, successful touring bands with managers, accountants and record companies behind them doing all that paperwork and all that red tape management. However, consider this, not one of those big, professional touring bands has not ever been in that situation for that young, struggling band or that semi-professional band or juggling a job and doing it at the weekends. If we do not encourage those people, we are going to end up with a music industry that has only got wealthy kids becoming bands and I do not really want to listen to that kind of music. We stop with the ease at which Scottish and UK musicians make their name internationally and reach a wider audience. You are going to make it more difficult for the success stories to emerge into the story. Thank you very much. I call on Michael Russell to close the Government. Minister, seven minutes and no need to make a declaration of musical talents unless you feel that it is necessary. I am glad that you already recognise the talent that exists, Presiding Officer. I congratulate Tom Arthur on putting this issue to Parliament and welcome Caroline Sewell and Jennifer Laidler from the Musicians Union to the gallery today. This has been the Musicians Union campaign and it has had the strong support of many in this Parliament and I have to say that the Scottish Government agrees with the terms of the motion. Brexit and particularly an end to free movement could undoubtedly have a negative impact on the Scottish music industry. The single market not only supports Scottish and EU musicians in the business sense, it allows artists to circulate, collaborate across borders, change ideas, courage its creativity and it means that there is much innovation. Indeed, I was struck by a point that Marie Todd made that in the sense that free movement is the exact parallel of artistic freedom. It allows that cross politic nation of ideas, it is the essence of artistry. If you crack down on that, if you mean to say that free movement is no longer available, then inevitably you are going to diminish the ability of musicians to contribute to society and to contribute to each other. Scotland has a rich tradition across all musical forms. We have had some of that tonight, some of its presence in this chamber and national performing companies of international reputations in classical music. Scottish traditional music and its influence is known the world over and again Marie Todd made that point very eloquently. Our contemporary artists are at the cutting edge of many different genres. I have to say that my own musical interests are, as Mr Arthur knows, slightly eclectic. I studied music at school. There is not much that I like that was composed after 1900 and virtually nothing after 1940. I remember having a visit to my house in Argyll from Ann Lauren Gillis, who looked in the days when there were CDs and who looked at my massive rack of CDs because I am very enthusiastic about music with some incomprehension to discover that the bulk of them represented English romantic composers of the 19th century. However, we all have our particular fondnesses and, as Pauline McNeill has pointed out, diversity in music, as in many other things, is to be welcomed. I suspect that I pretty much endorse Albert Schweitzer's view of music, who said that the way to overcome the misery of life and, in my case, the misery of Brexit, is to be fond of both music and cats. I have to say that I endorse both of those things. It is a pity that the debate was heard. I have to think that Brian Whittle is genuinely fond of rock music. I would be interested to see him performing, although I am sure that I would not like it, but that is nothing to do with Brian Whittle. That is to do my own personal taste. Maybe it is something to do with Brian Whittle, but not an awful lot. I was also sorry to hear both Brian Whittle and Rachel Hamilton take the position that I think Citizen Smith took in that television programme, which essentially is good news, comrade. The butter ration has been cut. There is apparently to be no difference from freedom of movement. Freedom of movement can be abolished with no consequences at all for the music industry. That is not what the musicians union say, of course. Brian Whittle, I thank you for taking an intervention. I would be delighted to bring my Gibson SG in and deafen you. Does the member recognise that, in Glasgow, the third biggest city in the world for live music, as was recently established, and that, predominantly, a lot of that live music comes from well-outside the EU, especially from United States of America? Yes, I recognise that, but it is not either or. That is the equivalent of the line that Michael Gove has taken in debate with me, which is to say that he does not believe in a migration policy that makes a difference between the Polish plumber and the Bangladeshi builder. The trouble with the Tory positions is that the Tories do not want either of them to be here. If the argument was that freedom of movement was being abolished but there would be a much wider view of allowing people into the country, I could sort of understand it, but it would not make much difference. However, abolishing freedom of movement goes hand-in-hand with a view that migration is not desirable. We have seen that at cultural events and festivals this very year in Scotland. That is part of an overall approach from the Conservative Government, which seeks to restrict entry into this country. We are over an approach that was not voted for by Rachel Hamilton's constituents nor by those who voted for the area in which Mr Whipple represents, because Scotland said no to Brexit, and that meant saying no to the end of freedom of movement. Yet again, we have heard from the Tories that this is what they want to impose. Now, there is bound to be an effect, no matter how small there is bound to be an effect, and the musicians' union are absolutely right about that. What it puts at risk is some really important things. Let me just mention two or three of them, Presiding Officer. The national performing companies are 21 per cent non-UK EU nationals in the permanent performing staff. We know that those people are affected by Brexit. Amy MacDonald recently stated in The Times that she would consider relocating from Glasgow, from that great city, to the continent due to concerns about Brexit and her ability to attract people to play with her. Edinburgh's festivals have audiences of more than £4.5 million. In 2016, the international festival had 2,000 artists from overseas, the largest group of whom were from the rest of the EU. Free movement supports that amazing international showcase. Music tourism is valuable to the Scottish economy. A report by UK Music in 2016 called Wish You Were Here indicated that there were 1.2 million music tourists in Scotland in 2016, many of whom would have come from the EU. We welcome the recent report by the Creative Industries Federation into global talent. It addresses the creative industries as a whole and not just music. It demonstrates the scale of the challenge that Brexit presents to all creative and cultural organisations. It shows the vital role that non-UK nationals play. That is not to say that some will not be here, but freedom of movement is tailor made to make so as many as possible come here. They have the opportunity to do whatever they want, and, moreover, artists can go elsewhere without let or hindrance, a point that Marie Todd made. I am sure that there are people throughout the continent of Europe who wish to hear Mr Arthur play. We should be keen to export him—not permanently, of course—but we should be keen to export him to make sure that he is heard. There may be even those who wish to hear Mr Whittle on his Gibson. We should not deny them that opportunity in Berlin or Barcelona, but it will be denied if Brexit goes ahead. I just want to make it absolutely clear that Tom Arthur and the Musicians Union are right on this matter. Brexit will impact on music as it will impact on all cultural industries and on all aspects of our lives. Mr Chapman was asking us earlier to be cheerful. There are no reasons to be cheerful about Brexit, but it is time that the Tories admitted it.