 The next item of business is a debate on motion 3049, in the name of Alistair Allan, on welcoming international migrants in Scotland. Can I invite members who wish to speak the debate to press the request to speak buttons now? I call Alistair Allan to speak to and move the motion. Minister, please, 12 minutes. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I am honoured to be here today to acknowledge International Migrants Day 2016, which takes place this Sunday. To mark this day, the UN encourages us to share information on the rights and freedoms of migrants and to design actions to ensure their protection. Today, I hope not only to recognise the rights of migrants and Scotland's duty to offer a place of protection and safety, but also to send a warm message of welcome to all those who have chosen to make Scotland their home. That message of welcome extends to all who have come to Scotland from other countries, whether they are seeking asylum and refuge, choosing to work or study here or joining family here. The motion is therefore using the word migrant in its widest sense. However, we must remember that all of those people are individuals with their own stories and their own sets of circumstances. I want to mark this day by highlighting the valuable contribution that migrants bring to Scotland's economy and the vibrancy that they bring to our society and culture. Following the EU referendum, it is more important than ever to stand up against negative rhetoric surrounding immigration and to strive to provide a welcoming and tolerant society for migrants in Scotland. To begin, I am sure that members around the chamber will join me in recognising Scotland's moral obligation to offer a place of safety to desperate people fleeing conflict and persecution. It is with great sadness that I note the increasing number of fatalities in the Mediterranean since the beginning of 2016. The number of people who have tragically lost their lives this year in the Mediterranean, while attempting to escape conflict or destitution, has risen to 4,690. That is some 1,125 more people than this time last year. However, numbers such as those used so frequently to describe the size and scale of human tragedies tend to strip away the humanity and, subsequently, the devastation caused by each individual death. Let me put the number into context. The number 4,690 is about 17 per cent or equivalent to about 17 per cent of my constituency's population. That number includes men, women and children who were not fortunate enough to experience peace and a decent standard of living in their native countries. Let us remember those brave and courageous people today and focus on how we can support measures to ensure that migrants and refugees are protected in the future. Moving forward, it is essential that we work. I will, yes. I am very grateful to the minister for taking the intervention and I would certainly concur with the comments that he has made to date. I do not know whether he is planning to turn to the situation in relation to the dismantling of the camp in Calais, but there has obviously been a great deal of concern around the welfare of unaccompanied children. The Parliament would benefit from an update on the steps that are being taken by the Scottish Government to secure the interests of those most vulnerable children and young people. I very much agree with the sentiments that the member expresses about the particular responsibility that we all have towards unaccompanied children and the particularly concerning situation of people who have been through the experience that they have been through in Calais. The Scottish Government has always made clear that we stand ready to do our share and more to welcome people from those difficult situations. There is much in the EU's actions that the Scottish Government can support, such as the focus on taking action to save lives in the Mediterranean and the recognition that migration to Europe is a complex global issue with its routes in other countries. I am keen also to highlight particularly in the current political climate that European co-operation and not isolation is key to much of that. As members around the chamber will know, last Saturday was human rights day. On 10 December 1948, the United Nations General Assembly adopted the universal declaration of human rights, which set out for the first time the fundamental human rights to which all people are entitled. While clear those rights belong equally to all people, this year the UN urges each one of us to step forward and defend the rights of particular groups of people among those refugees and migrants. In Scotland, we are fortunate to live in a country where our human rights are generally respected, where the Government and society more widely is committed to defending the existing human rights protections that we have and to embedding human rights in everything that we do, where there are duties on public authorities to respect and implement human rights principles and where an active civil society undertakes invaluable work to help to make rights real in people's day-to-day lives. That places all of us under a moral obligation to respond to the United Nations call to stand up for the rights of other people, both at home and throughout the world. I am pleased to be able to say that in Scotland we have responded positively to that call. The past 12 months have been a time of unprecedented change for refugee settlements in Scotland—for refugee resettlement in Scotland—as we have stepped up to play our part in responding to the refugee crisis. Scottish local authorities were quick to reflect the mood of the Scottish people by stating their willingness and desire to help even though many had no previous experience in that area. However, we have now received more than 1,250 Syrian refugees under the Syrian resettlement programme since October 2015, which amounts to more than 27 per cent of all refugees settled in the scheme in the UK. 29 local authorities have now received refugees in their areas. As I mentioned earlier, I also wish to focus today on the contribution that all migrants bring to Scotland and to thank Scotland's migrant community for the diversity and wealth of experience that it brings to our country, as well as thanking people like COSLA, local authorities, Scottish Refugee Council and many others in Scotland who have worked to make such a success. Unfortunately, divisive, misleading and inflammatory information regarding migration is all too easy to come across. It concerns me also that, post the Brexit referendum, some people now believe that it is socially acceptable to say some fairly extreme things, perhaps in ways that they did not think would be accepted in the past. Contrary to that rhetoric, migrants are not a drain on society and can contribute significantly if they are given the same rights and opportunities as other citizens. The Scottish Government published two reports in October, one on the impacts and one on the characteristics of migration. Those reports help, I think, to debunk many of those myths. For example, the claim that migrants are a strain on the benefits system. Our research disproved those claims and found that, in particular, our recent non-UK migrants are actually more likely to be in work than people born in Scotland. Another popular myth is that migrants force down wages. In reality, studies have found little or no impact on average wages as a result of migration. Any adverse effects on wages due to migration are likely to be greatest for workers who are migrants themselves. Ross Greer, please. I thank the minister for taking that intervention. Does he agree that the main culprits of spreading this vile propaganda about migrants and refugees are in fact right-wing tabloid newspapers such as The Sun, and we as politicians who represent and defend those people should distance ourselves from such vile claims? Minister. It is certainly the case that all of us have a responsibility as politicians to make clear the positive message about what refugees, among many other migrants to this country, have contributed to this country and to stand up to messages wherever they are found that try to make contrary claims. It is important to consider in doing that the evidence and how we can help to shape opinion in the future, because the impact of negative rhetoric on everyday lives of those who have chosen to make Scotland their home is something that should concern us. We must continue to call for an increased maturity and responsibility in how migration is discussed, and the onus is on all of us to be conscientious as we choose our words. In fact, the effect of what we might call an anti-migration discourse was raised at a recent focus group that I hosted for 11 EU nationals last month. Throughout our discussion, participants expressed unease with the language being used in some quarters to describe immigration. To many, that language represents a move towards dehumanisation and devalues individuals and their contribution. Those messages, along with the UK Government's unwillingness to guarantee its rights following the referendum, had forced them to question if they even wanted, in some cases, to remain in the UK. That included some people who had lived here for some 35 years. It is utterly disgraceful that the UK Government has not yet guaranteed the immigration status of our non-UK EU nationals, and that has in turn created the feeling of apprehension that is affecting every aspect of their lives. For those EU nationals who have until now felt part and parcel of the fabric of our society, their nationality is now a constant reminder of how insecure their future might be. Today, I wish to reiterate a message that Scotland's EU nationals are welcome here and that this remains your home. The contribution that you bring to our nation is valued, and we will continue to press the UK Government to guarantee your rights. In the coming weeks, we will be presenting our proposition to protect Scotland's place in Europe and to keep us in the single market. Remaining part of the single market means retaining freedom of movement. Those two things are, I believe, really indivisible. The minister's action is last minute, but I think that we've a little... If it's my last minute, I'll continue. Oh, you're taking it, certainly. All right. Okay, on you go. It's simply good to ask the minister if he clarifies to whether the options papers that he's just mentioned will be published before Christmas, because I think that that was the commitment that the First Minister gave to Parliament earlier in the year. I can tell the member is urgently thumbing through his advent calendar, but I refer to the commitments that were earlier given around that. I just want to conclude in that case by saying that I call on members here today to urge the UK Government to stand by the rights of immigrants in Scotland from all parts of the world, and in particular Europe. I also call on the UK Government to treat our EU nationals with respect and dignity that they deserve and to guarantee the rights that they seek to remain in the UK. Our EU nationals need answers now, and that's why the Scottish Government will continue to stand up for the rights of all others from other countries who have done us the honour of making Scotland their home. Thank you, minister. I call on Liam Kerr to speak to our move amendment 3049.2. Seven minutes, please, Mr Kerr. A big apart, Deputy Presiding Officer. Seven minutes. Seven minutes, yes. Were you expecting more? I was rather. Well, it's seven. Of course. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. We need to talk about international migrants, but more than that we need to listen. Alasdair Allan talks of negative rhetoric, and I have four quotes just here. One from an SNP MSP, one from an SNP MP, one from an SNP councillor, and one from an SNP aid. All separately seek to suggest that being a member of the Conservative Party equals being anti-immigrant and anti-immigration. Another recently tweeted, Tories don't care about vulnerable families. It is lazy dog-wistle politics, base-level debating, so Mr Allan is absolutely right. We must be careful how we use language in this debate this afternoon. Let's have none of that here today. Now let's clear something else up. Seventeen million people exercised their democratic right to vote to leave the European Union, and that voting leave does not mean that those individuals are in any way racist. We must not forget that one million people in Scotland voted to leave, and they had legitimate reasons for doing so. I hope that the SNP will start to speak up for those who voted to leave, as well as those who voted to remain—around 38 per cent of whom were famously SNP voters, of course. Stop with the casting aspersions on those who accept the democratic result of the referendum and try to work with the UK Government to secure the best deal for the UK. I will not take any intervention, so I am afraid of it. I am four minutes short of where I thought I was. I will give you 30 seconds if you have taken intervention. Is that up to you or is it a point of order? Thank you very much. Could you clarify or explain why this speech from the Conservatives over there has not even touched what the motion is about? I have to say the same as why I am monitoring when the member will come to the material part of the amendment, and I am sure that he is moving on to it now. Yes, the answer, of course, is because I was only one and a half minutes into it, but let me make clear then where we agree with the motion. Do we welcome international migrants to Scotland? Of course we do. Britain, at its best, has for centuries been a shining light of democracy, liberty and hope, and we believe that our internationalism abroad must be echoed here at home. As Ruth Davidson has said many times in the debates on numbers and criteria and quotas and percentages, we must never forget that behind it all, behind the figures and the rules and the criteria, there are homes, families and human beings. So let me make clear, we wholeheartedly support the UN's international migrants day, and we welcome that the motion clearly signals the status of refugees. But we must also acknowledge, as our First Amendment seeks to, that the UK Government is on track to meet its target to resettle 20,000 Syrian refugees by 2020, that the UK Government has pledged refugees will receive £8,500 per head for housing and healthcare in the year they arrive, along with lessons in the English language, and that the UK Government has spent more than £2.3 billion on providing opportunities for work and access to services. But also that the majority of people who do become refugees don't want to leave their homes, their communities or their countries. They live in hope that one day they can return and rebuild their lives. So our First Amendment notes and pays tribute to the UK Government, the Department for International Development, our aid workers and our staff from around the world. Britain is the second largest bilateral donor supporting Syrian refugees in that region. The UK has contributed £1.1 billion since 2012 on food, tents and other humanitarian aid, and the UK is giving a further £10 million to help vulnerable refugee miners already in Europe. The UK Government has provided more funding for refugees than any other western European Government. It is a Government less about gestures and more about the solid long-term work at the root of the problem that aims to prevent people taking life-threatening journeys and funding traffickers. So now I'll turn to economic migrants and I join the Scottish Government in their motion as we make clear again and again what Ruth said to the Conservative Party conference in October. For those who have already chosen to build a life, open a business, make a contribution, I say this. This is your home and you are welcome here. We also urge the UK Government to guarantee the rights of EU nationals to live and work here. But as our next amendment proposes, this is two-way. The Prime Minister has to ensure that she looks out for the 1.2 million UK nationals of whom 120,000 are Scots in the EU. That means that we aspire to an open, reciprocal agreement where UK citizens in other EU countries would be guaranteed rights to remain and, in turn, those from the EU who have already settled in the UK would receive the same guarantee, mutual assurance for mutual benefit. That is, of course, a little different to the, quote, robust and common sense position that there are 160,000 EU nationals from other states living in Scotland, and if Scotland was outside Europe, they would lose the right to stay here. Not my words, but those of the First Minister in 2014. And I am pleased at reports that the EU may be relaxing its hardcore position. Just recently, we've heard prominent MEPs talk about possible associate citizenship of the EU. That will require rigorous scrutiny and inspection, but let's hope that the EU sees sense, confirms the status ASAP and allows our Government to make a reciprocal promise. That is where we turn to our next amendment around non-EU migration and a future immigration system that should provide equal opportunities to live and work for migrants from outwith the EU. I cannot imagine anyone here who believes that the UK should not have some form of border. Certainly, quote, nobody's suggesting uncontrolled and unmanaged immigration because we've got to get more of our own young folks staying here, maximising good jobs and more women in work as well. That was the First Minister again. If you start from that premise, you have to accept there must be some criteria under which people can and should enter. A controlled, transparent and efficient immigration system that includes a points-based approach, that will be the white paper on independence. That is a fair system in which the door is open to anyone who meets the criteria because they are currently not. We will always work to make this country a welcoming place for international migrants, but we must make the immigration system fair, one that works for all and one that is in the interest of our communities and country. Of course, we acknowledge the UN's international migrants day. Of course, we remember the refugees that have lost their lives. Of course, we celebrate the contribution that migrants have made, but it is incoherent for us to sit here and call upon the UK Government to guarantee rights of EU nationals, while not urging the EU to do the same for British migrants. The Parliament must note that non-EU migration is essential and a future fairer immigration system can provide equal opportunities for all. Our amendment also notes the significant powers that the Scottish Government has at its disposal to create incentives to live and work in Scotland. We must note the UK Government's aid and support programme, the second largest in the world. That is where to stop. I am so sorry. You have done very well, Mr Kerr, as you were misinformed by your whip. I now please move the amendment in my name. Excellent. I now call Lewis MacDonald to speak and move amendment 3049.1. Mr MacDonald, I hope that you were told that it was six minutes. Thank you very much. When the United Nations established international migrants day at the turn of the century, it declared that migration could be beneficial to all concerned. It could be good for migrants moving country to better themselves and to improve life chances for their families. It could benefit destination countries, bringing in new people to do jobs that other people did not want and gaining new residents on average younger and more active than the people there already. It could also be good for countries of origin. Migrants around the world sent over $400 billion home to their families last year, more than three times as much as all the world's development aid put together. That is the upside, but, of course, it is not the whole story. Migrants can also be exploited and underpaid by employers, ripped off by landlords, trafficked into slavery or something like it, treated as expendable or placed in mortal danger on the journey from one country to another, as we have already heard today. Countries of origin can lose their best qualified, most enterprising people, while older and poorer and less able citizens are left behind. One country's demographic solution can be another country's demographic disaster. In destination countries, as the UN also says, migration may reduce wages or lead to higher unemployment among low-skilled workers in advanced economies, many of whom are migrants who arrived in earlier waves. That is why it is right to manage migration and to do it in the context of wider society, protecting the rights and interests of new migrants and established residents alike. Of course, Scotland has been at both ends of the migrant journey. That point was made at the St Andrews Day Rally in Aberdeen by Piotr Teodorowsky, a local member of the Scottish Youth Parliament. He reminded us that when the merchant Robert Gordon was trading between Aberdeen and the Baltic region, there were thousands of Scots living and working in what is now Poland. Those Scottish migrants had gone to the other side of Europe in pursuit of opportunity. They were known, among other things, for their strong work ethic and for looking out for each other, much as Polish migrant workers are known in Scotland today. Some of those Polish migrants today work or study at the university, which is named after, said Robert Gordon, founded with the profits of Scotland's Baltic trade 300 years ago. Every part of Scotland has a similar story to tell of outward migration in centuries past and inward migration in recent years. Some parts of Scotland, indeed, are still experiencing both at the same time. Jack McConnell, as First Minister a decade ago, saw that inward migration offered part of the answer to Scotland's demographic deficit, and his fresh talent initiative was so successful that it was extended by the then Labour Government to the rest of the UK. That is important for a number of reasons. It is an example of managed migration and immigration policy tailored to Scotland's needs, including an incentive for overseas students to study at Scottish universities. An immigration policy for only one part of the United Kingdom, but supported by a UK Government with overall immigration policy, still decided at Westminster. Here was Scotland's devolved government leading the way and the rest of Britain following. That example still matters today. After the scrapped post-study work visas across the UK in 2012, Tory ministers are now piloting a very modest variant at four English universities, prompted no doubt by the potentially devastating impact of Brexit on excellence in higher education. Perhaps more significantly and also in the context of Brexit, the idea of enabling skilled migrants to work in only one part of the UK has been taken up elsewhere. The mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, is exploring the idea of a regionally specific work permit to allow people to enter the UK in order to work in the greater London region alone. When members of this Parliament's European Committee met or count apart from the London Assembly last month, they were keen that Scotland and London should work together to see if such schemes could be part of the answer to the challenges posed by Brexit. I hope that ministers share that view, and I hope that they will work with the mayor of London and with other devolved Administrations to explore whether it is possible to devise a scheme of work permits specific to given nations or regions that could operate in the context of the UK as a whole. The outcome of the EU referendum has changed the picture profoundly as far as European migration into the UK is concerned and indeed for migration from here to other European countries. We have heard important words about the need to support the position of migrants from other European Union countries. Resident here or moving here over the next two years and indeed beyond that. That message to migrants into Scotland from other European Union countries is important and to say that they should be used simply as a barring chip is not acceptable. The Tory amendment today talks of levelling up the opportunities for migration from non-EU countries, but in reality UK Tory policy is much more likely to level down opportunities for migration to and from our nearest neighbours, potentially doubling the number of people who will require some kind of visa or permission to enter the UK. We should reject the folly of Tory plans to impose artificial caps on inward migration, taking no account of our demographic deficit or economic needs. We should instead embrace managed migration to grow Scotland's school space and our economically active population and explore all means to do so within the context of the United Kingdom. To that end, I move the amendment in my name. Thank you very much, Mr MacDonald. Can I ask all members who wish to speak in the open debate to make sure that they have pressed the request-to-speak buttons? I now call James Dornan to be followed by Alexander Stewart. Mr Dornan, please. Thank you for your indulgence about letting me leave after my speech. On the morning of October 3, 2013, a fishing boat leaves Tripoli. It's a small wooden boat like a child's drawing with a high wheelhouse. It's old, worn out, no one can remember its name. Fisher's scarce and its owner would have been happy to get rid of it for a handful of sticky notes. On board of 520 passengers, they pack every inch of the hold a biblical human fish and stand crammed in deck. Each is paid about $1,600 for the one-way trip. It's a calm, warm day. The tidalist Mediterranean is blue. The rickety engine warbles and chokes, slowly pushing north. Its destination is Lampedusa. This is the last journey, whatever the outcome. The boat is a disposable back with a disposable cargo. Mediterranean is mostly some Somalians and Syrians, with a couple of Tunisians, men and women and children. There are 41 unaccompanied minors. The youngest is 11. They look back at their last view of Africa. The distinction between an economic migrant and a refugee is simple. Are you running from or to? All those souls are escaping. On the night of October 3, that same old fishing boat, with exhaustive passengers, ran out of steam and fuel. They wouldn't normally have expected to get this far. As a practice rule, the Italian coast guard tracks and picks up the trafficking boats at sea and transfers the refugees to the small port in the town. Those are usually called ahead on satellite phones or shortwave radios, and it's an organised and familiar run, except not this time. There was no call, and somehow no one noticed a blip of 500 Africans in the radar. The boat began to drift towards a cliff. Someone set fire to a blanket to attract help. They could see the lights on the shore. The passengers were tired and frightened, and so close to the promised land, they panicked and moved to one side of the ship, which swaid, yodd, lost its slippery balance and capsized. 368 Africans drowned. When the refugees are brought ashore, they are given a medical check and their names are taken. They are bussed to a company outskirts of town that has been pushed into a thin dead end valley, two-story blocks of dormitories and an administration building surrounded by a chain link fence. The dormitories are packed. There is barely enough room to walk between the beds. The walls are covered in hopeful religious graffiti and names. The place smells of sewage and sweat. There are no dining facilities, refugees squatting open or eating their beds. There is a small area set aside for nursing mothers, otherwise there is one lavatory for 100 women. Assyrian complains that she has not been able to go to the loo for days because the door does not have a lock and there are always men there. That is the reality of the people who are trying hard to come to this country for a decent life. They are not coming here as economic migrants trying to steal their jobs. They are not coming here to take away our public services. They are coming here because life in their own country has become completely and utterly unbearable. If we remember young Eileen Curdie, the poor boy, the photos of him when he hit the media, the world responded with a collective gas. People could see that real children, who once had lives, feelings and a family, were just being washed up on the shore like they were part of a shipwreck. As we look forward to the UN's international migrants day next week, I am proud to be part of a Government and a Parliament and a country that sought out ways to save refugees who responded to that crisis with compassion and welcoming arms. When the First Minister committed to taking over 1,200 refugees as a starting point, it became apparent that local authorities would be tasked with rehoming and integrating those new members of Scottish society. The last figures released showed that 29 out of 32 local authorities have taken in a proportion of refugees. It is to their credit that this work was carried out quickly and timely adjustments made in response to the urgency of the appeal. Of course, we also have to congratulate the many third sector and religious organisations who have also helped to help refugees to adapt to life in a strange country. Education has a role to play in the adjustment for the lives of these vulnerable children who have arrived on our shores. Teachers have the challenging task of being a constant in the life of those children, sometimes the only one, while at the same time aiding them as they grasp the English language and Scottish customs, which can be so unfamiliar to their young lives. Kids can and do adapt well. Very recently, my office had the joy of meeting a young man, Hassan Ibrahim, whose family had fled from war-torn Iraq. He learned English from watching box sets of friends, went on to obtain outstanding grades at high school but was faced with a challenge when it came to university funding. As a young asylum-seeker funding, it can be a sticking point. However, to the great credit of student support and the wellbeing team, along with additional backup from the Institute of Pharmacy and Biological Sciences, both based at Strathclyde University, Hassan now has a place study in chemistry. When he is qualified, there is no telling what skills he could bring to in the way that we shape our nation. Another great news story of how migrants and refugees enrich the fabric of our society. Migrants really do bring so many gifts, Scotland, as a tapestry of colourful cultures due to years of migration from all over the world. Of course, we cannot speak of how wonderful it is to welcome refugees and migrants into our society without touching again on some of the brutal stories that those people faced before they had fled. Atrocities in an unimaginable scale were committed to some of those people. Atrocities will leave them damaged and traumatised for the rest of their lives. A young woman who came to Scotland with two young girls was shown her new living arrangements. She was led to a balcony and she made the comment that it was bigger than where she had lived before. Staff thought that she meant the whole house, but no, she was referring to the balcony. She had been surviving with her two girls and a chicken coop. It is unimaginable to think of that woman living like that while bombs fell around her beautiful daughters. There is a number of issues. The quotes that I started from came from an article by A. A. Gill, who unfortunately passed away just last week. I want to quote from something else that he said in that article. Most of the early training men I spoke to have been imprisoned in Libya or held hostage in the Sahara, all beaten, all tortured. The new others who had died of thirst of beatings of starvation, the girls who had been raped, whole families abandoned in the desert, disappeared under the sand. They tell the stories with a matter-of-fact fatalism. Police tell the world about Libya that they are dying in prison. I would suggest that when we have, when we are talking about this, we are very careful with the language. No, sorry, Mr Dornan. Please sit down. It was a good quote to end with. Do not spoil it. I call Alexander Stewart to be followed by Joan McAlpine. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I should like to start today by recognising the considerable contribution to Scotland that many migrants and people from across the world make. Many play vital roles in our health sector and education services, as well as in many sectors in our economy, and that is something that we should welcome. They play a vital role in our culture, our economy and our way of life. Since the United Kingdom made the decision to leave the European Union earlier this year, many in this chamber and I with have sought to portray this decision as somehow inward looking. In fact, it is quite the contrary. We are looking forward to the possibilities and the opportunities that exist now and in the future. When I campaigned during that, I made it quite clear that what was needed was not no immigration to the United Kingdom, but we have some control over the migration that takes place. We need a system that did not allow for unlimited migration, but rather one that would plug some of the skill gaps that we face within the economy. As a result of being part of the European area of freedom and movement, our current immigration system not only prevents us from doing that, but it also is unfairly focusing on disadvantage and we are not able to then deal with people from the rest of the world. Surely? Daniel Johnson The text of this debate, celebrating UN migration day, is not entirely unhelpful to describe immigration as being good and bad, as his statement seems to imply so far. Alexander Stewart No, I certainly did not do that. I will continue, as I said, during the referendum, I and many others argued for a new immigration system that would ensure the best and the brightest people from around the world would have the opportunity to come to this part of the country, and I think that that is very important. Shirling? Shirling Cymru Minister Does he really think that the tone struck by certain quarters in the Leave campaign was really urging for wider immigration beyond the EU and celebrating its potential contribution to our country? Shirling Cymru Mr Stewart The minister makes a valid point, but individuals had the right to put forward their case, and they did that during the referendum. As I said, we had a result at the end of the day, which we have to represent and respect, and I do that. However, I am very disappointed by the post-string of the First Minister over what she purports to the threat of the EU citizens who currently live in Scotland. The Leave campaign was absolutely categorical when it stated that the value in the contribution of people from the EU currently living in the United Kingdom should be allowed to remain so post Brexit. That is extremely from the UK Government considering, and that is exactly where the UK Government is when looking at this topic. It wants to ensure that ex-patriots who live in other parts of the European Union are granted that. That is the only reason that such an agreement has not yet formally been reached because the EU refused to negotiate any of that prior to triggering of article 50. That is what we find ourselves, which has already been mentioned in this chamber already. We cannot and are not able to because of the situation that we find ourselves in. You have asked many questions in this chamber about that in the past when we have had other debates, but it is because nothing can happen until article 50 is triggered. Moreover, the Scottish National Party has somewhat hypocritical when it comes to immigration and migration. The chamber might be interested to know that, in the Scottish independence referendum, it was indicated that there are 160,000 EU nationalists from other states living in Scotland. If Scotland was outside Europe, it would lose the right to stay here. That was from the First Minister. No spokesperson from officials leave campaign made such threats during the campaign. It is also very important that we look out our own labour force and encourage those greater participation within our own economy. The Scottish National Party record in government in doing that is quite unbelievable. Take, for example, the rate of economic activity within Scotland stands at 37.9 per cent compared to 36.4 in the rest of the UK. Over the course of the SNP time, there are 176,000 people who have become economically inactive in Scotland during their tenure. Time is short, and I have given way already twice. Long-term unemployment is a measure that looks at individuals who have been unemployed for over a year. We see that 2 per cent are higher in Scotland than the rest of the UK. We need to start addressing those issues on economic activity at home, encouraging more people to get back into the workplace and ensuring that people who live in Scotland have the opportunity to be employed. That is important. As I said at the outset, individuals who come to this country, who migrate to this country, participate in our own culture, in our lifestyle, and that is absolutely fantastic. I am not against any of that, but I want to ensure that our own system here is working as well. At the moment, under this Government, it is not. I would also like to take the opportunity to address the ludicrous situation that has been suggested by the SNP, that there should be some different criteria in different parts of the UK when it comes to the whole idea of managing that. The member is in his last 30 seconds. I have taken a number already. To conclude, on the benches, I am sure that everyone across the chamber will welcome the contribution that international maggots have made to Scotland in our culture. As I have said, they have made a fantastic contribution to where we are and what we are trying to achieve, but it is also important that we also take into account the genuine concerns that some people have in Scotland about migration and immigration. We cannot ignore them and we have to then look at how we manage the situation going forward and ensuring that the best and the brightest from all over the world have the opportunity to come here and benefit from where we take it. Thank you very much, Mr Stewart. I call Joan McAlpine. We are followed by Pauline McNeill. Ms McAlpine, please. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. I would point out to the last speaker that, during the referendum, one of the leading leave campaigners, Mr Gove, wrote to the First Minister and suggested that Scotland could have its own migration system. I would certainly ask him to pay attention to the work of the committee and to the comments that were made by Lewis MacDonald in his very considered speech earlier on. I am delighted to speak in this afternoon's debate on such an important topic. International Migrants Day on 18 December gives us the chance to pause and reflect on just what migration means to us here in Scotland and across the world. If you visit the United Nations website, it has a page devoted to International Migrants Day. In the first paragraph, it reads, throughout human history, migration has been a courageous expression of the individual's will to overcome adversity and to live a better life. That is true today more than ever, and I am glad that the motion gives us the chance to celebrate the contribution of those migrants who have chosen to make Scotland their home. In the wake of Brexit, it is important to counter those who did stir up fears of migration for political ends and to remember just how important migration has been for Scotland. As Lewis MacDonald has already alluded to, last week's meeting of the European Committee was a session solely focused on the impact of migration specifically from EU countries and figures provided by the Scottish Parliament information service ahead of the meeting told us that there were an estimated 181 EU nationals resident in Scotland, the majority from accession nations. Colin Wilson of Fife Migrants Forum provided the committee with some compelling evidence of the importance of migrants to the Scottish economy. He said that many of the migrants that we get here in Scotland may begin their stay here working in low-paid jobs, but are well qualified and able to do a lot more than that. Because they are ambitious, once they get to grips with the local knowledge and put down routes, they move into higher-skilled jobs, which is a great stimulus for the economy. He gave a striking example from Kirkcaldy, where he works. The high street has challenges, as high streets everywhere in Scotland and the UK are experiencing. However, he said that it is on the road to recovery with seven or eight businesses that are set up by migrants who have made their homes in Fife, and although the numbers of those small businesses are not huge, they are still providing employment and, of course, they are bringing much-needed regeneration to the town centre. The committee also took evidence from Kirsty McLaughlin of the National Records of Scotland, who warned us that, if we are not to have migration, the age structure of the population would be affected. Of course, it is a good thing that people are living longer. Population ageing brings with it considerable challenges. EU migrants are typically young and economically active, which helps us to deal with those challenges. With no EU migration, her model showed that the number of people of working age in Scotland is expected to fall by 3 per cent between 2014 and 2039, compared to her eyes of 28 per cent in those of pension age. That model is much worse for Scotland than it is for the rest of the UK with zero migration, because fertility is higher in the rest of the UK, although it is obviously adversely affected. That is obviously a worst-case scenario, but it shows how much we need EU migration here in Scotland. Just how wrong the UK Government's approach to reducing net migration, regardless of the contribution that is made, is. I am pleased that the motion gives us a chance to remember those refugees and migrants who have lost their lives while trying to reach safe harbour. As the UN website says, refugees and migrants are trying to reach our shores for a better life, but tragically, there are many who do not make it. Remembering those who have lost their lives on the journey is something that we should do every day, not just on international migrants day. Indeed, there are many groups across Scotland who do just that. Massive outpouring of love, a group in Dumfries in my south of Scotland region, was set up by volunteers last year in response to the growing refugee crisis, and it is still going strong. Last August, they launched an appeal for warming, clothing, bedding, food and tents, all where and still are needed by desperate people fleeing wars to reach safety. The collections are still going strong, and it is a testament to the fact that people have not been forgotten, and Scottish people have not forgotten those who have lost their lives, so they still need help today. The majority of people empathise with the plight of those refugees, as well as other migrants. In today's climate, it can sometimes be easy to forget that those on the far right who identify with racist messages and spread racist messages are, in fact, a minority. I want to end with a quote from Colin Wilson on EU migration from last week's committee meeting, which I think is very fitting. He said, "...the beauty of the European Union is that we have stopped talking about national borders and started looking at people and that we now have an ebb and flow of migrants and people from all different cultures mixing with one another and enjoying one another's company." That has been one of the great things about Scotland. People from the rest of Europe feel that they are accepted here. I call Pauline McNeill to be followed by Sandra White. International migration is probably the most topical issue right now, and that means that we have a duty as politicians and leaders to combat some of the terrible and dreadful negative rhetoric that we have heard. I wholeheartedly agree with Alistair Allen on his contribution. We know that we have issues to challenge politicians in this whole debate. Brexit, there is no doubt that there was a number one issue for people who voted, and the danger of the terrorism that we are leaving is that we leave our country more isolated than it previously was. The rise of right-wing parties across Europe exploiting that negative rhetoric is a dangerous precedence, inflamed by some of the media reports that create myths about immigration. In fact, people actually believe that there are twice as many immigrants living here than there actually are, so I think that the press have a lot to answer for here. That means that we have to have real political leadership to combat many of these myths. We must also have a deeper analysis. There are clearly concerns about immigration, and I think that it would be wrong to ignore that. In our reflections, I think that we have to show leadership but at the same time listen and understand. I am full of behind-the-government motion. It was Pope Francis who said that it is not the migrants that are the danger, it is the migrants who are in serious danger. That is what concerns me about what I have heard from the Tory benches in their contribution so far, which is echoed by Daniel Johnson. It is not that I disagree with the proposition that migrants bring many positive benefits to our country, but I want to hear some more words about why it is that many of the refugees and migrants who are coming here from Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan come here, because they are trying to save their lives and create a life here. There is a moral responsibility and a moral duty of our country to look after many of those people who choose to make Scotland their home. We cannot be complacent in Scotland. Different attitudes to the rest of the UK do not really exist. Much 49 per cent of people in Scotland want to see less immigration, which is the same proportion as across the UK. When it comes to social cohesion, it is the pace of change that concerns some communities. Interestingly, when you look at the Brexit result, it is striking that the areas where the highest levels of immigration voted strongly for remain, but those where they experienced the fastest pace of change voted strongly to leave. Who are those refugees? I have said that the highest numbers are from Syria number one, Iraq number two and Afghanistan number three. Most of the responsibility is borne by the countries that surround those countries. Lebanon, a tiny country of five million people of the same size of Scotland, has one in four refugees. I was in Lebanon recently and some of the local people tell me that it is probably near to one in three. Jordan, which is a GDP of 1.2 per cent of the size of the United Kingdom, has 1.5 million refugees in its borders. It is worthy of mentioning the Syrian conflict itself, probably the most complex conflict of our time. Only today do poor people of Eastern Aleppo wear the military about to fall to the Government forces and reports of massacres of millions of unarmed civilians. Unfortunately, in Eastern Aleppo, those people cannot flee but would if they could. A multi-proxy war, including the superpowers, whose interests seem to be much more important than the innocent civilians who are caught up in it. The biggest driver of migration is this conflict. 11 million Syrians are displaced. We are involved in this conflict. We are bombing Syrians. We have to take some moral responsibility for the consequences. That is one of the leadership issues of politicians that we need to take to the public, because we are involved in Yemen. We are involved—or we are involved in Afghanistan and Iraq—where those refugees are coming from. There are consequences of war. I think that it was the Liberal Democrat mentions who mentioned the very important issue of child migrants. I was in Calais in the jungle shortly before it closed. It is one of the most heartbreaking things to see. The number of children who have simply fled and you really do not know what has happened to them now. The Home Office transfers of unaccompanied minors who were registered in the Calais refugee camp are still thousands of them and they have been told that they will not be given sanctuary. I'll stub the Labour peer who has championed this cause recently. I'm just made to learn that transfers are about to cease having only just begun, had the bridge been pulled up so soon after the start of the kinder transport through which my life was saved, many of us would never have made it to Britain at all. According to UNICEF, there are 2.6 million children who are no longer in school, 2 million are living of refugees, they are on the run, they are not saved and they are being targeted for abduction. What greater moral case can you make for doing more to ensure that child migrants have a place to go? I believe that the Government's position is the right one. There are many, many positive benefits and I will close the presiding officer on that. It is interesting that migrants—much than the myth that we might hear—pay more in taxes than they actually receive in benefits. It's the skills gap, the ageing population, the pension gap and many, many positive reasons. EU nationals need answers. They need to know that Scotland is their chosen home, that they're safe here, they need that security. We have a job to do. Thank you, Ms McNeill. We have a very famous author and commentator, Willie McAlvany, who said that we are a nation of mongrels. Scotland was built up on that, as was the rest of the UK and many other countries in the world. Migration, as Paulie McNeill has already mentioned, has been going on for thousands of years. We welcome migrants into our country. That is why I welcome the opportunity to highlight the positive contribution of international migrants, particularly in my constituency of Glasgow-Kelvin. I applaud the community and the groups for the support that they have shown to EU nationals within my community and migrants. Basically, they are global citizens and they live and work in Glasgow. They are very much supported by the local community. I also want to endorse this year's International Migrants Day, December 18, and commend the international organisation for migration. It is called to the international community to come together and remember the refugees and migrants who have tragically lost their lives this year, fleeing from their homes, seeking safety and protection. I commend Paulie McNeill on her contribution because she is absolutely right that the fleeing war and most of the war has been caused by the west. It is not because of the sake of the people, it is because of the rich's oil, or whatever it may be. We have a responsibility to tell the truth about that. We have a responsibility to also take those migrants' refugees into our countries as well. Glasgow, as we all know, and other areas too, but I want to concentrate on Glasgow for this one, has a very rich history of welcoming migrants and attitudes towards immigration across Scotland. I am certainly more positive, unfortunately, than the rest of the UK if you see what has been said in the media and so forth. We have made those migrants and refugees who have arrived here feel very welcome from lessons in the local dialect, and I won't say the local Glaswegian dialect, you can expect, to sharing local foods. It is these small things that people may see as small, small actions that really go to a very long way for an inclusive and tolerant society. All across my constituents, we have a wide and varied mix of migrants, adding to the cultural, social and economic fabric of the local community. I can just give you some examples and apologise to others that I have not been able to mention. We have got the award-winning North Star cafe that is owned by Mrs and Mr Rosini, originally from Italy. There are many, many migrants who have made their homes here in the past 100 years from Italy. They are now business owners in Queen Margaret Drive, in my constituency. The little cafe is excellent, down at Kelvin Grove, owned by Ernst and Sheffrey, who made Scotland his home after fleeing Cotifol, and his mother is one of the women of the year from the evening times awards. A fantastic family all made Glasgow their home and have contributed greatly. Another one is called The Grunting Growler, owned by Jihad Hattu, who has made Scotland his home and contributes greatly to our local communities. We have got to remember that migration is crucial to Scotland thriving. That has been indicated in recent research that has been mentioned by perhaps the minister, which shows that our migrant workforce makes a positive contribution to local economies. Many sectors are reliant on migrant labour, and we must look to a more flexible approach to immigration. People over here for the Tories seem to think that we cannot do that, but Scotland is different. We need migration. One size does not fit all. We need to look at a different approach to immigration for our country as well. The UK Government's strategy to reducing net migration will have a lasting and damaging effect on Scotland and severely reduce our ability for economic growth, as well as a cultural and social impact that myself and others have already mentioned. My constituent is home to all the Glasgow universities, so we are also home to many EU national students. The Scottish Government has confirmed—I am pleased about that—all those currently studying will continue to receive free tuition for the duration of their studies, but there are very many uncertain times. I am worried that people who study and also work within our universities—the Brexit shamble that is continuing—does not instill any confidence into the people who are already worried at the moment. Our higher education system is home to 13,450 students of EU domicile, 5,390 EU students at postgraduate level, paying fees to do so, 16.7 per cent of postgraduate research students, 4,600 EU staff working. That is working and contributing in our 19 higher education institutions. 23 per cent of Scotland's research-only staff are from the EU. It is very important to mention that. I echo Lewis MacDonald's concerns in that particular area of education. Knowledge knows no bounds and research crosses borders. Freedom of movement is essential for students and people's migration to ensure that everyone benefits from a greater learning experience. I welcome the opportunity to celebrate the contribution of everyone who has made their home here, where they have come of their own choice, from elsewhere in Europe or across the world, or whether they are a refugee seeking sanctuary in our country. Scotland's internationalist tradition has, in many ways, long made us a welcoming home for those who have come here. During the second world war, many Polish servicemen came to Scotland to help to defend our coastline long after their country had fallen to the Nazis. Many of those servicemen stayed. They raised families here, they contributed to the local communities and they are firmly a part of Scotland's history and our community today. Indeed, today, almost half of EU nationals living in this country are from Poland, having largely arrived since their accession to the European Union. It was only a few weeks ago that this parliament celebrated the arrival of the 1,000th Syrian refugee to Scotland, leading the way across these islands in responding to the crisis of human misery that that conflict has unleashed. However, we should not, for a second, pretend that Scotland is a utopia of multiculturalism, a society free of bigotry, where everyone is guaranteed a warm welcome. We do not have to look too far into our past to see the discrimination that the Irish community faced, for example. Although there was not the surge in hate crime after the Brexit vote here that we saw elsewhere in the UK—indeed, it looks like there was actually a bit of a decrease—there were still over 120 recorded hate crimes reported to police in the week after the vote. There was clearly still work to be done to ensure that every new arrival in Scotland, everyone who has chosen to make their home here or whose circumstances have brought them here out of necessity is welcomed, valued and respected. I am glad to see that, in my own region, Eastern Bartonshire Council has recently agreed to open its doors to refugees from Syria and is working on resettling its first four Syrian refugee families. I and the community hope that they are the first of many. I should pay tribute to my colleague Grona Mackay between us. We spent a considerable amount of time putting pressure on the council to join the 29 others who had already taken in Syrian refugees. There are organisations across the length and breadth of this country who are making progress in this area. The Scottish Refugee Council, for example, has published a guide for housing professionals to help to ensure that those arriving in this country can rest with a safe roof over their head and begin to build their lives. There are also concerted efforts from the third sector, from voluntary organisations, to help new arrivals to access the range of services that we all need, from healthcare to financial advice. Unfortunately, the immigration and asylum systems that we currently operate under—those of the UK Government—do not offer the safety, the security or even the dignity that we would want for those arriving in our country. With accommodation and support services being provided by heartless multinational providers such as Serco and their subcontractors, we have seen decisions taken that prioritise cost savings over providing decent shelter or even basic human dignity to those most in need of it. In Glasgow, we have heard of atrocious living conditions in substandard housing provided by the firm Orchard and Shipman. They have been the subject of numerous allegations of putting vulnerable people in slum-like accommodation. Health professionals and charities say that the health of refugees, particularly of children, has suffered by living in such strained conditions. The UK system does not respect human dignity of those who came here seeking refuge, who fled war, persecution or disaster. Devolving the provision of asylum accommodation and services to the Scottish Government, though, would allow for public sector bids to provide decent services in a compassionate way. I would be keen to hear what steps the Scottish Government has taken to press the UK Government to devolve those responsibilities since this Parliament passed the Green amendment on that matter during our debate on the Syrian refugee resettlement scheme. As recent weeks have also shown, the UK immigration system also fails to recognise the absolute economic necessity of inward migration to Scotland, being as we are a country with an ageing population and significant skills gaps. Projections from the national records of Scotland estimate that halting future immigration from the EU would see a 12 per cent drop in the 16 to 29-year-old population, double the decline that would be seen across the UK as a whole, and a significant blow to our working age population. Indeed, the total working age population under that Brexit scenario is projected to decline by 3 per cent in Scotland, a drop not experienced in any other part of the UK. We benefit far more from the opportunities that freedom of movement has provided us. We must value the contribution that EU migrants bring to our economy and appreciate how their skills enrich in our workplaces, our public services and our communities. All of us in this Parliament, though, I am sure, are familiar with cases of constituents from elsewhere in the world coming to us because of bizarre, unfair or downright cruel decisions taken by the Home Office in regards to their right to stay here or that of their family. That is why I read the amendment from the Conservatives with some confusion. Taking on board that the UK operates a thoroughly broken, discredited and unfair immigration system for non-EU citizens, I am still confused by what they mean by a future fairer immigration system. Surely Conservative members are not suggesting that bringing EU citizens into the fold of the current broken system for the rest of the world is in any way fairer? It might be equally unfair, but that is a bit as generous as we can be. Indeed, in the past few days, we have seen proposals to half the number of international student visas because nothing says that we have taken back control like a body blow to our universities. However, I suppose that we are sick of experts anyway. Why would we want more of them? We must continue to welcome those who have chosen to make Scotland their home and to guarantee the right of our fellow EU citizens who already call Scotland their home. This Parliament and the people of Scotland would benefit significantly from the power to do so, and I hope that it is one that we will see soon. Tavish Scott, followed by Jamie Greene. Thank you very much, Deputy Presiding Officer. A very good friend of 30 years passing is working in Uganda in the aid world at the moment. He emailed me last night to say that hundreds of thousands of people are refugees across and into the Ugandan border at this time. It is getting absolutely no news coverage here at all in the west and more broadly at all, and yet that is the reality of certain and different parts of Africa. I just highlight that, because occasionally we get very exercised, or some in our politics and some in our society, get very exercised by very few number of people when mass movements of refugees are happening in incredible scale in other parts of the world and we know nothing or little of it. The other aspect that I cannot fail to stress this afternoon is that the UN today describes what is appropriate to say is the total meltdown in humanity. There are children trapped in buildings under attack in Aleppo right now. It is occasionally important to remember that we are pretty fortunate to be in a pretty stable, grown-up, mature democracy while others, at the moment, are losing their lives. There will be many more instances that James Dornan mentioned in his remarks earlier on. There will be many more people lost in the Mediterranean this next year. As the president-elect of the United States appoints Rex Tillerson, the boss of ExxonMobil as the Secretary of State, who is a close personal friend of Putin, I think that we all in our politics need to be alive to the reality of a very different and changing world order. Pauline McNeill rightly mentioned earlier on the vibrancy of the language used in different parts of the European Union on immigration at the moment. There are candidates for the presidency of the French Republic who are now openly describing immigration controls and look like being in the runner for that. This world is changing around us. This world around refugees and immigration is changing around us. I agreed with much of what Alistair Allen made in his opening ministerial address. I thought that he got that tone absolutely right. Lewis Macdonald also made a series of remarks that I entirely endorsed. I'd much of what we achieved with fresh talent gets obliterated as time goes on, but it was a good programme. I think that, in fairness, there were many friends and colleagues across other benches in Parliament at that time who recognised that. My most difficult conversation in the Scottish elections back in May was not about domestic politics. It was about two young working guys who took me to task on immigration on a building site when I was cheerfully canvassing. I wasn't very cheerful after I had that conversation, but tackling them and I thought that there's no way to do this immigration discussion. You can't hide away from it. You've got to take it head on. The only way that I got them to at least move their thinking was to describe—Pauline McNeill mentioned Jordan—a discussion that I had about five years ago or less in the last Parliament anyway, with the Jordanian minister of something who was in Parliament meeting people from across the political parties. He graphically illustrated to me the challenges for his country of dealing with a million and a half refugees from different parts of the Middle East, particularly Syria, given that war has now been going on so long. What that meant for his country and the demands that were placed on that country. I explained all those to young working men in Shetland and they conceded that our perspective on those things, if nothing else, was limited by the reality of what was happening even in Shetland compared to the sheer enormous challenge of coping with that influx of people fleeing war in Jordan. I also want to mention—there's a member of my own staff who's EU national. I know there'll be other colleagues across politics here who also have people who are EU nationals working for them here in Edinburgh. I am very strong in my commitment, as others have been in and the minister started rightly in my commitment to making sure that in this mess that is Brexit, the position of EU citizens is guaranteed for the future. I don't think it's good enough and I would disagree profoundly with Alistair Stewart's comments earlier on. It's not good enough to just simply say that the UK Government can't do anything because the EU won't let them until article 53. It's absolute rubbish. The Prime Minister could stand up and make a very clear statement about the position of these people in our country and she should. Alistair Stewart may have watched a different referendum than the one I remember seeing back in the summer, but Liam Kerr, the one thing I absolutely agreed with Liam Kerr on, is language does matter. Language has got debased by what's gone on of late and we need to get back to a position where language actually does matter and how we conduct ourselves on this issue above all else is profoundly important. Can I just finish with one plea to the minister? I wasn't trying to crack a joker or anything about the Brexit options paper. I genuinely believed that the Government had made a commitment to bringing that back before Parliament, before the end of the year and I hope that you'll just confirm that will happen, not least of which because it would be an important chance to make the same point again about the importance of EU nationals in Scotland and across the UK and their right to be here. I call on Jamie Greene to be followed by Tom Arthur. The UN's international migrant day on December 18th is observed to recognise the efforts, contributions and the rights of migrants worldwide. However, as the migration observatory of the University of Oxford pointed out in its briefing, there is no single definition for what type of person makes a migrant. To a researcher, a migrant may be one type of person, to a lawyer another, and clearly to a politician another. That is why, in debates like this, we must be very careful not to throw terms such as immigrant, refugee, migrant or asylum seeker around as if each word is entirely interchangeable with the other. I think that the Government's motion today is willing to take it. Clare Adamson, do not recognise that mix-up on those benches and certainly not from the Labour benches from the contributions that I have heard today. My point is entirely proved by the wording of the Government's motion. There is very little to disagree in, to be honest with you, but it is very jumbled in the way that it interchanges migrants, immigrants, economic migration and refugees. I am going to talk about that in a little bit more detail, if you would let me. What is a migrant? A migrant can be someone who is displaced from their home country due to poverty and conflict. James Dornan painted a very eloquent picture of that tragic circumstance, but there are also migrants who choose to move from one country to another to create a better life for their families. The generations of my own family left Scotland and moved to Canada to seek a better life, and the majority of them are still there. They were not escaping or fleeing from war, but they were wanting a better life and economic life for their children. When we discuss migration in Scotland and indeed the UK, I think that we must first agree upon some common principles for this discussion. Scotland is a welcoming country, and I am proud of the welcome that we have given migrants arriving here in crisis. No one is disputing that. However, there is no doubt that there is a need for economic migration into Scotland across all skill levels, and no one on those benches is disputing that either. More importantly, let us not confuse the challenges of welcoming refugees into society to the genuine need to recruit the best talent from anywhere in the globe. By way of example, I spoke to a tech business in Edinburgh recently that was struggling to recruit software engineers and developers, most of them from India, under the current visa system. In the absence of enough suitably skilled workers, that MD is forced to recruit from afar if he wants his business to grow. From personal experience, I know what it feels like to have to leave your home, job, friends and partner behind when your visa runs out. After a year in Australia, the Government there decided that I did not have the skillset that they needed at that point in time to allow me to stay in their country, and it was tough to leave. However, in the passage of time, I have come to respect their decision and their system. I am not here to discuss the merits of one immigration system but I make this point to demonstrate that we as a Parliament should be having a grown-up debate about the skills that we need as a country and how we manage inward migration. I think that Pauline McNeill made a very valid contribution to that about social cohesion, and it is a problem that is not just unique to Scotland. The Government motion also talks about refugees, a very different type of migrant. When it comes to forced migration, conflict, climate change and poverty have left to mobility in unprecedented numbers over the last decade. Although there is always more that we can do, I am proud that, as a wealthy country, the UK is the world's second-largest bilateral aid donor after the USA. I am also very proud that British taxpayers' money is providing vital food, shelter, water and medicine for many hundreds of thousands of people all over the world. Our amendment today, I will. Ross Greer, I thank the member for taking an intervention. I am wondering if he is proud that his party last week hosted a reception in this Parliament for the manufacturers of the bombs that are being dropped on those countries that forced people into seeking refuge here in Europe. Jamie Greene It is absolutely nothing to do with the debate today, I would say to the member, and I am pretty sure that we were not only concerned with MSPs who maybe attended that event, so he is welcome to make his own political point if he wants to. I am proud of the contribution that the UK makes to looking after people across the world. Our amendment notes that, and I would like to think that other members in this chamber accepted that as well. In Scotland, it is important that we note that charities, voluntary organisations and faith groups, in particular, are also playing a vital role to help migrants as they arrive in Scotland. In Verruri, the Amal group brings together refugees with local people. They sit over traditional Arabic food and coffee and chat. In Pitlockery, local people are raising money for medicines on frontier in the Red Cross. The Church of Scotland is giving backpacks to refugee school children. In Glasgow, volunteers are delivering refugee welcome packs throughout December and January of this year, and their motto is that we are all face somewhere. We all wish to achieve migration policies that are fair and effective and protect those in needs, but to ensure that Scotland is a prosperous place to live. Some people simply choose to make a better life for themselves in Britain simply as many Brits move abroad to do the same. Whether you agree or disagree with the decision to leave the EU, we should be using this opportunity to set the tone of this debate with pragmatic ideas. We face demographic challenges in this country, such as an ageing population and the skills shortages. We should work together towards a migration system that attracts the skills that we need from every part of the world on our terms. Wanting more control does not make us less humanitarian or any less outward looking. So, in conclusion, I give my humble thanks to the migrants that have given so much to Scotland whilst also thanking the many countries that have given Scottish migrants a home over the years. After all, we are all face somewhere. Tom Arthur, followed by Daniel Johnson. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I am glad to have the opportunity to participate in this debate this afternoon, recognising a UN international migrant state. It gives us an opportunity, collectively, to participate across the globe in recognising the contribution that migrants make to our culture, to our economies, to our universities, to our society. It also gives us an opportunity to reflect on those migrants who have been lost in transit. It gives us an opportunity to reflect not just on the impact in the countries where migrants end up but also the countries that transit through and the countries that come from. It gives us an opportunity to reflect on those who do not leave the families that are left behind. That is something that in Scotland we can have a lot of rich historical experience of all the blood that flew away. I noticed that Sandra White touched on the international organisation for migration, which is celebrating its 65th anniversary this year. It is worth recounting what the original name of that organisation was. It was the Committee for European Migration. That was an organisation that grew out of the ashes of the Second World War. Its purpose was to help and assist displaced people. It is worth remembering that, because it is such a vivid illustration of the potential consequences of a fractured Europe. It is worth noting that one of the last debates that we will have in this place before the Christmas recess is that 2016 has been a year of seismic political events. The global liberal order that Tavish Scott alluded to has been shook to its foundations. On all those occasions, migration has been at the heart of those debates. Within the UK, Brexit was a campaign that was originally predicated upon the notion of sovereignty, but it quickly degraded into the demonisation of migrants. The spectators' Brexit butterfly did a first that transmogrified back into a slug. We saw in the United States a president elected in a campaign whose central planks were the deportation of millions of migrants, the building of a wall to keep migrants out and a commitment to ban celebrants of the world's second-largest faith for mentally and in the United States. It underlines the point about the importance of language. We see the consequences that language can have and, if I could say very gently to Liam Kerr, I think that he should reflect upon the rhetoric of his own party calling for companies to be named and shamed for foreign workers, treating people as bargaining ships and failing to guarantee the rights of EU nationalities here in the UK. Perhaps he should reflect on that before coming to this chamber and lecturing people in dog whistle politics. I want to touch on something that Ross Greily did. He spoke about right-wing tabloids, and 2016 has also been the year of post-truth politics. It is an interesting expression, post-truth, when one point in the past when we just called it a lie. I am going to entertain it for a moment. I am going to use some of that philosophical training that I got in university and tie it into post-modernism. What post-truth is about is a dogmatic relativism. It is where everything is accorded equal status, and facts and evidence disappear. We have seen this in debates in the United States on tracingism and intelligent design, and we have seen it in debates about climate change, but we see it in debates about migration because how often do we hear the concrete, rational and empirical case for migration? It is so rarely that we only hear it in this chamber. We see the headlines, we see the scare stories, but when we actually bring some clarity to it, when we really consider what the impact of migration is—in Scotland, for example—of Scotland's 369,000 migrants from outside the UK, they are mostly young, economically active and highly qualified. As the minister highlighted, migrants are more likely to be in work when most people are born in Scotland, and migrants are not responsible for wage suppression. That myth has to be debunked once and for all. Globalisation and automation have a role to play, but the solution is also to be found in globalisation. It is to be found through freedom of movement. Alexander Stewart touched on the opportunities of Brexit. I recalled what Mike Russo had said in Parliament a few weeks ago when he confronted those issues. He quoted an article from Meehur Sharmal, in which he said that the economies of the future are based on people and ideas, but the UK cannot become that type of economy because of its obsession with migration. Another point that has been made is the important role that migrants play in our health and social care sector. Within the health and sport committee, we have had evidence suggesting that it would collapse without the role that migrants play. We know that one of the key challenges that we face is that of an ageing population, but it is worth remembering that one in five of UK-born people living in Scotland are retired, but only 1 per cent of migrants. There is much more that I could say in this debate, but I want to join in showing solidarity with EU citizens living in Scotland and across the UK. To those migrants who come to Scotland to call at home, Kate Miliff-Alcher. Daniel Johnson, followed by Rona Mackay. I would like to thank the Government Bench for bringing forward this motion, celebrating UN international migrants day. Migration is important for two very important reasons. One, in terms of protecting those fleeing war and persecution, and in terms of developing our economy. Tom Arthur did a very good job describing the international situation that we have and the issues around Brexit. When you look at those, you realise the jeopardy that migration faces. My views on migration are very much shaped by my family's history. My mother's maiden name was Barkley, but that is not what it should have been. Her family's name had been Bercfeldt, a German name, but my great-great-grandparents were in turn during the First World War. The reason that they lost their liberty was because they had a German passport. They spoke German and had a German name. That was enough living in British India for them to be deprived of their liberty. That was a stigma that meant that my great-grandfather changed his surname, never used his first name. Indeed, a shame and stigma that was passed on to my grandfather, who very proudly wore a kilt, but the reality was that he had far more in common with the people of Hanover than the people of the Highlands. Indeed, I think that it is easy to assume that this sort of institutionalised xenophobia and intolerance and, indeed, stigmatisation of others, people from other countries is something that happens in other countries, but it is something that has happened in this country. Moreover, I think that migration is something that is essential to human beings. We are notable to species for our adaptability, but also the fact that we move. We are a people that have moved from Africa through Asia across the Bering Strait, populating the Americas and down to Australia. It is quite remarkable our ability to do that. Indeed, Scotland in turn has a particular status. Sandra White mentioned that we are a country of mongrels. I would go further. I would say that Scotland is named for migrants. As the venerable bead chronicled, the Scots moved from Spain through Ireland before eventually settling in Scotland. It was also one of the first issues that was raised for me by a constituent. An EU citizen, a French woman, worried about her ability to stay in this country following the Brexit vote. It is perhaps not surprising, given that, in my constituency, as much as 10 per cent of the population are from the EU, we have a strong base in education, professional services, tourism and technology. Brexit has created a very real worry. However, it is also against a backdrop where migration is happening now on a scale that we have never seen before. Some people have talked about numbers, but according to the UN, on an annual basis, 232 million people move between countries. If you include internal migration, that increases to 740 million. That is a huge proportion of the world's population moving every single year. That is a sign of an increasingly globalised culture and economy, a sign of the strife and poverty of 19 million of those people being refugees, four million from Syria. Others have very well highlighted those issues, including James Dornan, Tavish Scott and Paul McNeill. I will not do that here, because I think that one of the things that we need to do on top of protecting the protections that we afford refugees is celebrating the benefits of immigration to our own economy. Migration allows our economy to adapt, grow and innovate. It adapts by filling the needs that are created in our economy, not least of which, through the ageing population, we know what a valuable contribution foreign workers make in our health service, in nursing and medicine. However, we have to be very careful not to describe those with certificates and degrees as being good migrants and those with lesser skills as being less welcome. It is right that, across our economy, we need skills and people, because our population pyramid has gone from a pyramid to a column to an inverted pyramid. We have an ageing population that needs support. Indeed, Alexander Stewart contrasted Scottish growth with the rest of the UK. There are many reasons for that. Uncertainty is one, but one of them is because we have attracted less migrants into our economy. That is a well-established economic fact. However, in innovation 2, growing occupations in many is 15 per cent of people working in those are from other countries. Edinburgh has become a high-tech hub for technology companies. Those companies welcome people from other countries for two reasons. One is because it allows them to cluster skills here in Edinburgh, people who are specialists and experts in the area. However, by having people from other parts of the world, they are able to face the world, they are globalised, despite the fact that they are based in Edinburgh. I would also like to mention our universities. Again, I am very lucky to have the King's buildings from one of the campuses of Edinburgh University in my constituency. Universities are perhaps our longest, most enduring global institutions. They are historically international. Indeed, in Edinburgh University, 17 per cent of staff are EU nationals. 25 per cent are academics. 14 per cent of its students are from the EU. However, the impact of Brexit is that they have seen a fall-off in applications for vacancies across other parts of the world. Apparently, according to people who are being gently encouraged not to be part of funding applications with other international universities. The reality is that our knowledge relies on international exchange of understanding and benefits. I realise that my time is coming to an end, but I think that it is important that we celebrate immigration in its fullest sense and not try to claim that there is good and bad immigration. Time is getting really tight now, so can I ask for under the six minutes, please? Rona Mackay to be followed by Rachael Hamilton. My colleague Sandra White stole my introduction, but it is worth repeating, so I am going to say it again. The late Willie McElvaney famously said, Scotland is not full and we are among a nation. Both statements are, of course, true. Scotland was founded by immigrants and we all have immigrant ancestors somewhere down the line in our family tree. As well as being among a nation, Scotland is also a welcoming nation. It is in our DNA to welcome people, particularly those in crisis or distress. It is anathema to us to turn away people in need if we can help them when they are seeking refuge. As has been said in this chamber many times, the current situation in Aleppo, Yemen and other parts of the world ravaged by war and terrorism is a humanitarian crisis. Scotland is proportionally punched way above its weight when it comes to taking on refugees with the numbers that we have welcomed topping more than 1,200. As Ross Greer said, my own local authority in Eastern Bartonshire have at long last agreed to take four families and four unaccompanied children, and I look forward to being part of the welcoming committee to help them to integrate when they arrive early next year. Of course, welcoming immigrants does not just mean providing refuge. It means welcoming people from any part of the world who want to come and work here and contribute to Scotland's economy and culture. I do not think that there is any reason to differentiate between immigrants or refugees. Who would want to start a new life in a country and get a pittance to live on with the most basic accommodation and second hand furniture and handouts? Immigrants, refugees and asylum seekers want to work and should be encouraged to work for their own dignity and wellbeing. Those are families who deserve no less than us. They have pride and want the best for their children. Why would they not? When it comes to welcoming migrant workers, why would we not do so with open arms? As has been said many times during this debate, migrant workers contribute immensely to the Scottish economy and culture. In fact, without migrant workers, we would face a serious shortfall in skilled and unskilled workers. Just for the record, does Rona Mackaylaon disagree with Nicola Sturgeon when Nicola Sturgeon says that an independent Scotland would not have an unmanaged immigration and nobody is suggesting an uncontrolled and unmanaged immigration? I did not even allude to that and I do not think that you are in any position of strength to talk about our policy on this issue. Why does the Tory Westminster Government make it so difficult for them to come and work here? Since Brexit, they have given workers and EU citizens no security, preferring instead to adopt the I will if you will mentality, insisting that workers from this country are given security in their countries, what utter hypocrisy and arrogance the Tory Government gambled with our European identity and lost and now they think that they can set the rules. The fact is that Brexit is a no-win situation. We are all losers and that is why our First Minister and excellent European cabinet team are working so hard to give Scotland access to the single market, so vitally important to our economy and cultural wellbeing. Why would we want to be an insular country, cutting ourselves off from trading and interacting at all levels with our European neighbours? That is the past that this right-wing Government is going down, but we will never follow them. Europe is too important for all the reasons that have been mentioned in this passionate debate today. On June 23 this year, on the steps of Bute House, the First Minister said that all our EU citizens were welcome in Scotland. She said what we were all thinking, what all right-minded people were thinking, in the depths of our shock and despair at the news that were to be dragged out of Europe. The indisputable facts are that international migrants make important economic, social and cultural contributions to our communities, and the UK Government's focus on arbitrarily reducing net migration is entirely wrong for Scotland. I certainly would not want to live in a country where the shutters went up and we were unable to benefit from international migrants culturally and economically, just as much as I would not want to live in a country that did not welcome families freeing from war and persecution with open arms. I have every confidence—I am in the last paragraph—that the Scottish Government will never allow that. Scotland will always be open for business and open for refuge. I support that motion. Rachael Hamilton, to be followed by Clare Adamson. First, let me acknowledge the UN International Migrants Day and remember the refugees and migrants who lost their lives while trying to reach safe harbour. Today, I would like to focus on an amendment within the Scottish Conservative motion that the Scottish Government has significant powers to create incentives to live and work in Scotland. National identity is a hotly discussed topic in Scotland. The 2014 referendum challenged national identity. If Scotland were to separate, could those who identify as British Scottish still claim to be so? As members may not know, I grew up in Wales and, as members will have heard, I have an English accent. I have been asked how this combination is received in Scottish Parliament. However, let me say this. I have been in Scotland for 26 years. Prior to the Parliament, I helped to run a business with my husband in the Scottish Borders. My three children are Scottish and I feel as much as Scottish as they do. If those questions are asked of me, how am I welcomed, then the same questions will have been directed to others from further afield. I will further develop this opinion later. We must, in this Parliament, echo the words of Ruth Davidson and say that we want the values, the brains and the culture of all those who come to Scotland and, indeed, to call our country their home. We must work harder to encourage new talent to Scotland if we are to achieve what we need to do in terms of population growth and labour shortages and cultural diversity. As mentioned before, EU migrants make a valuable contribution and help labour shortages. 80 per cent of EU nationals are working age compared to 65 per cent of the Scottish population as a whole and, as such, more likely to be economically active. Migrants should not be underestimated and the benefit that they bring to Scotland. They plug shortages in our unskilled and skilled labour, enrich our lives with diversity and help grow our population. I am aware of the importance of EU migrants in the hospitality industry, from my own experience in this sector, almost a third of EU nationals are employed in jobs linked to distribution, hotels and restaurants. Of those, 20,000 work within the accommodation and food sectors is typically carrying out roles in bar work, waiting and housekeeping. Indeed, the Food and Drink Federation says that the industry could not function without EU migrants. Workforce planning is crucial. Every week, we hear of impending shortages to key services. I will finish the sentence and I will give way. As our constituents tell us, we already know that shortages are present in the health and social care sector, too. I will give way to the member. Daniel Johnson I thank the member for highlighting people working in the hospitality sector, but there are also sectors in which workers help and find themselves exploited. The member therefore supports the Labour amendment looking for protection of workers' rights who migrate from other countries. Rachael Hamilton Currently, the protection of workers' rights are higher in some circumstances than the EU requirements and regulations that are set out. In particular, we have the working directive. I would ask the Scottish Government whether it would be doing more to focus on workforce planning and to help to alleviate the current shortages and focus on skilling up our young workforce. EU migrant labour is also key to agriculture and horticulture sector. The crux of the problem that rural areas have is the shortage of local seasonal labour to pick their products at its freshest. In this regard, migrant labour is essential. I met an East Lothian mushroom grower and he employs 283 people, mainly from Poland and Bulgaria. Without those labourers, the business would struggle to harvest in time. Last week, we heard evidence of the European Committee from Professor Rebecca Kaye. Her paper set out a study for social support and migration in Scotland. The project explores experience of migration and settlement among migrants from Central and Eastern Europe living in Scotland. We talk much about welcoming migrants, but the report found issues around migrants settling in, loneliness and isolation, and migrants from Eastern European countries are clustered in low-skilled, low-paid employment. Career progression is difficult, especially in rural areas. Those aspects need to improve if we really want to make Scotland a place that welcomes all. Pauline McNeill I do not disagree with a single word that the member has said in her speech so far, but no one in the Conservative benches so far has mentioned in the contribution the moral responsibility that we have, not just the migrants who have something to offer, but those who flee for safety. I wonder if the member will address that at some point. Rachael Hamilton I say to Pauline McNeill that I have mentioned the social and cultural diversity that migrants bring to our country, and I am not in any way shape or form saying that, other than the skill shortage that I have defined as an issue and the population growth in Scotland, I do not value migrants in other senses. I do not know where I am now. The Scottish Government must set out its requirements in a rational immigration system where people are matched to skills. Gathering sectorial data is essential for workforce planning. The Scottish Government must concentrate on growing the economy. There will not be jobs to fill our economy if our economy does not grow and productivity will stay static. I believe that a solution to that is in skilling up our workforce. That is investing in the future of this country. It is ensuring that measures are in place that will guarantee that all sectors in industry will not suffer from labour shortages. It is promoting what Scotland has to offer and giving those opportunities to make life better. To do that, the SNP Government has to acknowledge the issues that are prevalent in Scotland's workforce first and seek to resolve them. Not as is often the case, claim that the Scottish Government is powerless to do anything. I now move to the last of the open speeches. Claire Adamson, please. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I want to talk about some of the Syrian refugees who have come to my own area. Before doing that, I want to touch on some of the things that have come up in this afternoon's debate. I very much thank Jamie Greene for taking the intervention. I would say that from my point of view, while I can see very different reasons for people coming to live and work in this country, what we do in Scotland is embrace them. When they are here, they are all new Scots. Once they are here, we do not make the distinction, because they are our friends and our neighbours and they are welcome in our country. On the issue that was touched on by Rachel Hamilton about skills shortages, earlier in the debate, the Tory Benches were talking about migrants who make a contribution being welcome. I do not know where those migrants who do not make a contribution are. They are not visible to me in Scotland. Mr Greene mentioned, particularly in the software industry, which is my own area. I know that there are great skill shortages there, but I also know from speaking to the NFU farmers last week that there are shortages in soft fruit picking as well and in our farms. They all make a contribution and one should not be valued any more than another. Whether it is software or soft fruit, migrants should be welcome when they come to work here. Yes, there are reasons for people seeking new lives going to Canada. I am sure that many people have families who have gone elsewhere, but someone who has Irish heritage, I am sure that there are also people from my family who are a few generations back who had to flee potato famine, or people in Scotland who had to flee because of the highland clearances. We know for the many reasons of war in our current situation that there are many, many reasons why people choose to move and work in other areas. Just over a year ago, I was asked by my good friend Bush-Rych-Ball, someone who is no stranger to this place, having delivered time for reflection in the last session of the Parliament. She invited me to Airdrie Mosque to a celebration of welcome to the first Syrian refugees to be welcomed in North Lanarkshire. I was delighted to attend. It was a truly uplifting experience, with the community represented by local schools, police and fire, local churches and mosques, those of faith and of no faith, North Lanarkshire Council officers and elected members, all who gathered to offer friendship and support to the families who had sought refuge in this country. It was no surprise to me that North Lanarkshire Council's Syrian Resettlement project was awarded team of the year for excellence in housing by the Chanted Institute of Housing Scotland. In preparation for the arrival, the Syrian Resettlement project was established involving housing, social work and other council services, together with NHS Lanarkshire, local voluntary organisations, housing associations, police and fire services, in recognition of the continuing support that would be needed to the families, giving them confidence and promoting their independence within our communities. I was not surprised by the success, because North Lanarkshire has a great history in welcoming also Congolese refugees in 2007. It is also a great success in our communities. Now, success does not mean that it has not been without problems. As you can imagine, there are always those who are uneducated and stupid enough not to welcome people, but thankfully, in both situations, they have very much been a minority. I welcome my colleague to highlight those refugees settled in North Lanarkshire. She may be aware that, just a couple of weeks ago, I had the pleasure of welcoming those from Coabridge to a tour of the Parliament. Would the member agree that, now that it has been in Scotland for about a year, the priority for the UK Government, the Parliament and the local authorities is continuing to help them to settle and deal with the trauma that many of them have faced? Claire Adamson I absolutely agree with the member's points. Many of the people who have come have had to suffer from violence, torture and have required additional help from specialist services because of post-traumatic stress disorder. The Syrian families were brought from the refugee camps and are some of those who are most in need with some of their children having really difficult conditions and medical conditions to deal with. I am very glad that North Lanarkshire is continuing to offer that support. Indeed, I had my very own visitor last week to the Parliament. My local GP practice undertakes an exchange with the American University in Beirut, offering a four-week placement with people who are studying family health there who will become the equivalent of our GPs. It has been going for a number of years, but this year there was a problem. Gareth, who had applied and been successful and accepted on the programme, was denied a visa by the UK Government because he was a Syrian national. With the help of my colleague and friend Marion Fellowes asking questions in the Commons and pursuing this case, he was eventually given his visa to attend. I think that this is just an example of how UK immigration stands in the way rather than facilitates that cultural and knowledge exchange that is so vital as we move forward. It was very heartening to see him and also very sad to know that he had not been able to return home for three years to visit his parents who were in Aleppo. We should all be remembered where John Tamsons bans, but we should all aspire to be Glasgow girls too. We now move to the closing speeches. I call on Anna Sarwar up to six minutes, please. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. First of all, I thank the Government and Minister Alice Rallon for bringing forward today's debate. I think that it has been a fantastic debate and had some strong contributions from all benches. I certainly want to welcome the UN International Migrants Day, which will be taking place on Sunday. I would like to echo the comments that were made by Alice Rallon and so many others to say that this Parliament should put on its record that we thank all those people who have chosen to make Scotland their home no matter where they come from. As Daniel Johnson and Claire Adamson have both said, we all have our own personal stories about whether that is relatives or people who have treated us in a public service, whether that be in our national health service, about how a migrant or migration has impacted on our lives. I am a third generation migrant myself. My grandfather came here in the 1940s fleeing the poverty of pre-partition India, looking to make a better life for himself and his family. He arrived in the south of England, looking for a place to settle and travel north. Of all the places that he picked, Sonny and Wussymouth set home, and that became the home for my mother and my family. His intention was always to return home, but, like so many others, he fell in love with Scotland and chose to bring his own family here. That is a story that is probably replicated by so many families, whether they are Irish families or families from other parts of the world. I think that we should pay tribute to all those people who have helped to make the tapestry of Scotland what it is today. Sandra White rightly mentioned Glasgow. I think that we have a shiny example of how we can create diverse and open communities that welcomes all those people who say that when you arrive here, no matter your background, race or religion, you are part of the one Glasgow approach. I think that we have seen that from the leadership that Glasgow has shown around its support for migrants but also its support for refugees, particularly the cost-of-un refugees or, indeed, refugees from Syria who we are now supporting to. I also want to echo the comments that were made by Tom Arthur, who said that we shouldn't be using our EU citizens that are here as bargaining chips. I think that all of us should send a strong message to the UK Government and to Theresa May, the Prime Minister, that we expect the rights of every single EU national already here in the United Kingdom to be protected and guaranteed. That should be done without delay. I am happy to take intervention. Jamie Greene I am sure that you are not clapping me there. What is Labour's position then on our amendment that the EU should protect the interests of UK nationals, including many Scots who are currently living in the EU? If you will not support that, why not? Anas Sarwar Of course, I think that the UK should protect the rights of every EU national, and I think that the EU should protect the rights of UK nationals. I think that that is a pretty simple concept to understand. I was going to just mention Jamie Greene in my next comment, which was that I actually agree with what Jamie Greene was saying about the conflation between refugees and migrants. I am not for a second suggesting as any kind of criticism to anybody or implying any kind of ill intent, but I think that we should be careful about not mixing migrants and refugees because there are clear differences and challenges. A refugee is a person who has been forced to leave their country in order to escape war, persecution or natural disaster, while a migrant is a person who moves from one place to another in order to find work or a better living circumstance or conditions, and I think that we just need to be careful about the two. On the issues of refugees, James Dornan quite rightly said, as did Pauline McNeill, as did Tavish Scott, about the sacrifices that so many people have made as refugees trying to flee conflict and war. Currently, we see it in Syria, but we have seen it before in Iraq, in Afghanistan and in Bosnia. For a country that is not slow to get involved with war, I do not think that we should be slow in supporting people who are the victims of war, too, and that is why we should be welcoming refugees into this country with open arms. Lewis MacDonald rightly talked about the economic interests that he rightly pointed out about that migrants can also be exploited, whether they be underpaid by employers, ripped off by landlords or trafficked. We have many of those problems, for example, currently being investigated in Gowanhill and Glasgow, and I think that that is something that needs to be reflected on. Joan McAlpine and Rona Mackay and Rachel Hamilton quite rightly spoke about the economic benefits of migrants. Joan in particular, speaking of the ageing population and the requirement to have migrants coming into the country, I think that that is something that we can all support on all sides of this chamber, particularly for our economic purposes, but also if you look at the support that we get in our NHS from people coming from other parts of the world. Lewis MacDonald also mentioned the powers. I think that if we have two Governments that are willing to work together, we can find a model to try and support our needs, as we did with the fresh challenge scheme before us. I want to close and talk about the challenges. I do not think that it is right for us to talk about the rosy picture of migration. There are also challenges. One is tackling the myths around benefits crowners. The reality is that migrants contribute more to the economy than they take back. We should say that loudly. Secondly, we should openly challenge the right-wing media who would happily let you believe that their only benefits crowners are coming here and not people helping to drive our economy. We should take on the far-right head-on who try to foster prejudice and racism in our country or Islamophobia and let them know that the people who are not welcome here are them and their views, not the migrants who choose to come. I think that we can proactively work together to expose the failures of the Tory immigration system that is heartless, treating people unfairly, as Ross Greer quite rightly said, and instead say that we can build an immigration system that welcomes people here, whether they become here for building their economy or for people fleeing conflict just to make a better life for themselves. Ross Thomson, up to six minutes, please. Thank you very much, Deputy Presiding Officer. I would like to declare an interest as a councillor on Aberdeen City Council. First of all, I would like to acknowledge the comments of my colleague Liam Kerr in his opening speech this afternoon, where we say that we welcome that the Parliament acknowledges the UN's international migrants date on 18 December, because it is so important that we recognise the tragic loss of life that there has been for those who have tried to reach our shores and other places to reach and finally secure freedom. It is really important that I take head-on some of the arguments that were made during the debate this afternoon, particularly learning about rhetoric and stirring up emotions during the EU referendum campaign, by the leave campaign and those who voted for Brexit, as was mentioned by Joe McAlpine and Tom Arthur. I think that we need to be absolutely clear that this SNP Government has consistently and unashamedly attempted to paint a false image of lead voters, including 400,000 of their own voters as anti-immigration, anti-globalisation nativists. Believe me, they noticed when the First Minister declared that Scotland voted remain in order to be an open, inclusive and outward-looking society, and therefore, although those who voted leave automatically represented the opposite. In her rhetoric, the First Minister has painted lead voters as the other. In fact, following the comments of Mike Russell and Brussels, it is clear that the SNP is trying to airbrush the 1 million Scottish lead voters from history. To address Pauline McNeill's point, people in Scotland who voted to leave did so not just for migration, but for a variety of reasons. One of them was to create a fairer system of immigration, which is fit for purpose in the age of globalisation. Lewis MacDonald in his—which one? Claire Adamson Thank you for taking the intervention. I hear what the member is saying, but can the member explain why, then? He is not asking his Tory colleagues to reinstate the post-study work-fesa, which works so well, and was a fair system of immigration. Ross Thompson If the member has been paying attention to my remarks, as well as my colleague Liz Smith, you will see that the work that we have been doing in the lobbying UK Government has been very active on that particular front, probably more so than some of our colleagues on our benches there. In relation to Lewis MacDonald, he stated in his opening remarks about the devastating impact of Brexit on migration and that we need to reject the Tory fallacy of caps on migration. I want to address those points head-on, because the EU rules on free movement are, at their core, inherently unfair. It is a ridiculous notion that, by the simple fact of your birth in an EU member state, you have the right to move without restriction throughout the European Union, regardless of your skills or capability to contribute to your chosen state society and economy. Meanwhile, highly skilled workers from other parts of the world have to jump through hoops to get in. The burden imposed on our economy and public services by uncontrolled free movement and large pockets of unskilled labour from Europe has meant that we have to turn away people from other parts of the world who have vital skills, which could contribute economically and enormously to our society. Lewis MacDonald Thank you very much. Does Mr Thompson not appreciate that the point and purpose of free movement among neighbouring countries is in order to increase the solidarity and the community of those countries? Is that not a principle that applies to the United Kingdom? If it does, why does it not apply to the European Union? Ross Thomson In the north-east of Scotland, Mr MacDonald, which we both represent, we, as you know, are unable to access the necessary levels of skilled labour from outside the EU to populate our underman fishing vessels, fill our teacher shortages in our schools or support the renaissance in our oil and gas industry because of EU free movement, which is inherently unfair and inward looking. The UK has decided to take a path that allows skilled migrants from right across the world to come to the UK to fill our skills gaps and help to take our economy forward. In relation to Liam Kerr, the UK Government has a track record to meet its commitment to resettle 20,000 Syrian refugees by 2020. That is something that I am really proud of. The UK Government has played a leading role in ensuring that refugees from Syria are resettled here with the housing, healthcare and infrastructure that they need. I am proud to have played my own role in that role as an Aberdeen City councillor, where the community planning partnership has, in fact, worked together to ensure that Syrian refugee families are supported within our communities to adjust to their new life in Scotland. Since settling in the city, and it touches on the point raised by James Dornan, we have heard of the horror stories of beheadings and starvation and crucifixion at the hands of ISIS, of families who have been starving to death, who have no food, no electricity and the devastation that has been caused by war, which has driven them to leave their home. Therefore, I am proud that Aberdeen is playing its vital and important role in making our multicultural city home to 100 Syrian refugees. Sandra White said that Scotland is different and that we need a much more flexible approach to immigration. It is worth making the point to her that Scotland is not that different. According to the Oxford University Migration Observatory, 58 per cent of Scotland's support reduced immigration to Scotland in 2015, a UGov poll found that 49 per cent of Scotland want less immigration, exactly the same proportion as across Britain. Further, I could forgive the member if perhaps she did not want to take my word for it, but perhaps she will take the words of the First Minister who said, and I quote, that there are not radically different views on immigration between Scotland and the rest of the UK. Tavish Scott mentioned the situation in Aleppo, of which we all know remains dire and desperate. However, in relation to the status of EU migrants, let's be clear that, just as the Law Society of Scotland has reiterated, the UK Government has stated that EU nationals who have lived continuously and lawfully in the UK for at least five years automatically have a permanent right to reside. That means that they have a right to live in the UK permanently. In relation to those who have not lived here for five years, we all agree, and I am sure that those EU nationals living and working and contributing in Scotland should stay, just as those living and working in the rest of Europe should also stay. No, I think that you are finished now, Mr Thomson. Thank you very much, even with all those interventions. We are rather pushed for time. I now call on Alasdair Allan to update minutes, please, minister. Well, thank you, Presiding Officer. This has been an important debate and a largely rational one, something that is worth saying in the current political climate. I hope that the points raised have set a precedent across the UK to encourage politicians to approach immigration in a constructive and sensible manner. Indeed, members from across the chamber generally struck a thoughtful and well-judged tone, Mr Kerr's efforts notwithstanding. May I begin, however, by referring to a point made by Lewis MacDonald, where he rightly pointed out that Scots have formed, as it were, on being migrants over the last 200 years and where Scots have found the world over. Others have pointed to the history that we share and the family histories of Daniel Johnson, Rachel Hamilton, Claire Adamson, Anna Sarwar and others pointed to that. We are here because it is International Migrants Day, which was established in 2000. There has been a 41 per cent increase since 2000 in the number of migrants across the world. That figure underlines the significant responsibility that we share in working to protect the rights of all migrants in Scotland and across the globe. Members have joined me today in expressing our sincere sadness for those who have lost their lives while searching for peace and for an improved standard of living. It is vital that we never forget what has happened and what continues to happen in the Mediterranean, as Pauline McNeill and many others have referred to. We will continue to do all that we can to address this devastating humanitarian crisis, and that includes continuing to play our part in the refugee resettlement programme. Pauline McNeill I would like to put on the record that the Scottish Government announced that it would be given a quarter of a million towards DECC for the people of Yemen, which we believe that almost 10 million people are starving because of the war efforts there. I would like to put that on the record. Alasdair Allan The Scottish Government has been pleased to assist in Yemen and is very proud of the role that, in a modest way, we can play to help to alleviate some of that suffering. Mr Allan, may I stop you for a moment? It is all right. Do not panic. May I ask all those who are coming into the chamber to please not to have private conversations when you do so, so that we can hear the minister. The Minister for Public Health and Sport I want to say that we will continue to urge the UK Government to do more to increase the number of refugees that it will take. It is our belief that the UK Government should be willing to take refugees from among those who have fled to Europe, as well as those in camps and countries neighbouring Syria. To pick up on a specific question raised by Mr Greer, the cabinet secretary for communities continues to urge the UK Government to improve the accommodation provided to asylum seekers, which was recently raised by the UK Parliament's Home Affairs Committee. Today, we also recognise the hugely valuable contribution of those who come to Scotland more generally. We are grateful to welcome those people to Scotland who enrich our culture, our economy and our own traditions. It is very positive that so many new Scots want to learn about Scotland's culture and to be a distinctive part of it. Following a year that has seen so much anti-immigrant rhetoric during the rounds, it is very important that the Scottish Parliament has ended the year with such a positive debate, showing our firm commitment to welcoming and valuing all people who choose to make Scotland their home. In particular, I am proud that the Scottish Parliament has today acknowledged the impact of the EU referendum on some of this debate. I hope that the UK Government will finally take note and give the EU citizens in Scotland the reassurances that they need about their future. We are proud that others have chosen to make Scotland the place to call home and also appreciate the benefits of freedom of movement enjoyed by our own citizens, such as the right to free movement to live, study and work in all EU countries and to benefit from their public services. Therefore, it is imperative that the Scottish Government is treated as an equal partner and is centrally involved in developing the UK Government's negotiating position on Europe, in which any move to seriously restrict freedom of movement will be opposed by myself and by other Scottish Government ministers, a point in which Mr Russell and I made to UK ministers in London last week. Currently, Scotland's population is projected to grow by 7 per cent between 2014 and 2039. However, we could be in a situation in which, if EU migration to Scotland stopped completely, population would only be projected to grow by 3 per cent. That, perhaps hypothetical as it is, illustrates why, among many other reasons, Scotland needs to be welcoming towards people from other countries who choose to live here. There are many other points that I could cover, but I touch on the post-studio work visa, and I take the opportunity to agree with the points made by many members about the importance of creating such an arrangement for Scotland. That is a point that I raised with Immigration Minister Robert Goodwill in the past few days. In response to comments from the Tory benches, I have to say that this Government is working very hard to resolve the issue. I hope that the UK Government is doing so likewise, but I want to conclude by saying that, whilst we welcome UK support for humanitarian actions in Greece and in the wider Mediterranean, we urge the Prime Minister to reconsider her position and participate in EU-led relocation in respect of the many people in need of protection. It is hugely disappointing that the UK Government has chosen not to participate fully in the EU's collective efforts, and that is a matter of some regret. I want to come to a conclusion in the few seconds that I have remaining really to say that today has been a great chance to reflect on the contribution of people from other countries who have chosen to make Scotland their home. It is imperative that the UK Government stops treating those who are EU nationals as human bargaining chips and, instead, acknowledges their highly valuable contribution to our nation. For those and many other reasons, I urge all members to support the motion, and I move it in my name. Thank you, and we go straight to decision time. There are three questions to be put as a result of today's business. I remind members that, if the amendment in the name of Liam Kerr is agreed to, the amendment in the name of Lewis MacDonald falls. The first question is that amendment 3049.2 in the name of Liam Kerr, which seeks to amend motion 3049 in the name of Alistair Allen on welcoming international migrants in Scotland be agreed to. Are we all agreed? We are not agreed. We will move to a vote, and members may cast their votes now. The result of the vote on amendment number 3049.2 in the name of Liam Kerr is yes, 27, no, 85. There were no abstentions. The amendment is therefore not agreed. And the next question is that amendment 3049.1 in the name of Lewis MacDonald, which seeks to amend the motion in the name of Alistair Allen be agreed. Are we all agreed? We are not agreed. We will move to a vote, and members may cast their votes now. The result of the vote in the name of Lewis MacDonald is yes, 84, no, 27. There were no abstentions. The amendment is therefore agreed. And the final question is that motion 3049 in the name of Alistair Allen as amended be agreed. Are we all agreed? We are not agreed. We will move to a vote, and members may cast their votes now. The result of the vote on the motion in the name of Alistair Allen as amended is yes, 84, no, 27. There were no abstentions. The motion as amended is therefore agreed. That concludes decision time. We will now move to members' debates from Fulton MacGregor, and I will take just a few moments to change for ministers and others to change seats.