 Do not push my sympathy too far, Mr Stewart. I call the next item of business, which is a debate on motion 3303 in the name of Alistair Allen, on welcoming global citizenship Scotland's international development strategy. Can I ask members who wish to speak in the debate to press their questions to speak in London now, and I call Alistair Allen Minister to speak and move the motion. Thirteen minutes are there abouts, please. Thank you, Presiding Officer. In moving this motion, it's a great pleasure to lead this debate and to introduce members to global citizenship Scotland's international development strategy. This is, I believe, a dynamic new strategy that brings greater focus and direction to our international development work, and it recognises recent developments in international theory and practice, such as the new UN global goals. I'll set out the contents of our new strategy, which was published on 21 December, and also how Scotland might continue to make a global impact through international development. Before I do any of that, can I reflect briefly on our international development work today? Many members may remember that the Scottish Government began working in this area in 2005 with a modest budget of £3 million per annum, but Scotland's own tradition of humanitarian work overseas goes back, of course, further than that into our history with principles of global solidarity lying behind much of the work of Scots around the world. For over two centuries, Scotland has forged a distinctive tradition of seeking to tackle poverty by working in partnership with local people to improve the lives of those who don't have the access to the basic resources that we take for granted. As the inheritors and trustees of that tradition, we have, I think, developed our own distinctive approach to international development work, built on partnership and mutual respect. Perhaps nowhere is that tradition better exemplified than in Scotland's special relationship with Malawi, where our development work first began with a fund of £3 million in 2005. Of course, Scots and Malawians have been collaborating with one another to improve health and education for over a century and a half, since Dr Livingstone first sat down with local chiefs by the shores of Lake Malawi to discuss how they would end the regional slave trade. The myriad of connections between our two countries that have resulted from that history have become central to our development programme. If we harness the links that Scottish health workers have to Malawian hospitals, that Scottish teachers have to old Scottish missionary schools or that Scottish parliamentarians indeed have to the national assembly of Malawi, it is easier to get things done to achieve greater value for money and to bring about culturally sensitive development that is guided by practical needs on the ground. We believe that it is a new model for development that is unique in world terms. In the past 11 years, the model has enabled Scots to achieve, I think, a disproportionately large impact in partnership with Malawian individuals and organisations. I am very grateful to the minister for taking intervention and for focusing his early remarks on the relationship that we have with Malawi. As the co-convener of the cross-party group, I am well aware of the excellent work that civic society in Scotland does to provide the foundations for that relationship. However, there is some concern that some of the core funding for some of those civic networks has not yet been clarified. I wonder what reassurances he can offer, but the discussions that he is taking forward with those groups to assure them of their future funding so that they can continue to carry out that excellent work that he has highlighted. The member rightly points to the importance of networking groups in Scotland, working with civic society, churches and others. Of course, the funding decisions that he is referring to have not yet been made, but will be made soon. The group's concerns certainly will not have to wait overly long for those decisions, but I am very conscious of the important role that they play. We have brought energy access to over 80,000 Malawians in rural areas. We have established the national educational standards that are being used to assess education for millions of schoolchildren there. Education Scotland is working closely with Scottish Government and partners, having developed a memorandum of understanding with the Ministry of Education, Science and Technology in Malawi, and we have helped to quadruple the annual number of medical graduates from Malawi's only public medical school. Of course, we have provided the Scottish charity Mary's Meals with more than £1.8 million over the past decade to feed tens of thousands of school pupils across Malawi. I would like to take this opportunity to congratulate her founder, Magnus McFarlane Barrow, on being awarded the prestigious Livingston medal by the Royal Scottish Geographical Society. Magnus received that honour in recognition of his contribution to feeding over 1 million children in Malawi and thousands more in other countries. I agree very much with what he has just said. I wonder if he would agree with me that we need to do the longer-term investment in enabling other countries, but also the shorter-term stuff such as the meals that he has just been referring to. The member is right that the constant challenge in international development is to make sure that we respond to immediate need and that we think about long-term international development, and of course the fact that the countries that we are working in have ambitions, like any other people in any other country in the future, that they will be in a position to be more self-sufficient than they are, but that does not take away from the urgent need to help now. I want to conclude that my comments about Malawi by saying that although what we do in Malawi is for Malawi's sake, in many cases our partnership working has created real benefits for Scottish people too. I am delighted to announce that the over 1 million pounds matched funding over five years for the Blantyre to Blantyre clinical research project. Observant people will be aware that there is a Blantyre in both Malawi and Scotland, and we are linking clinicians from the University of Glasgow with those in Malawi so that we can study the increasing incidence of cardiac and inflammatory disease within the Malawian population. However, the results of that collaboration will contribute to research into the Glasgow effect and studies into the health of the Scottish population. As with all our work in Malawi, the project is being carried out under the terms of the bilateral co-operation agreement, ensuring that our work dovetails the Government's own wider priorities and long-term vision. Our manifesto promised to renew our agreement with the Government of Malawi, and we will be taking that forward in the coming year. We will also continue to ring-fence £3 million per year for initiatives in Malawi. As I mentioned, the mobilisation of Scottish civil society is central to all that. Some of the organisations have been alluded to and are mentioned, whether that is the Scotland-Malawi partnership or others. Recent years have also seen large civil society involvement in fair trade activities. In 2013, Scotland became the second country in the world to achieve fair trade nation status. Scotland's capacity to help the developing world is not limited to one country. In 2008, the Government added several other countries to our programme across sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia and increased the international development fund to £9 million, with a global footprint across seven countries. That work has received invaluable support from the network of international development organisations in Scotland, NIDOS, who have supported the growth of that sector and enabled our sector colleagues to come together to share best practice. In Rwanda, the Scottish Government is working with tier fund to deliver the ending poverty one village at the time project. That project aims to empower communities to end poverty, hunger and disease through developing self-help groups and focusing on those needs that are identified by people on the ground. In Zambia, through our funding of the Skiaf Sculema programme, we are able to ensure that the project has been able to help to address the impact of soil degradation by working with more than 1,300 smallholder farmers to increase food production levels. The result has been an improvement in the fertility and resilience of their soil to climate change. In Pakistan, the Scottish Government has provided £670,000 from the international development fund to run highly regarded scholarship programmes. That funding will enable 400 women from disadvantaged backgrounds to study for master's degrees and over 3,000 children from disadvantaged backgrounds to complete one year of primary and secondary schooling. The last couple of years have been a good time to reflect on the international development work and to think about how to maximise its impact in November 2015. We celebrated the 10th anniversary of the global goals. The First Minister has also announced that the intended framework for domestic implementation of the goals would be the national performance framework. To align our work with that commitment to the global goals, we have launched a nationwide consultation on our international development policy. I believe that our new strategy will achieve those ends. We have brought greater geographic focus to our work by reducing the number of countries that we work in. Malawi, Rwanda and Zambia will form our new sub-Saharan African project base, and we will continue our engagement with Pakistan through our highly successful focus on scholarships for educational benefit. Those four countries are four countries with which Scotland shares extensive, historic and contemporary links, and where the Scottish Government can therefore focus its efforts for maximum impact. In working to the spirit of the global goals, we will concentrate our efforts as a Government on four distinct priorities, first of all, to encourage new and historic relationships with the developing world, secondly, to empower our partner countries and to increase their capacity for development, thirdly, to engage the people of Scotland across all levels of society in the process of achieving global sustainable development, and finally, to enhance our global citizenship by showing leadership on tackling poverty and injustice at home and abroad. If I may turn briefly to the amendments that have been tabled, I say that I am happy to support the Labour amendment. With regard to the Conservative amendment, I did look at it carefully because there is much in it to commend it. I am happy to confirm, for instance, that we do work closely with the UK on many projects and to agree with points made in the amendment about promoting the rights of marginalised minorities. Indeed, the new strategy embeds human rights in all of our development work, which is why I am happy to confirm our commitment to eliminate all discrimination and to work actively for the inclusion of women and girls, the disabled, LGBTI people and other marginalised groups. However, I would make clear to members that we support and, indeed, are implementing the beyond-aid agenda. That means that we still consider aid programmes to be a vital component of sustainable development efforts in the meantime. That is why we have maintained our development assistance funding stream, in addition to an investment stream. Perhaps unintentionally, the Conservative amendment does not make clear that there is a need for both aid and trade, and for that reason, I regret that I am not minded to support the amendment. I think that it would be helpful for members if I were briefly to highlight some of the further changes to our international development work. I think that the minister will have to be terribly brief. It will be very brief indeed, but I will conclude in that case by saying that I am delighted to present the Government's new intervention. It means as brief as that, but go for it. How brief is brief? In that case, I want, as I said, to indicate some of the changes to our international development work that will support us to implement our broad policy aims. Firstly, in order to facilitate the wide range of engagement that we believe we can leverage between Scotland and the developing world, we will create three new funding streams within our international development fund. A development assistance stream will fund Scottish organisations to deliver projects in our partner countries, mostly being allocated through a competitive application process. I am delighted to present the Government's new international development strategy to the Parliament today. Scotland is a nation proud of its reputation as a good global citizen at the time where many around the world are questioning the very basis of those principles. I hope that members will agree that the strategy gives Scotland the best chance of playing a vital and distinctive role in the challenges that are faced by our world, and I will move that motion in my name. I am delighted to be leading on behalf of the Scottish Conservatives on this very important issue and proposed amendment in my name. We on these benches very much welcome the Scottish Government's commitment to international development. At a UK level, the Scottish Conservatives have been staunch's defenders of meeting the United Nations target of spending 0.7 per cent on GDP on international aid, and in government we became the first G7 country to enshrine that commitment in law. As a developed country, we have a responsibility to play our part in providing aid to people around the world who are less well off than ourselves. We must continue to contribute to the international fight against poverty and provide assistance during humanitarian crises that take place throughout the world. To that end, in our Holyrood manifesto, we, like the Scottish National Party, pledged to raise Scotland's international development fund from £9 million to £10 million to tackle the poverty and inequality faced by some of the world's poorest and most vulnerable people. We very much will welcome the fact that this commitment is to be fulfilled. Although it is, of course, the UK Government that plays the biggest role in delivering the British humanitarian aid, it is commended that the international fund's budget allocation is for the coming financial year, including a Scottish humanitarian fund. That is very much to be welcomed to allow us to better respond to the growing number of international humanitarian crises that take place across the globe, and they are unanticipated or unpredictable. For the international development fund to continue the approach of not providing direct funding to the Government and partner countries, that is the right thing to do. The targeting of the funds to specific projects will ensure that, not only in our funding spend, it will achieve the best possible outcome for those individuals and partner countries, but it will also ensure that we get the best value for the money for our taxpayers. Just as important as the development assists in developing ties between Scotland and our partner countries, however, it is trade and investment, targeted investment along with the critical involvement with the private sector that makes Scotland's partner countries able to take part in this transition, and therefore sustaining economic growth for the future. That is vitally important that we can continue to develop and support them to develop and forward themselves within those countries. Although the Global Citizenship Publication does make reference to this, our amendment today seeks to put a greater emphasis on the long-term, more direct approach within supporting those countries. In Scotland, we are increasingly lucky that we have so many communities and organisations that are partnering across the world and want to forge relationships and progress in the developing countries. Civic society plays a vital role in the contribution to international development, and it is very welcome that the Scottish Government's strategy values the efforts of those groups. They require to be given support and they require to be looked after. As a relatively new member, I am chuffed beyond belief that I have the chance to become a co-convener of the Malawi Scotland cross-party group. I see that as a real privilege because I am astounded by the amount of work and the amount of organisations that participate in that, and the interests of hundreds of community projects that foster links between those two countries in every part of Scotland is to be commended. Scotland is the longest dying history with links with Malawi and dating back to the explorer and missionary David Livingston, who arrived there in the 1850s. The close ties between the two countries have only strengthened in recent years, with the signing of the co-operation agreement between Scotland and Malawi in 2005. The many community-based projects that we have seen throughout Scotland, such as those that link with Malawi and the great foundations that we are building on international development strategy, are to be commended. By using those existing relationships and encouraging people across the region, we can see the talents in our churches, in our schools, in our universities, in our businesses and in our community groups. In doing that, they are representing a wider possible support across communities throughout Scotland. However, we must not forget that the human rights record of some of our partner countries is poor. Same-sex relationships, for example, are criminalised in Malawi, Zambia and Pakistan, and women still face significant discrimination, particularly in Malawi and Pakistan, and we have to acknowledge that as we go forward. We on those benches were somewhat disappointed at the Scottish Government's motion today failed to include any reference to doing more to protect human rights in those countries. Although the global citizenship in Scotland's international development strategy talks about taking economic inequalities and fails to mention the challenges that marginalise and vulnerable individuals often face criticism and harassment. In two seconds, Mr Crawford, let me finish the paragraph. Are amendments thus calls on the Scottish Government to do more to promote the needs of those individuals and partner countries? I recognise the point that was not contained specifically in the Government's motion, but the Minister did outline the specific position that she took in regard to the issues that she just raised. I think that it would have been at least reasonable for her to recognise that. Mr Stewart? I was about to come on to that, Mr Crawford. I had written it down because it was not in my initial speech, but it is now. I would like to acknowledge today that the Scottish Government has taken on board some of the concerns that we have raised. It is important that you acknowledge it and we acknowledge it and, together, we can work collaboratively. I believe that there is a lot of work that can be done across parties and organisations within the Parliament and civic society that can endeavour that. I acknowledge and thank you for taking that on. Moreover, I am pleased to note that the global citizenship publication refers to the close work and relationship between Scotland's Government and the Department of International Development and the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. Those partnerships are already invaluable in the relations with Scotland and places such as Malawi. As we move forward and we want to continue to develop in Rwanda and Zambia, all those relationships will become much more apparent. Time is now moving on. The point that I want to bring forward today is that there is much consensus on the issue within the chamber, not just among the parties across us but throughout Scotland. I am very proud of the international development efforts that Scotland's two Governments are leading the way on international and providing help for those who need it. To that end, the Scottish Government has broadly welcomed the Scottish Government strategy for international development, and we hope that we can continue to build on our success in those areas in the years ahead. We also urge the Scottish Government to consider carefully the efforts to propose human rights in our partner countries. As I said, I am delighted that that has been incorporated as we move forward. I therefore move the amendment in my name. I remind members not to use the term you in the chamber, but either the member's name or the member's. I now call on Lewis MacDonald to speak to and move amendment 3 through 3.2. Mr MacDonald's seven minutes are thereabouts, thank you. Thank you very much. The Government's motion today talks about a strong cross-party collaborative approach and support for international development in the Parliament, and there is indeed broad consensus. Scottish Labour has been proud to be part of building that consensus. We welcome that strategy paper. What we now want is for the Government to go beyond those 24 pages of good intentions and set out in detail what it will do to deliver them and how. I know that the minister will welcome the opportunity, the invitation, to attend the cross-party group on international development in order to perhaps address those questions in more detail than he will have time to do today. I am glad that the Government has indicated that it will accept our amendment in the same spirit. Discussion of Scotland's approach to international development is always likely to start with Malawi, as it has done again today. Key early decisions in shaping a distinctive strategy for Scotland's devolved Government included core funding of the Scotland-Malawi partnership and establishment of the Malawi development programme in 2005, as the minister has acknowledged. Jack McConnell's vision as First Minister and the vision of that coalition Government was to build on the long-standing partnerships in church and civil society between Scotland and Malawi and for Scotland's devolved Government to add value, both directly in financial support and indirectly in providing a focus for the efforts of others. That remains just as important today. For every £1 in official Government assistance, according to the Scotland-Malawi partnership, there is a further £8 in support from civil society, with more than 1,000 individual partnerships or connections between individuals and organisations in the two countries. Many of those links are of long-standing, but others have been stimulated by Government-to-Government engagement over the past 12 years. For example, individual congregations of the Church of Scotland had long had links with their counterparts in the Presbytery in Church of Central Africa, and those have grown and developed in the context of Government support. The Presbytery of Aberdeen, for instance, twinned with its counterpart in the city of Blantyre in November 2005, the same point and time as the Scotland-Malawi partnership was established, and there are now 18 individual twinning links between congregations in those two cities alone. The Government's latest strategy proposes a closer focus perhaps on Malawi and three other countries. In principle, we think that a strong focus on a small number of countries makes sense. That way, the relatively modest Scottish Government budget can make the biggest difference where it is needed most. At the same time, we recognise that development partnerships in civil society are independent of Government and are all the more valuable as a result of that. Organic connections of grass-roots levels can survive changes in Government and changes in policy and can continue to deliver at a local level whatever may be happening elsewhere. It follows therefore that Government must not be prescriptive when it comes to development work undertaken by civil society. A focus by Government on particular countries may encourage others to follow suit, but it should not discourage or downplay other independent initiatives by local churches or faith groups, local councils or other partners that choose to support development elsewhere in the world. Alexander Stewart in moving his amendment made some important points, for example that the Scottish Government should continue to work closely with the UK Department for International Development. The UK is indeed one of the biggest providers of development assistance in the world, along with the United States, Japan, Germany, France and, of course, the European Union. Working with DFID and the EU institutions will be essential to get the best outcomes from Scottish aid spending. It is simply a fact that taxpayers contribute far more through the UK and the EU than through the programmes of the Scottish Government. We can also agree about the importance of supporting minority-marginalised and vulnerable groups in the delivery of aid. I was pleased to hear the minister's assurances on human rights. Where Mr Stewart's amendment causes concern, however, is the reference to encouraging the move from aid to investment in developing economic growth. Of course, aid is a means to an end. Successful development assistance does ultimately put itself out of business, but that is quite different from making a political choice to shift the whole focus from aid to investment, regardless of how far poverty or obstacles to inclusive economic growth have been eliminated. We have heard the international development secretary suggesting that her department's role should focus more on trade and economic advantage for the UK. We are bound to worry about the political choices that are being made by some of Mr Stewart's party colleagues elsewhere. Our choice should be to work for sustainable inclusive growth and to use both aid and investment towards that end. Labour's amendment calls for more detail of the Government's strategy and highlights in particular the country's strategies and policy coherence across the Government itself. Non-governmental organisations keen to support in-country work need to understand the mechanics of how applications to the international development fund and the climate justice fund will actually work when applications can be made, the number of stages that will be involved and whether the grant receiver will be required to part fund projects. There are also questions about how the Government will seek to build sustainable long-term partnerships in-country and to make best use of local resources and local expertise. Just as local authorities and voluntary organisations in Scotland would want to be able to plan on the basis of three-year budgets rather than one-year funding commitments, so NGOs would like to have certainty about longer-term support for projects that will take time to mature or, indeed, as Liam McArthur said, for core funding of their essential work that allows them to deliver individual projects. Part of that will depend on how the Government intends to assess and evaluate the projects that it supports and how it will use those evaluations to improve the effectiveness of future projects. When the Government commits to going beyond aid, it is important to know how it intends to do that in relation to its own activities outwith the international development programmes that we are debating today. Direct assistance, for example, from police and health and education services in Scotland to building up those same services in Malawi is important, but it is also useful to know and important to know how the Government intends to embed its commitments on development, human rights and global justice in its routine decision making process across Government justice that it does in considering impacts on business, the environment and the qualities. I hope that the minister will be able to respond to many of those points in closing the debate today. On that basis, I move the amendment in my name. I welcome the Scottish Government's international development strategy and its 10 million funding commitment, alongside complementary funding streams such as the climate justice fund and the humanitarian aid fund. I note that all of those have been welcomed by a range of stakeholders in advance of today's debate, including SCIAF and Oxfam, but I would like to begin my comments today by taking this opportunity to promote the general principle of international aid because it has lately been under attack from elements of the right-wing press and perhaps what is known as alt-right politicians. It is important that we counter those attacks and I believe that our cross-party record of support in Scotland puts us in a good position to do that. It is now almost 12 years since 225,000 people all dressed in white marched through Edinburgh in support of the Make Poverty History campaign in 2005 and I am very proud to say that I was one of them. It was then the 20th anniversary of the live aid concerts that first focused the world's attention on Africa. The point of Make Poverty History was that the spirit of live aid needed to be permanent and that the problem of global poverty and inequality required not just charity but global structural and political changes and of course hard cash. 2005 was also the year in which the current Scottish international development strategy has its roots. The G8 summit was taking place in our country and the focus of that summit was alleviating absolute poverty from the developing world in sub-Saharan Africa in particular. I would like to pay tribute to the then Government of Jack McConnell, who felt that it was important that Scotland did its bit to make a difference. That was not without some opposition, probably by the same right-wing papers that are attacking aid today. That year, the Scottish Government signed the agreement with Malawi, which has been so successful and, of course, then coming SNP Government unveiled an international development strategy in 2008, which is being replaced today after extensive consultation and assessment. My own involvement in this area back in 2005 was also professional in that I was editor of the magazine for delegates to the G8 summit that year. I sent Scottish journalists from the Herald newspaper to Eritrea and Tanzania to put a human face on the issues that were discussed by world leaders. The then millennium development goals were committed to things such as access to clean water, reducing child mortality and accessing education. One of our reporters went out to Eritrea and rose before dawn with a little girl in East Africa to make the long five-kilometre trek with a picture to collect muddy water for her family before she even managed to get to school. Of course, sometimes she was too tired to go to school and that was the human face of make poverty history. Diarrhea caused by dirty water and bad sanitation is still the second biggest child killer worldwide. There are 2.4 billion people in the world who still lack access to improved sanitation. However, partly as a result of the G8 summit in Scotland and the commitment made there, real advances have been made. According to the UN, the world has met the target of halving the proportion of people without access to improved sources of water. Five years ahead of schedule and between 1990 and 2015, 2.6 billion people gained access to improved drinking water sources. That is just one area. We have also seen improvements in maternal health, access to education and a reduction in the number of people living on what was then less than a dollar a day in 2005. That is a direct result of international aid because international aid works. World leaders committed at the G8 summit to spend £48 billion a year by 2010 and £1 billion a year was used to wiping out debt for the most highly indebted poor countries. All UK political parties committed to maintaining the aid target of 0.7 per cent of national income. Although I have many disagreements with the Government of David Cameron, it was commendable that he stuck to that commitment. I just hope that the present Government and the international development under Pretty Patel maintain that commitment that existed under Mr Cameron. I am very pleased to note that there is absolutely no chance of us reneging on any of our commitments that we have made in Scotland. We contribute to the UK's spending through our taxes, and our fund is in addition to that. However, there is a consensus here in Scotland that is the right thing to do, and it makes us better global citizens to borrow from the title of the new strategy. It is fair to say that there appears to be a consensus among those submissions from charities that the priorities of the strategy should address those in greatest poverty. By focusing on just four countries—three of them in Sub-Saharan Africa—we can do that more effectively. The Scottish Government's approach to date has also been tightly focused, working with NGOs and experts across Scotland and in the countries themselves, and it is fair to say that this system is more accountable than when large sums of aid are channeled through government. The Scottish system of delivering small grants and project funding allows us to see exactly where the money is spent. I had a glance at the Scottish Government's grant for 2016. I was very impressed by how well it illustrated the aims of the new strategies. For example, £20,000 to enable Hemophilia Scotland to educate 300 health workers in Malawi about bleeding disorders and the excellent example of partnership, another £48,000 to help communities suffering from leprosy in Zambia and Tanzania to generate their own income through work, and many other projects over the years in Scotland have particularly helped to improve maternal health with clinicians from Scotland travelling to Malawi. However, I agree with Skiaf in their briefing that we should always, where possible, use expertise and workers in the country itself to build up capacity there. A good example of that is the work that the Scotland Malawi business group and has been doing with Stirling University, backed by the Scottish Government to promote aquaculture on a small-scale in Malawi so that people can earn a living and improve nutrition and food security in local communities through small-scale fish farming. That is a good example of the beyond-aid approach. You give a poor man a fish and you feed him for a day, you teach him to fish and you give him an occupation that will feed him for a lifetime. That is a very old Chinese proverb, but it is particularly apt for our 21st century international development strategy today. Thank you very much. I remind members of the open debate. If you all take seven minutes, we get everybody in. Ross Thomson, to be followed by Stuart Stevenson, Mr Thomson, please. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I am sure that all members in the chamber today would agree that it is the responsibility of developed nations such as our own to contribute towards sustainable international development and to co-operate globally with our international partners towards achievement of the UN sustainable development goals. Therefore, I welcome the Scottish Government's £10 million commitment to continue to take action to help to tackle poverty in relation to some of the world's poorest and most vulnerable people in areas of Malawi, Zambia, Rwanda and Pakistan. That, on top of the UK Government's £12 billion international development budget, demonstrates that Scotland and the UK are punching above its weight in our commitment to promote sustainable international development. By working together, we are able to tackle the global challenges of our time, including poverty and disease, mass migration, insecurity and conflict. That work is building a safer, healthier, more prosperous world for everyone. International development is not just about creating stability in tackling poverty abroad. It also contributes directly to our own security and prosperity at home. It was Andrew Mitchell MP who said that the security of our country is not only maintained by our brilliant armed forces, it is also secured by training the police in Afghanistan, or building government structures in the Middle East. Those things make Britain more secure and stable and are funded from international development. I applaud the minister for international development in Europe for his commitment in the strategy paper to aim even higher and to achieve our development goals within our partner countries and beyond. However, it is also important to recognise potential shortcomings within the strategy, not simply for the sake of doing so but to help to enhance it. Firstly, the UN sustainable development goals are built on the principle of leaving no one behind and endeavouring to reach the most vulnerable first. Indeed, the Scottish Government's paper notes that his commitment to the global goals must reflect and mirror our domestic aims and ambitions for Scotland. With that in mind, the Scottish Government should contain a greater emphasis on the importance of deploying international aid to reach vulnerable and marginalised communities. The chamber will be aware of the concerns of Stonewall Scotland on LGBT inclusion in development, which states that there is a lack of recognition that barriers other than economic inequality such as criminalisation, ostracism and harassment can hold individuals back and stop them accessing vital services, including through international development programmes. Although I welcome the minister's reassurances, I would make the following points. In Pakistan, the Scottish Government strategy places a strong emphasis on education. However, what about the millions of LGBT people in Pakistan who live in fear of the death penalty for simply being who they are and able to enjoy the personal freedoms that we do here in Scotland? In Malawi and Zambia, the Scottish Government will form part of its sub-Saharan African project base to foster cross-border learning. What about the fact that these countries continue to criminalise same-sex relationships, imposing draconian penalties on individuals for simply being in love? I would therefore urge the Scottish Government, wherever possible, to consult with local human rights defenders in partner countries to guarantee that an inclusive approach is taken and that the projects that we support actively and effectively promote freedom, personal liberty and pursue real change. We are all proud of the role that Scotland plays in the world. That being said, it is also important that we follow the public pound to ensure that hard-earned money of Scottish taxpayers does not end up in the wrong hands but that we will be helping the most vulnerable and oppressed who most desperately need it. We also need to learn the lessons of the past. That is especially true in the wake of allegations that over £2 million of UK aid to Gaza has been funneled to Hamas by so-called charitable organisations, enabling the recognised terrorist organisation to build tunnels and purchase weapons in preparation for third intifada against Israel. It is an unfortunate fact that corruption—yes, absolutely. Claudia Beamish I am grateful for the member for taking intervention. He may have his own views on the issue. I would like to highlight that, in the words of my colleague and friend in front of me on Arsawa over many years, Gaza City is like putting a big wall around Glasgow and there is a prison in which people have to live. If it was not for UNRA aid and the support from a whole range of countries, it would be an even worse, unlivable situation there. I thank the member for your intervention. The point that I am making is not the support that we give but where the support goes. It is right that we help the most vulnerable. I have made that clear in what I have said, but we have evidence of where it has got into the wrong hands and facilitated acts. I do not want to get dragged into that. I am just making a brief point about the importance of following the public pound, and I would like to move on. The member takes intervention, not back benches, or indeed front benches. The Scottish Government's strategy must always ensure a process of real due diligence to guarantee that our taxpayers' money reaches the projects that help with peace, not hatred, discrimination or violence. Finally, our amendment encourages the Scottish Government to support investment and economic growth in our partner countries. Country to the view that the minister expressed when he was opening, I not only can international development aid encourage and promote democracy, but also the development of international trade. It is not one of the other, it is both. Securing trade agreements with developing nations can help to reduce poverty by stimulating economic growth, encouraging investment and creating jobs. We can benefit in Scotland by enhancing innovation, improving skills and strengthening the ties between nations to secure peace and stability, particularly in the most troubled parts of the world. Deputy Presiding Officer, I believe that our amendment is considered, and I think that it draws fair attention to the issues of real importance where we feel they have maybe not been fully considered by the Scottish Government's strategy and its own motion. I would therefore urge the minister to reconsider. I believe that there is common ground between us, and we could all build a consensus today. If not, I would therefore urge all members to support the amendment in the name of Alexander Stewart. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. Thank you very much, I call Stewart Stevenson, if we fall by Claudia Beamish. Mr Stevenson, please. Thank you, Presiding Officer. That is a debate that is founded upon principle. In the paper that we are speaking to today, in page 17, we captured some of the principle. Our approach to international development is one of working in partnerships of equals with others, both within Scotland and in our partner countries. That goes to a very important point. That is not about what we do to people, it is what we do with people. If the people with whom we are working are not with us, then we are going to achieve nothing of long-term benefit. Looking at the underpinnings of the whole issue, Bankie Moon and Ross Thompson referred to the United Nations said that saving our planet, lifting people out of poverty, advancing economic growth, is one and the same fight. At the moment, our eyes will be looking at what may happen in the United States, which is currently one of the biggest contributors in this particular area, and is one where we perhaps made out the future commitment. Looking to John F. Kennedy's inaugural address in 1961, to those people in the huts and villages of half the globe struggling to break the bonds of mass misery, we pledged our best efforts to help them to help themselves. I wonder if we will hear that in the next few days in the United States. Perhaps Theodore Roosevelt, in his speech in Washington in 1906, got to the heart of where the United States now seems to have got. He said, The liar is no fit better than the thief. An epidemic of indiscriminate assault upon character does not good but does very great harm. Let's hope that the events of the election of the United States can be put behind us and that the Republicans can return to their founder, Abraham Lincoln, who at Gettysburg said, all men are created equal. He meant, of course, women as well at the times have changed. The faiths that underpin the moral codes of communities across the world also speak to this, and Isaiah 58.6 says, to undo the heavy burdens and let the oppressed go free and that you break every yoke. So it is all pervasive in the thinking of the human race. Like others, I quote from Jack McConnell. I give Jack McConnell great regard for two things that he did in his time in office. First of all, on smoking, but this is the other one, where he said on the 1st of June 2005, if we are not part of the solution in Africa, we exacerbate the problem. Jack McConnell was absolutely correct in that regard. It's worth saying that the last year has been a tough one for international relationship. We've seen intolerance become almost normalised in too many parts of the world and perhaps the hope that we might look to a better future for all the peoples of the world has all but vanished. In the once-in-future king, written by T. H. White, he ends his story of hope at the point of his own death, but before he passes, he imparts a vision to a young boy. The last line of that book reads The Beginning. So let us hope that what has happened in the last year in particular, in the face of defeat, that we are actually now looking at a new beginning. In doing that, we can work with our partners, sharing a vision. In a world that is driven by intolerance and disregard, it is much more important than ever that we address building bridges with those who we can work with to improve their conditions and to give our young people very often the opportunity to learn from those who are less well-off than themselves that there are different ways of addressing the world's problem. Thank You Moon has been quoted by myself already, and I think that it is an excellent place to start. Of course, the vision must simply reflect that. We must tackle each part of the issue with our partners. Climate change is one that I have spoken about before, and in particular climate justice. Mary Robinson, the former president of Ireland, now runs a foundation that addresses that issue and works very largely with women, many of them in Africa. We have heard of children going out to collect muddy water for their family before going to school. We know that women have to travel further and further as climate change eridifies the area in which they live to get wood for their fires. We here, of course, in benefiting from an industrial past, are part of the reason that those burdens are being placed on people in less developed countries. That is why it is important that we stick to the knitting on climate change while also working with the individuals who are most affected by it, whose problems we have very largely in that respect created. Working to end global poverty reinforces our own commitment to defeating it here in our own country. It shows that our actions are not simply limited, we are not selective, no human being anywhere should suffer the pain of poverty. The diversity of peoples, the diversity of approaches strengthen the outcomes that we are likely to get. Diversity is intrinsically of value. I have before quoted the first law of epigenetics that the more highly optimised an organism is for one environment and the more adversely affected it is by changing that environment. That gives us the scientific underpinnings as to why diversity means that we have more resilient societies, more resilient ecosystems. International development is an opportunity. It is an opportunity to create a certain unity of purpose across national boundaries. The greatest problems of our time will not be defeated by the actions of a single nation, but by the collaboration of all nations. Partnerships give us that collective power. This paper that the Scottish Government has brought forward is a very encouraging part of developing a global response, but we are but a small part, but let's hope that we are an exemplar that encourages others to greater efforts in future. I want to add my voice to welcoming the Scottish Government's new development strategy today. Internationalism is indeed a proud facet of socialism, and Scottish Labour is supportive of the new Scottish Government strategy and the role that we can play here in Scotland in influencing progressive futures on the global stage. I, too, would like to highlight the contribution of Ban Ki-moon and would like to start by playing tribute to him as General Secretary of the United Nations, as his term has recently ended. I quote, he said, This generation is the first in humanity's history with the capacity to end endemic poverty and the last with the chance to halt catastrophic climate change. The UN global goals for sustainable development are a powerful and important guiding force for the path that we all hope our global community will take. The goals are set targets to end extreme poverty, inequality and climate change by 2030, and their might has been bolstered by the engagement of not only 193 world leaders, but also through social media and reaching out to young people across the world. Raising awareness of these kinds of ways to fuel a sense of shared duty and encourage the behaviour changes that we must make. It is absolutely right that the climate challenge fund is featured in the strategy. Climate change is perhaps the greatest challenge that we face and is demonstrated by the references in so many of the UN goals. Creating partnerships in the four targeted countries mean that we can share the valuable expertise that is garnered at home, as highlighted by Stuart Stevenson. The Scottish Government motion recognizes the holistic approach that is necessary to achieve sustainable development through a shared duty to consider everyday decisions and behaviours in Scotland and the impact that those have on developing countries. A fine example of that is the charity, the Tier Fund Scotland. Through the climate justice fund, it has been able to assist with water resource management in Malawi, making clean and safe water more available, setting up district and community systems for governing resources, and empowering targeted communities with strategies to adapt to climate change. The benefits of community empowerment initiatives like those are far-reaching, from the reduced risk of waterborne disease to making bricks and mortar for new infrastructure, to saving valuable time for those who would collect water, often women and children. The charity states that more people have escaped from poverty in the last 25 years around the world and at any time in history. At Tier Fund Scotland, we are concerned that climate change and rising inequality will reverse that unless we act now. The charity also asks us to act here in Scotland on a number of issues in the climate change plan. It is right that we have a robust link with what we do here and what we do globally. Last year, the COP23 saw the launch of the Marrakesh vision pledged by 48 nations to dramatically cut emissions. As I highlighted in a parliamentary motion in December, the most inspiring part of the vision is the commitment from some of the poorest nations around the world, nations that have contributed least to climate change. Scotland is resplendent with the opportunity for renewable energy creation. The Marrakesh vision should remind the chamber that we must not squander that privilege and must strive for greater progress in decarbonisation. I want to also speak about the support that the Scottish Government's targeted approach, as highlighted by Lewis MacDonald's amendment, shows how important it is that we look for detailed plans in the way forward. The minister highlighted the myriad of connections with Malawi. As a member of the cross-party group in the last session, I was further able to witness the strength of the links between Scotland and Malawi, and the Scott-Malawi partnership makes a significant contribution to those. The empowerment and support of women is an area of great importance globally, and I was able to contribute in a small way to a day of sharing knowledge and experience with women from both countries about the opportunities for women in civic and political life, the barriers that we face and the positive action that is necessary. I ask the minister in summing up what contribution the Scottish Government intends to make to supporting women in our four sister countries in the global quest for gender equality, and specifically whether there will be any work to tackle the scourge of men's violence against women and children in those four countries. The Scotland-Malawi partnership also works to develop relationships between schools here and in Malawi. In my own region in South Scotland, there are a number of schools, including B-slack community high school, Newton-Grange primary school, Penicook high school, Carstass primary school, Liberton primary school—the list continues. I quote from the partnership saying that all have active, dignified, two-way school-to-school links, which are informing and inspiring generations of young Scots to be good global citizens. As an ex-ECO schools coordinator, I would like to recognise the global citizenship as part of the green flag programme. Indeed, the climate coalition is running show the love project with a free resource pack this February to highlight climate change. Oxfam has produced food for thought for primary learners to look at Malawi and use a version of snakes and ladders to learn about the experiences of small-scale farmers. Can I ask the Scottish Government how links with our four sister countries will be encouraged specifically through the EECO schools programme? As a member of the co-operative group of MSPs, I also ask the minister if he agrees with me that the opportunities for people and communities to take financial productive and negotiating power into their own hands here in Scotland across the world through co-operative models are clear to see and whether the strategy will highlight these ways forward. Finally, I make a plea that the Scottish Government will seize every opportunity to contribute to conflict resolution through the new strategy, not least through whatever involvement possible to support the development of non-proliferation treaties to rid our world once and for all of nuclear weapons. Thank you very much. I call Keith Forbes, who followed by Alison Harris. Ms Forbes, please. Thank you, Presiding Officer. For two years, I used to pass a tarpolin-covered shack on my way to school each morning. Not a heap of rubbish, although you might be forgiven for thinking it was, but a semi-permanent home for a family with four or five children. Through every season, only a thin sheet protected them from the scorching sun or the heavy rain. The father and mother and the eldest children, who were probably my age, were probably manual labourers when they could find work, building roads and houses with loads of bricks and cement perched precariously on their heads and their worn sandals barely protecting their feet from the gravel. The toddlers would play in the dust by the road, stopping to smile as my siblings and I walked past in our smart uniforms, our packed lunches and textbooks in our school bags, and that, for me, is injustice. I met and saw countless families like this, but I wanted to pick just one today to really personalise this debate. One family out of 836 million people living in extreme poverty worldwide, one household who face more than just lack of income and resources, but who have limited access to education and healthcare and face discrimination and exclusion from society. The UN's number one global sustainable development goal is for them, wherever they are now. It is to end poverty in all its forms everywhere. The Scottish Government's new international development strategy is a message to the world that we will play our roles with Malawi, Zambia, Rwanda and Pakistan to achieve mutual progress towards the UN global goals. If the benefits of ending poverty and meeting the UN global goals are mutual, the means by which we have to do it must be collaborative. That is at the heart of the Scottish Government's strategy. We might be a fairly small nation, but we certainly stand on the shoulders of giants whose belief in the ethos of the common wheel, sharing wealth, whether that be financial faith and friendship for the common good, was not restricted to their own front gardens but beyond. It was not born of an inflated view of self-importance but a view of common humanity. Men like David Livingstone, a medical missionary from a humble home in Blantyre, whose working life began at the age of 10 in a cotton mill and whose explorations of the African continent and crusades against slavery made him a national hero, or Mary Slesser from the slums of Dundee, who started working at a mill aged 11 and then travelled to West Africa as a missionary who fought for women's and children's rights. I passionately believe in community and none more so than the global community. There is an enormous challenge before us and a moral obligation to act but not as the paternalistic benefactors of generations past, though I fear that there is still a strain of imperialism in a lot of our public rhetoric from politicians, the press and others. The Scottish Government's approach to international development, as has already been quoted by Stuart Stevenson, is working in and I quote, a partnership of equals with others. The purpose is to empower communities within and beyond our borders and only a partnership approach with a mutually beneficial goal will empower the communities to effect change and work towards sustainable development. That approach dignifies all partners. My own personal desire to empower communities is what drives my service to my constituents and I am so pleased that the Scottish Government's strategy puts empowerment rather than charity alone at the core of our internationalism. I have already mentioned Mr Livingstone and many others in the chamber have mentioned our long-standing relationship with Malawi, which is a great example of a mutually beneficial and valued enterprise. I thank the Scotland-Malawi partnership for all that it does, as the very title of that organisation is evocative of our relationship of friends and equals rather than reliance and subsidy. The strategy under debate today also considers the importance of funding opportunities for Scottish organisations that support young people to volunteer to realise their own role and to be a force for good in the wider world via education and the example that we set. Earlier this year, I saw the enormous potential of young people pursuing the common global good as a mentor at the Commonwealth Youth Parliament. With young people from 66 regions, there was great variety in culture, language and experience, and yet much friendship and unity of purpose. If they are the future leaders, then there is great hope that international friendships of the future will develop great global partnerships. In September 2015, 193 world leaders agreed to 17 global goals for sustainable development—to end extreme poverty, inequality and climate change. It can be easy—very, very easy—and I do it myself at times to despair of the challenge and the magnitude of the problems of extreme poverty that we face. It can also be easy to indulge in self-centred parochialism or to sign a cheque, get a pat on the back and move on. However, I believe that this strategy does not take the easy route and instead it contributes distinctively to international development, focusing our expertise, being innovative and employing our unique partnership approach for the global good. I do not know where the family that I mentioned at the start of my speech is today. I do not know if their children managed to get out of the relentless cycle of poverty that passes from generation to generation. Yes, that family is just one of millions of families on the other side of the world, but I firmly believe that they are also fellow members of our global community. They are global citizens and so are we. I am proud to stand here as a member of a party whose Government at Westminster leads the world in its support for the people of poor nations. Our UK Conservative Government has ensured that our country is one of only six in the world who meets the UN target of donating 0.7 per cent of GDP to assist those who are less fortunate than ourselves. It is good that here in Scotland we add to the contribution by assisting countries with which we have a special bond, such as Malawi. The UK has been setting this example to the rest of the world since 2013. It is the only member of the G7 to meet the UN target and, of course, by far the largest contributor of any European country. In actual cash terms, it is over £12.1 billion, second only in the world to the United States, but at 0.71 per cent of GDP, the UK's contribution is far in excess of the 0.17 per cent from the Obama Administration. According to a report from the House of Commons Library, and I quote, "...country's proximity to achieve the UN target is regarded by the international community as being an indicator of the generosity of individual countries' AIDS policies." Well, that being the case, thanks to both the UK Government and our own Scottish international aid, we in Scotland can certainly hold our heads high. High, but we should not and cannot be complacent, as everything possible needs to be done to ensure that aid from the UK taxpayer reaches the designated project and individuals who are in need. Often giving aid to developing countries has had found critics. A lack of targeting, corruption in the receiving countries or aid being used to allow countries to divert expenditure towards other purposes, often not in keeping with meeting the United Nations sustainable development goals. To maintain taxpayers' confidence that their money is well spent, aid must be focused, it must be accountable and, except in emergency humanitarian situations, must always go hand-in-hand with our recognition by the recipient countries of human rights and freedoms. Mikayla Rong, the author of It's a Return to Eat, looked at the corruption in Kenya, but she points to other countries, including Rwanda, where the promotion of democracy and human rights has not had the same focus as building schools. A large number of countries benefit from UK aid, not surprisingly, nations of the Commonwealth feature highly in the list of recipient countries. Pakistan is the largest recipient, with more than £350 million of aid from British taxpayers. Other countries in the top 10 include India, Tanzania, Bangladesh, Nigeria, but also Ethiopia, South Sudan, Afghanistan and Syria. Aids receive hundreds of millions of pounds in aid, reflecting recent tragic events. International development aid makes a real difference towards achieving the United Nations global goals. It assists 9 million children in the poorest countries on earth to attend primary school. UK aid has immunised 55 million children against preventable and life-threatening diseases. Further, it is estimated that over a quarter of million of newborn children are alive today, thanks to our contribution. Developing sources of clean drinking water, improving agricultural yields, humanitarian aid to people displaced by war and famine, providing shelter, food and medicines. From the refugee camps of Jordan, Turkey and Lebanon to the newly dug wells in the south Sudan, the logo of the UK aid highlighting our flag and the message aid from the British people is a welcome site to countless thousands. Not only is this the right thing to do in human terms, but in political terms. Giving aid to the poorest is also the right thing. We must do this. Poverty can provide a recruiting sergeant to those who seek to radicalise and failed states can become safe havens for enemies of our way of life. I believe that it is in our national interest to help to alleviate poverty and suffering. As we leave the European Union and take up our historic role in the wider world, we can be proud of what Scotland and the wider UK does. If by our actions it makes it easier for a safer world then that is no bad thing. Encouraging and giving aid to countries who genuinely aspire to the United Nations global objectives has many positives. I was also struck by the words of Kirsty McNeill, executive director of policy and campaigns at Save the Children, who said that we should also play our part because, as one of the world's wealthiest and most successful economies, we can. Kirsty put it like this. If I saw a man in the Thames on the way home tonight and I saved him, it may well do wonders for my reputation, but that is not why I do it. I do it because if you can save a life, you should save a life. I applaud the amendment to the motion put forward by my colleague Alexander Stewart because, of course, it is good to save a life. Using Kirsty's analogy, what would have happened if she hadn't been passing by? Surely it is better to provide the tools, the know-how and, yes, the emergency aid when needed, but let us use the aid to empower people in developing countries and to promote the rights of those who are targeted because of gender or sexuality. That is the difference between those two visions and why I should be supporting the Conservative amendment. I must confess that, when the whip told me how to speak this afternoon, I had a sense of slight, oh my goodness, not another debate on Brexit. I have thankfully realised that Alice that the minister was not promoting yet another debate on Brexit. Instead, we were debating the international strategy. Although I couldn't resist the tweet that I saw this morning on the aforementioned subject, which we will never hear its name again, which said that, fearing her position on Brexit, it was starting to emerge. Theresa May decided to un-clarify it again, which I thought was fairly accurate summation of the last few days of running commentary that we've seen. In fairness to my Tory friends, I will say no more on Brexit and no more on tweets either, because the tweet now appears to be the mechanism of foreign policy announcement by the president-elect of the United States, which would cause most of us some concerns. I see his secretary of state or his nominee for secretary of states being scrutinised in the Senate today—I think that it happens later today—our time, and that will be worth watching. I hope that he gets a few questions on Africa. I suspect that Mr Tillerson's knowledge of Africa will be probably concentrating around Angola and Nigeria, given that ExxonMobil has fairly significant oil interests there. However, the Trump administration begins to act internationally. International aid and how it responds to that will be an important component of that. This is a young Parliament and new institutions around the world have to consider the most effective way they can invest limited resources, particularly at times of tougher economic times in the world, how they can contribute, how they can help and how they can offer assistance. Alistair Allen and others have been generous today about Governments in the past to begin a journey that is certainly being continued at this present time. Concentrating resources—I suspect that this Government today had exactly the same challenge that the one that Lewis Macdonald and I have shared in previous years, as to how we would win the argument for the budget to be spent in this way, which I do not think that we should be ignored in the context of the political world that we are in, and in fairness to some of my Conservative friends, they have made that observation as well. Secondly, the importance of concentrating the resources that Alistair Allen—in this case now—may have. The other aspect to this that we can play—others have talked about much wider avenues of international events—is to be an active part of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association. Now, many countries that have been mentioned today are very much part of that Commonwealth family. Some of the best things that I have been involved in as a member of this place is in and with parliamentary colleagues from different legislatures, particularly across Africa. One can meet Canadians, Australians and Kiwis, and we tend to all talk the same talk in terms of audit and parliamentary scrutiny and so on and so forth. We all do things differently, but there are similarities. Meeting colleagues from Africa is to meet people who have profoundly different issues. Those colleagues who have been on parliamentary delegations to Malawi in particular are all too well aware of that. That is why I believe that the CPA branch here in Edinburgh has its role in building and helping clerking in parliaments, for example, in Malawi. It is some of the practical aspects of democracy that we can bring. Not, as Kate Forbes rightly said, not the essence of any kind of colonial reach that this country and other European nations in the past tried to impose, but rather to say, look, here is a way to do it. Balmy is going to talk to the Kiwis, he is going to talk to the Canadians about how they do it as well, but those are some thoughts that you might want to. Others have mentioned the UN today. I must confess that I struggle a bit with the United Nations in the modern world. I read a terrifying account of the reality of Syria and Aleppo right now. It was on a website somewhere this morning. The problem with being critical of the United Nations is what is the alternative. None of us can get past the fact that the United Nations Security Council has not covered itself in glory in six years of atrocity after atrocity in Syria, which I find very difficult to contemplate that any grouping of the world has not been able to find some way forward on, but nor it has. A GP I know well works in Uganda. I just wanted to mention a couple of examples today. A GP I know well works in Uganda. She works for Marcel Saint-Fronter. She sent me an email the other day about the 2.2 million people who have fled from South Sudan and the civil war that is going on there into neighbouring countries, some of which have been mentioned here this morning, some of which, of course, are part of the Scottish Government's strategy. She said that her immediate challenge as a doctor was her husband. He was killed in front of you. Your teenage son was forced to stay and fight in South Sudan. You have brought your other three children plus a couple of orphans that you have picked up on the way into another country, a country that you have never been in before. You may have been raped on the way and it starts to get dark. You go into labour. That is the daily reality. We live sheltered lives, if I may say so, compared to a Scottish GP who happens to be working in a aid camp in Uganda. Never mind the woman that she was describing. If we can do our bit, if we can do a bit more on the medical front, then perhaps we should. If we can occasionally be a bit more reflective about our own health debates, we probably should as well. When she describes the life-saving interventions for 50,000 people that she is seeking to co-ordinate in a mobile clinic, which instantly is, yes, our tent, providing healthcare, vaccination, mental health, care for rape survivors, a network of community health workers maternity and an inpatient ward, and yes, that is still another tent. There is much that we can do in that way as well. Two constituency examples I want to briefly mention today. A brilliant woman who was, again, a nurse in South Africa many years ago, runs Shetland with love or charity for children orphaned or abandoned because of HIV AIDS-related illnesses and violence. She is quite a woman. She delivered two of Nelson Mandela's grandchildren and met him on several occasions as a very fine photograph of that at home in Shetland. However, what they do now is to provide help for a charity that is doing simple things such as restoring schools, roofs blown off a dining room during a heavy storm and so on and so forth. Many projects such as that where the money is always locally by people who just want to do their little bit to help in different parts of the world. The other example, Presiding Officer, is by an arts teacher or an hour retired arts teacher Peter Davis, who runs a brilliant project, a non-profit making charitable trust based in Shetland, providing money for Ghana in West Africa. Again, similar educational programmes, similar aspects to the Shetland with love project, all about putting money that comes from, yes, our rich part of the world into places where there is none or little or else. That is the place that we can play. The strategy that the ministers outlined today is an important part of that. Colin Smyth, by John Mason. The Government's international development strategy document touches on a wide range of matters. I want to focus my brief comments on three main areas. First, the importance of trade and trading relations. Secondly, the key part of civil society in Scotland plays in the promotion of international development. Thirdly, the global impact that is made by NGOs based here in Scotland. In other words, the positive role that people live in learning and working right here in Scotland can play internationally. In making those comments, I want to draw members' attention to my register of interests, where it states that I am a local councillor in Dumfries and Galloway and that includes a voluntary role as Dumfries and Galloway's fair trade champion. I am also convener of the Parliament's cross-party group on fair trade, which is an honour so soon after being elected to this chamber. It is a post that gives me the privilege of being able to continue to promote fair trade and I would like to take this opportunity to pay tribute to the many volunteers and campaigners who have actively promoted fair trade for many years, particularly in Dumfries and Galloway, where I have worked closely with them as chair of the regional fair trade steering group. The contribution that volunteers from Dumfries and Galloway have made was most recently recognised at the Scottish Fair Trade Awards, where the fair trade group in the village of Dunskirk won the community award, the Dumfries fair trade group were joint winners of the campaign of the year award, and Dumfries's Paul Toffield won the volunteer of the year award. The region also boasts fair trade groups in Wigtown, Cacubrie, Castle Douglas and, thanks to the work of all those groups, we are well on the way to achieving fair trade zone status for the whole of Dumfries and Galloway. Those are examples of fair trade activities that I am closely aware of, but I know that outstanding activities and campaigns promoting fair trade are to be found in all members' constituencies and regions right across Scotland. Much of the work is organised, co-ordinated or supported by the Scottish Fair Trade Forum, so I want to commend the valuable role played by the forum, which not only led the way in securing the fair trade nation status for Scotland, mentioned by the minister in his opening comments, but continues to do so much to ensure that we retain that status. It was Scotland, along with Wales, that helped to develop the idea of a fair trade nation, and now this model is shaping interest in the development of fair trade nations and regions across the world. In fact, just recently in Glasgow, the Scottish Fair Trade Forum hosted fair trade representatives from Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland and the UK's Fair Trade Foundation, Sweden, the Netherlands, Poland and Canada to discuss the development of the fair trade nations and regions models. In those times, when the nature of international connections can sometimes seem fragile, it is welcome to see that Scotland has taken a leadership role in the process of developing equipment internationally to fair trade. The fair trade nation campaign itself has had the support of all successive Governments in Scotland, support and pleased to see that international development strategy commits to maintaining. Much has been achieved in the promotion of fair trade in Scotland, but a lot more still needs to be done. Trade that is fair and mutually beneficial is a means to promote the development that is sustainable and empowering, yet much of global trade is still inherently unfair and exploitative. The support of Government and the people in our communities across Scotland for fair trade needs to continue and has never been more important. However, it is not just in the area of fair trade that the support of Government and Civic Scotland is important. There are many examples of positive engagement with international development across civic society. That engagement is perhaps more necessary than ever at a time when uncertainty globally is on the increase. For the commitment in the strategy to prioritise the engagement of the people of Scotland is important, as is the commitment to raise awareness of Scotland's international development work through networking organisations. I commended earlier the excellent work of the Scottish Fair Trade Forum, which I hope the Government will continue to support. I also want to recognise the work undertaken by other networking advocacy agencies, such as the Network of International Development Organisations in Scotland, the International Development Education Association Scotland and the Scotland-Malawi partnership. It is those networks that build support in Scotland for the work undertaken overseas, and we see that support every day in our communities, not least in our schools. Claudia Beamish has outlined a number of schools in the south of Scotland. It is also included in Lockerbie academy in the south of Scotland. The school that has had a partnership with Tawallee primary school in the Melange district of Malawi for some eight years. The link that is established by the academy's teacher Helen Wright through Link Community Development Scotland in 2009 has included significant fund raising enabling the academy to, among many other things, sponsor the Mary's Meal kitchen in Tawallee primary school. That kitchen has encouraged more pupils than ever before to attend the primary, and thanks to the continuing fund raising efforts of Lockerbie academy, a scholarship fund has now been set up to allow students from the primary to go on to secondary school. The global link is about more than just fund raising. It is about sharing experiences through regular exchange visits, and it is about pupils in all years at Lockerbie academy having the opportunity to be involved in the school's African link, encouraging pupils to be responsible citizens in their local community and to understand their also citizens of a world community. As well as those that are learning in Scotland, there are also many examples of people working in their local communities making a massive contribution to international development. I suspect that few members will be aware that the world's largest humanitarian mine clearance organisation is actually based here in Scotland in rural Dumfrieshire. The HALO trust currently works in 20 countries and territories across the world clearing land mines, cluster munitions and improvised explosive devices. It has destroyed literally tens of millions of bullets and bombs clearing an area that is equivalent of nearly 40,000 football pitches. However, its work is about more than just the physical clearance of the debris of war—important indeed, life-saving, though that work is—in its work to make people and places safe, the HALO trust very much embeds themselves in local communities around the world, providing skills and a livelihood to the 6,500 people that they employ, offering opportunities to rebuild lives, preparing the way for development and long-term stability. Although the trust is not currently active in the four partner countries that are identified in the Government's strategies, I know that they are pursuing funding to carry out work in Malawi, where badly stored ammunition and military stores are posing a real threat to the lives of civilians. I hope that the minister will give careful consideration as to whether the Scottish Government could support that work and show a real commitment to harnessing Scottish expertise as set out in the strategy. Indeed, I would urge the minister to take the opportunity to visit the trust headquarters in Cannonbridge on the outskirts of Thornhill. I can tell him from my own recent visit that it is a pretty eye-opening experience walking into the HQ and being introduced to the Afghanistan desk officer who was co-ordinating the work of 2,500 Afghans and international staff from a converted ban in rural Dumfrieshire. It is also very much international development and action that is taking place right here and right now from Scotland. In conclusion, I have highlighted just some of the examples of people living, learning and working here in their communities who play such a positive role in promoting and delivering international development. Examples that we can be very proud of and which I am sure are replicated in other members' constituencies. As the Government's new strategy is implemented, there is obviously a need for the Government to provide more detail in how it will turn in good intentions into real action. I look forward to seeing that detail, including, I hope, continued practical support for fair trade, support for network and organisations to build on public support for international development work and for NGOs to ensure that we harness Scotland's expertise as a force for good right across the world. I am very pleased to take part in today's debate. I myself lived and worked for three years in Nepal, which, at that time in the 1980s, was one of the six poorest countries in the world. For me, that immediately raises the question, what about all the other countries that Scotland might have links with? Nepal itself, through the Gurkhas and the British Army, Jamaica, with the salt iron its flag and our involvement in the slave trade there, and the list could go on and on. On balance, it is right to focus on a few countries. We are relatively small ourselves, and we are really only supplementing, I accept, the main UK development budget. The risk is that we do spread ourselves too thinly and have less effect. However, I would hope, as others have said, that we can at least keep some interest in other countries, for example, through the Commonwealth parliamentary association and through exchanges with parliaments more widely, which I think is valuable. I also welcome the focus on education and the links between education institutions. That way, we can certainly make the money go further, as other organisations get involved in sharing the costs. An example of that has been schools in my constituency, and, as other members have mentioned, their schools. I would mention Bannerman High, for example, who not only have been able to raise funds to take youngsters from Scotland out to Malawi but have also raised funds to bring youngsters from Malawi to visit here in Scotland. There will, of course, be those who argue against Scotland having any international development programme at all. I meet people like that in my constituency and, of course, in Twitterland, where I enjoy spending some of my time. We have so many needs here, people say. Shouldn't we just focus on them? However, I would say a couple of things to that. First of all, it is not the poorest people in my constituency who say that kind of thing. I see pensioners and others who are not well off running coffee mornings or other fundraising events and giving their own money sacrificially in order to help people in other countries who they know are less well off than themselves. Secondly, we live in an interdependent world and we really cannot separate what is good for Scotland from what is good in Malawi, Pakistan, Zambia or Rwanda. To put it in crude economic terms, if we want to sell our goods, like whisky, to other countries around the world, then clearly it is to our advantage if they have stronger economies and many more of their residents can afford to buy our goods. That is why I am so keen on supporting fair trade, which we have just heard so eloquently from Colin Smython, which not only is morally right that people earn a decent wage for their work, but it benefits their economy and ours as well, if all of that works. Another argument that is sometimes used against Scotland's engaging in international development can be that there already is wealth in some of those countries. Pakistan is an obvious example of that with some very wealthy individuals and a country that can spend a lot of money on sophisticated military weapons. However, there is still extreme poverty in that country and we have a responsibility to help those in greatest need. That is why I particularly welcome the strategy being to work in conjunction with Governments while not actually giving the cash to the Governments. On that point of working with, can I also make another point? Of course, we want to help those four countries as much as we can, but there are aspects of life in all of those countries that are better than ours, and we can learn, and we should learn from them as well. I have visited three of the four, and one example of the strengths that I have seen would be strong family bonds and care for the elderly, but that does not mean better material care for the elderly. However, I have seen a real sense of duty towards the older generation, which I think that we used to have here in Scotland but which we can be in danger of losing, as we expect wider society to shoulder most of the responsibility for our elderly relatives. That is not to say that we should not also hope to share some of our values with those other countries. However, I hope that we can do it, as one or two others have said today, from that position of mutual respect and not talking down to them as has often been done by Western countries, including ourselves in the past. Briefings for today's debate included the encouragement to remember the most marginalised in those societies, and I certainly agree with that. It is not entirely easy, as we have a limited budget and limited influence, and we need to get the balance right between respecting different values and traditions on the one hand while calling a spade a spade if something is wrong. Mary Slesser is still respected in Nigeria, despite her challenging the tradition that twins were bad. Obviously, she went about it in the right way and in the long run has been respected for her challenge. One area of concern that I hope we can work on is treatment of those of a minority religion or even no religion. People should be free to worship in the faith of their choice, they should be free to change religion or faith, and they should be able to abandon all faith if they choose to do so. In Pakistan, Christians can be treated very much as second-class citizens, although there is little protection in the legal system, and often they are open to empty charges of blasphemy. Even Pakistani Muslim leaders who challenge this system can put themselves at great risk. Hopefully, through sharing in education in other ways, we can discuss this kind of issue with our partners while still respecting their culture. In relation to Pakistan, I was extremely disappointed when the UK Government Borders Agency refused visas recently for Pakistani church leaders visiting Scotland under the auspices of Glasgow Presbytery of the Church of Scotland. I am very glad that that situation has been reversed, and I think that that is partly due to the intervention of the minister and his colleagues. However, I hope that there would be some kind of agreement with the UK Government that Scotland has a relationship with those four countries, and, at the very least, it will not put obstacles in the way of visitors coming here from there. Again, this shows the importance of the third sector in general and churches and religious organisations in particular in taking forward our relationships around the world. Finally, we often come up against this question of sustainable development versus short-term emergency aid. Should it be one or the other? The strategy clearly says that it should be both, so as well as the international development fund and the humanitarian aid fund. Of course, we should be aiming for each country to be as self-reliant as it can be. However, if children today cannot go to school because there is no food, we have to tackle that problem, too, and I welcome the likes of Mary Mills who do so much in that regard. There is a lot more that could be said, but the key thing is that it is great that Scotland has an international development strategy, and although we might debate some of the details, there is broad agreement that this is the direction that we should be going in. Maurice Corry, please, followed by Bruce Crawford. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. First of all, I would like to pay tribute to the comments that were made about Mary's meals and their team on their fantastic work that they do around the world, which the minister very kindly referred to. Particularly as a resident of Argyll and Buton, I am particularly proud of the work that they do based on Locky Uphead. As one of the world's leading economic powers, one of the world's key long-term stable democratic states and one of the world's most compassionate nations, it is only right that the UK and Scotland pay a key role in helping other nations through our aid projects and our aid spending. I would like to commend Tavish Scott's comments in his speech about the work and the examples that he gave of the situations abroad. A wonderful work has done, the harrowing situations that people find themselves in, and particularly the work delivered to sort those situations out by several British people. I have seen it, I have experienced it in the parts of the world that I have worked in. The UK as a whole should be congratulated for contributing the second largest amount of aid to other countries on the planet, only behind the United States of America. The UK as a whole provides over £12 billion in aid mainly to Africa and Asia. The UK is also currently the only G7 nation that meets his obligations set by the United Nations to provide 0.7 per cent of his GDP on international aid spending. That is thanks to a Conservative Government that has legislated to protect the UK's international aid project and budget. That is because the international aid spending does not just help those receiving it, which of course would be enough reason to spend it, but it also does to help us here at home. It means that countries can have the opportunity to develop economically, creating jobs and growth locally, meaning, hopefully, more customers to our products and services overseas and us receiving more business from this area. It also means that countries are less likely to produce the conditions necessary for terror organisation and, more importantly, the hateful radicalisation that they spout to thrive, which means that we are safer here on our streets at home. Additionally, it gives other countries the breathing space that they need to develop political institutes and institutions and to create flourishing new democracies across the world where, before, they have not existed. I was lucky enough to meet some members and officials from the Pakistani Provincial Assembly of the Kaiba Pashtun QA delegation that visited the Parliament this last November. They were across learning about the procedures and the practices of our Parliament in the hope of implementing best practice in their assembly back home. The visit by the delegation is a perfect example of the sort of expertise and example of what we can provide to others alongside our financial help. My other personal experience of offering aid and support was while serving in Bosnia and in support in Afghanistan. We were providing logistical support to vehicles and four vehicles and their movements to help move aid around the country and also to train up the Afghan national police to ensure effective security in Afghanistan and its efforts in securing its borders. From my own experience, these are part of the so-called golden rules when stabilising developing countries. One, establish a secure and stable environment. Two, ensure supplies of water and electricity. Get the light switched on. It is amazing the positive effect that this has when those lights go on. I can tell you that I saw what was happening in Sarajevo in Bosnia and they were switched on by a Glasgow engineer. Making sure that the transport systems are operational and effective, opening the shops so that commerce and normal day-to-day life begins to operate and providing medical services and education. Providing these basic services and building the infrastructure is something that we are brilliant at in this country and we are second to none. I am pleased to see that these areas are covered by aid spending in one way or another. The many of the Scots who go there to help deliver these come from our own country here and a lot of them are in very high positions in those aid projects and have been at it many years and their skills in engineering particularly are absolutely brilliant. The last point is of the utmost importance and that is providing education, which I am pleased to see that the strategy has focused certainly in part. In Pakistan, for example, the fact that over 7 million children are not in school is a disaster waiting to happen. The lack of even basic education for so many is going to create problems down that line in that country. That is why we must encourage them into school and also into further and higher education, in particular young women. As has been noted by the World Bank chief economist, an investment in women's education could potentially provide the highest return available. It is not just economically beneficial but is also socially beneficial in many parts of the world. I believe that for those parts of Pakistan where the education of women is not the norm, for example in rural areas, which also happen to be some of the poorest parts of that country, the benefits will be felt most of all there. It is why the announcement of the £300,000 of the Scottish Government to create a scholarship programme back in 2013, enabling women from disadvantaged backgrounds to study their master courses in educated environment, was a very welcome step. We can only imagine how much those parts of Pakistan will improve having two or three generations of women educated and their education being considered the norm and not an exception. Alongside the other projects of Scotland that are supporting in Pakistan, including those that will support the agricultural sector in the country, not only helping to secure food supply in Pakistan but also so that the large number of small holder farmers in Pakistan can benefit more from their work and can begin to build up the wealth amongst their group rather than the hand-to-mouth and day-by-day existence that many currently have. Scotland is doing great work in that country, alongside great organisations such as Mercy Corps, Oxfam, Tier Fund, Christian Aid and others. With its large energy and mineral reserves and position near some of the world's busiest shipping lanes, the opportunities for Pakistan are massive. It is certainly the opportunity to turn itself into the first world democratic state and, hopefully, with our help, it will be able to do just that. That is why, therefore, today, I will be supporting the Conservative amendment in this debate. I was delighted to learn that the Scottish Government has decided to bring forward this particular debate early in the new year. I was delighted because 2016 was such a miserable year for those of us who believe in progressive politics, as it seemed that reactionary forces and intolerance increased and isolation increases were on the march across the globe. I thought that this debate gives us the chance to remind ourselves and the world that Scotland is a home of citizens where, by far the majority, we are outward looking and want to give a helping hand to those who are less fortunate in the world. That debate gives us a chance to provide a positive and forward-looking perspective on what we in this Parliament can do to help others in the world by shining a bright light on what can be achieved in this field and help to banish some of those blues of 2016. Yes, there will always be those who have a negative view towards the Scottish Government contributing to international areas, which John Mason alluded to. Just like a constituent who contacted me only in the past few days, I would contend, as I did with him, that Scotland has a unique contribution to making to the world. Let me give you an example from the Friends of the Earth briefing paper that explained that the Climate Justice Fund was established in 2013 with a budget of only around £1 million to help tackle the effects of climate change in four sub-Saharan African countries, Malawi, Zimbabwe, Tanzania and Rwanda. That was increased to £3 million in 2015. Achievements of that fund so far include providing more than 75,000 people with access to clean, safe drinking water and training to 110,000 people in climate change and water rights. In addition, Scotland is in a position to help mitigate and help to adapt to climate change in those areas by sharing knowledge and expertise, especially in the areas of water management and energy. I make a particular point on climate change, because this is a vital area for work. If we are going to avoid the mass displacement of human beings and enabling people to live in their own homelands and safety, they are removed from absolute poverty. I cannot reflect on it, but someone mentioned John McAlpine, who said that when we are doing these tasks, it cannot simply be all about exploiting the skills of our own people, but making sure that we are developing local skills in that activity. In working in that way, not only can we help troubled parts of the world, but I believe that we can hugely enrich ourselves. I know that when I go about my own daily job as an MSP, if I am helping someone to get a bit of justice against a Government agency or helping them in their general lives, I feel good about myself. There is absolutely no reason why our nation should not feel the same when it is doing good things in their own world. However, with John Mason and others, and I am sure that others have had the same experiences in their own parts of the world, we still have a big job to do in raising awareness in our own country to let others see the virtue of such works. As Maurice Corry said, that is much about letting them understand that if we are acting positively in those other parts of the world, it is as much for our own good as it is for them. I really believe that we need to do something about that. That helps us to break down on tolerance and isolationism in the same way. I know that the Scottish Government is committed to integrating the principles and priorities of its international development programme into its broader policy agenda. That clearly does not just mean throwing money into a country and hoping for the best. Instead, the international development policy seeks to harness the existing links that Scotland has and use our peoples expertise in areas such as climate change, as we have already talked about, education, health improvement and to create a model of civil society-led partnerships. In Scotland and the Scottish Government have found innovative ways to tap into incredible expertise, goodwill and willingness to volunteer time across Scotland and in partner countries. The more holistic, as they say, beyond-aid approach means having all groups, local government, public bodies, the private sector, communities and individuals adapt their behaviour in support of global goals. Aid is only a small part of international development work. Some of the greater benefits to the world's poorest and most vulnerable can be brought about through policy changes by developed countries. Beyond-aid policy recognises the variety of development challenges that the underdeveloped countries face, and by addressing the causes of seemingly attractable challenges, you can help to reduce their impact on future generations. Aid alone, as we all know, will not end poverty. I also believe that by focusing, as others have said, our efforts on a select number of countries were able to maximise our impact. We have heard about the refreshed international development strategy that targets support for communities in four countries. Most people have reflected on the impact that we have had in Malawi over the past 150 years, with more than 94,000 Scots being actively involved in civic links with Malawi, making the world probably the world's strongest north to south civic links. It is central to the Scottish Government's work. In my constituency, there are a number of organisations that are involved in the type of activity. Barnett Burn High School, Cardin Wind Teeth Primary School and St Ninian's Primary School have all links with Malawi, which are informing and inspiring generations of young Scots to be good global citizens. There are other links with Malawi, which are helping to transform the lives in both Malawi and Scotland. I know that, in 2015, Barnett Burn High School sent a group of students and teachers to Malawi for the first time, and they helped to build and refurbish classrooms. I can only imagine just how much they learned about their own lives and the lives of others, especially through the relationships that they formed. I want Scotland to be able to empower our partner countries and, in turn, to go on to effect change and work towards sustainable development in their own countries for their own communities. Across the chamber, we have heard that international aid is much more than just about giving money. It is about establishing links, learning from each other and playing our part in tackling global challenges. I want Scotland to be proud of the role that we play across the world in doing just that. The last of the open speeches is Elaine Smith. Thank you, Presiding Officer. Can I start by declaring something of an interest as a member of the CPA Scotland branch executive and also take this opportunity to thank our Parliament, international relations office staff and team for all the work that they do on Parliament's behalf, advancing both inward and outward international relations and supporting the CPA. I am also co-vice convener of the Malawi Cross Party group, and, as a deputy Presiding Officer in the last session, I led a delegation in 2015 to Malawi to recognise the 10-year anniversary of the Scotland-Malawi relationship at parliamentary level. I would like to recommend the report of that visit to members if they have not already read it. It would be difficult, Presiding Officer, to disagree with the Government's motion and, in particular, the recognition of the strong cross-party collaboration and support for international development. I am pleased that the Government has indicated that it is accepting Labour's amendment. It is important to recognise the legitimate role that this Parliament and the Scottish Government have in the field of international development. I say that because there has been criticism from some quarters about the Government and Parliament spending money on international development, and I note that that is a point that was made earlier by Joan McAlpine. However, Scotland has got a massive contribution to make to international development and to tackling poverty and inequality across the globe, using our expertise in innovation through partnership working, and we have a long-proud history of doing that. Oxfam provided an interesting briefing for this debate, and in that, it stated, good quality aid saves lives and can unlock people's ability to work their own way out of poverty. I also want to put on the record that they state that conditionality should be avoided, and I agree with that point that they make. Oxfam also pointed out that a human rights approach to international development work is vital and must go beyond material resources, considering and addressing the capacity choices and power that are needed for people living in poverty to enjoy their human rights. I note that other members have mentioned that throughout the debate. Oxfam also proposed that a do-no-harm approach should go further and that the Government should have a more proactive do-good policy, as well as implementing policy coherence for development and should produce a publicly accessible annual expenditure report to aid openness and accountability. I would be interested in the minister's response to that in the summation to the debate. In the time that I have left, I want to turn to focusing on Malawi, which I recognise other members have also done. I recently noted that Malawi was a pointless answer on one of my favourite BBC programmes when people were naming African countries. I doubt if that would have been the case if the question had been asked only in Scotland. Indeed, the Scotland-Malawi partnership found that not only is there a high awareness among Scots of the People to People links with Malawi at 49 per cent, but there is also a remarkably high level of active and diverse civic involvement. 46 per cent of Scots know someone involved in one of 40 different types of links with Malawi. There is also remarkably strong public support for those civic links with Malawi, with 74 per cent in favour and only 3 per cent against. When viewed alongside comparable international development surveys across the UK, it is quite clear that Scotland's People to People partnership with Malawi is quite exceptional in terms of public awareness, engagement and perception. A lot of that is down to the work that has been done via the Government and the Parliament, as well as the work that is done in civic society. Of course, our links have Christian roots going back over 150 years to David Livingstone from Lanarkshire and other Scottish missionaries, who are still remembered fondly in Malawi. Our most recent and extremely close parliamentary relationship goes back to 2005, with the then First Minister, Jack McConnell, establishing our unique co-operation agreement with Malawi, a point that was mentioned by various other members, including Stuart Stevenson. The Scotland-Malawi partnership was keen that contributions in today's debate—or was keen, since we are reaching the end of the debate—that contributions emphasise the vital role that civic society plays in driving Scotland's international development work. Members have done that throughout the debate. Many churches and voluntary organisations have connections with Malawi. We have heard of several of those during the debate, but I want to specifically mention the healthy lifestyle project aiming higher in Malawi, supported by North Lanarkshire Council and run by Charles Fawcett. That project has been running for nearly two decades. At one level, it involves local schools in Cotebridge and Airdrie having partnerships with schools in the Malangie area. Young people learn through education here about Malawi, but they also fundraise, and many have the opportunity to go out to Malawi and do voluntary work. When I was there, I was lucky to see some of the healthy lifestyle projects, in particular the Girls' Go for Health team in Manjolo Parish, which was empowering women to set up enterprise activities and supporting girls in school through things like confidence building and practical support, for example providing sanitary wear. I also visited children being assisted by the disabled children programme, providing wheelchairs, crutches, other aids and transports. Those projects need Government assistance to support the fantastic work that they are doing on the ground. The international development strategy can and should provide help to such projects where the funds are going directly into communities and the people are being given the skills and tools to help themselves in the longer term. Being a good global citizen is vitally important in the world, because so many people live in abject poverty. Of course, the main purpose of aid is to tackle such poverty, and that remains vitally important. Being a good global citizen also involves promoting and supporting human rights, fairness, equality, sustainable development, fair trade and climate justice. A Scotland's international development strategy must do all that. Like others, I welcome the Government's newly refreshed strategy today. We now move to the closing speeches, and I call Anna Sarwar up to seven minutes, please. I start by saying that it has been a fantastic debate that we have had in the chamber today, and I think that it reflects the best of this Parliament, how we have unified around the important goals of not just delivering people right here in Scotland but looking out for those who are less fortunate right around the world. Critics of development often say that charity begins at home, and I agree with them. Charity does begin at home, but as I have demonstrated today, it does not end there. We have a responsibility to the world, both in social terms and economic terms, but also in terms of our human interests as well, to look out for all our common citizens in this global village. A point that is very well made by Stuart Stevenson, Katie Forbes and Alison Harris. As Alasdair Allan and Elaine Smith have both said, Scotland has a historic link with development. We have been beacons to the world about reaching out and looking out for those who are less fortunate. That is why I am so proud that it was a Labour Government that delivered not just the initial £3 million of development spend coming from this place but also delivered the Department for International Development. Lewis MacDonald has also made clear the point that Labour has played a huge role in trying to get this great consensus on development right across the United Kingdom. I am happy to take an intervention. Just for completeness, it might be as well to recognise the contribution that the person in the chair made to the debate in 2006, in which she supported the aims. It is always an opportunity to seek up to the Presiding Officer too. You are such a soup, Mr Stevenson. Mr Sarwar, you could do with being a soup of the morning. Yesterday, I was speaking up to the Presiding Officer, so today I will speak up to the Deputy Presiding Officer. I will echo that point again, which is a very well-made point. It is important to see how far we have come in the past 20 years, because 20 years ago, in our politics, we were debating whether we should even have a Department for International Development in the United Kingdom. We moved past that. The debates then became about whether we should have a 0.7 per cent commitment in terms of international aid. Again, we found consensus on that issue, so I welcome the fact that what we are now debating is not if we spend money, but how we spend money to help those people who are struggling right around the world. I will take an intervention, but I am running out of time quickly. I apologise that it is just in recognising people's contribution. I wonder if you would recognise the contribution of Tom Clack in the reporting of his 0.7 per cent? Absolutely. I was just coming to that to say that it was a particularly proud moment for myself to lead from the front bench in the UK Parliament when we delivered the 0.7 per cent bill, an issue that Tom Clack led and inspired on in terms of that Parliament. Actually, it was Mike Crockhart to pay tribute to the Liberal Democrats as well, who made that bill happen in terms of our private members' bill that passed right across the UK. I want to pick up on a point that Joan McAlpine quite rightly made, is that we cannot be complacent—yes, we have found consensus—but we cannot be complacent about the risks to that consensus. I would therefore gently say to Mr Thomson, who highlighted concerns about where AIDS spend might go and the negative consequence of it. It is actually his Government and the UK that has developed the international development tracker, where he can track where the money goes in terms of the UK's AIDS spend to make sure that it is not going to negative places to add perhaps. Ask Mr Thomson to maybe go and look at the development tracker and see where the UK money is going. I am happy to take an intervention. I do welcome that. I am sure that you will appreciate that I was referring to a particular case of the cherprion of world vision and that we do always need to learn lessons when any incident like that occurs that we always must be diligent to prevent the abuse of international aid. We should always learn lessons, but I think that Mr Thomson was suggesting that AIDS that was being sent from this country to the Gaza Strip was perhaps being used for illegitimate purposes. If you look at the development tracker, you can see that every penny of international development aid from the UK has been going to Gaza to feed cloth people who otherwise would be starving and indeed dying in the Gaza Strip. However, an important point that has also been made is that it is not just about AIDS, it is actually about development. It is important that we cloth people, we feed people and that we support them in a humanitarian crisis, but it is called international development for a reason. That is because we want to support developing countries to hopefully make them develop countries. We do that by helping to support institutions, by helping to promote good governance, by helping to promote universal education programmes and universal health programmes, a point that was made very well by Tavis Scott. We should also recognise our other commitments and obligations as well. Claudia Beamish rightly mentioned climate change, the impacts of climate change and the actions that we take here in the UK. It has an impact on the impact of water taking over land and mass migration of individuals, which again can drive people into extreme poverty. Our responsibilities on climate change, we should not forget either. I want to pick up on Alexander Stewart's amendment, which rightly mentions the role of the UK in terms of DFID, the second largest aid agency in the world, based here in Scotland in East Kilbride, employing thousands of people and having a budget of £12.1 billion. Scotland, yes, contributes to £10 million through this Government, but it contributes over £1 billion to the Department for International Development. Through that Department for International Development, we demonstrate how we can pool and share resources to maximise income and impact for those who are suffering in the most vulnerable places. For example, in Malawi, £86 million, Zambia, £57 million, Rwanda, £101 million and, in the case of Pakistan, the single largest recipient of UK aid £374 million a year. I want to say in closing a couple of things. One is that, yes, we have a responsibility in terms of development, but let us not forget that the importance of institutions failures to pay tax are three times as much as the complete global aid budget combined. Failing to introduce tax systems in those countries is absolutely crucial. How we procure is also very important. That is why I think that the points made by Colin Smyth on fair trade are also important. One of the things that we should do is take into account our diaspora community so that we can share and learn lessons from it. That is why we should try to shape participatory development so that we can use the expertise of our diaspora community to target our aid but also to win confidence that our aid is delivering and making a result. I want to close by saying that we take the issues of health, education and the rights of women and girls here in Scotland really, really seriously. That right and privilege should not just be for Scots, but for British people. It should be a principle for people, men, women and children right around the world. Yes, we have poverty here, but there is extreme poverty right around the world. I hope that, working in this Parliament and across the world, we can eliminate poverty globally. Rachel Hamilton No more than eight minutes, please, Ms Hamilton. We are all proud of our involvement in international development today. Many have made reference to Scotland's commitment to the social, economic and environmental global goals. Both Stuart Stevenson and Claudia Beamish rightly paid tribute to Ban Ki-moon and his role in the UN. Cross-party, we agree that the Parliament can set an example to our young people, an example that shares values of humanity, tolerance, compassion and progressiveness. We are, after all, as emotion states, part of an interlinked global community. Demonstrating global citizenship cuts through the detail in our own lives and encourages us to look closer at others' lives. As Alice Zander-Stewitt said, we are proud to be able to provide aid to people who are less well off than ourselves. Scottish universities play an important role, often linking courses to development work in respect of countries. Of course, not only can universities share their knowledge, in this regard, as members have highlighted today, Scotland as a whole can share its knowledge and collaborate on projects where we face common challenges such as health, education and renewable energy. Alistair Allen talked about the Blantyre to Blantyre research project linking health in Glasgow and Malawi, and Mary's Meals feeding over 1 million children in Malawi, also mentioned by Maurice Corry and John Mason. Joe McAlpine gave us a poignant Chinese proverb to demonstrate ways for people in Malawi to feed themselves in a sustainable way through an aquaculture project developed between Malawi and Stirling University. Mention has been made of Scotland's distinctly different approach, and Lewis MacDonald rightly talked about civic activity, stating that for every £1 committed by the Scottish Government, around £8 comes from civic society. There are many ways to engage, and Kate Forbes was recently a mentor at the youth Parliament and was heartened by the quality of leadership shown, giving hope for great global partnerships in the future. Colin Smyth gave examples of the importance of fair trade activities throughout Scotland. Claudia Beamish passionately spoke of global violence against women and children. One of the harmful cultural practices is female genital mutilation. The UN reports that the practice is carried out in 29 countries. The procedure performed on over 125 million girls and women. Through targeted focus on this issue from both Scotland and the UK Government, I hope that we will see this practice abolished. I would like to bring the attention to the chamber of the recent contribution that was made by Pretty Patel announcing an extra £6 million to fight abuse against abuse to women and girls. On top of the £12.1 billion that the UK Government has already given in funding to developing countries, the £6 million package announced in November will go towards supporting innovative grassroots programmes in 17 countries, dealing with female genital mutilation, child marriage and domestic violence. The funding has been welcomed by many in the AIDS sector because it will impact significantly on smaller projects, thought to make such a difference to women's lives. It is true that our country will not tolerate any form of violence against women and girls, so it is shocking to learn from the UN that 35 per cent of women worldwide have experienced either physical or sexual abuse at some points in their lives. As a reaction to these unacceptable statistics, extra funding has been dedicated to break the cycle of abuse. £2.75 million of funding will go to the UN Trust Fund to end violence against women, to tackle gender-based violence, improve access to legal assistance and healthcare and work towards strengthening laws that protect women. I am pleased that the minister supports the Scottish Conservative amendment that calls on the Scottish Government to promote the needs of vulnerable groups. However, I am a little disappointed that the Scottish Government will not support our amendment that highlights the importance of economic growth and the fact that it will see our partner countries prosper through sustainable growth. Hopefully, the minister will affect on the back benches such as John Mason, who talked about the importance of trade and self-reliance. In the 2006 debate on the subject to your colleague Murdo Fraser, he ended his contribution by saying that we are making a difference to people's lives in Malawi and I encourage the Scottish Executive to carry on its work, creating consensus across the Parliament. Notwithstanding some difficulties with the Tory amendment today, will the Tories be supporting the unamended motion, should that be what the final vote is tonight? I thank Stuart Steeleonson for that intervention, and the answer is yes. Ross Thompson made it clear that, within our partner countries, we should promote human rights defending minority groups and the most vulnerable. The Scottish Conservatives support the Labour amendment to further promote the needs of minority marginalised and vulnerable groups in those countries, where such groups are often subject to criminalisation and harassment. Both the Scottish and UK Government have a strong record of helping countries less fortunate than our own, from ending female genital mutilation and child marriage to preventing domestic abuse, aid helps survivors in some of the world's poorest countries. I hope that both Governments will continue to increase our global leadership and support to protect even more women and girls and address the root causes of violence and promote the needs of those marginalised groups in need of support. My colleagues across the chamber have almost unanimously agreed that Scotland's continued engagement in international development, without doubt, has huge impact across our partner countries, and we must continue to show and promote collaborative cross-party efforts. I begin by saying how pleased I was to see earlier on in the gallery the Malawian High Commissioner, Keen Am Fonda, and it was further testimony to the warm relationship that exists between our countries, which many members have spoken of today. I thank all members who have contributed to the debate and to all the countries that they have referred to. There is, as has been mentioned, cross-party support, as represented by the comments of Mr Stewart, Mr MacDonald and many others. I am happy to begin by taking up the invitation to meet the cross-party group on Malawi, which Mr MacDonald referred to. Over the coming months, I will provide further information on an on-going basis about the work that we are doing and the plans that we have on a country-by-country basis. John McAlpine made an important point in the debate, which is that helping the world's poorest is a good thing and that anyone who tells us otherwise deceives us and themselves. It is important to deal head on with the myths that are sometimes published about the question of international development, and it is important for us to say too that, despite what you may have heard elsewhere, the Scottish Government does not give money to Governments on that matter. The point that was made by Ross Thomson is an important one. We should not keep silent about human rights. It should be at the heart of all that we do in our international development work. On my recent visit to Malawi, I raised the issues of LGBTI rights and met representatives of the community of people who have albinism, who are subject in some parts of the country to persecution from some quarters. Mr Yousaf, my predecessor, previously met a delegation of Christian leaders in Pakistan in 2013 to hear their concerns. To respond to points that were made by many speakers, the question of human rights is at the forefront of all that we do. To respond specifically to one issue that Claudia Beamish raised in that respect, I can confirm that the Scottish Government actively works to tackle violence against women and children, and we work to highlight the issue specifically of child marriage in Malawi. In Pakistan, more than £600,000 has been spent to date on the subject area of empowering women through education. Regarding a point that was made by Claudia Beamish about conflict resolution, I am happy to confirm that the Scottish Government has been supporting 50 women every year from conflict zones around the world to allow them to play their full role in the peace process in their countries. Elaine Smith I wonder whether the minister has had any opportunity to look at the issue of juvenile justice in Malawi, particularly juvenile prisons. Alasdair Allan Yes. When I was in Malawi, I visited Chance for Change, which is a project that is run specifically with the issues that the member raises in mind to divert young people from aspects of the justice system to allow them to be rehabilitated in the community, and Scotland has made a great contribution towards the good work that has been done in many individuals' lives in that respect. There were many, many points made about not numerous countries, as I say by speakers, but if I can pick up on one or two questions that were raised about NGOs and their funding, and specifically the question of three-year funding, I should say that current grants under development programmes are generally three years, and we have said in the strategy that we will consider how we might support longer-term partnerships for all three-year-funded streams. However, as Mr Sarwar points out, the question now is not just about whether we spend money but how the money is spent and what projects are supported. John Mason raised the question of what we do beyond the four partner countries that we operate in, and he and others have acknowledged that our programme is limited. However, of course, there is a huge contribution made by the Scottish public and by the Scottish civic society around the world, and one way that we can emphasise that contribution is through the help that we give to the fair trade movement, which is one of the ways that we show that commitment on a much wider number of countries. Colin Smyth rightly highlighted the good work of the HALO Trust in Dumfriesshire and its constituency. I am aware of the vital work that it does, and indeed Ms Hyslop was delighted to meet the delegation from it on 25 October. Bruce Crawford focused on the manner in which Scotland goes about international development and the importance of addressing the causes of poverty, as well as treating its symptoms. I acknowledge two points that were made by Mr Scott and others about the role of previous Administrations and previous parties in Government in the establishment of much of the work that we continue with and which we expand. Perhaps picking out one or two examples that I did not have time to mention earlier on in our work, it is worth mentioning the hydro-nation area of activity, and while in Scotland we are fortunate to have an abundance or a superabundance of water, it is important to remember that that is not a privilege that is enjoyed by all around the world. Sustainable development goal number six is specifically about water and sanitation, and both our climate justice and hydro-nation initiatives have already delivered success in this area in many parts of the world. As Claudia Beamish again mentioned, Scotland's international approach to climate change is at the centre of what we do and what we should do, and one key point about climate change, a point that was made to me when I was in Malawi by some of the world's poorest people was that climate change is not created by them but affects them disproportionately. I want to mention before we conclude one or two other areas around humanitarian aid in the course of the debate that members referred to humanitarian disasters that there have been, so I should take this opportunity to emphasise that this Government is strengthening its capacity to respond quickly and effectively to urgent humanitarian crises overseas. We will establish a separate £1 million humanitarian aid fund to respond to those urgent crises. I want to conclude again by referring briefly, if I may, to my recent visit to Malawi. I also want to end by referring to an important and at times very moving contribution by Kate Forbes, who reminded us that international development, if it is to be about anything at all, is about individual real people, people with the same inaliable rights to dignity that we never question that we as individuals have ourselves. When I had the privilege of being in Malawi, it was truly amazing to see the number and variety of projects that Scotland supports in that country and in other countries, too. Nothing prepares visitors for the warmth and kindness of Malawian people and neither does anything prepare the visitor for the reality and the immensity of many people's needs. In conclusion, this month, as we mark the first anniversary of the new UN global goals coming to force, there is no doubt that that is a timely debate and one that allows us to demonstrate that Scotland continues to play its part as a good global citizen, meeting both our own domestic and international challenges head-on. We will continue to lead by example through our commitment to the UN global goals, helping to tackle poverty-related issues. We will do that in our best traditions of humanitarianism and global solidarity, mobilising our skills and our expertise in the fight against poverty and injustice, both here in Scotland and beyond. Thank you. That concludes the debate on welcoming global citizenship. It is now time to move on to the next item of business. The next item of business is consideration of business motion 3 3 2 2, the name of Joe Fitzpatrick on behalf of the parliamentary bureau setting of the business programme. I would ask any member who wishes to speak against the motion to press their request-to-speak button now. I call on Joe Fitzpatrick to move motion 3 3 2 2. Formally moved, Presiding Officer. And no member has asked to speak against the motion, therefore I will put the question to the chamber. The question is that motion number 3 3 2 2 in the name of Joe Fitzpatrick be agreed. Are we all agreed? Yes. We are all agreed. The next item of business is consideration of parliamentary bureau motion. I would ask Joe Fitzpatrick to move motion 3 3 2 3 on the designation of a lead committee. Thank you very much. The question on this motion will be put at decision time, which we will come to in about 15 seconds. Thank you. There are four questions to be put as a result of today's business. The first question is that amendment 3 3 0 3 0 1 in the name of Alexander Stewart, which seeks to amend motion 3 3 0 3 in the name of Alasdair Allan on welcoming global citizenship be agreed. Are we all agreed? We are not agreed. We will move to a vote and members will cast a vote now. The result of the vote on amendment number 3 3 0 3 1 in the name of Alexander Stewart is yes 29, no 94, there were no abstentions and the amendment is therefore not agreed. The next question is that amendment 3 3 0 3 2 in the name of Lewis MacDonald, which seeks to amend the motion in the name of Alasdair Allan be agreed. Are we all agreed? Yes. We are all agreed. The next question is that motion 3 3 0 3 in the name of Alasdair Allan, as amended, on global citizenship be agreed. Are we all agreed? Yes. We are all agreed. And the final question is that motion 3 3 2 3 in the name of Joe Fitzpatrick on the designation of a lead committee be agreed. Are we all agreed? Yes. We are agreed and that concludes decision time. We will now move to members' business in the name of Liz Smith. Just take a few moments to change seats.